There is the implicit assumption that before MP3s, people were listening to music in less 'destructive' devices. The assumption is that people were listening to music without losing as much as the 90% of detail/data that the iPod experience gives.
The reality is that most people previously listened to music through devices which had the same, if not worse drawbacks: - car radios - where the background adds so much noise - radio - where the degradation in quality again adds a bunch of noise - audio cassette - where repeated listning degrades performance - vinyl - you are trying to tell me that scratches were part of the 'original' sound
Perhaps the industry experts are comparing the experience of listening to beautiful monitor speakers to an iPod. My god! There is a difference
6. The rebates allow multiple pricing across consumers - in general, the consumer desparate for the cheapest deal will look for rebates and factor them in. the consumer who is happy with the price offered probably doesn't look for rebates. For example, the couponing in cereals is targeted at the price conscious
IAAL
(1) I'm not sure about the american system, but the Australian system for granting tax credits (ie more than 100% deducticble, eg 175%) on R&D is limited when it comes to software.
The government argued that every billion-dollar profit making bank would claim their inhouse systems, so they introduced a need to licence to more than 2 parties test on the software.
(2) I am preparing an R&D claim for a company which GPLs its code and I have a problem. I need to demonstrate that this company holds the benefit of the R&D. In a GPL environment, this appears tricky. I hope I'm not too late on this but it would be nice to cut a tax break for a company doing something good.
Actually, paying royalties on potential copyright infringement already exists in the form of a levy on audio (and i think video) cassettes which is then paid to royalty distrbution agents like AAPRA.
Slashdot Mirror
There is the implicit assumption that before MP3s, people were listening to music in less 'destructive' devices. The assumption is that people were listening to music without losing as much as the 90% of detail/data that the iPod experience gives.
The reality is that most people previously listened to music through devices which had the same, if not worse drawbacks:
- car radios - where the background adds so much noise
- radio - where the degradation in quality again adds a bunch of noise
- audio cassette - where repeated listning degrades performance
- vinyl - you are trying to tell me that scratches were part of the 'original' sound
Perhaps the industry experts are comparing the experience of listening to beautiful monitor speakers to an iPod. My god! There is a difference
6. The rebates allow multiple pricing across consumers - in general, the consumer desparate for the cheapest deal will look for rebates and factor them in. the consumer who is happy with the price offered probably doesn't look for rebates. For example, the couponing in cereals is targeted at the price conscious
What about ss40 -47 of the copyright act - the 'fair use' provisions
or is it that you think your use is fair?
IAAL (1) I'm not sure about the american system, but the Australian system for granting tax credits (ie more than 100% deducticble, eg 175%) on R&D is limited when it comes to software. The government argued that every billion-dollar profit making bank would claim their inhouse systems, so they introduced a need to licence to more than 2 parties test on the software. (2) I am preparing an R&D claim for a company which GPLs its code and I have a problem. I need to demonstrate that this company holds the benefit of the R&D. In a GPL environment, this appears tricky. I hope I'm not too late on this but it would be nice to cut a tax break for a company doing something good.
I hope to god this is flamebait, but obviously the moderator thought it was well-structured argument. let's follow this argument then
"black people mostly vote democrat, therefore balck people should not vote."
Makes a whole lotta sense
Actually, paying royalties on potential copyright infringement already exists in the form of a levy on audio (and i think video) cassettes which is then paid to royalty distrbution agents like AAPRA.