Again, this assumes that he indeed owns the copyright to his own work. Most recording artists signed to a record label indeed do not.
However, if he does indeed own his own work, then just by him handing you the work does not imply that you have authorization to copy or distribute that work unless it is explicitly written in form of a license (think Creative Commons or GPL), or contract.
US copyright law is set up so that only the original author of a creative work retains the exclusive right to copy, distribute, display, reproduce, etc unless one of the above conditions are met. By the way, a verbal "go ahead and upload this onto public P2P" doesn't hold up in court.
Think of it this way...When you hand the valet the keys to your car are you giving him ownership of the car? No of course not. Just because he possesses the keys to the car doesn't give him permission for him to take it out to get groceries, race it at 120MPH on the interstate, sell it to a neighbor, give it away to a friend etc.
Yes - I am an audio engineer and work in the recording industry. Until recently (a couple of years ago) DATs were EXTREMELY popular in the realm of professional audio for the reasons mentioned above. But like MiniDisc it never took hold in the consumer market.
Chances are that unless NiN is on their own label, they don't own the copyright to their own works; the record label does.
Also you are incorrect because possession of the copyrighted work does NOT equal authorization to reproduce or distribute said copyrighted work. Copyright isn't tangible property, its an intangible abstract. Therefore the idea of "if possession equals 9/10th of the law..." doesn't apply.
Iam an audio engineer, I have a degree in the recording industry, and I took 2 semesters of copyright law in college.
No - just because you physically possesses the medium containing the material does not give you authorization to reproduce or distribute it. The courts have already determined this.
All creative works are copyrighted the instant that they are "fixed in a tangible medium of expression" which means recorded, drawn, written down, typed up, digitized, etc...
I am an audio engineer, I have a degree in the recording industry, and I took 2 semesters of copyright law in college.
Why would you say that the gov isn't proving a means to deal with it?!?!?
It isn't the government's job to deal with it. Character comes from morals which are a set of personal beliefs and values. These come from home, typically from parental upbringing, not from the government or State.
This is not to mention that the government shouldn't be in the business of education anyway.
Please quit blaming the government for any societal downfalls that exist. The government is NOT our nanny!
You're on the right track (no pun intended) however trains would be just fine if it was paid for by private interests. Also the airlines should not be subsidized by the gov, nor should Amtrak, or the bus service, or light rail, or even highways. All of it should be private for the opportunity to make a profit. That's the only way for it to be efficient and finacially viable.
Crime dropped during the Clinton era because abortion was made legal 20 or so years before. This is talked about in the book "Freakonomics" You can get it on Amazon.
The reason we are not as "wealthy" today as we were previously is because of excessive government regulation stifling innovation, manufacturing, and over the top taxation.
This is an exact example of why big business LIKES big government. Big government has the ability to legislate and regulate in favor of big business thus stifling competition from small business.
Government should be limited and allow free markets to run their course. This is why I will be voting Libertarian every chance I get.
Saddam wasn't buying yellowcake from Nigeria, he was about to buy it from North Korea. Remember a few months before the invasion of Iraq NK had unplugged the cameras in their reactors and began to reactivate them?
Iraq needed uranium. North Korea needed oil and fuel. It was the perfect trade until the US stepped in and took our Saddam.
The problem here is that the RF spectrum is carved up by the government and the barriers to entry are artificially high. Therefore big business does indeed like big government because big government can regulate and legislate in favor of big government. Meaning that if the government wasn't so involved in the entire situation, smaller firms could compete and there would be more firms. More firms means more competition.
Businesses should not be forced to pay taxes because it only increases their overhead. An increased overhead means that their product costs more. This is why it is often said that businesses don't pay taxes, but merely collect them.
No one is being denied access except by the monopolies set up by the government. This is why "public utilities" and government regulations are a bad idea.
Roads are a special case in my opinion, but interstates should be paid for with tolls. Sending men to the moon was a strategy by the US in a time of cold war. And the US should NOT have a standing army according to the Constitution.
The Fed is not allowed to do anything with education according to the Constitution. If it was, it would be mentioned in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution.
It is also proven that the free market educates students better than government schools. They are more efficient, less wasteful, and are not simply a babysitting service like the government schools tend to be. The government should NOT be in the business of education.
The FCC has expanded WAY beyond its original mission of simply keeping the airwaves in order. Government does that, it expands and protrudes into the free market stifling growth and innovation. This is why government should be kept small and limited.
See, big business LIKES big government because big government will regulate and legislate in favor of big business. If government didnt have the power to decide which business get to compete, and which dont, then business would not bother buying off Congress.
And as I have mentioned elsewhere, if the government DIDN'T regulate radio, I assure that we would've seen technology arise that would've allowed the spectrum to be used regardless. It might have taken a while, but I assure you it would've happened.
But all of those are optional. Mandatory regulations by the government, are just that - mandatory. They are NOT optional besides the fact that the Fed has no authority to act in this manner anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, this assumes that he indeed owns the copyright to his own work. Most recording artists signed to a record label indeed do not.
However, if he does indeed own his own work, then just by him handing you the work does not imply that you have authorization to copy or distribute that work unless it is explicitly written in form of a license (think Creative Commons or GPL), or contract.
US copyright law is set up so that only the original author of a creative work retains the exclusive right to copy, distribute, display, reproduce, etc unless one of the above conditions are met. By the way, a verbal "go ahead and upload this onto public P2P" doesn't hold up in court.
Think of it this way...When you hand the valet the keys to your car are you giving him ownership of the car? No of course not. Just because he possesses the keys to the car doesn't give him permission for him to take it out to get groceries, race it at 120MPH on the interstate, sell it to a neighbor, give it away to a friend etc.
Yes - I am an audio engineer and work in the recording industry. Until recently (a couple of years ago) DATs were EXTREMELY popular in the realm of professional audio for the reasons mentioned above. But like MiniDisc it never took hold in the consumer market.
Chances are that unless NiN is on their own label, they don't own the copyright to their own works; the record label does.
Also you are incorrect because possession of the copyrighted work does NOT equal authorization to reproduce or distribute said copyrighted work. Copyright isn't tangible property, its an intangible abstract. Therefore the idea of "if possession equals 9/10th of the law..." doesn't apply.
Iam an audio engineer, I have a degree in the recording industry, and I took 2 semesters of copyright law in college.
No - just because you physically possesses the medium containing the material does not give you authorization to reproduce or distribute it. The courts have already determined this.
All creative works are copyrighted the instant that they are "fixed in a tangible medium of expression" which means recorded, drawn, written down, typed up, digitized, etc...
I am an audio engineer, I have a degree in the recording industry, and I took 2 semesters of copyright law in college.
Why would you say that the gov isn't proving a means to deal with it?!?!?
It isn't the government's job to deal with it. Character comes from morals which are a set of personal beliefs and values. These come from home, typically from parental upbringing, not from the government or State.
This is not to mention that the government shouldn't be in the business of education anyway.
Please quit blaming the government for any societal downfalls that exist. The government is NOT our nanny!
You're on the right track (no pun intended) however trains would be just fine if it was paid for by private interests. Also the airlines should not be subsidized by the gov, nor should Amtrak, or the bus service, or light rail, or even highways. All of it should be private for the opportunity to make a profit. That's the only way for it to be efficient and finacially viable.
Crime dropped during the Clinton era because abortion was made legal 20 or so years before. This is talked about in the book "Freakonomics" You can get it on Amazon.
The reason we are not as "wealthy" today as we were previously is because of excessive government regulation stifling innovation, manufacturing, and over the top taxation.
"Hey Sheep... do you have any human in ya? Would you like some!?"
heh
All the chicks who are "sore" from the night before ;-)
Yup - my parents have been married for 40 years this year and they go through that same fight usually 3 or 4 times a day AT LEAST!
A prime example is the Levitra logo. It looks like a flame; it isn't!
Here is an example:
http://www.uro.ru/forall/images/levitra.jpg
The asstronaut was an avid sportswoman. She played a lot of badminton. Apparently she was always trying to score with the shuttlecock ;-)
Thanks ladies and gentlemen... I'm here all week!
This is an exact example of why big business LIKES big government. Big government has the ability to legislate and regulate in favor of big business thus stifling competition from small business.
Government should be limited and allow free markets to run their course. This is why I will be voting Libertarian every chance I get.
...there will be a full moon by Uranus.
I completely agree..
Saddam wasn't buying yellowcake from Nigeria, he was about to buy it from North Korea. Remember a few months before the invasion of Iraq NK had unplugged the cameras in their reactors and began to reactivate them?
Iraq needed uranium. North Korea needed oil and fuel. It was the perfect trade until the US stepped in and took our Saddam.
LP all the way for real!
I second this!
Just be aware that the Democrats are just as guilty. If you don't believe me Google for the Nancy Pelosi Starkist American Samoa minimum wage fiasco.
Neither party is immune this bs.
And that's why I will be voting Libertarian, Constitutional, and independent every chance I get.
How would this be implemented?
Will everyone who sells now have to enter a SSN or fed tax ID?
What about selling from overseas?
What if one doesn't have a SSN or fed tax ID?
How will the auction sites verify this information?
Will they be held liable if someone gives false information?
The problem here is that the RF spectrum is carved up by the government and the barriers to entry are artificially high. Therefore big business does indeed like big government because big government can regulate and legislate in favor of big government. Meaning that if the government wasn't so involved in the entire situation, smaller firms could compete and there would be more firms. More firms means more competition.
Businesses should not be forced to pay taxes because it only increases their overhead. An increased overhead means that their product costs more. This is why it is often said that businesses don't pay taxes, but merely collect them.
No one is being denied access except by the monopolies set up by the government. This is why "public utilities" and government regulations are a bad idea.
Roads are a special case in my opinion, but interstates should be paid for with tolls. Sending men to the moon was a strategy by the US in a time of cold war. And the US should NOT have a standing army according to the Constitution.
The Fed is not allowed to do anything with education according to the Constitution. If it was, it would be mentioned in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution.
It is also proven that the free market educates students better than government schools. They are more efficient, less wasteful, and are not simply a babysitting service like the government schools tend to be. The government should NOT be in the business of education.
The FCC has expanded WAY beyond its original mission of simply keeping the airwaves in order. Government does that, it expands and protrudes into the free market stifling growth and innovation. This is why government should be kept small and limited.
See, big business LIKES big government because big government will regulate and legislate in favor of big business. If government didnt have the power to decide which business get to compete, and which dont, then business would not bother buying off Congress.
And as I have mentioned elsewhere, if the government DIDN'T regulate radio, I assure that we would've seen technology arise that would've allowed the spectrum to be used regardless. It might have taken a while, but I assure you it would've happened.
But all of those are optional. Mandatory regulations by the government, are just that - mandatory. They are NOT optional besides the fact that the Fed has no authority to act in this manner anyway.