That's understandable...that if the code remains under a FS license (like GPLed code must) then it's ok. But, if you do a BSD/X license, you can't necessarily use it in commercial code. This came up with the recent Redhat patents also...they conspicuously left the BSD/X licenses off their list of ok licenses.
IANAL, of course, but my reading of the GPL is that if you (the pure thought patent owner) put your pure thought patented code into GPLed code and release it, you've given up control over that implementation of your pure thought patent. And, anyone can take the code covered by the pure thought patent and extend it just as the GPL says they can. Of course, this might mean that you can modify it under the GPL, but you can't run it. If that's the case, then the GPL is worthless, and it needs to be modified to allow execution of code covered by pure thought patents, and of derivatives to that code.
Also, there is something called estoppel, which might apply here. But, basically if you promise something, and people do things based upon that promise, you can't go back and change it later and screw everyone over. I am not sure if it applies here, but companies shouldn't be able to say one thing, then wait a few years then change their minds.
I do watch some TV, but I decided to stop going to the movies and to stop buying CDs/tapes. I don't steal them either (despite what people say about distributing mp3's as not being stealing...it is). I do know that the industry has a point that people steal their stuff and they have to do something about it but I can't see how to stop piracy without destroying freedom. They would have to confiscate all current electronics or make them illegal to use to do what they want to do. I also think their real reason for doing all this is to stop competition machines that will make it cheap and easy to make good entertainment (given a creative story).
But ILM gets paid for making parts of movies and those get distributed by the big movie companies (like FOX) who pay money to the MPAA. They ARE in the movie business and money from there does go to the MPAA. They may not be a "movie company" but they get hired by movie companies to help make movies.
I guess CmdTaco has better things todo then read/.
My opinion of him just went up.
But seriously, this just means that they will go to Sen. Hollings (D-Disney) for more controls like the SSCCPBDTABA or whatever it's being called this week to hide from the public outcry.
And, in case you were still buying or renting content, plz stop so these people can't do this stuff. Don't steal the stuff, just don't buy it either.
Seriously, would any self-respecting geek (ok ok another oxymoron...but you know what I mean.:P) ever call themselves a digerati? Isn't this the kind of Buzzword9000 compliant bullshit that makes your stomach turn? Good lord.
Now I get Katz. He's a digerati and they think that they're geeks, so he thinks that he's a geek. That single misconception probably accounted for most of the dotcom bubble and subsequent burst.
This will make a good bs filter. If you ever want to see if someone has a clue, ask them about how the rise of the "geek digerati" of the late 90's will influence the future of the Internet and communications. If they don't laugh at you for talking about geek digerati, they're one of them. Run.
We have to buy him a bandanna, an eyepatch, a hook, a cutlass, a parrot for his shoulder, a striped shirt and some black pants and boots. After all,
JACK VALENTI IS A FUCKING PIRATE
Jack Sez: I am taking somebody else's copyrighted material without their consent and I know damn well I am infringing.
So here's what you need to do:
STOP GIVING MONEY TO THE COPYRIGHT INDUSTRY
DO NOT STEAL THEIR STUFF EVEN IF THEY'RE A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES!!!
Then donate money to people who can help and give money to politicians who might be supportive and write to your politicians once in a while. (Write in a nice way). You can actually be better than JACK! He's a fucking pirate! You don't have to be one! But don't support him either! And most of all
Don't do what he did. You can't win by lowering yourself to their level!
He's a pirate. Don't be like him. But don't give him any money either! He'll just use it to break copyright laws.:P
Let's talk about "THE BIG LIE". The big lie is a lie so big that gets repeated so often that people start to believe it. If you're talking about how piracy won't be stopped by these laws or how the movie companies are making lots of money despite the piracy, you've bought into the big lie.
The truth: It isn't about piracy. It's about competition.
These giant companies have had a long run of huge profits because it is so expensive to make a movie or a record. Technology can change that.
Cheap high-quality digital recording equipment can eventually be made, and massive bandwidth will mean that those things that are recorded can be sent all over at very little cost. It can happen.
However, if this happens, the movie studios and record companies can lose out, because people might be willing to pay less for good indie things. It could end up like the open-source movement where eventually an entire industry of hobbyists starts making extremely high quality movies and songs. (Although it would also create al ot of crap...also like the OS movement.)
Therefore, they have to stop the introduction of high-quality recording and editing and distribution equipment (unless it's under their control).
Fortunately, The same equipment you can use to copy the content of the current regime is the equipment you will eventually be able to use to make cheap high-quality alternatives to the products the current companies.
That means they can attack their real enemy: "competition" by setting up a straw man: "piracy".
You might be wondering why they don't just go after the "competition" angle directly and state that they're scared of the possiblity of people making high-quality movies and distributing them without the blessing of the big studios. They're scared that there might be too many choices out there that are good enough that people aren't willing to give money to the mega companies anymore.
To understand this, you have to ask yourself a question:
If we eventully live in a world where it is possible for creative people to make and distribute high-quality movies and record cheaply, this technology (hinder/not affect/promote) the progress of the useful arts?
Pick one of those three. I say it will promote the arts. I admit, although the vast majority of things that get created will be crap, there will be more gems than there would be if the reation and distribution channels were still tightly controlled by the studios and record companies. So, I say
allowing technologies to come into existence that let people create and distribute high-quality art cheaply will promote the progress of the useful arts.
That may be an odd way to look at things, but it's actually the only way that counts. You see, there is no moral right of authors or companies to benefit from their works. Copyright only exists to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."
That means taht you can't use copyright to hinder the progress of the useful arts.
Therefore, you can't use copyright to prevent new technologies that will promote the arts from coming into existence.
But, as I said before, fortunately for the big media companies, the technology that you could use to make illegal copies of their content is the same technology that could be used to promote the progess of the useful arts by giving cheap easy access to creation tools to more people.
So, that is the problem: The thing they fear is something that they can't attack directly. They cannot use copyright to hinder the progress of the arts. But, fortunately for them, they can attack the technology for being used to pirate their works and get the same effect without going against the Constitution and the only reason that copyright even exists.
So, please in your discussions of the various laws and **AA's don't mention piracy anymore and how these laws won't stop it. If you do that, you got suckered into believing THE BIG LIE and you're fighting on their turf.
Instead focus on the loss of creativity and expression that will occur if they don't allow the technology to exist. The key is to expose the big lie for what it is and repeat the truth enough times so that other people can see through the big lie.
PS: All they care about is money, so please stop going to the movies/renting/buying movies and CDs and tapes. If you're giving them your money, you're helping them.:)
Ironically, boycotting plays into their hands. They will take the statistics showing a decrease in purchases of music or attendance at cinemas and say "See? Told ya so. Pirating is killing us."
I believe you. But the fact that they would do it is all the more reason to boycott them. They're just businesses. They don't have a God-given right to have me buy their stuff if I think they're immoral.
Don't see any more movies, don't buy any more CDs, just stop giving them money. Like all of you people who saw Star Wars, you're helping to make useful digital cameras a thing of the past. (I mean digital cameras for the little people since the bigshot movie people won't have to follow this law.)
Do you understand the implications of this? You can't record a couple's first dance at their wedding because the copyrighted music in the background cannot be allowed to be converted from analog to digital. Plz use this example to explain how sick these people are instead of talking about abstract coding ideas. Not being able to record a wedding reception will hit pretty close to home.
Hmm. So, if they "protect" themselves, they make it harder for "little people" to create art because the things that record and copy sound and images will be crippled for everyone except the big boys. I don't call that "promoting the progress of the useful arts." If they get rid of computers, it will be much harder to make technological advances because computers are used everywhere to advance society and the sciences. I hardly call that "promoting the progress of the useful sciences." If we took away all devices in the world that were either designed by or manufactured with or include the kinds of machines the copyright industry wants to outlaw, we would be in much worse shape. We would go back to 1950 in terms of technology and freeze the calendar there.
Remember that the only reason copyright (and patents for that matter) exist is
to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing, for limited time, to inventors the exclusive right to their respective discoveries.
You can't use copyright to do things that will hinder the arts and sciences. There is no right to "protect yourself". You can get some limited protection if you promote the arts and sciences, but you can't do things that will hurt society by retarding progress just to keep your obsolete business model functioning.
No, the next step is BOYCOTT STAR WARS!!! Those people who go out and see these movies and rent or buy DVDs or tapes and buy CDs or tapes are the ones paying to take 2600 to court. If you don't like what they're doing, STOP BUYING THEIR STUFF AND INSTEAD GIVE THE MONEY TO GROUPS THAT OPPOSE THEM!!!
If you're on this page bitching about the MPAA AND you saw Star Wars or you're planning to see it, then you just don't get it.
The next step is not get a new legislature, and it's not civil disobedience or breaking the law, and it's not to go to the media whining about how mean the media companies are being and expecting the media companies to care. (I hope you can see the irony in that last statement.)
The next step is:
STOP BUYING STUFF FROM COMPANIES THAT TREAT YOU LIKE SHIT!
Get that through your heads. Until you're willing to forego seeing/hearing $BrightShinyThing every time a new interesting thing gets made by the media companies, you're still helping them. All they care about is money. The only way to stop them is to take away their money, and the only way to do that is to decide for yourself that you will no longer give them any money. If your freedom is important, you should be willing to suffer a little by not helping the people who want to take away the freedom. You can do it. It sucks, but you can go through life without seeing movies in the theater and without buying CDs.
All of the other things, from political actions to media campaigns (snicker) to lawsuits won't matter if you keep buying their stuff. Stop giving them money. Tell everyone you know to stop giving them money.
Well, it all goes to the same place. I go to the MPAA page and I see a list of members including:
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.; (which is distributing SW)
That's why I don't make a distinction. They're all a part of it.
I also don't really expect people to stop going to the movies. I would like that, but I don't see it happening. I hope people may minimize their movie and music purchases and maybe spend money to try to stop these industries from taking away computers. I just choose not to give them money and I choose to be an asshole and rant like this once in a while. Shrug. Ignore me if you want.:)
This may come as a shock to you, but not everybody hates the MPAA and the RIAA with a passion.
I know most people don't hate them and don't care. You can ignore my posts if you don't like them. Maybe I overanalyze things, but I really think they want to lock down communications to the point that things like this site won't even be able to exist, and where computers won't exist either.
You ranted a bit there about freedom and, in particular, the **AA trying to take away our computers. I wish you had been
more specific.
Look up SSSCA and CBDTPA: "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act". The idea is, put controls into all hardware and software so that copyrighted materials can't be copied or accessed without the consent of the content owners. The ability to copy and modify data is fundamental to what computer is. If a box cannot do those things, it is not a computer. It is an expensive toaster. They don't want you to have computers. They may argue that you can have other boxes that they will call computers that can't copy and modify arbitrary data, but those won't be computers.
I will go into raving lunatic mode, but I think they want a pay-per-use world where everything you see and hear is metered such that you can't write programs. Basically, given the choice between movies and programming, I choose programming. Other consequences of these kinds of laws may be that you can't send large files, you can't use encryption, and you can't download large files without permission, because those things can be used to copy copyrighted material. I expect that the Internet of the future will be filtered so that only "approved" bits can get through, rather than the assumption that all data can get through now. Maybe you don't care about programming or actually having privacy in terms of what you watch and listen to, but I do. They want to take it away.
**AA has too much money... gorging ourselves on the latest cvrap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us.
You're right. That was an unfair attack, since a lot of what they do is good. I want to see SW. I really do, but I don't want to help them anymore. It's the same reason I've stopped buying CDs and tapes and stuff. It's a personal choice, and I don't expect everyone else to follow meor listen to me, but perhaps if people could minimize the amount they spend, or donate money to an organization opposing what they MPAA wants to do to computers, things would be better in the long run. Anyway, ranting on/. is a good way to let off a little steam.
You posted "if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers." I think you may need to reexamine your perspective if you really believe this.
What I said was extreme, but I really do believe this. If you go to this movie, you give money to the movie industry which gives money to the MPAA which is using that money to try to take away computers. Money is fungible. There is no way to say that your 8 bucks are not going to the MPAA. Whatever percentage of all movie revenues go to the MPAA is the percentage of your ticket that goes to the MPAA. What I'm saying is that every time you go see a movie, you're helping them to take away computers.
And my perspective was very different until about a year ago. I really do like movies. I like CDs. But, the people who make those things are shitting on the little people like me and trying to fuck us over. I don't even think they realize how much their own creativity and profits and new and amazing things are based on the same technology that they want to destroy. Oh well. I do what I can. It isn't much but at least when I'm sitting on my couch in a few years paying 5 cents a word to talk on a cellphone because there are so many layers of copy control and spyware to prevent illegal copying that it requires 2gigabits of bandwidth per second to hold a conversation I can look back and know that at least I spoke up a little bit.
And it looks good. Given the amazing special effects and storyline I expect the MPAA will be able to use the profits to buy off 2-3 more congressmen and take away computers just a little bit faster. It's a good thing that just about everybody on/. is a hypocrite because on Monday we can all come back here and bitch about how the **AA has too much money and how they're trying to take away freedom after we just spent a weekend gorging ourselves on the latest crap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us. Well folx. if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers. Have a nice day.
And yes I *DO* have a lot of karma to burn, and no I *DON'T* care so mod me down you little hypocrite for hitting a little too close to home. You know I'm right.
Hey, you're right. That's impossible. They should ask for a reexamination, like they do with compression patents that compress totally random data. I don't think you're allowed to patent something that's impossible to make...:)
Although, after you bankrupt the company, you need to tell all of your employees they got fired because their Congressman allows people to patent pure thought. And that's why everyone got fired. So, if they don't like it, they should write their congressman and bitch about the government letting people run them out of business for patenting pure thought.
Then, the owner should take the money from the business and use it to warn all other businesses that people are out there patenting pure thought, and they should encourage the congressman to fix the stupid system.
And tell him/her how many jobs will be lost if these extortionists get away with pounding you into the ground. You're just trying to have a business that brings lots of jobs for good hardworking people to the district, and then one of these leeches comes along and tries to trip you up. Also, point out that they could go after any number of other businesses in the district, as well. Does the congressman want all of the businesses in his district to pay blackmail to leeches? Nope, then fix the law.
There are a few things I could think of that would make the absolute stupidity and danger of software patents obvious to the USPTO. But, I don't have the money to get them yet. Oh well.:P Maybe someday.
The difference is that I get +2 Funny karma (as of this posting) for saying "This was posted on Saturday." with some humor instead of -2 Redundant karma for just stating it blandly. Of course now that I have stupidly revealed my master plan, I will lose lots of karma from both of these posts.:)
Slashdot Mirror
That's understandable...that if the code remains under a FS license (like GPLed code must) then it's ok. But, if you do a BSD/X license, you can't necessarily use it in commercial code. This came up with the recent Redhat patents also...they conspicuously left the BSD/X licenses off their list of ok licenses.
IANAL, of course, but my reading of the GPL is that if you (the pure thought patent owner) put your pure thought patented code into GPLed code and release it, you've given up control over that implementation of your pure thought patent. And, anyone can take the code covered by the pure thought patent and extend it just as the GPL says they can. Of course, this might mean that you can modify it under the GPL, but you can't run it. If that's the case, then the GPL is worthless, and it needs to be modified to allow execution of code covered by pure thought patents, and of derivatives to that code.
Also, there is something called estoppel, which might apply here. But, basically if you promise something, and people do things based upon that promise, you can't go back and change it later and screw everyone over. I am not sure if it applies here, but companies shouldn't be able to say one thing, then wait a few years then change their minds.
I do watch some TV, but I decided to stop going to the movies and to stop buying CDs/tapes. I don't steal them either (despite what people say about distributing mp3's as not being stealing...it is). I do know that the industry has a point that people steal their stuff and they have to do something about it but I can't see how to stop piracy without destroying freedom. They would have to confiscate all current electronics or make them illegal to use to do what they want to do. I also think their real reason for doing all this is to stop competition machines that will make it cheap and easy to make good entertainment (given a creative story).
I see the difference being that the caterers and nurses can work for other people. What can ILM do outside of the realm of movies and TV?
But I see your point that you have to cut it off someplace.
But they don't, so by *not* buying an Xbox, you're actually helping microsoft.
:P
You're making my head hurt. Stop confusing me.
But ILM gets paid for making parts of movies and those get distributed by the big movie companies (like FOX) who pay money to the MPAA. They ARE in the movie business and money from there does go to the MPAA. They may not be a "movie company" but they get hired by movie companies to help make movies.
I guess CmdTaco has better things todo then read /.
My opinion of him just went up.
But seriously, this just means that they will go to Sen. Hollings (D-Disney) for more controls like the SSCCPBDTABA or whatever it's being called this week to hide from the public outcry.
And, in case you were still buying or renting content, plz stop so these people can't do this stuff. Don't steal the stuff, just don't buy it either.
And another thing.
:P) ever call themselves a digerati? Isn't this the kind of Buzzword9000 compliant bullshit that makes your stomach turn? Good lord.
geek digerati
Oxymoron? WTF?
Seriously, would any self-respecting geek (ok ok another oxymoron...but you know what I mean.
Now I get Katz. He's a digerati and they think that they're geeks, so he thinks that he's a geek. That single misconception probably accounted for most of the dotcom bubble and subsequent burst.
This will make a good bs filter. If you ever want to see if someone has a clue, ask them about how the rise of the "geek digerati" of the late 90's will influence the future of the Internet and communications. If they don't laugh at you for talking about geek digerati, they're one of them. Run.
We have to buy him a bandanna, an eyepatch, a hook, a cutlass, a parrot for his shoulder, a striped shirt and some black pants and boots. After all,
:P
JACK VALENTI IS A FUCKING PIRATE
Jack Sez: I am taking somebody else's copyrighted material without their consent and I know damn well I am infringing.
So here's what you need to do:
STOP GIVING MONEY TO THE COPYRIGHT INDUSTRY
DO NOT STEAL THEIR STUFF EVEN IF THEY'RE A BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES!!!
Then donate money to people who can help and give money to politicians who might be supportive and write to your politicians once in a while. (Write in a nice way). You can actually be better than JACK! He's a fucking pirate! You don't have to be one! But don't support him either! And most of all
Don't do what he did. You can't win by lowering yourself to their level!
He's a pirate. Don't be like him. But don't give him any money either! He'll just use it to break copyright laws.
Let's talk about "THE BIG LIE". The big lie is a lie so big that gets repeated so often that people start to believe it. If you're talking about how piracy won't be stopped by these laws or how the movie companies are making lots of money despite the piracy, you've bought into the big lie.
:)
The truth: It isn't about piracy. It's about competition.
These giant companies have had a long run of huge profits because it is so expensive to make a movie or a record. Technology can change that.
Cheap high-quality digital recording equipment can eventually be made, and massive bandwidth will mean that those things that are recorded can be sent all over at very little cost. It can happen.
However, if this happens, the movie studios and record companies can lose out, because people might be willing to pay less for good indie things. It could end up like the open-source movement where eventually an entire industry of hobbyists starts making extremely high quality movies and songs. (Although it would also create al ot of crap...also like the OS movement.)
Therefore, they have to stop the introduction of high-quality recording and editing and distribution equipment (unless it's under their control).
Fortunately, The same equipment you can use to copy the content of the current regime is the equipment you will eventually be able to use to make cheap high-quality alternatives to the products the current companies.
That means they can attack their real enemy: "competition" by setting up a straw man: "piracy".
You might be wondering why they don't just go after the "competition" angle directly and state that they're scared of the possiblity of people making high-quality movies and distributing them without the blessing of the big studios. They're scared that there might be too many choices out there that are good enough that people aren't willing to give money to the mega companies anymore.
To understand this, you have to ask yourself a question:
If we eventully live in a world where it is possible for creative people to make and distribute high-quality movies and record cheaply, this technology (hinder/not affect/promote) the progress of the useful arts?
Pick one of those three. I say it will promote the arts. I admit, although the vast majority of things that get created will be crap, there will be more gems than there would be if the reation and distribution channels were still tightly controlled by the studios and record companies. So, I say
allowing technologies to come into existence that let people create and distribute high-quality art cheaply will promote the progress of the useful arts.
That may be an odd way to look at things, but it's actually the only way that counts. You see, there is no moral right of authors or companies to benefit from their works. Copyright only exists to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."
That means taht you can't use copyright to hinder the progress of the useful arts.
Therefore, you can't use copyright to prevent new technologies that will promote the arts from coming into existence.
But, as I said before, fortunately for the big media companies, the technology that you could use to make illegal copies of their content is the same technology that could be used to promote the progess of the useful arts by giving cheap easy access to creation tools to more people.
So, that is the problem: The thing they fear is something that they can't attack directly. They cannot use copyright to hinder the progress of the arts. But, fortunately for them, they can attack the technology for being used to pirate their works and get the same effect without going against the Constitution and the only reason that copyright even exists.
So, please in your discussions of the various laws and **AA's don't mention piracy anymore and how these laws won't stop it. If you do that, you got suckered into believing THE BIG LIE and you're fighting on their turf.
Instead focus on the loss of creativity and expression that will occur if they don't allow the technology to exist. The key is to expose the big lie for what it is and repeat the truth enough times so that other people can see through the big lie.
PS: All they care about is money, so please stop going to the movies/renting/buying movies and CDs and tapes. If you're giving them your money, you're helping them.
Coincidentally, this same statistic would be used by the **AA's to convince Congress that "piracy" is having a direct and imediate impact on revenues.
I understand this argument, and I agree that it may happen. However, it also shows that you think of the copyright industry as the mafia:
You better pay up or the Constitution might have a little accident...
For that reason, I think it's a great idea.
Ironically, boycotting plays into their hands. They will take the statistics showing a decrease in purchases of music or attendance at cinemas and say "See? Told ya so. Pirating is killing us."
I believe you. But the fact that they would do it is all the more reason to boycott them. They're just businesses. They don't have a God-given right to have me buy their stuff if I think they're immoral.
Don't see any more movies, don't buy any more CDs, just stop giving them money. Like all of you people who saw Star Wars, you're helping to make useful digital cameras a thing of the past. (I mean digital cameras for the little people since the bigshot movie people won't have to follow this law.)
Do you understand the implications of this? You can't record a couple's first dance at their wedding because the copyrighted music in the background cannot be allowed to be converted from analog to digital. Plz use this example to explain how sick these people are instead of talking about abstract coding ideas. Not being able to record a wedding reception will hit pretty close to home.
Hmm. So, if they "protect" themselves, they make it harder for "little people" to create art because the things that record and copy sound and images will be crippled for everyone except the big boys. I don't call that "promoting the progress of the useful arts." If they get rid of computers, it will be much harder to make technological advances because computers are used everywhere to advance society and the sciences. I hardly call that "promoting the progress of the useful sciences." If we took away all devices in the world that were either designed by or manufactured with or include the kinds of machines the copyright industry wants to outlaw, we would be in much worse shape. We would go back to 1950 in terms of technology and freeze the calendar there.
Remember that the only reason copyright (and patents for that matter) exist is
to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing, for limited time, to inventors the exclusive right to their respective discoveries.
You can't use copyright to do things that will hinder the arts and sciences. There is no right to "protect yourself". You can get some limited protection if you promote the arts and sciences, but you can't do things that will hurt society by retarding progress just to keep your obsolete business model functioning.
No, the next step is BOYCOTT STAR WARS!!! Those people who go out and see these movies and rent or buy DVDs or tapes and buy CDs or tapes are the ones paying to take 2600 to court. If you don't like what they're doing, STOP BUYING THEIR STUFF AND INSTEAD GIVE THE MONEY TO GROUPS THAT OPPOSE THEM!!!
If you're on this page bitching about the MPAA AND you saw Star Wars or you're planning to see it, then you just don't get it.
The next step is not get a new legislature, and it's not civil disobedience or breaking the law, and it's not to go to the media whining about how mean the media companies are being and expecting the media companies to care. (I hope you can see the irony in that last statement.)
The next step is:
STOP BUYING STUFF FROM COMPANIES THAT TREAT YOU LIKE SHIT!
Get that through your heads. Until you're willing to forego seeing/hearing $BrightShinyThing every time a new interesting thing gets made by the media companies, you're still helping them. All they care about is money. The only way to stop them is to take away their money, and the only way to do that is to decide for yourself that you will no longer give them any money. If your freedom is important, you should be willing to suffer a little by not helping the people who want to take away the freedom. You can do it. It sucks, but you can go through life without seeing movies in the theater and without buying CDs.
All of the other things, from political actions to media campaigns (snicker) to lawsuits won't matter if you keep buying their stuff. Stop giving them money. Tell everyone you know to stop giving them money.
Well, it all goes to the same place. I go to the MPAA page and I see a list of members including:
:)
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.; (which is distributing SW)
That's why I don't make a distinction. They're all a part of it.
I also don't really expect people to stop going to the movies. I would like that, but I don't see it happening. I hope people may minimize their movie and music purchases and maybe spend money to try to stop these industries from taking away computers. I just choose not to give them money and I choose to be an asshole and rant like this once in a while. Shrug. Ignore me if you want.
This may come as a shock to you, but not everybody hates the MPAA and the RIAA with a passion.
... gorging ourselves on the latest cvrap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us.
/. is a good way to let off a little steam.
I know most people don't hate them and don't care. You can ignore my posts if you don't like them. Maybe I overanalyze things, but I really think they want to lock down communications to the point that things like this site won't even be able to exist, and where computers won't exist either.
You ranted a bit there about freedom and, in particular, the **AA trying to take away our computers. I wish you had been
more specific.
Look up SSSCA and CBDTPA: "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act". The idea is, put controls into all hardware and software so that copyrighted materials can't be copied or accessed without the consent of the content owners. The ability to copy and modify data is fundamental to what computer is. If a box cannot do those things, it is not a computer. It is an expensive toaster. They don't want you to have computers. They may argue that you can have other boxes that they will call computers that can't copy and modify arbitrary data, but those won't be computers.
I will go into raving lunatic mode, but I think they want a pay-per-use world where everything you see and hear is metered such that you can't write programs. Basically, given the choice between movies and programming, I choose programming. Other consequences of these kinds of laws may be that you can't send large files, you can't use encryption, and you can't download large files without permission, because those things can be used to copy copyrighted material. I expect that the Internet of the future will be filtered so that only "approved" bits can get through, rather than the assumption that all data can get through now. Maybe you don't care about programming or actually having privacy in terms of what you watch and listen to, but I do. They want to take it away.
**AA has too much money
You're right. That was an unfair attack, since a lot of what they do is good. I want to see SW. I really do, but I don't want to help them anymore. It's the same reason I've stopped buying CDs and tapes and stuff. It's a personal choice, and I don't expect everyone else to follow meor listen to me, but perhaps if people could minimize the amount they spend, or donate money to an organization opposing what they MPAA wants to do to computers, things would be better in the long run. Anyway, ranting on
You posted "if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers." I think you may need to reexamine your perspective if you really believe this.
What I said was extreme, but I really do believe this. If you go to this movie, you give money to the movie industry which gives money to the MPAA which is using that money to try to take away computers. Money is fungible. There is no way to say that your 8 bucks are not going to the MPAA. Whatever percentage of all movie revenues go to the MPAA is the percentage of your ticket that goes to the MPAA. What I'm saying is that every time you go see a movie, you're helping them to take away computers.
And my perspective was very different until about a year ago. I really do like movies. I like CDs. But, the people who make those things are shitting on the little people like me and trying to fuck us over. I don't even think they realize how much their own creativity and profits and new and amazing things are based on the same technology that they want to destroy. Oh well. I do what I can. It isn't much but at least when I'm sitting on my couch in a few years paying 5 cents a word to talk on a cellphone because there are so many layers of copy control and spyware to prevent illegal copying that it requires 2gigabits of bandwidth per second to hold a conversation I can look back and know that at least I spoke up a little bit.
And it looks good. Given the amazing special effects and storyline I expect the MPAA will be able to use the profits to buy off 2-3 more congressmen and take away computers just a little bit faster. It's a good thing that just about everybody on /. is a hypocrite because on Monday we can all come back here and bitch about how the **AA has too much money and how they're trying to take away freedom after we just spent a weekend gorging ourselves on the latest crap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us. Well folx. if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers. Have a nice day.
And yes I *DO* have a lot of karma to burn, and no I *DON'T* care so mod me down you little hypocrite for hitting a little too close to home. You know I'm right.
And what's up with all of these people verbing nouns? They really piss me off.
Hey, you're right. That's impossible. They should ask for a reexamination, like they do with compression patents that compress totally random data. I don't think you're allowed to patent something that's impossible to make... :)
Although, after you bankrupt the company, you need to tell all of your employees they got fired because their Congressman allows people to patent pure thought. And that's why everyone got fired. So, if they don't like it, they should write their congressman and bitch about the government letting people run them out of business for patenting pure thought.
Then, the owner should take the money from the business and use it to warn all other businesses that people are out there patenting pure thought, and they should encourage the congressman to fix the stupid system.
And tell him/her how many jobs will be lost if these extortionists get away with pounding you into the ground. You're just trying to have a business that brings lots of jobs for good hardworking people to the district, and then one of these leeches comes along and tries to trip you up. Also, point out that they could go after any number of other businesses in the district, as well. Does the congressman want all of the businesses in his district to pay blackmail to leeches? Nope, then fix the law.
There are a few things I could think of that would make the absolute stupidity and danger of software patents obvious to the USPTO. But, I don't have the money to get them yet. Oh well. :P Maybe someday.
Face it, the only right you'll have is the right to not buy a product.
Good, then boycott Star Wars as a start toward not buying this crap anymore.
The difference is that I get +2 Funny karma (as of this posting) for saying "This was posted on Saturday." with some humor instead of -2 Redundant karma for just stating it blandly. Of course now that I have stupidly revealed my master plan, I will lose lots of karma from both of these posts. :)