The gov't couldn't keep up with technology regarding their "regulation" on this issue, what makes you think they can keep up with it in 5, 10, 15, 20, or even 50 years?
Government is usually the CAUSE of problems, rarely the solution. Less regulation is needed, not more.
I would say that they are pre-Teddy Roosevelt. IMO, he was the president that started us on the path away from our original idea of "trade with all, entanglement with none"
And this is EXACTLY why the government should have little to no regulatory authority in the free market.
When the government is far-reaching, then the legislators are influenced by whoever writes their campaign checks. Big business gives lots of money in order to get legislation passed IN FAVOR of big business. Ever wonder why a small businessman these days really MUST have an attorney AND a tax accountant on retainer?
Independent and small business is a thread to big business. Therefore the big businesses attempt to skew the market in their favor by buying legislation.
The simple solution is to shrink the government and have a hands off approach to the market (thus the term "free" market) that way big business cannot pay off legislators to legislate in their favor and crush competition through regulation.
This is also why people in other places can make products/services for such a lower cost than we can in the US. Their regulation is almost nil whereas our regulation for business is through the roof.
When the government is large and far reaching, it then has the power to legislate and regulate in favor of big business to help squash competition from small business.
Government here in the US should be minimal (at best) as set forth by the Constitution and the DoI. If the government doesn't have the power to regulate things in which it should not, then it doesn't have the ability to be biased to the largest campaign supporters.
If you are that bitter, why not go into business for yourself?
Who the hell wants to work for someone else? There are thousands of things you can do right out of your house. It isn't easy, nor do you have the "security" of employment (although I would argue that "security" in employment is becoming less and less) but at least you are your own boss and your potential earned income can be huge.
I am self-employed and I just don't get why people want "a job"
First off the RIAA is not the same as the music publishing industry. ASCAP/BMI/SESAC licenses songs from the publisher for broadcast and live performances, NOT recordings. Mechanical reproductions are licensed from the publisher through the Harry Fox Agency to be cut or recorded.
Secondly, the Congress does not need to actively protect IP by enacting new laws. The ones we have work just fine. It is the court's job to protect the IP of the involved parties. In the US copyright law is a civil matter, a tort, between two parties not a criminal matter which is between the government and an individual.
And this is a prime example of why big business likes big government.
When the government is large and far reaching, it then has the power to legislate and regulate in favor of big business to help squash competition from small business.
Government here in the US should be minimal (at best) as set forth by the Constitution and the DoI. If the government doesn't have the power to regulate things in which it should not, then it doesn't have the ability to be biased to the largest campaign supporters.
This is a prime example of why big business likes big government.
When the government is large and far reaching, it then has the power to legislate and regulate in favor of big business to help squash competition from small business.
Government here in the US should be minimal (at best) as set forth by the Constitution and the DoI. If the government doesn't have the power to regulate things in which it should not, then it doesn't have the ability to be biased to the largest campaign supporters.
I have taken a couple of US copyright law courses in college.
The way to sum it up is this: Ideas and facts are NOT copyrightable in the US.
Only the expression of ideas and facts can be copyrighted given there is a minimal degree of creativity. If the layout of the facts can be considered copyrightable as long as it has a minimal degree of creativity to it. For example, the phonebook listing of names isn't copyrightable because an alphabetical listing does not constitute enough creativity to be copyrightable.
Charachters can only be copyrighted if they are well enough deliniated.
I wasn't allowed to watch Simpson, YCDTOTV, Married With Children, and a few others in that vein.
Did it bother me? Not at all.
But my mom bought a NES the second Christmas they were out ('89 I think) and she played it just as much, if not more, than I did.
My parents bought me a Commodore 64/128 around 1987. I used it to play games mostly and learned a little bit of very simplistic BASIC programming then. To give you perspective I'm 24 now.
My parents bought a series of PCs in the 90s the first one of which contained PC-GEOS a well developed DOS-based 16bit GUI. Eventually we got on Prodigy and I did the BBS thing too.
When I was a teenager at age 14 I paid for broadband cable in my house. I then began to create websites for various small businesses and that kept me from ever having to have a "job" in high school. In fact I did so well with that I didn't have to have a "job" until my 3rd year in college because school kept me too busy to work on my other income-producing products.
He was born in north Mississippi in the 30s and lived in a shack with dirt floors.
To my knowledge, he was the only one in his family who graduated from high school and was given a scholarship to Ole Miss Univ. He earned a BS and then went to work for Buckeye/Procter and Gamble. He also has his own firm.
He currently holds 20 something patents and was the principle chemist that designed the absorbancy factor of Pampers and MaxiPads.
He is a millionare, and has earned it.
There is nothing wrong with using science to make money - in fact it is how society progresses forward (that and warfare technology development). Money is the driving force of innovation and invention. Don't beleive me? Look at Hughes, Bell, Edison, Ford etc...
Once I made the mistake of having day-old beaver, and the only thing I can say is that it was like a dried up crusty grilled cheese sandwhich with just a hint of mayo.
I can't imagine how one from the jurassic era would taste?
Ohhh. You mean animals? I though we were talking about...
Did you know that when petroleum is refined into gasoline a thick sludge material is left over as a by-product of that process?
The oil industry would have to pay big money and would have big problems trying to get rid of the sludge. So what do they do? They chemically massage it, soften it up, and bottle it up and sell it as motor oil!
This is one reason why synthetic motor oils are MUCH better lubricants than petroleum based motor oils. This is also why you can get a qt of petroleum motor oil for $.99/qt whereas most high quality synthetics start at $4.20/qt.
And yes I am a distributor of synthetic motor oils;-)
I have studied copyright mostly in regards to music and recording (I'm an audio engineer).
Unfortunately I don't have a firm grasp on how copyright affects one's code.
If you are interested, you should check out the concept of the design/utility dichotomy in regards to copyright law.
In your writing/Hemingway example, your work would be a new work based upon the fact that the layout is a creative element, however it would be based off of a derivative work.
My copyright law professor would often say "it isn't what's wrong and right, it's what's proveable in court" and "the law is not black and white, but many shades of grey".
Slashdot Mirror
Technology changes all the time.
The gov't couldn't keep up with technology regarding their "regulation" on this issue, what makes you think they can keep up with it in 5, 10, 15, 20, or even 50 years?
Government is usually the CAUSE of problems, rarely the solution. Less regulation is needed, not more.
Yeah -
That was Castro's excuse too
Our telephony mess that we are in now was caused by excessive regulation.
I don't one can reasonably think more regulation will fix things or cause less problems 10-50 years down the road.
I would say that they are pre-Teddy Roosevelt. IMO, he was the president that started us on the path away from our original idea of "trade with all, entanglement with none"
That's because those types of gun laws are unconstitutional.
If it has to be permitted by the state, then it isn't a right!
My girlfriend has one of these about once a month...
:-(
Uhh...err...wait... ok... I admit it... my "imaginary girlfriend"
I still don't get the joke.... I've been accused of being dense before.
Perhaps this is like a virual marketing campaign for him and his workout stuff that he sells?
After all, I can't believe he is THIS popular?
I am half owner and webmaster of www.GM-Diesel.com We have a forum for people interested in GM's line of diesel trucks.
Out of 8,150 total users 1,007 have AOL e-mail addresses.
That is almost 12.5% !!!!
I don't think that people like me can just simply "ignore" 12.5% of our user base!
When that number drops below 5% it might be possible. Until then (and I believe it is well on it's way) we all have to deal with it.
And this is EXACTLY why the government should have little to no regulatory authority in the free market.
When the government is far-reaching, then the legislators are influenced by whoever writes their campaign checks. Big business gives lots of money in order to get legislation passed IN FAVOR of big business. Ever wonder why a small businessman these days really MUST have an attorney AND a tax accountant on retainer?
Independent and small business is a thread to big business. Therefore the big businesses attempt to skew the market in their favor by buying legislation.
The simple solution is to shrink the government and have a hands off approach to the market (thus the term "free" market) that way big business cannot pay off legislators to legislate in their favor and crush competition through regulation.
This is also why people in other places can make products/services for such a lower cost than we can in the US. Their regulation is almost nil whereas our regulation for business is through the roof.
Big business likes big government.
When the government is large and far reaching, it then has the power to legislate and regulate in favor of big business to help squash competition from small business.
Government here in the US should be minimal (at best) as set forth by the Constitution and the DoI. If the government doesn't have the power to regulate things in which it should not, then it doesn't have the ability to be biased to the largest campaign supporters.
What is it with all of the Chuck Norris jokes lately? I've seen them all over the Internet in more and more frequency recently.
What is up with it?
If you are that bitter, why not go into business for yourself?
Who the hell wants to work for someone else? There are thousands of things you can do right out of your house. It isn't easy, nor do you have the "security" of employment (although I would argue that "security" in employment is becoming less and less) but at least you are your own boss and your potential earned income can be huge.
I am self-employed and I just don't get why people want "a job"
A few points:
First off the RIAA is not the same as the music publishing industry. ASCAP/BMI/SESAC licenses songs from the publisher for broadcast and live performances, NOT recordings. Mechanical reproductions are licensed from the publisher through the Harry Fox Agency to be cut or recorded.
Secondly, the Congress does not need to actively protect IP by enacting new laws. The ones we have work just fine. It is the court's job to protect the IP of the involved parties. In the US copyright law is a civil matter, a tort, between two parties not a criminal matter which is between the government and an individual.
And this is a prime example of why big business likes big government.
When the government is large and far reaching, it then has the power to legislate and regulate in favor of big business to help squash competition from small business.
Government here in the US should be minimal (at best) as set forth by the Constitution and the DoI. If the government doesn't have the power to regulate things in which it should not, then it doesn't have the ability to be biased to the largest campaign supporters.
This is a prime example of why big business likes big government.
When the government is large and far reaching, it then has the power to legislate and regulate in favor of big business to help squash competition from small business.
Government here in the US should be minimal (at best) as set forth by the Constitution and the DoI. If the government doesn't have the power to regulate things in which it should not, then it doesn't have the ability to be biased to the largest campaign supporters.
I am half owner/operator of www.GM-Diesel.com We have a forum for people interested in GM's line of diesel trucks.
Out of 8,150 total users 1,007 have AOL e-mail addresses.
That is almost 12.5% !!!!
I don't think that people like me can just simply "ignore" 12.5% of our user base!
When that number drops below 5% it might be possible. Until then (and I believe it is well on it's way) we all have to deal with it.
I have taken a couple of US copyright law courses in college.
The way to sum it up is this:
Ideas and facts are NOT copyrightable in the US.
Only the expression of ideas and facts can be copyrighted given there is a minimal degree of creativity. If the layout of the facts can be considered copyrightable as long as it has a minimal degree of creativity to it. For example, the phonebook listing of names isn't copyrightable because an alphabetical listing does not constitute enough creativity to be copyrightable.
Charachters can only be copyrighted if they are well enough deliniated.
I hope this clears some things up for everyone.
I wasn't allowed to watch Simpson, YCDTOTV, Married With Children, and a few others in that vein.
Did it bother me? Not at all.
But my mom bought a NES the second Christmas they were out ('89 I think) and she played it just as much, if not more, than I did.
My parents bought me a Commodore 64/128 around 1987. I used it to play games mostly and learned a little bit of very simplistic BASIC programming then. To give you perspective I'm 24 now.
My parents bought a series of PCs in the 90s the first one of which contained PC-GEOS a well developed DOS-based 16bit GUI. Eventually we got on Prodigy and I did the BBS thing too.
When I was a teenager at age 14 I paid for broadband cable in my house. I then began to create websites for various small businesses and that kept me from ever having to have a "job" in high school. In fact I did so well with that I didn't have to have a "job" until my 3rd year in college because school kept me too busy to work on my other income-producing products.
... are a close-minded, bigoted, narrow-thinking ass.
I believe in the seperation of school and state!
That would eliminate this entire issue.
My uncle is a chemist millionaire.
He was born in north Mississippi in the 30s and lived in a shack with dirt floors.
To my knowledge, he was the only one in his family who graduated from high school and was given a scholarship to Ole Miss Univ. He earned a BS and then went to work for Buckeye/Procter and Gamble. He also has his own firm.
He currently holds 20 something patents and was the principle chemist that designed the absorbancy factor of Pampers and MaxiPads.
He is a millionare, and has earned it.
There is nothing wrong with using science to make money - in fact it is how society progresses forward (that and warfare technology development). Money is the driving force of innovation and invention. Don't beleive me? Look at Hughes, Bell, Edison, Ford etc...
I bet those things smell horrible.
Once I made the mistake of having day-old beaver, and the only thing I can say is that it was like a dried up crusty grilled cheese sandwhich with just a hint of mayo.
I can't imagine how one from the jurassic era would taste?
Ohhh. You mean animals? I though we were talking about...
Did you know that when petroleum is refined into gasoline a thick sludge material is left over as a by-product of that process?
;-)
The oil industry would have to pay big money and would have big problems trying to get rid of the sludge. So what do they do? They chemically massage it, soften it up, and bottle it up and sell it as motor oil!
This is one reason why synthetic motor oils are MUCH better lubricants than petroleum based motor oils. This is also why you can get a qt of petroleum motor oil for $.99/qt whereas most high quality synthetics start at $4.20/qt.
And yes I am a distributor of synthetic motor oils
Geeze I hope you are a member of SMPTE
I have studied copyright mostly in regards to music and recording (I'm an audio engineer).
Unfortunately I don't have a firm grasp on how copyright affects one's code.
If you are interested, you should check out the concept of the design/utility dichotomy in regards to copyright law.
In your writing/Hemingway example, your work would be a new work based upon the fact that the layout is a creative element, however it would be based off of a derivative work.
My copyright law professor would often say "it isn't what's wrong and right, it's what's proveable in court" and "the law is not black and white, but many shades of grey".
How in the bloody hell did this get modded "interesting"?!?!?!