Article I section 8 of the constitution states that the purpose of copyright is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors exclusive right to their respective Writings...."
(bold mine)
This is clear. It says that the copyright should go to the author. It does not say that it goes to the author's children, grandchilderen, distant relatives, or corporate interest. When congress originally passed the first extension to the copyright law in 1831 (upon renewal for a total term of 28years) none of the original framers of the constitution were even in the congress to vote on it, and only one (Madison) was alive.
Retroactive changes to the length of a term of copyright are wrong, in my opinion. I would have no problem with Disney lobbying for longer and longer copyright terms .
The problem is that "ex post facto" is Disney's middle name. See here. So it's ok for big money to argue for retroactive changes, but if the public does, then screw them??? The thing is that if the public ever does, they don't have the money "to grease the wheels" to move legislation through. There are no glamerous movie stars, no expensive parties, no expensive lobbyists to take congress out to dinner. That's they way it has been for the last tenty-five years until now you have David Corwin, senior counsel for the Motion Picture Association of America, saying that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is "near and dear to our heart." See here.
The fact of the matter is that anybody who studies this issue even just a little bit realize that the public's interest has aalways been nothing more than an afterthought. Indeed, the author of this analysis noted that with the task force on the DMCA;
The message of these recommendations seems to be that the Task Force will see what rights are left over for the public once the rights of the authors have been firmly established.
And this was before the passage of the Sonny Bonno Copyright Term Extension Act!
So we have reached the point now that the only rights left to take away are constitutional ones, such as freedom of speech, fair use, the right of first sale, and the established right to reverse engineer and have interoperability. So now copyright holders are taking those too!
What really has been "ex post facto" has been the endless retroactive copyright terms over the last 40 years.
with Disney lobbying for longer and longer copyright terms if the longer terms only affected new works
For the first time in our history, nothing is falling into the public domain due to the CTEA. So, as a citizen, why should I support some government granted monopoly if I get nothing in return??? Where is the Quid Pro Quo???? These same companies that are suing Napster are the ones who lobbyied and effectively "paid" congress for the CTEA, not to mention the DMCA. Look at it, what is this story and thread about?? Companies who do not want us to use Napster or DVDs on linux, but at the same time are taking our fundamental rights as citizens away, not to mention the old (and I mean old) works that were supposed to enter the public domain?
So what reason do I have to support their so called "copyright" when they are effectively taking all my "rights" away????
Time for a little counterpoint, don't you think?
If the term length is set by legislation (I am not certain if it is or not), then in what way is this not ex post facto?
If you read the constitution, the "right to copy" was originally intended to go to the author only for limited times. So the only "ex post facto" here is the endless copyright term extensions??
It's so ludicrously bad now, that you have the government arguing that extending copyright is a national tradition This statement (in their brief to the appelant court, see openlaw) is so outrageously absurd that it defies description. So by their reasonong, congress twenty years ago had planned on retroactively extending copyright terms now, and in another twenty years they are going to do it again, ad infinitum???
Why didn't congress back in 1976 just extend copyright law for another 100 years? Or is congress just trying to "circumvent" the "limited times" clause of the constitution???? What's "ex post facto" about saying that is wrong??
So, what congress is doing is whoring themselves to special corporate interests by defrauding the public of their due. There is no nicer way to put it.
Please forgive me if this post seems like a flame. But your statement illustrates perfectly why many of us over at openlaw shake our heads. On the surface it seems very logically and correct, but in reality it could not be further from what is right. I'm really glad you made your post, because it illustrates beautifully the widespread ignorance of how the publics' rights are being ripped off by a prostituted congress. I do not say this lightly.
So I invite you to become familiar with the openlaw site, and I hope to see you on the discussion boards there. Some of the people their are extremely smart, and when I open my mouth I get it slapped!!!
Yes, that's what they do now. A recent LA times article goes into detail about this. From the article;
Experts say the first pirated DVDs in Asia came from legally licensed DVD makers in Taiwan. These firms supplement their legitimate sales by producing bootlegged copies for the mainland's booming black market.
In December, police in the Taiwanese port of Keelung seized 225,000 pirated DVDs that were about to be smuggled into mainland China by sea.
extinction temporary. Because then when that happens extinction happens all over again as the earth gets showered with lethal doses of gamma radiation. Then all the furry little mammals that live underground in moutainess areas are the only ones left. See here.
The 80mm CD didn't catch on everywhere. In some markets, notably the USA, the smaller discs are rarely seen. The 80mm CD-R made a brief appearance, and then vanished.
3" CDs were among the first CD singles to be released, they kept the distinction between album and single and were widely welcomed by the record buying public. They were however doomed.
Shortly after they bought CBS, Sony announced that the "extra expense" of making CD players that could accomodate 3" CDs was unnacceptable and, being one of the largest makers of both players and discs, they easily killed the format.
With the release of Minidisc only a few years later a much more likely reason for Sony's actions can be seen.
The 3" format is now highly collectable as the numbers pressed in the late 80s were very small.
Ironically most new CD players, including Sonys, will play 3" CDs.
I suspect that this collectibility factor and the internet, plus $20+ CDs are starting to bring them back. It's just that in some areas (like mine) they are to be found nowhere in stores.
If they were to charge $1 a single I'd bet you'd see them everywhere on earth though.
hoops to make a DVD work. The hole thing is stinky anyway. That's why I'm holding out on DVD. I'll stick with tape. Unfortunately they're probably will be a day that I'll need to upgrade. One can only hope that the citzenry can take action against all bastards involved..
I keep on asking myself this very same question. All the time. It's obvious that the file format thing was to introduce backward incompatibilities. When are people going to get tired of buying the same software over and over and over????? That's one of my main reasons I'm getting to linux, and only hope that easy distros happen soon so I can get my mom on it.
It's clear they are walking a tightrope on this region coding thing. One almost gets the feeling that if a "little bit of shaking" were to happen (I don't know what yet) that they could be kicked off. Back when the government was honest (the late 40s-50s) they took the MPAA to court for owning all the theatres as that was an antitrust action. Knowing that they were on the end of a losing stick they settled out of court to sell all of their theatre chains.
It could be argued now that the MPAA "owns" the home theatre. Thus, I think under the right circumstances (public awareness or problem - like selling/advertising Rs to kids) there could be the right "incubation" for legal action.
They make all the discs for different regions in Taiwan or where ever they can get cheap labor. The problem they have is that they have a hard time with factories operating at night or producing an "overrun" with the production line. So then, all those region 1 movies that they don't want played in China won't play on their "legal" region 6 player.
This is probably why the MPAA is so cranky about DECSS. Because now it is possible to change the region now on the DVDs and then cut different discs (in a hidden factory somewhere) and stamp out millions of copies.
I really do not think pirating is a problem in the US of video anymore (it is in China). Traditional channels of copyright protection exist with legal remedies to take care of unauthorized copying. The MPAA is shaking in their boots over a video "napster" however, and once you watch a movie, you tend not to watch it again unlike listening to music. What they need to do is add extra value to the DVDs - like maybe a complete soundtrack with the DVD, a copy of the screenplay, history of the writing of the screenplay etc. etc.
But these same channels do not exist in other countries, and there is little if any debate there whether it is "moral" or not. It's "just done".
The sad thing is that the MPAA has to buy off congress (done) and knife the constitution (getting ready to turn the knife) to protect their profit in other countries not even pertaining to the US.
However I say this with a caveat. If the price of DVDs climb like that what has been happening with CDs, then it suddenly becomes "economical" to pirate. This raises a whole other issue as to why CDs are so expensive and the price never drops. There obviously is no market pressure on the few big players (aka price fixing?), and as the judge in the Napster case astutely noted "why isn't there any singles like 45s in the old days?" (because it costs the same to do a single !!!)
Another thought, if the term of copyright was lowered to a term of twenty years (like patents), then there would be an inspiration to create more, better and cheaper movies. huh??
So it is really about achieving control and greed. Not that I think that people should "steal" music and video, but that it is more of a symptom. If traditional market pressures existed in the recorded movie/music business (as it obviously doesn't now - antitrust issues are rife here) I doubt if we would even be having these problems now.
Odlyzko shows that the phone industry is not only bigger, it's growing faster than "content" industries. Movie theaters sell nearly $10 billion of tickets a year, but that's only two weeks' revenue for the phone industry. Similarly, the revenue of the recorded music industry is dwarfed by that of Fed Ex and the U.S. Postal Service. Even meterists such as Metcalfe believe point-to-point communication is the most likely type of traffic to be metered because that is what customers are willing to pay for.
The pressure for flat rate music is going to grow. It's just that the RIAA can't give up their $20+ CD prices. So they are going to nuke the internet instead.
Too bad that they can't get a brain transplant. One can only wait for the mighty to fall.....
Most of us feel like that Carnivore is a done deal, and anything you might say against it will only be pulled out of the final report.
Could you inconspicuosly add a keyword in the final report to indicate that there is something really bad here. Like maybe "peppered"??
So you might say "the source code is peppered with comments" or maybe "we peppered each other endlessly with questions" or maybe "the code is peppered with features to make sure abuse doesn't take place"??
Normally I'd say great idea, we need open mindedness. But if he has being paying attention to any of the shenanigans that the WIPO has been pulling, and how they rubberstamp the corporate interests that fly by them, we need to have someone who is closeminded to the WIPO and all they represent.
Also, this list above represents the people who are most likely to fix the registration servers so next time I might be able to vote.
Actually, there is one. As the judges listening to the Amazon case point out "a single swipe of the credit card at the gas station" comes pretty close. In fact, the way I buy gas - identical. I stick my credit card in and press a single button. That single press on the button could be the same as a single mouse click.
From the sound of this article (at law.com), it sounds like that the judges know that there is a lot of internet hooey going on with patents.
Roses are Red
Violets are Blue
I want some open source drivers
And hack the hardware too
Won't you let the Cue Cat be mine??
From the article;
The CueCats cost about $10 apiece, Davis said, and the company will spend a significant portion of its $190 million in private financing giving the devices away.
Don't you get the feeling that it's backward? It would make more sense if you put the cuecat in a blister pack for $29.95 and sell it at Office Depot and Radio Shack, and include a cdrom with some open source drivers and open source inventory applications. The purchase price would include the developer license you're charging for now anyway. Maybe include a point of sale app and barcode printing program.
Then they could also sell a subscription web based service that would make it easy to inventory/sort my CD collection. Then I would also pay to link the actual MP3's (or preferably OGG Vorbis) files to those names. Then, you could allow other subscribers to browse my online collection and create a "playlist"
Since I don't listen to my CD's all the time, I would have them available for "check out" for a couple of hours. When I was listening to them I would scan them with the cuecat and they would not be available for further "check out" for a couple of hours.
If the otheer subscriber wanted to "buy" the music for continuous availibilty and be able to ad it to his "subscriber list", he could do a paypal type transaction to whoever owned the music (it wouldn't matter who it was or who the licensing organization was). But first maybe the subscriber would be "whisked away" to the band's music page that could offer additional music or package type deals. I also would be presented with some check boxes that said "Other people who bought this music also bought music from these other artists"
When I was done buying the music, I would be able to downlad some barcodes that I could stick on the CDR's that I could burn . Also, I might would like to buy some barcodes that I could "snail mail" to some other friends so I could "gift" them some music. Or maybe email them as an attachment with a nice ecard. They would be allowed to 'exchange' the barcodes for other music if they wanted to. Heck, maybe they could go to a gift shop if they wanted to.
So, how 'bout it Digital Convergence?? How about letting the "end user" "digitally converge" rather than just big companies that may or may not want to advertise with you. I'd be willing to bet that a steady income stream is more valuable than one that appears "in chunks" any way. And if the end user doesn't see these little 'cue cats' as useful beyond making them marketeer fodder or spam targets, they are not going to stay plugged in very long, and they will end up in the 50 cent bin down at thrift shop.
Don't burn through your 190 mil either. If you want to include any copyrighted music in your database, you will need to buy some lawyers. So it would be a good idea to support that MP3.com legislation also.
If you do "burn through" the 190 mil giving these things away and it still isn't working out like it should, maybe you should keep us open source developers in mind????
If you notice down at the bottom it says "Comments are owned by the Poster." So I claim all patent rights to the ideas in this post (not including those that have been patented already). Since this is formally publishing these ideas, I have one year to file for patents. So if you are a patent lawyer, I need some help in getting these patents filed in exchange for a cut. Contact me at kphil@hotmail.com.
One studio executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that new ideas on copy protection for that analog interface are under discussion among PC, consumer electronics and movie makers. Companies such as Hitachi, Intel, Matsushita Sony and Toshiba -- all with a big stake in the issue -- have been working to find a solution, the executive said. He indicated that an answer might emerge in the next few weeks. (bold mine)
So this is what Sony VP Hecler meant when he said;
We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source -- we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [Internet-service provider]. We will firewall it at your PC.
So why do I get this 'gut feeling' that we are going to have to buy infallible copy protection for the studios with our future PC purchase???. Does that mean that I can't modify said future hardware purchase without being in violation of the DMCA even if it was for a "legit" purpose??
I propose the "Akzar model", where we accumalate Karma by fighting for it. For more information see here Also, there would be a way to "take out" certain users, meaning if they lose enough Karma their posts would be invisible to all. Then they would have to behave for a while in order to re-accumalate Karma.
That way we could 'punish' lamers and trollers. Good posters could be awarded with cash and/or prizes.
Jack if he had the chance to think about this might well agree. I really do think he is a decent guy and it is wrong to make fun of him.
I think this is his effectiveness. Don't think that he doesn't know it either. He was an actor after all. He plays that "ol' country boy" theme for all it's worth, and that gravelly voice is soothing to listen to.
Just too bad he has to "knife" the constitution with his ignorance.
Slashdot Mirror
Look at the constitution;
Article I section 8 of the constitution states that the purpose of copyright is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors exclusive right to their respective Writings...."
(bold mine)
This is clear. It says that the copyright should go to the author. It does not say that it goes to the author's children, grandchilderen, distant relatives, or corporate interest. When congress originally passed the first extension to the copyright law in 1831 (upon renewal for a total term of 28years) none of the original framers of the constitution were even in the congress to vote on it, and only one (Madison) was alive.
Retroactive changes to the length of a term of copyright are wrong, in my opinion. I would have no problem with Disney lobbying for longer and longer copyright terms .
The problem is that "ex post facto" is Disney's middle name. See here. So it's ok for big money to argue for retroactive changes, but if the public does, then screw them??? The thing is that if the public ever does, they don't have the money "to grease the wheels" to move legislation through. There are no glamerous movie stars, no expensive parties, no expensive lobbyists to take congress out to dinner. That's they way it has been for the last tenty-five years until now you have David Corwin, senior counsel for the Motion Picture Association of America, saying that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is "near and dear to our heart." See here.
The fact of the matter is that anybody who studies this issue even just a little bit realize that the public's interest has aalways been nothing more than an afterthought. Indeed, the author of this analysis noted that with the task force on the DMCA;
The message of these recommendations seems to be that the Task Force will see what rights are left over for the public once the rights of the authors have been firmly established.
And this was before the passage of the Sonny Bonno Copyright Term Extension Act!
So we have reached the point now that the only rights left to take away are constitutional ones, such as freedom of speech, fair use, the right of first sale, and the established right to reverse engineer and have interoperability. So now copyright holders are taking those too!
What really has been "ex post facto" has been the endless retroactive copyright terms over the last 40 years.
with Disney lobbying for longer and longer copyright terms if the longer terms only affected new works
For the first time in our history, nothing is falling into the public domain due to the CTEA. So, as a citizen, why should I support some government granted monopoly if I get nothing in return??? Where is the Quid Pro Quo???? These same companies that are suing Napster are the ones who lobbyied and effectively "paid" congress for the CTEA, not to mention the DMCA. Look at it, what is this story and thread about?? Companies who do not want us to use Napster or DVDs on linux, but at the same time are taking our fundamental rights as citizens away, not to mention the old (and I mean old) works that were supposed to enter the public domain?
So what reason do I have to support their so called "copyright" when they are effectively taking all my "rights" away????
Time for a little counterpoint, don't you think?
If the term length is set by legislation (I am not certain if it is or not), then in what way is this not ex post facto?
If you read the constitution, the "right to copy" was originally intended to go to the author only for limited times. So the only "ex post facto" here is the endless copyright term extensions??
It's so ludicrously bad now, that you have the government arguing that extending copyright is a national tradition This statement (in their brief to the appelant court, see openlaw) is so outrageously absurd that it defies description. So by their reasonong, congress twenty years ago had planned on retroactively extending copyright terms now, and in another twenty years they are going to do it again, ad infinitum???
Why didn't congress back in 1976 just extend copyright law for another 100 years? Or is congress just trying to "circumvent" the "limited times" clause of the constitution???? What's "ex post facto" about saying that is wrong??
So, what congress is doing is whoring themselves to special corporate interests by defrauding the public of their due. There is no nicer way to put it.
Please forgive me if this post seems like a flame. But your statement illustrates perfectly why many of us over at openlaw shake our heads. On the surface it seems very logically and correct, but in reality it could not be further from what is right. I'm really glad you made your post, because it illustrates beautifully the widespread ignorance of how the publics' rights are being ripped off by a prostituted congress. I do not say this lightly.
So I invite you to become familiar with the openlaw site, and I hope to see you on the discussion boards there. Some of the people their are extremely smart, and when I open my mouth I get it slapped!!!
Yes, that's what they do now. A recent LA times article goes into detail about this. From the article;
Experts say the first pirated DVDs in Asia came from legally licensed DVD makers in Taiwan. These firms supplement their legitimate sales by producing bootlegged copies for the mainland's booming black market.
In December, police in the Taiwanese port of Keelung seized 225,000 pirated DVDs that were about to be smuggled into mainland China by sea.
extinction temporary. Because then when that happens extinction happens all over again as the earth gets showered with lethal doses of gamma radiation. Then all the furry little mammals that live underground in moutainess areas are the only ones left. See here.
From this CDR faq;
The 80mm CD didn't catch on everywhere. In some markets, notably the USA, the smaller discs are rarely seen. The 80mm CD-R made a brief appearance, and then vanished.
And from this person who sells them;
3" CDs were among the first CD singles to be released, they kept the distinction between album and single and were widely welcomed by the record buying public. They were however doomed.
Shortly after they bought CBS, Sony announced that the "extra expense" of making CD players that could accomodate 3" CDs was unnacceptable and, being one of the largest makers of both players and discs, they easily killed the format.
With the release of Minidisc only a few years later a much more likely reason for Sony's actions can be seen.
The 3" format is now highly collectable as the numbers pressed in the late 80s were very small.
Ironically most new CD players, including Sonys, will play 3" CDs.
I suspect that this collectibility factor and the internet, plus $20+ CDs are starting to bring them back. It's just that in some areas (like mine) they are to be found nowhere in stores.
If they were to charge $1 a single I'd bet you'd see them everywhere on earth though.
hoops to make a DVD work. The hole thing is stinky anyway. That's why I'm holding out on DVD. I'll stick with tape. Unfortunately they're probably will be a day that I'll need to upgrade. One can only hope that the citzenry can take action against all bastards involved..
The next time I'll buy something from then is when the sheriff is auctioning off the furniture at the bankruptcy sale.
I keep on asking myself this very same question. All the time. It's obvious that the file format thing was to introduce backward incompatibilities. When are people going to get tired of buying the same software over and over and over????? That's one of my main reasons I'm getting to linux, and only hope that easy distros happen soon so I can get my mom on it.
It's clear they are walking a tightrope on this region coding thing. One almost gets the feeling that if a "little bit of shaking" were to happen (I don't know what yet) that they could be kicked off. Back when the government was honest (the late 40s-50s) they took the MPAA to court for owning all the theatres as that was an antitrust action. Knowing that they were on the end of a losing stick they settled out of court to sell all of their theatre chains.
It could be argued now that the MPAA "owns" the home theatre. Thus, I think under the right circumstances (public awareness or problem - like selling/advertising Rs to kids) there could be the right "incubation" for legal action.
It would be nice if history repeated itsef....
They make all the discs for different regions in Taiwan or where ever they can get cheap labor. The problem they have is that they have a hard time with factories operating at night or producing an "overrun" with the production line. So then, all those region 1 movies that they don't want played in China won't play on their "legal" region 6 player.
This is probably why the MPAA is so cranky about DECSS. Because now it is possible to change the region now on the DVDs and then cut different discs (in a hidden factory somewhere) and stamp out millions of copies.
I really do not think pirating is a problem in the US of video anymore (it is in China). Traditional channels of copyright protection exist with legal remedies to take care of unauthorized copying. The MPAA is shaking in their boots over a video "napster" however, and once you watch a movie, you tend not to watch it again unlike listening to music. What they need to do is add extra value to the DVDs - like maybe a complete soundtrack with the DVD, a copy of the screenplay, history of the writing of the screenplay etc. etc.
But these same channels do not exist in other countries, and there is little if any debate there whether it is "moral" or not. It's "just done".
The sad thing is that the MPAA has to buy off congress (done) and knife the constitution (getting ready to turn the knife) to protect their profit in other countries not even pertaining to the US.
However I say this with a caveat. If the price of DVDs climb like that what has been happening with CDs, then it suddenly becomes "economical" to pirate. This raises a whole other issue as to why CDs are so expensive and the price never drops. There obviously is no market pressure on the few big players (aka price fixing?), and as the judge in the Napster case astutely noted "why isn't there any singles like 45s in the old days?" (because it costs the same to do a single !!!)
Another thought, if the term of copyright was lowered to a term of twenty years (like patents), then there would be an inspiration to create more, better and cheaper movies. huh??
So it is really about achieving control and greed. Not that I think that people should "steal" music and video, but that it is more of a symptom. If traditional market pressures existed in the recorded movie/music business (as it obviously doesn't now - antitrust issues are rife here) I doubt if we would even be having these problems now.
too bad that the US is less "advanced" in their thinking, or is it because congress is bought????
From the article;
Odlyzko shows that the phone industry is not only bigger, it's growing faster than "content" industries. Movie theaters sell nearly $10 billion of tickets a year, but that's only two weeks' revenue for the phone industry. Similarly, the revenue of the recorded music industry is dwarfed by that of Fed Ex and the U.S. Postal Service. Even meterists such as Metcalfe believe point-to-point communication is the most likely type of traffic to be metered because that is what customers are willing to pay for.
The pressure for flat rate music is going to grow. It's just that the RIAA can't give up their $20+ CD prices. So they are going to nuke the internet instead.
Too bad that they can't get a brain transplant. One can only wait for the mighty to fall.....
Most of us feel like that Carnivore is a done deal, and anything you might say against it will only be pulled out of the final report.
Could you inconspicuosly add a keyword in the final report to indicate that there is something really bad here. Like maybe "peppered"??
So you might say "the source code is peppered with comments" or maybe "we peppered each other endlessly with questions" or maybe "the code is peppered with features to make sure abuse doesn't take place"??
Normally I'd say great idea, we need open mindedness. But if he has being paying attention to any of the shenanigans that the WIPO has been pulling, and how they rubberstamp the corporate interests that fly by them, we need to have someone who is closeminded to the WIPO and all they represent.
Also, this list above represents the people who are most likely to fix the registration servers so next time I might be able to vote.
Actually, there is one. As the judges listening to the Amazon case point out "a single swipe of the credit card at the gas station" comes pretty close. In fact, the way I buy gas - identical. I stick my credit card in and press a single button. That single press on the button could be the same as a single mouse click.
From the sound of this article (at law.com), it sounds like that the judges know that there is a lot of internet hooey going on with patents.
why are those links above slashdotted out of existance???
I have an idea. Why don't you just post a barcode that we can scan and go to the corresponding cuecat story???
Roses are Red
Violets are Blue
I want some open source drivers
And hack the hardware too
Won't you let the Cue Cat be mine??
From the article;
The CueCats cost about $10 apiece, Davis said, and the company will spend a significant portion of its $190 million in private financing giving the devices away.
Don't you get the feeling that it's backward? It would make more sense if you put the cuecat in a blister pack for $29.95 and sell it at Office Depot and Radio Shack, and include a cdrom with some open source drivers and open source inventory applications. The purchase price would include the developer license you're charging for now anyway. Maybe include a point of sale app and barcode printing program.
Then they could also sell a subscription web based service that would make it easy to inventory/sort my CD collection. Then I would also pay to link the actual MP3's (or preferably OGG Vorbis) files to those names. Then, you could allow other subscribers to browse my online collection and create a "playlist"
Since I don't listen to my CD's all the time, I would have them available for "check out" for a couple of hours. When I was listening to them I would scan them with the cuecat and they would not be available for further "check out" for a couple of hours.
If the otheer subscriber wanted to "buy" the music for continuous availibilty and be able to ad it to his "subscriber list", he could do a paypal type transaction to whoever owned the music (it wouldn't matter who it was or who the licensing organization was). But first maybe the subscriber would be "whisked away" to the band's music page that could offer additional music or package type deals. I also would be presented with some check boxes that said "Other people who bought this music also bought music from these other artists"
When I was done buying the music, I would be able to downlad some barcodes that I could stick on the CDR's that I could burn . Also, I might would like to buy some barcodes that I could "snail mail" to some other friends so I could "gift" them some music. Or maybe email them as an attachment with a nice ecard. They would be allowed to 'exchange' the barcodes for other music if they wanted to. Heck, maybe they could go to a gift shop if they wanted to.
So, how 'bout it Digital Convergence?? How about letting the "end user" "digitally converge" rather than just big companies that may or may not want to advertise with you. I'd be willing to bet that a steady income stream is more valuable than one that appears "in chunks" any way. And if the end user doesn't see these little 'cue cats' as useful beyond making them marketeer fodder or spam targets, they are not going to stay plugged in very long, and they will end up in the 50 cent bin down at thrift shop.
Don't burn through your 190 mil either. If you want to include any copyrighted music in your database, you will need to buy some lawyers. So it would be a good idea to support that MP3.com legislation also.
If you do "burn through" the 190 mil giving these things away and it still isn't working out like it should, maybe you should keep us open source developers in mind????
If you notice down at the bottom it says "Comments are owned by the Poster." So I claim all patent rights to the ideas in this post (not including those that have been patented already). Since this is formally publishing these ideas, I have one year to file for patents. So if you are a patent lawyer, I need some help in getting these patents filed in exchange for a cut. Contact me at kphil@hotmail.com.
from the article;
One studio executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that new ideas on copy protection for that analog interface are under discussion among PC, consumer electronics and movie makers. Companies such as Hitachi, Intel, Matsushita Sony and Toshiba -- all with a big stake in the issue -- have been working to find a solution, the executive said. He indicated that an answer might emerge in the next few weeks. (bold mine)
So this is what Sony VP Hecler meant when he said;
We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source -- we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [Internet-service provider]. We will firewall it at your PC.
So why do I get this 'gut feeling' that we are going to have to buy infallible copy protection for the studios with our future PC purchase???. Does that mean that I can't modify said future hardware purchase without being in violation of the DMCA even if it was for a "legit" purpose??
I propose the "Akzar model", where we accumalate Karma by fighting for it. For more information see here
.02
Also, there would be a way to "take out" certain users, meaning if they lose enough Karma their posts would be invisible to all. Then they would have to behave for a while in order to re-accumalate Karma.
That way we could 'punish' lamers and trollers. Good posters could be awarded with cash and/or prizes.
Just my
Those were Valenti's words, not mine.
Jack if he had the chance to think about this might well agree. I really do think he is a decent guy and it is wrong to make fun of him.
I think this is his effectiveness. Don't think that he doesn't know it either. He was an actor after all. He plays that "ol' country boy" theme for all it's worth, and that gravelly voice is soothing to listen to.
Just too bad he has to "knife" the constitution with his ignorance.
He'd make a great friend otherwise.
ok, I deserve that. But why did I have zero problems with Netscape?
That's not neccessary. Congress understands Valenti's position just fine. His arguments are quite well stated with the campaign contributions.
No, he doesn't look like Colonel Sanders. It's obvious that he's "Papa Smurf".
No kidding! Listening to that stream brought me back to my ol' "Ham Radio" days. In fact, 40 meters sound better than that stream at most times.
Don't steal my idea! I was thinking it'd be great if they could bring in a couple of foldup chairs...
It's amazing - you can get 12 CDs for a "single penny" and it's a federal offense to download a few songs off Napster for one penny less.....