Pay attention folks! The case was not ruled in W's favor, it was sent back to the Florida supremes. I think it is better for W than for Al but it wrong to say that W won the case.
Damn, those ratings are not fair at all! There are lots of cuties on there that got rated way too low. Don't people like brunettes?
It's silly to rate people's looks based on some sort of popularity contest! EPID - every person is different and I'm sure for each photo on there, somebody in the world thinks they're hot.
Once the novelty of Napster wears off, and since they are paying to use the service, users will demand high-quality MP3s from trusted sources, instead of slow downloads from some guy who didn't even get all of the song ripped. So naturally the music publisher will supply them. And people will mostly download from the music publisher. Napster will turn from a peer-to-peer network into a client-server network, similar to what eMusic has done with flat-rate unlimited MP3 downloads, except with a proprietary browser (the Napster client). Big publishers will get a piece of the fees and lots of exposure, but indie artists looking for exposure will be shut out of both exposure and fees.
So is this good or bad? I personally like the idea of a centralized place to get MP3s, with guaranteed quality. I don't want to download them from my neighbor if I can't tell ahead of time what the quality is.
But I also don't like the idea that an indie publisher or individual will have to pay to put their songs on Napster, their fans will pay to download them, and BMG gets money both ways.
Does this mean we can freely redistribute copies of the show? Shouldn't they be distributing source for the theme they used? Hmm, I smell a GPL violation, let's get 'em! We must demand the source code for every actor!
You know, if 5 years ago you had shown me that Digital Convergence press release, I would've laughed my ass off and congratulated you on your excellent use of fake buzzwords and your sarcastic take on corporate America.
"..the international leader in print-to-Internet enabling technology.."
"..cooperative efforts to assure that the consumer experience in this emerging space is positive.."
"PaperClick works by using.. numeric strings which are embedded in the print media."
"Entering a PaperClick code.. routes readers directly to relevant Web information."
And they're even having a PRESS CONFERENCE call about it. Hey, didja notice that they're using those fancy "paper-to-phone" technologies that link consumers DIRECTLY to a interactive telephone experience? Now that's an exciting and emerging space, and I'm glad they're enabling it!
Anyway, now when I see this press release I laugh for about 3 seconds then choke and go silent when I realize this is TOTALLY SERIOUS and these guys have LAWYERS..
As a result of both points, when I explain to someone that "I solely use Free Software", he might respond with "Cool. Well, I got my copy of Internet Explorer as a free download, too."
Then you could use that opportunity to discuss the difference between Free Software and free downloads. Probably your friend will not care and think you're a little nutty, but I'd imagine part of the reason RMS keeps the term Free Software is so that he can use such times to spout some Free Software rhetoric and make his point.
Until early 1999, the definitions of "open source" and "free software" were, as far as anyone but RMS knew, identical. The set of necessary freedoms described in the Open Source Definition was (and was intended to be) the same as the set of necessary freedoms described in the FSF's white papers and propaganda.
Then why was the Open Source Definition even created? If they were meant or intended to be identical, then why didn't the Open Source folks just say that they would adopt any and all requirements of Free Software?
If anyone has the knowledge of what Free Software is or is not, isn't it RMS? I would think he has the right to say that something is not the same as Free Software, and he doesn't even have to make sense when he says it.
My impression is that Open Source is different at this point, not perhaps because of little details in a definition, but because of basic philosophy: Open Source begins from some utilitarian viewpoint (this is the best way) and Free Software begins from some moral/political viewpoint (this is the right way).
What if my wife had died since last Christmas? What if she had left me in that time?
I do stuff like this often: call them and tell them that your wife died or is in the hospital, or left you, or whatever. Come up with a story. The people on the other end are only human and will bend the rules. It works.
Good for telemarketing: when they call, tell them in a shaky voice that the person they called for died in a drunk driving accident and please remove them from the list.
You could call every day and ask them firmly ``This is $yourname. Did you remove me from the database yet?'' After a while they will pass you off to a manager or somebody who will do it. I learned that trick from my mom.
Companies do crap like that all the time, it's only fair to do it back to them!
The negativity against Gore is not the fault of the press. If anything,
the press leans to the left.
The issue is many an American's distrust of intelligence. Or even the
appearance of intelligence. People fear and feeled threatened by people who
come off as smarter than them. Gore unfortunately constantly presents
himself as an intellectual giant, as someone who is above it all, in his
words and body language.
How many geeks here can relate? How many of us have been in a social
setting with ``normal people'' and inadvertently blurted out an unnecessary
correction or factoid that made everyone's eyes roll? And then from that
point on you are treated differently. Everything you say must be correct
and precise and you're no longer ``one of the guys''.
On the news one night, a talking head called Gore ``that kid in the back
that always raises his hand with the answer'', and everybody laughed. Why
is that funny? How come we don't say ``hey, there's that kid that always
makes the touchdowns in football games, what an arrogant jerk''. Even
though the nerd might be the nicer guy, people don't like him.
So that's what I think is working against Gore and why everything he
says must be precise. Bush can mispronounce words, mangle phrases, call
people assholes, and never answer questions, and people brush it off.
The reason Gore doesn't score high in the likability polls isn't because
of a press conspiracy or a Republican character assassination. It's because
he's annoying to many Americans.
They are both intelligent capable men and much of what the press has
said about them (bungler vs. liar) is just a product of their
personalities.
Disclaimer: I am a registered Democrat and always raise my hand in
class.:-)
This whole peice is dedicated to the principal that Government is smarter than people are. "We are from the Government and
we are going to help" is one of the most scary thoughts anyone could have.
In my mind, not NEARLY as scary as "We are from The Big (Insurance|Drug|Oil|Software) Company and we know what's best for the world." Whenever Bush says "I trust people" I hear "I trust the big companies". We need to always strike a balance between Government, Corporations, and Individuals and not let one grow too large and powerful.
The problem is Government thinks that your money is their money.
Money you pay to the government in taxes is the government's money. How else would they be able to pay for things that you may not use, such as welfare, social security, public services, etc. Yes, of course we should make a fuss when they don't make the best use of the money, or they take too much for what we get, but I don't agree with the idea that our tax dollars is just some sort of a "loan" to the government. In fact in times of prosperity like we have now, I'm not missing my tax dollars, and I hope they are put to good use (like paying down the debt).
I just bought Red Hat 7 and installed it on a new drive after six years of building my Linux system by hand, thinking by now Red Hat must really be good and I don't have to mess with compiling and installing everything by hand any more. What the hell, RedHat!
So does this mean that the next major version of GCC will break everything with C++? Did the GCC have a warning or anything in it, saying it was a development version? Will the next Red Hat have, like, 5 versions of the libraries?
Artists end up spending more time trying to figure out ways to make money and to get the pirates to pirate less than they do writing music. The successful bands are forced to tour at a strenuous pace. Even the most popular band spends most of their money on instruments and have to record in a very cramped apartment. The bands that are playing are basically doing it because they really really love to make music, not because they care about being able to do more than scrape by.
Two things come to mind: 1) are many other workers in Russia doing better; and 2) it reminds me of one of my favorite bands, Lush.. their drummer commited suicide, and one of the articles I read talked about how he made something like $250 a month and had to take on extra jobs, live with his parents, etc. And they were a fairly popular indy band, just put out an album on a major, copyrights in full effect, etc.
I think these are more appropriate analogies, though not perfect of course:
"Mr. Farmer, I'm going to plant my own apple tree and not buy your apples, even though they taste better and you know more about growing apples, because you are charging $20 per bushel, and it takes me $0.05 to grow my crappy apples.
or
If you don't sell those hand crafted silver bracelets for $4 apiece, I'm going to pick it up, look at it, memorize it, and then go home and make a copy for my personal use.
Prices are set in market by what the market will bear, not by the seller. Unless the price-setter is a monopolist, and we know how much fun those are!
Re:are copyrights necessary?
on
RIAA CEO Speaks
·
· Score: 1
I don't see the system "working" at all, and that's the case you need to make.
Definitely the system isn't working, but we still need copyright. I don't think any musician except the most generous would want to wake up one morning and find her music being sold on a CD with someone else's name on it. That is plagarism which to me is theft.
The rights of fair use should be closer aligned with the desires of the general population. For instance, why does the GPL work so well even though it's never been tested in court? Because the mass population (us) generally agrees with the spirit of the license, and it basically enforces itself.
Let's imagine a world exactly like what we have now, except that copying for non-commercial use is EXPLICITLY allowed.. would this world be so bad? Would it be without music or art? It would probably be a lot like this world but with a few lower-paid lawyers.
Or let's just convince more copyright holders to allow this with their works. Perhaps market forces will do the convincing.
Maybe a better compromise would be 5 years for a copyright.
This is definitely something important to think about. In what other job can your kids get paid for something you did 40+ years ago?
I mean really, about half the stuff I've found on Napster had screwed up ID3 tags, skips, dropouts, and cutoff songs, and took forever to download.
WHY don't the record companies SELL MP3s? Just set up a page on Amazon, B&N, CDnow, etc (cuz I don't know where the hell half the bands are signed, I want to look in one place). Offer MP3's with ID tags (ie, set the genre to Rock if it's a Rock song). Don't watermark it, don't encrypt it, don't embed anything in it. Just take the damn CD and rip it and say, Here, for $0.50 you get piece of mind that the artist is compensated, and you get the guarantee that the Mp3 will play. Set up a $9.95/month deal for unlimited downloads, etc.
I don't know about you, but I would use this regularly and often. Doesn't emusic do this already with some smaller labels? Hello? Big record companies? Remember us? Consumers? Without us you wouldn't exist?
I guess it's more like when my Sendmail connects to your Sendmail and exchanges a PGP-encrypted message. Except that process doesn't have a fresh and hip trademark next to it. How about SendSecureMailPGP(tm). Or maybe SekretSenderPro2000(tm). Maybe KANT-C-IT(tm). Or maybe FuqDaManPlus(tm). Hmm. Better call the VCs. And the patent office.
The true source of the problem is the monitors themselves. On these monitors, filthy pornography and violence, and blasphemy are continuously displayed, 24 hours a day, in libraries and schools around the country. We must put a stop to monitors at any cost!!
Aren't there people who take old computers and extract the gold, lead, and other materials and sell the stuff after they've collected several hundred computer's worth? I recall reading that someplace. That would be one way to get rid of old machines.
So..now that pretty much everything except kitchen appliances and air conditioning uses low voltage, are we ever going to move to a lower voltage DC power standard? If we have our own power plant in the back yard, the distance is short and we don't need high voltage AC.
It seems weird to generate electricity and then immediately rectify it and lower the voltage with bulky power supplies, giving off heat, etc. Plus lower voltage would be safer.
So, just add copying MP3's to the growing list of things that people like to do but are illegal. Things that can drain millions of dollars from the economy in legal fees, court cases, high prices from artificial scarcity, costs of creating pointless encryption schemes, pointless police busts.
Doesn't it make sense that the way to create value in our economy (ie, make money) is to see what people like to do, and then figure out a way to profit from it?
Not that I feel particularly sorry for this kid, but I wonder what the RIAA is going to accomplish in their grand scheme of things.
Slashdot Mirror
Pay attention folks! The case was not ruled in W's favor, it was sent back to the Florida supremes. I think it is better for W than for Al but it wrong to say that W won the case.
Damn, those ratings are not fair at all! There are lots of cuties on there that got rated way too low. Don't people like brunettes?
It's silly to rate people's looks based on some sort of popularity contest! EPID - every person is different and I'm sure for each photo on there, somebody in the world thinks they're hot.
Once the novelty of Napster wears off, and since they are paying to use the service, users will demand high-quality MP3s from trusted sources, instead of slow downloads from some guy who didn't even get all of the song ripped. So naturally the music publisher will supply them. And people will mostly download from the music publisher. Napster will turn from a peer-to-peer network into a client-server network, similar to what eMusic has done with flat-rate unlimited MP3 downloads, except with a proprietary browser (the Napster client). Big publishers will get a piece of the fees and lots of exposure, but indie artists looking for exposure will be shut out of both exposure and fees.
So is this good or bad? I personally like the idea of a centralized place to get MP3s, with guaranteed quality. I don't want to download them from my neighbor if I can't tell ahead of time what the quality is.
But I also don't like the idea that an indie publisher or individual will have to pay to put their songs on Napster, their fans will pay to download them, and BMG gets money both ways.
Does this mean we can freely redistribute copies of the show? Shouldn't they be distributing source for the theme they used? Hmm, I smell a GPL violation, let's get 'em! We must demand the source code for every actor!
Is the Playstation II similar to the Playstation 2?
You know, if 5 years ago you had shown me that Digital Convergence press release, I would've laughed my ass off and congratulated you on your excellent use of fake buzzwords and your sarcastic take on corporate America.
"..the international leader in print-to-Internet enabling technology.."
"..cooperative efforts to assure that the consumer experience in this emerging space is positive.."
"PaperClick works by using .. numeric strings which are embedded in the print media."
"Entering a PaperClick code .. routes readers directly to relevant Web information."
And they're even having a PRESS CONFERENCE call about it. Hey, didja notice that they're using those fancy "paper-to-phone" technologies that link consumers DIRECTLY to a interactive telephone experience? Now that's an exciting and emerging space, and I'm glad they're enabling it!
Anyway, now when I see this press release I laugh for about 3 seconds then choke and go silent when I realize this is TOTALLY SERIOUS and these guys have LAWYERS..
If RMS was rational...
Why is RMS not rational? Because he doesn't compromise? RMS is inflexible, not irrational.
As a result of both points, when I explain to someone that "I solely use Free Software", he might respond with "Cool. Well, I got my copy of Internet Explorer as a free download, too."
Then you could use that opportunity to discuss the difference between Free Software and free downloads. Probably your friend will not care and think you're a little nutty, but I'd imagine part of the reason RMS keeps the term Free Software is so that he can use such times to spout some Free Software rhetoric and make his point.
Until early 1999, the definitions of "open source" and "free software" were, as far as anyone but RMS knew, identical. The set of necessary freedoms described in the Open Source Definition was (and was intended to be) the same as the set of necessary freedoms described in the FSF's white papers and propaganda.
Then why was the Open Source Definition even created? If they were meant or intended to be identical, then why didn't the Open Source folks just say that they would adopt any and all requirements of Free Software?
If anyone has the knowledge of what Free Software is or is not, isn't it RMS? I would think he has the right to say that something is not the same as Free Software, and he doesn't even have to make sense when he says it.
My impression is that Open Source is different at this point, not perhaps because of little details in a definition, but because of basic philosophy: Open Source begins from some utilitarian viewpoint (this is the best way) and Free Software begins from some moral/political viewpoint (this is the right way).
What if my wife had died since last Christmas? What if she had left me in that time?
I do stuff like this often: call them and tell them that your wife died or is in the hospital, or left you, or whatever. Come up with a story. The people on the other end are only human and will bend the rules. It works.
Good for telemarketing: when they call, tell them in a shaky voice that the person they called for died in a drunk driving accident and please remove them from the list.
You could call every day and ask them firmly ``This is $yourname. Did you remove me from the database yet?'' After a while they will pass you off to a manager or somebody who will do it. I learned that trick from my mom.
Companies do crap like that all the time, it's only fair to do it back to them!
The negativity against Gore is not the fault of the press. If anything, the press leans to the left.
The issue is many an American's distrust of intelligence. Or even the appearance of intelligence. People fear and feeled threatened by people who come off as smarter than them. Gore unfortunately constantly presents himself as an intellectual giant, as someone who is above it all, in his words and body language.
How many geeks here can relate? How many of us have been in a social setting with ``normal people'' and inadvertently blurted out an unnecessary correction or factoid that made everyone's eyes roll? And then from that point on you are treated differently. Everything you say must be correct and precise and you're no longer ``one of the guys''.
On the news one night, a talking head called Gore ``that kid in the back that always raises his hand with the answer'', and everybody laughed. Why is that funny? How come we don't say ``hey, there's that kid that always makes the touchdowns in football games, what an arrogant jerk''. Even though the nerd might be the nicer guy, people don't like him.
So that's what I think is working against Gore and why everything he says must be precise. Bush can mispronounce words, mangle phrases, call people assholes, and never answer questions, and people brush it off.
The reason Gore doesn't score high in the likability polls isn't because of a press conspiracy or a Republican character assassination. It's because he's annoying to many Americans.
They are both intelligent capable men and much of what the press has said about them (bungler vs. liar) is just a product of their personalities.
Disclaimer: I am a registered Democrat and always raise my hand in class. :-)
More info if you're curious, courtesy of Scripting News:
http://www.camworld.com/misc/adobecom. txt
I'm surprised /. hasn't picked this up yet:
adobe.com whois lookup
Adobe.com was hijacked by somebody in China today! ftp.adobe.com doesn't work, etc.
This whole peice is dedicated to the principal that Government is smarter than people are. "We are from the Government and we are going to help" is one of the most scary thoughts anyone could have.
In my mind, not NEARLY as scary as "We are from The Big (Insurance|Drug|Oil|Software) Company and we know what's best for the world." Whenever Bush says "I trust people" I hear "I trust the big companies". We need to always strike a balance between Government, Corporations, and Individuals and not let one grow too large and powerful.
The problem is Government thinks that your money is their money.
Money you pay to the government in taxes is the government's money. How else would they be able to pay for things that you may not use, such as welfare, social security, public services, etc. Yes, of course we should make a fuss when they don't make the best use of the money, or they take too much for what we get, but I don't agree with the idea that our tax dollars is just some sort of a "loan" to the government. In fact in times of prosperity like we have now, I'm not missing my tax dollars, and I hope they are put to good use (like paying down the debt).
I just bought Red Hat 7 and installed it on a new drive after six years of building my Linux system by hand, thinking by now Red Hat must really be good and I don't have to mess with compiling and installing everything by hand any more. What the hell, RedHat!
So does this mean that the next major version of GCC will break everything with C++? Did the GCC have a warning or anything in it, saying it was a development version? Will the next Red Hat have, like, 5 versions of the libraries?
Artists end up spending more time trying to figure out ways to make money and to get the pirates to pirate less than they do writing music. The successful bands are forced to tour at a strenuous pace. Even the most popular band spends most of their money on instruments and have to record in a very cramped apartment. The bands that are playing are basically doing it because they really really love to make music, not because they care about being able to do more than scrape by.
Two things come to mind: 1) are many other workers in Russia doing better; and 2) it reminds me of one of my favorite bands, Lush .. their drummer commited suicide, and one of the articles I read talked about how he made something like $250 a month and had to take on extra jobs, live with his parents, etc. And they were a fairly popular indy band, just put out an album on a major, copyrights in full effect, etc.
I think these are more appropriate analogies, though not perfect of course:
"Mr. Farmer, I'm going to plant my own apple tree and not buy your apples, even though they taste better and you know more about growing apples, because you are charging $20 per bushel, and it takes me $0.05 to grow my crappy apples.
or
If you don't sell those hand crafted silver bracelets for $4 apiece, I'm going to pick it up, look at it, memorize it, and then go home and make a copy for my personal use.
Prices are set in market by what the market will bear, not by the seller. Unless the price-setter is a monopolist, and we know how much fun those are!
I don't see the system "working" at all, and that's the case you need to make.
Definitely the system isn't working, but we still need copyright. I don't think any musician except the most generous would want to wake up one morning and find her music being sold on a CD with someone else's name on it. That is plagarism which to me is theft.
The rights of fair use should be closer aligned with the desires of the general population. For instance, why does the GPL work so well even though it's never been tested in court? Because the mass population (us) generally agrees with the spirit of the license, and it basically enforces itself.
Let's imagine a world exactly like what we have now, except that copying for non-commercial use is EXPLICITLY allowed.. would this world be so bad? Would it be without music or art? It would probably be a lot like this world but with a few lower-paid lawyers.
Or let's just convince more copyright holders to allow this with their works. Perhaps market forces will do the convincing.
Maybe a better compromise would be 5 years for a copyright.
This is definitely something important to think about. In what other job can your kids get paid for something you did 40+ years ago?
I mean really, about half the stuff I've found on Napster had screwed up ID3 tags, skips, dropouts, and cutoff songs, and took forever to download.
WHY don't the record companies SELL MP3s? Just set up a page on Amazon, B&N, CDnow, etc (cuz I don't know where the hell half the bands are signed, I want to look in one place). Offer MP3's with ID tags (ie, set the genre to Rock if it's a Rock song). Don't watermark it, don't encrypt it, don't embed anything in it. Just take the damn CD and rip it and say, Here, for $0.50 you get piece of mind that the artist is compensated, and you get the guarantee that the Mp3 will play. Set up a $9.95/month deal for unlimited downloads, etc.
I don't know about you, but I would use this regularly and often. Doesn't emusic do this already with some smaller labels? Hello? Big record companies? Remember us? Consumers? Without us you wouldn't exist?
Using a peer-to-peer setup would make e-mail more secure since Carnivore intercepts mail on the ISPs mail server, and this eliminates that middleman.
Well, except all the traffic goes through your ISP anyway.. the P2P setup is just buzzword compliance. It's the encryption that's important.
I guess it's more like when my Sendmail connects to your Sendmail and exchanges a PGP-encrypted message. Except that process doesn't have a fresh and hip trademark next to it. How about SendSecureMailPGP(tm). Or maybe SekretSenderPro2000(tm). Maybe KANT-C-IT(tm). Or maybe FuqDaManPlus(tm). Hmm. Better call the VCs. And the patent office.
The true source of the problem is the monitors themselves. On these monitors, filthy pornography and violence, and blasphemy are continuously displayed, 24 hours a day, in libraries and schools around the country. We must put a stop to monitors at any cost!!
Aren't there people who take old computers and extract the gold, lead, and other materials and sell the stuff after they've collected several hundred computer's worth? I recall reading that someplace. That would be one way to get rid of old machines.
So..now that pretty much everything except kitchen appliances and air conditioning uses low voltage, are we ever going to move to a lower voltage DC power standard? If we have our own power plant in the back yard, the distance is short and we don't need high voltage AC.
It seems weird to generate electricity and then immediately rectify it and lower the voltage with bulky power supplies, giving off heat, etc. Plus lower voltage would be safer.
So, just add copying MP3's to the growing list of things that people like to do but are illegal. Things that can drain millions of dollars from the economy in legal fees, court cases, high prices from artificial scarcity, costs of creating pointless encryption schemes, pointless police busts.
Doesn't it make sense that the way to create value in our economy (ie, make money) is to see what people like to do, and then figure out a way to profit from it?
Not that I feel particularly sorry for this kid, but I wonder what the RIAA is going to accomplish in their grand scheme of things.