You have described the street performers protocol. I personally think its great. Everyone pays what they want and gets paid what they want.
The biggest problem is that many content producers are hoping to create the next big thing. An unknown will not be able to solicit a large fee for their work even if it turns out to be extremely popular. Under the current system if an unknown band makes a triple platinum record they are millionaires(maybe). But using the street performers protocol they only get paid what they asked for in the first place.
I believe there was also a cryptographical element to insure that all participants remain anonymous. Also, the gambler's bets would have to remain secret until after the event in case Joe Smith caught wind of the bet and went underground on January 32, 2006.
An interesting system but definatly illegal in most countries.
I'm much to late to be read by anyone but, you could use a similar system to hijack opensource programs.
instead of selling copies of your proprietary descendant of an open source app. Just let anyone of your "partners" use it. The GPL doesnt require you to distribute the source of any changes as long as you don't distribute binaries. But in this case all the binaries would remain within your partnership.
But we do expect the phone company to block ALL unsolicited sales calls with a NO CALL LIST? How is that different?
What?
The phone company has no obligation to block any calls. However under the proposed do not call list telemarketers(not the phone company) are not allowed to call people on a certain list.
There are already laws concerning the legality of creating and having child porn. Forcinging ISPs to make sure they don't inadvertantly provide access to it is stupid.
Other arguments aside, why do people assume that Success == Growth?
Many small restaurants/shops thrive without opening new locations on every corner turning the entire world into a homogeneous blob with no unique neighborhoods. It seems like everything is becoming one large walmart/starbucks/mcdonalds planet.
I like diversity it creates change and innovation. Large corporations often act against change and technological advance because it threatens their strangle hold on the marketplace.
To put it in slashdot terms do you think that if people listened to live music and supported bands/artists directly and not through massive corporations that there would be such resistance to new distribution mechanisms like the internet?
The Debian menu system sucks ass too. Great idea in theory, terrible in practice. The upshot of it is you can't use the desktop's own menu editor, or your changes get wiped out next time you install a package. Also, any software that isn't aware of the menu system can't put entries in your menu, or again they will be gone when you install a menu-aware package
Not true, windowmaker(unequivocally the best window manager;P) allows you to use the debian menu(also the KDE menu, maybe others) as a sub menu of your custom menu.
It seems like the "cooperative" ownership of copyrighted material could be used to work around the GPL.
Here is the business plan:
Company X gets some GPL programs, makes their own changes to them and keeps them in house. Under the GPL you can make any changes you want without releasing the new source as long as you do not distribute the changed software.
Then, the "customers" of X get charged a "membership" fee to be considered part of company X and then they have access to the "internal" proprietary changes to the GPL. So, the proprietary changes never get "distributed" so they dont have to release the source.
Will someone please tell me I am wrong somehow? I love the GPL and I feel that cooperatively owned business is a much better system than corporations but this seems like a big loophole. How can it be closed?
Here is what is going to happen:
-within the next few years this initiative or one very similar will become the standard and harddrives will have some secret scheme to stop copying or whatever.
-Someone will certainly subsidize the distribution of these "enhanced" HDs because certainly no one will pay _more_ for a feature that doesnt help them.
-THEN
either the industries scheme will be in place and they will be able to decide what data is ok for you to store on a HD
OR
some people will figure out a way to render safe these enhanced HDs and at least one of them will release the code or method. So, once again people will be able to use their own things as they like not as some corporation thinks they should.
SO, what _YOU_ need to do is start hacking NOW so that people will have the skills and curiosity to figure out how things work when these HDs become standard so that YOU can solve a problem for humanity.
It seems to me that all this is heading towards a world where everything is illegal and the powerholders can choose to attack whoever they like because everyone is guilty. If linking to illegal material is illegal then nearly every web site is illegal so the MAN will be able to single any webmaster they want out for persecution.
These kinds of laws really bother me because they put too much discretion in the hands of the police/prosecuter If laws are more careful then much fewer people are guilty and only the deserving are prosected.
From what I understood, cavitation torpedoes could be rocket driven. surrounded by vacuum they would have to expell propellant to move.
You could steer such torpedoes by turning the rocket. Now, how much they could turn with out losing the crucial cavity is unknown to me but it might be significant
A solution for this is similar to one that I heard for cybersquating.
The Problem: If I make a service available on the web through a form(ie Ebay or Mapquest) what stops another person from making their website a simple front end to my engine that pulls out the data with out showing anyone the ads that I use to make money? Nothing(AFAIK)
The Solution: enforce linkage. Make such frontends legal as long as they have a link that says "mined from" or "found on" XYZ web site. this way I would get credit for my engine and the extra front end would provide me with more traffic to my web site.
What if im an isp trying to make some money and I decide that if XXX corp pays me a small fee monthly I will make connections going to ZZZ corp somewhat slower. This could be used as a very subtle marketing scheme. No content would be blocked but it would be made inconvienient to access some sites or use some software services. Of course ISPs would _probably_ need to include this kind of thing in the terms of service but no one reads those anyways. Linux is my friend...
Slashdot Mirror
feel free to use a bittorrent client that doesn't upload. You should still get the file but it will take a lot longer.
But nowhere in his new column does he answer the question. I am disapointed.
The biggest problem is that many content producers are hoping to create the next big thing. An unknown will not be able to solicit a large fee for their work even if it turns out to be extremely popular. Under the current system if an unknown band makes a triple platinum record they are millionaires(maybe). But using the street performers protocol they only get paid what they asked for in the first place.
An interesting system but definatly illegal in most countries.
I'm much to late to be read by anyone but, you could use a similar system to hijack opensource programs.
instead of selling copies of your proprietary descendant of an open source app. Just let anyone of your "partners" use it. The GPL doesnt require you to distribute the source of any changes as long as you don't distribute binaries. But in this case all the binaries would remain within your partnership.
Anyways, without providing a list of sites it doesn't mean anything anyways.
What?
The phone company has no obligation to block any calls. However under the proposed do not call list telemarketers(not the phone company) are not allowed to call people on a certain list.
There are already laws concerning the legality of creating and having child porn. Forcinging ISPs to make sure they don't inadvertantly provide access to it is stupid.
Does Fedex?
How is an ISP any different?
Many small restaurants/shops thrive without opening new locations on every corner turning the entire world into a homogeneous blob with no unique neighborhoods. It seems like everything is becoming one large walmart/starbucks/mcdonalds planet.
I like diversity it creates change and innovation. Large corporations often act against change and technological advance because it threatens their strangle hold on the marketplace.
To put it in slashdot terms do you think that if people listened to live music and supported bands/artists directly and not through massive corporations that there would be such resistance to new distribution mechanisms like the internet?
Not true, windowmaker(unequivocally the best window manager
where is your sig from?
It seems like the "cooperative" ownership of copyrighted material could be used to work around the GPL.
Here is the business plan:
Company X gets some GPL programs, makes their own changes to them and keeps them in house. Under the GPL you can make any changes you want without releasing the new source as long as you do not distribute the changed software.
Then, the "customers" of X get charged a "membership" fee to be considered part of company X and then they have access to the "internal" proprietary changes to the GPL. So, the proprietary changes never get "distributed" so they dont have to release the source.
Will someone please tell me I am wrong somehow? I love the GPL and I feel that cooperatively owned business is a much better system than corporations but this seems like a big loophole. How can it be closed?
Only Outlaws will have exploits.
Here is what is going to happen:
-within the next few years this initiative or one very similar will become the standard and harddrives will have some secret scheme to stop copying or whatever.
-Someone will certainly subsidize the distribution of these "enhanced" HDs because certainly no one will pay _more_ for a feature that doesnt help them.
-THEN
either the industries scheme will be in place and they will be able to decide what data is ok for you to store on a HD
OR
some people will figure out a way to render safe these enhanced HDs and at least one of them will release the code or method. So, once again people will be able to use their own things as they like not as some corporation thinks they should.
SO, what _YOU_ need to do is start hacking NOW so that people will have the skills and curiosity to figure out how things work when these HDs become standard so that YOU can solve a problem for humanity.
It seems to me that all this is heading towards a world where everything is illegal and the powerholders can choose to attack whoever they like because everyone is guilty. If linking to illegal material is illegal then nearly every web site is illegal so the MAN will be able to single any webmaster they want out for persecution.
These kinds of laws really bother me because they put too much discretion in the hands of the police/prosecuter If laws are more careful then much fewer people are guilty and only the deserving are prosected.
From what I understood, cavitation torpedoes could be rocket driven. surrounded by vacuum they would have to expell propellant to move. You could steer such torpedoes by turning the rocket. Now, how much they could turn with out losing the crucial cavity is unknown to me but it might be significant
A solution for this is similar to one that I heard for cybersquating.
The Problem: If I make a service available on the web through a form(ie Ebay or Mapquest) what stops another person from making their website a simple front end to my engine that pulls out the data with out showing anyone the ads that I use to make money? Nothing(AFAIK)
The Solution: enforce linkage. Make such frontends legal as long as they have a link that says "mined from" or "found on" XYZ web site. this way I would get credit for my engine and the extra front end would provide me with more traffic to my web site.
What if im an isp trying to make some money and I decide that if XXX corp pays me a small fee monthly I will make connections going to ZZZ corp somewhat slower. This could be used as a very subtle marketing scheme. No content would be blocked but it would be made inconvienient to access some sites or use some software services. Of course ISPs would _probably_ need to include this kind of thing in the terms of service but no one reads those anyways. Linux is my friend...