If this were true, there would be no Napster. Again, the industry has lost the means to control the distribution of their product. If they don't lower the price to the point that the cost of developing alternative systems is no longer worth it, they will continue to lose business. At this point, swappers are paying the market value, $0. Surely there is a point above that which will accomodate both sides. If not, the music in question is not commercially viable.
This is flawed reasoning. Whether the mp3 is commercially viable or not, or the price of a CD is down to $3.00. If people can get it for free (as in beer), they will. It's the american way. Why work for it when you can get it for free.
Right. The song. Not the filler that they use to pad the price. If $1 per song is fair, then $12 for 12 songs would be just as fair, right? This is the industries logic. Thus they take one song that people want to buy and bundle it with 11 that no one has heard or wants. This is just a way of charging $12 for the $1 worth of product that you want you want. Specious marketing logic at its most transparent.
Why is $1.00 a fair price for a song? Why not $10.00? The only person to decide that is the person who owns the music. If people don't buy the muic, the price will eventually get lowered. It's capitalism at its finest.
No one forced the artists to release it either. So why should they expect to get a fair deal? If they don't think that they are properly compensated, or if they can convince their fans that their music is worth paying for, they can find other means of employment.
This is the reasoning of a thief. I don't agree with the DMCA or the new proposed laws, but this, I don't agree with.
Really this argument isn't over the RIAA, it's about the destruction of IP.
because Microsoft created it, that's why. It's just like when someone creates a piece of Open Source Software and releases it under the GNU license. (that was their choice)
Any news site (especially technical ones) will surely dump this software immediately if they want to keep their reputations of impartiality intact. There is no WAY they will risk using it if there's a chance it will make their readers think less of them.
Since MS products are so popular, people are pirating (making illegal copies) them across the internet. I seriously doubt anyone is going to stop using it because of this clause. The general public, which makes up about 98% of the internet, doesn't give a shit.
here is my original post:I don't know what's going to be worse, the US government or the GNU police......
What part of this DON'T you understand. The gnu license is as free as the copyright. IF it were a truly "free" license, it would be in the public domain, with NO restrictions. Instead of going to a copyright holder to see if it is in violation, we are going to Richard Stallman and the FSF. You can also still get sued in court for violating the license.
I realize that noone is forcing this license upon anyone, but judging from the dribble that I have read at the FSF/stallman's website, he believes it should be. (as well as the hundreds of posts relating to napster in the OSS community with something to the effect of: "information needs to be free" including music,programs,etc,etc,anything that can be turned into 1's and 0's. Sharing someone's music,program,etc. without their permission is FORCING your beliefs on to them).
and how about some of the latest news? There's no problems in the slashdot community when a prop. protocol is broken and forced into the open source community (hence violating copyright) (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/19/00132 35&mode=flat). But when the GNU is violated, you NEVER hear the END of it:
the term "freedom" means to share and do what you would like with anyone's IP (sounds like a GREAT representation of freedom to me), except when it comes to things like the GNU license. (then we must follow the great FSF, to "enforce" freedom)
im not sure if anyone here has actually used the GIft client for linux, but kazaa's response was short and sweet: After about 3 days of it's release (which was approx. a month ago), a new "security" patch was forced upon all users of their client. This new patch ultimately prevented the OSS linux client from working again.
It would be great if the open source community could get behind one standard
This really is the answer, but most people will not follow. Why? Because the very nature of Open Source is void of standards. (a part of the "freedom"). An example of this is the many flavors.
. If a company can't deal with that you probably don't want to work for them.
I hate to break it to you, but a company doesn't come to you for a job. If MS Word format makes it easier for a possible employer to view my resume easier, im using it. Sending it in a non-standard formatto a company, only proves your ignorance, and most will treat it as such.
Re:Even goatse.cx is mourning
on
More On Tragedy
·
· Score: 0
I was hoping for a strong condemnation of the people who did this, an emotional expression of the nation's sorrow, and a stirring call-to-arms.
boy thats an intelligent idea.............
if he did that, the american public would be in a state of panic. As it is the gas prices rose about.30 per gallon in some areas. Do you want pure chaos? I think his speech was short, and it got right to the point. The United States is going to search for the group(s) responsible, and if found, will take the appropriate action.
If you had paid attention during the actual election, you might have noticed that bush actually did win with the most number of votes. It was the people in florida that fucked it all up.
I suggest that next time, we try not to count "pregnant" ballots, and get people that are competent enough to count. (then there would have been no question about bush winning). Or how about the liberal news media falsifying the election status? And maybe while we are at it, we can fix the fact that in many inner cities, the polls were open PAST the cut-off time.
The key thing is a dialogue. If the terrorists want to complain about something to the US, and we just ignore them, then that could explain why the go to such drastic measurers.
I fail to see your reasoning. If the terrorists decided they needed to kill 10,000 innocent people in the process of getting their point across, their cause wasn't just.
5. Evaluate their rational (maybe we gave them cause, it's possible)
cause? this now gives us cause to destroy the group that is behind this attack (the only rational thinking invloved is finding out the responsible party).
Even if it does not benefit musicians, it will be of considerable benefit to nonmusicians -- probably over 99% of the population -- who don't want to live in a police state.
and the extermination of the jews was a good idea also, because it was for the "good for over 99% of the population"
Even if it does not benefit musicians, it will be of considerable benefit to nonmusicians -- want to live in a police state.
Using this new license is WORSE than recording studios. At least when you sign up with a Recording studio, you have a chance at making enough money to survive.
Slashdot Mirror
If this were true, there would be no Napster. Again, the industry has lost the means to control the distribution of their product. If they don't lower the price to the point that the cost of developing alternative systems is no longer worth it, they will continue to lose business. At this point, swappers are paying the market value, $0. Surely there is a point above that which will accomodate both sides. If not, the music in question is not commercially viable.
This is flawed reasoning. Whether the mp3 is commercially viable or not, or the price of a CD is down to $3.00. If people can get it for free (as in beer), they will. It's the american way. Why work for it when you can get it for free.
Right. The song. Not the filler that they use to pad the price. If $1 per song is fair, then $12 for 12 songs would be just as fair, right? This is the industries logic. Thus they take one song that people want to buy and bundle it with 11 that no one has heard or wants. This is just a way of charging $12 for the $1 worth of product that you want you want. Specious marketing logic at its most transparent.
Why is $1.00 a fair price for a song? Why not $10.00? The only person to decide that is the person who owns the music. If people don't buy the muic, the price will eventually get lowered. It's capitalism at its finest.
No one forced the artists to release it either. So why should they expect to get a fair deal? If they don't think that they are properly compensated, or if they can convince their fans that their music is worth paying for, they can find other means of employment.
This is the reasoning of a thief. I don't agree with the DMCA or the new proposed laws, but this, I don't agree with.
Really this argument isn't over the RIAA, it's about the destruction of IP.
You must NOT be a SYSADMIN.......or a troll....
I can.
because Microsoft created it, that's why. It's just like when someone creates a piece of Open Source Software and releases it under the GNU license. (that was their choice)
Any news site (especially technical ones) will surely dump this software immediately if they want to keep their reputations of impartiality intact. There is no WAY they will risk using it if there's a chance it will make their readers think less of them.
Since MS products are so popular, people are pirating (making illegal copies) them across the internet. I seriously doubt anyone is going to stop using it because of this clause. The general public, which makes up about 98% of the internet, doesn't give a shit.
Frontpage logo on a site that disparage Microsoft
I think that is within microsoft's right, don't you?
here is my original post:I don't know what's going to be worse, the US government or the GNU police......
2 35&mode=flat). But when the GNU is violated, you NEVER hear the END of it:
2 19 .shtml)
2 26 .shtml)
What part of this DON'T you understand. The gnu license is as free as the copyright. IF it were a truly "free" license, it would be in the public domain, with NO restrictions. Instead of going to a copyright holder to see if it is in violation, we are going to Richard Stallman and the FSF. You can also still get sued in court for violating the license.
I realize that noone is forcing this license upon anyone, but judging from the dribble that I have read at the FSF/stallman's website, he believes it should be. (as well as the hundreds of posts relating to napster in the OSS community with something to the effect of: "information needs to be free" including music,programs,etc,etc,anything that can be turned into 1's and 0's. Sharing someone's music,program,etc. without their permission is FORCING your beliefs on to them).
and how about some of the latest news? There's no problems in the slashdot community when a prop. protocol is broken and forced into the open source community (hence violating copyright) (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/19/0013
Examples:
1) RTLinux
2)NVIDIA GPL VIOLATION
(http://www.slashdot.org/features/00/05/01/0047
3)Corel Linux GPL violation
(http://www.slashdot.org/articles/99/09/20/1051
im just trying to set the facts STRAIGHT
not to the slashdot community....
the term "freedom" means to share and do what you would like with anyone's IP (sounds like a GREAT representation of freedom to me), except when it comes to things like the GNU license. (then we must follow the great FSF, to "enforce" freedom)
get filenavigator (http://www.filenavigator.com).
it's a lot more efficient than most. (at least in my opinion).
im not sure if anyone here has actually used the GIft client for linux, but kazaa's response was short and sweet: After about 3 days of it's release (which was approx. a month ago), a new "security" patch was forced upon all users of their client. This new patch ultimately prevented the OSS linux client from working again.
Shall we compare compare Word and Outlook to VI and Mutt?
as silly as comparing MS outlook to various linux mail clients.
I should be used to it.
The socialists/communists running slashdot censoring my every word is not a suprise to me.
'nuff said
Free Software Foundation has reached an agreement
I don't know what's going to be worse, the US government or the GNU police......
You really need to check the expiration date on your FUD, you know
YOU are the one that needs to actually use linux sometime before spewing smart ass remarks.
And you'll have to give away all your software
There is some truth to this.....
Another problem, is the fact that you have to compile everything you get.
It would be great if the open source community could get behind one standard
This really is the answer, but most people will not follow. Why? Because the very nature of Open Source is void of standards. (a part of the "freedom"). An example of this is the many flavors.
. If a company can't deal with that you probably don't want to work for them.
I hate to break it to you, but a company doesn't come to you for a job. If MS Word format makes it easier for a possible employer to view my resume easier, im using it. Sending it in a non-standard formatto a company, only proves your ignorance, and most will treat it as such.
I am truly amazed
I was hoping for a strong condemnation of the people who did this, an emotional expression of the nation's sorrow, and a stirring call-to-arms.
.30 per gallon in some areas. Do you want pure chaos? I think his speech was short, and it got right to the point. The United States is going to search for the group(s) responsible, and if found, will take the appropriate action.
boy thats an intelligent idea.............
if he did that, the american public would be in a state of panic. As it is the gas prices rose about
If you had paid attention during the actual election, you might have noticed that bush actually did win with the most number of votes. It was the people in florida that fucked it all up.
I suggest that next time, we try not to count "pregnant" ballots, and get people that are competent enough to count. (then there would have been no question about bush winning). Or how about the liberal news media falsifying the election status? And maybe while we are at it, we can fix the fact that in many inner cities, the polls were open PAST the cut-off time.
try blaming someone who deserves it........the terrorists...ASSHOLE!
The key thing is a dialogue. If the terrorists want to complain about something to the US, and we just ignore them, then that could explain why the go to such drastic measurers.
I fail to see your reasoning. If the terrorists decided they needed to kill 10,000 innocent people in the process of getting their point across, their cause wasn't just.
5. Evaluate their rational (maybe we gave them cause, it's possible)
cause? this now gives us cause to destroy the group that is behind this attack (the only rational thinking invloved is finding out the responsible party).
Even if it does not benefit musicians, it will be of considerable benefit to nonmusicians -- probably over 99% of the population -- who don't want to live in a police state.
and the extermination of the jews was a good idea also, because it was for the "good for over 99% of the population"
Even if it does not benefit musicians, it will be of considerable benefit to nonmusicians -- want to live in a police state.
Using this new license is WORSE than recording studios. At least when you sign up with a Recording studio, you have a chance at making enough money to survive.
well,
Since this license is about "sharing", why can't everyone who listens to the music "share" the cost of the equipment.
This is not meant as a troll, merely my opinion.
the game IS pirated and everyone who plays it actually ARE pirates.
yeah, butt pirates