Wait, if a film's being downloaded, then it's already been made... so surely all these thousands of people have already been paid?
Yes, but if the movie makes zero dollars because every potential customer pirated it instead of going to a theater, the staff will be paid for the current release but they won't be paid for any future movies... becuase they won't make any future movies. This is what the MPAA is arguing, that by pirating movies, you make them less profitable. By making them less profitable, Hollywood has less incentive to make more and will consequently hire less moviemakers.
There are plenty of legit problems with the MPAA's arguements, let's not get bogged down in the stupid ones.
That's what you get for donating money to someone who is predictably going to lose, and lose big. It's not like it wasn't obvious. If you're in the US and you're running a bittorrent site geared towards MPAA released films, you know you're in trouble. Donating money to such a website is foolish at best.
There's the one where France said you can't internationally auction NAZI memorobilia. And there's more about them going after other neo-Nazi websites. They went after their own ISPs in the 1990s. And then there's Toubon Law which dictates what materials MUST be written in French and what is allowed to be written in other languages.
Every country has their problems, but France's problem seems to be that they don't really understand that they're living in an international world (regardless of how much they might trumpet that belief to other countries). It's time for them to stop attempting to enforce silly standards on other countries, and start allowing their own people to communicate without interference with the outside world, in whatever manner (or language) they see fit.
Yuck, just tried map24 for the first time and was not happy with the EXTREME load times. I don't want to sit around while silly java applets load up. Also, it didn't actually pinpoint my home address, just gave me the street. Google maps is better.
I went to my bank the other day to see if I could put a hold on all transfers of money coming out of my account with the exception of those going to two (and only two) credit card companies. Specifically I wanted to block all money going OUT to my paypal account (I only use the account to receive funds). They said they were not able to stop companies from transferring money out of my account if they had the proper information to do so.
What the hell?
Why not demand pre-verfication on this sort of thing? Why not give the option to request a phone call confirmation of fund transfers, especially when the funds aren't simply going to Visa or the gas company? Or just allow me to set up a list of comanies/websites that are permitted to transfer funds out of my account. There's no reason the banks can't set this up, it's not very difficult. If anyone knows of a national bank that has an option for something like this, I'd be glad to hear about it.
The fact that it's a game versus some mission critical software doesn't matter. The fact of the matter is you paid for a product that you can fairly expect to work when you need/want it to. If they can't keep their servers up and running, then they need to refund some fraction of the original price to make up for their failure.
I was also going to nominate Fight Club. Uh, I was not a big fan of the book. It was as if they went through the entire book and just pulled every third line of dialogue and turned that into the film. But the other 2/3rds of lines were terrible. Whoever did the adaptation deserved the Oscar.
Do you really want to consider "getting around" the censorship. It's not like they're playing a game over there. They're not setting up challenges for the techno-elite to figure out how to access Slashdot from being the Great Firewall of China. It's not like "Gosh, I can use a proxy! I can tunnel... they'll find this very clever and I'll be able to do whatever I want."
You'll be breaking the law.
In China.
Are you a big fan of breaking the law in general? Are you a big fan of spending days, weeks, or years in a Chinese political prison? Do you like having your legs unbroken?
I would highly recommend against going to China with a plan of "Getting around" the censhorship. It's not just a technological hurdle to overcome, it's the law. And as a general policy, you don't want to be breaking the law in foreign countries. Their jails aren't as nice as ours.
I don't think the original author was arguing that the standard was the issue, only that Sony corporate has several competing interests internally and has taken some time to let them fight over the digital music/digital data territory. To say that this is an issue for big corporations to grapple with is not something that deserves derision, it's an accurate statement of the situation.
Piracy is an issue for these guys, whether we like it or not. They're trying to figure out how to deal with it. To say that, out loud, is not stupid.
And nothing corporate-generated can be entertaining? Nothing to come out of a corporation has ever been good?
I don't understand the wholesale rejection of things simply because they are popular or mass-produced. Neither is a statement about their quality, merely a statement about their popularity or origins. If something is of high quality, it doesn't matter who likes it or who buys it. It stands alone. It's childish to reject things without valid grounds for doing so.
"Howard came back from break and got Mike Walker on the line so they could play the Gossip Game with him. Howard told Mike that something just came over the wire saying that Michael Powell is probably going to resign today. Howard said that's not a surprise because now that he's leaving radio, he's got nothing else to do. Gary told Howard that they're getting a ton of requests from the press for Howard to give some quotes. Howard said that this is a great thing because the guy didn't deserve the job in the first place. He believes that Powell got the job because of who his father was. Howard gave the history of Colin Powell and how Michael Powell was given the job to pay back Colin Powell. Howard said that Powell didn't deserve the position and eventually started fining Howard and other broadcasters to look good to the religious right. Howard went off on Powell for a couple of minutes and complained about the things he did while he was in that position. He claims that Powell and the FCC blackmailed companies by threatening to hold up their licenses. Howard said ''Thank God he's gone... but God help us with what's next.''"
It's very mature to forever rule out entire genres of entertainment because you didn't like a miniscule sampling of one series of one show. I'm not saying you have to go out and watch every episode of the Amazing Race or anything, but it's childish to reject something without giving it a fair sampling.
I'm confused, if people are making music for the sake of making music, then what's the difference if there's a big organization attempting to make money on the backs of the musicians? If they're not doing it to make money anyway, then they shouldn't really care if someone else does. And if they're going to make music even with the RIAA there, then why is the RIAA being around (and potentially paying them more money) a bad thing.
I've never understood this part of the anti-RIAA arguement. From a consumer point of view, I can understand someone being unhappy about them, but from a performer point of view it doesn't make any sense. You've detailed how musicians are able to make music without the RIAA and have done so for a long time. You've also detailed how new technologies make this EASIER now than in the past with the advent of high-quality home recording.
If you, as a musician, do not like the RIAA, why don't you just go around them? They're not forcing you to play by their rules, they're offering you the opportunity to play by their rules for some money. If you don't like them, just avoid them.
I don't understand, could you please explain it to me?
Slashdot Mirror
Bravo.
Wait, if a film's being downloaded, then it's already been made... so surely all these thousands of people have already been paid?
Yes, but if the movie makes zero dollars because every potential customer pirated it instead of going to a theater, the staff will be paid for the current release but they won't be paid for any future movies... becuase they won't make any future movies. This is what the MPAA is arguing, that by pirating movies, you make them less profitable. By making them less profitable, Hollywood has less incentive to make more and will consequently hire less moviemakers.
There are plenty of legit problems with the MPAA's arguements, let's not get bogged down in the stupid ones.
That's what you get for donating money to someone who is predictably going to lose, and lose big. It's not like it wasn't obvious. If you're in the US and you're running a bittorrent site geared towards MPAA released films, you know you're in trouble. Donating money to such a website is foolish at best.
I understood that, you're a moron.
Agreed.
There's the one where France said you can't internationally auction NAZI memorobilia. And there's more about them going after other neo-Nazi websites. They went after their own ISPs in the 1990s. And then there's Toubon Law which dictates what materials MUST be written in French and what is allowed to be written in other languages.
Every country has their problems, but France's problem seems to be that they don't really understand that they're living in an international world (regardless of how much they might trumpet that belief to other countries). It's time for them to stop attempting to enforce silly standards on other countries, and start allowing their own people to communicate without interference with the outside world, in whatever manner (or language) they see fit.
PS. I know nothing about France.
Yuck, just tried map24 for the first time and was not happy with the EXTREME load times. I don't want to sit around while silly java applets load up. Also, it didn't actually pinpoint my home address, just gave me the street. Google maps is better.
Uh, you can tax it. In fact, there's a question on your taxes explicity about work done for barter.
He was joking. It was on Saturday Night Live. It was funny.
I'd like a bike route feature, which avoids highways and other major streets.
Hey, that's not a bad idea. A little bit complicated keeping enough funds in there, without leaving TOO MUCH, but it's still good.
I went to my bank the other day to see if I could put a hold on all transfers of money coming out of my account with the exception of those going to two (and only two) credit card companies. Specifically I wanted to block all money going OUT to my paypal account (I only use the account to receive funds). They said they were not able to stop companies from transferring money out of my account if they had the proper information to do so.
What the hell?
Why not demand pre-verfication on this sort of thing? Why not give the option to request a phone call confirmation of fund transfers, especially when the funds aren't simply going to Visa or the gas company? Or just allow me to set up a list of comanies/websites that are permitted to transfer funds out of my account. There's no reason the banks can't set this up, it's not very difficult. If anyone knows of a national bank that has an option for something like this, I'd be glad to hear about it.
Bank of America does not.
I didn't know anybody watched that show in the last three years? Good to know.
Eh, I guess it's an easy continent.
Really, though, what's Bimbo... besides a GREAT brand name I mean.
The fact that it's a game versus some mission critical software doesn't matter. The fact of the matter is you paid for a product that you can fairly expect to work when you need/want it to. If they can't keep their servers up and running, then they need to refund some fraction of the original price to make up for their failure.
I was also going to nominate Fight Club. Uh, I was not a big fan of the book. It was as if they went through the entire book and just pulled every third line of dialogue and turned that into the film. But the other 2/3rds of lines were terrible. Whoever did the adaptation deserved the Oscar.
So I just went up and down that webpage and I can't figure out how I can sign up for part of the settlement, or list the movies that I've purchased.
Ghostworld, Spaceballs and This is Spinal Tap if you're interested.
Anyway, can someone give me a link for where I can sign up? Thanks.
At last the goatse guy can make an album! I've been waiting for so long. And hell, the hold is already built into the disc!
Do you really want to consider "getting around" the censorship. It's not like they're playing a game over there. They're not setting up challenges for the techno-elite to figure out how to access Slashdot from being the Great Firewall of China. It's not like "Gosh, I can use a proxy! I can tunnel... they'll find this very clever and I'll be able to do whatever I want."
You'll be breaking the law.
In China.
Are you a big fan of breaking the law in general? Are you a big fan of spending days, weeks, or years in a Chinese political prison? Do you like having your legs unbroken?
I would highly recommend against going to China with a plan of "Getting around" the censhorship. It's not just a technological hurdle to overcome, it's the law. And as a general policy, you don't want to be breaking the law in foreign countries. Their jails aren't as nice as ours.
Maybe the drum weighed just enough to offset the bouyancy of the air? Could have been a lead drum, right?
I don't think the original author was arguing that the standard was the issue, only that Sony corporate has several competing interests internally and has taken some time to let them fight over the digital music/digital data territory. To say that this is an issue for big corporations to grapple with is not something that deserves derision, it's an accurate statement of the situation.
Piracy is an issue for these guys, whether we like it or not. They're trying to figure out how to deal with it. To say that, out loud, is not stupid.
And nothing corporate-generated can be entertaining? Nothing to come out of a corporation has ever been good?
I don't understand the wholesale rejection of things simply because they are popular or mass-produced. Neither is a statement about their quality, merely a statement about their popularity or origins. If something is of high quality, it doesn't matter who likes it or who buys it. It stands alone. It's childish to reject things without valid grounds for doing so.
This is a reason why it's bad for consumers. I'm questioning why it's bad for artists who are writing music only for art's sake?
"Howard came back from break and got Mike Walker on the line so they could play the Gossip Game with him. Howard told Mike that something just came over the wire saying that Michael Powell is probably going to resign today. Howard said that's not a surprise because now that he's leaving radio, he's got nothing else to do. Gary told Howard that they're getting a ton of requests from the press for Howard to give some quotes. Howard said that this is a great thing because the guy didn't deserve the job in the first place. He believes that Powell got the job because of who his father was. Howard gave the history of Colin Powell and how Michael Powell was given the job to pay back Colin Powell. Howard said that Powell didn't deserve the position and eventually started fining Howard and other broadcasters to look good to the religious right. Howard went off on Powell for a couple of minutes and complained about the things he did while he was in that position. He claims that Powell and the FCC blackmailed companies by threatening to hold up their licenses. Howard said ''Thank God he's gone... but God help us with what's next.''"
From Mark's Friggin Website
It's very mature to forever rule out entire genres of entertainment because you didn't like a miniscule sampling of one series of one show. I'm not saying you have to go out and watch every episode of the Amazing Race or anything, but it's childish to reject something without giving it a fair sampling.
I'm confused, if people are making music for the sake of making music, then what's the difference if there's a big organization attempting to make money on the backs of the musicians? If they're not doing it to make money anyway, then they shouldn't really care if someone else does. And if they're going to make music even with the RIAA there, then why is the RIAA being around (and potentially paying them more money) a bad thing.
I've never understood this part of the anti-RIAA arguement. From a consumer point of view, I can understand someone being unhappy about them, but from a performer point of view it doesn't make any sense. You've detailed how musicians are able to make music without the RIAA and have done so for a long time. You've also detailed how new technologies make this EASIER now than in the past with the advent of high-quality home recording.
If you, as a musician, do not like the RIAA, why don't you just go around them? They're not forcing you to play by their rules, they're offering you the opportunity to play by their rules for some money. If you don't like them, just avoid them.
I don't understand, could you please explain it to me?
Thanks.