But most likely you are unwilling to change your lifestyle to do so.
And I am not talking about giving up food (which you could, must USians are too fat) or basic amenities, but that you review your consumerist culture of buying stuff for buying's sake.
Gas guzleers, long comutes to work, having 3 or 4 computers at home, wasteful use of energy, cavalier invasions of other countries (you pay them with higer taxes).
All those things add up and make you uncompetitive against people in India, CHina or elsewhere that use public transport, live in closer proximity to their jobs, and can only dream about a $600 PS3.
You want a company, with no relationship with a given individual, to spend time and money for no good reason whatsoever.
Look pal, if you need comforting of some kind then join a club or something. In the bussiness world a polite communication is all what is necessary once a relationship is terminated (in this case a job interview).
People are costumers, candidates or whatever, and given the sheer amount of them, companies can only treat them in a "faceless" manner, but this is OK because that means the company is more efficient.
First of all, most bands, even well known, with a record lable behind them, make more money from their tours and live presentations than from CDs.
And with the internet being the ideal mechanism to distribute your music, it stands to reason you would invest that money into old media instead of several months of presence online.
I have done so to listen to great musicians and orechestras.
I will not pay for DRMed stuff of the same artist (so better they don't put lame DRM or lame "any copying" mechanisms on their CDs). Fortunately classical music has not gone down this idiotic path.
Copyright helps squat most musicians. Most of them make a living from performances and other related activities (talks, personal presentations, advertisment, etc). Only a selected few make actually any money of CDs or printed music.
Good musicians will make a living from music alone, but at the end people have to make ends meet, and we the public don't value music and other forms of art to highly by itself, then it is just fair if musicians and other artists get different sources of income revolving around their art.
This idealized, naive (frankly idiotic) view of the world where arts exists for art's sake is fine in the realms of fantasy, but does not apply to the real world and its daily nitty-grittyness.
The point is that MS is desperately diversifying (game consoles, music players, media) because they know their products are not innovative or reliable (the mountains of security reports and fixes are testament to that, your anecdotal evidence pales in comparision to that).
MS products are in everybody's desktops because most people have got no choice and MS is always inventing new marketing ploys to ensure things remain that way (unnecessary and confussing product differentiation, artificial restrictions like prohibition of runing ceratin versions of Vista in virtual machines).
An innovative company whose prodicts work flawlessly does not need to break the law and to constantly shift the ground under its costumers' feet in order to keep their costum.
The commercial model in which you make shops in which your costumer know what they get has proven successful. Give me a good commercial reason for a big chain not to use that model of making bussiness.
The horror of horrors! A commercial entity wanting to attract more costumers by means of loyalty schemes. The criminals.
I will let pass the asinine comment regarding diversity. Les just say that saying apples are bad because oranges have vitamin C is an equally idiotic statement.
A coffee shop trying to be an "artistic venue" has more serious problems than Starbucks' competition. If they are been oblitarated by Starbucks then either their coffee is not that good, the "art" is crap or both.
Coffee is not adictive, neither is caffeine, the active substance found on the drink. People drinking too much of the stuff may have unpleasent reactions when they stop it cold for a couple of days, but their body will not crave the thing and they will not rob you to get their fix. Finally everybody charges what the market bears. You do when you get a job, or are you going to tell us you look for the job that pays you the least?
The law is trying to cordon off something that by its own nature can't be cordonned off, specially now when it should be patently obvious that anything that is presented in a digital means will be copied.
Laws and regulations that close the eyes to this most simple of realities are wrong.
Artists could still make a living, but it will not be by equating ideas with physical objects.
So if a USian goes to Russia, downloads a song there, and goes back to the US, all of the suddden it is legit according to your warped view of the Universe?
And what about a Russian moving to the US with a terabyte of music downloaded legally in Russia?
If the RUssian company is not breaching copyright law (where they are based) and the downloaders are not breaking the law (where they are based) I fail to see what legal claim they may have.
If anything that only shows that maybe RUssian copyright law is not what US based cartels would like it to be, but frankly that is just bad luck for recording companies.
Selling civil liberties for a false sense of security.
All the 9-11 guys had valid documents, several of them had been identified as potential terrorists, but the sharing of information between different US government agencies was crap to say the least.
You are advocating giving more information to agencies that have demonstrated are hopeless at handling it.
Great way to combat terrorism that of yours buddy.
What are you waiting then to stop the illegal immigrants going there?
Please let us know when US citizens and legal residents are ready to clean toilettes, do the gardening, pick up produce in farms, flip burgers, clean your houses, care for your children.
You will have your precious public services back.
And a collapsed economy.
Which is why your double faced government does absolutely nothing to stop illegal immigration.
If MS wants its products reviewed they can send a DVD, or they could lend you a machine with their wares installed for a couple of months.
In my current job I would have to report such a present and most likely would be told to return it, in many industries it would be illegal to give such "gifts".
The immorality of such actions is beyond question, if it is a widespread practice does not make it any better.
Sometimes compromise betrays lack of character and principle.
And frankly to honour somebody to for reaching a position of responsibility without regard for the consequences of his actions is frankly abhorrent to me, nobody should be accorded honours for his poisition but for his actions.
Mr Ford failed miserably and should be remembered as the failure he was, no matter how much positive spin some of the media are trying to put on his demise.
Slashdot Mirror
But most likely you are unwilling to change your lifestyle to do so.
And I am not talking about giving up food (which you could, must USians are too fat) or basic amenities, but that you review your consumerist culture of buying stuff for buying's sake.
Gas guzleers, long comutes to work, having 3 or 4 computers at home, wasteful use of energy, cavalier invasions of other countries (you pay them with higer taxes).
All those things add up and make you uncompetitive against people in India, CHina or elsewhere that use public transport, live in closer proximity to their jobs, and can only dream about a $600 PS3.
You want a company, with no relationship with a given individual, to spend time and money for no good reason whatsoever.
Look pal, if you need comforting of some kind then join a club or something. In the bussiness world a polite communication is all what is necessary once a relationship is terminated (in this case a job interview).
People are costumers, candidates or whatever, and given the sheer amount of them, companies can only treat them in a "faceless" manner, but this is OK because that means the company is more efficient.
First of all, most bands, even well known, with a record lable behind them, make more money from their tours and live presentations than from CDs.
And with the internet being the ideal mechanism to distribute your music, it stands to reason you would invest that money into old media instead of several months of presence online.
I have done so to listen to great musicians and orechestras.
I will not pay for DRMed stuff of the same artist (so better they don't put lame DRM or lame "any copying" mechanisms on their CDs). Fortunately classical music has not gone down this idiotic path.
Copyright helps squat most musicians. Most of them make a living from performances and other related activities (talks, personal presentations, advertisment, etc). Only a selected few make actually any money of CDs or printed music.
Good musicians will make a living from music alone, but at the end people have to make ends meet, and we the public don't value music and other forms of art to highly by itself, then it is just fair if musicians and other artists get different sources of income revolving around their art.
This idealized, naive (frankly idiotic) view of the world where arts exists for art's sake is fine in the realms of fantasy, but does not apply to the real world and its daily nitty-grittyness.
Why?
I could post mine as well, there is no point.
The point is that MS is desperately diversifying (game consoles, music players, media) because they know their products are not innovative or reliable (the mountains of security reports and fixes are testament to that, your anecdotal evidence pales in comparision to that).
MS products are in everybody's desktops because most people have got no choice and MS is always inventing new marketing ploys to ensure things remain that way (unnecessary and confussing product differentiation, artificial restrictions like prohibition of runing ceratin versions of Vista in virtual machines).
An innovative company whose prodicts work flawlessly does not need to break the law and to constantly shift the ground under its costumers' feet in order to keep their costum.
There are some prepared to pay it.
Some others clearly aren't.
Oh, I say this as a home Linux desktop user for the last 9 years (and on and off at work, as permitted by my different employers).
... in the points you raised originally.
You are not advocating ethics, you are advocating self sacrifice and self immolation.
Those are very different things.
Honestly, what the fuck do you want:
The commercial model in which you make shops in which your costumer know what they get has proven successful. Give me a good commercial reason for a big chain not to use that model of making bussiness.
The horror of horrors! A commercial entity wanting to attract more costumers by means of loyalty schemes. The criminals.
I will let pass the asinine comment regarding diversity. Les just say that saying apples are bad because oranges have vitamin C is an equally idiotic statement.
A coffee shop trying to be an "artistic venue" has more serious problems than Starbucks' competition. If they are been oblitarated by Starbucks then either their coffee is not that good, the "art" is crap or both.
Coffee is not adictive, neither is caffeine, the active substance found on the drink. People drinking too much of the stuff may have unpleasent reactions when they stop it cold for a couple of days, but their body will not crave the thing and they will not rob you to get their fix. Finally everybody charges what the market bears. You do when you get a job, or are you going to tell us you look for the job that pays you the least?
.... could have said that.
The evil foreign investement rears its ugly head again.
For those people artificial corneas are the best hope.
The law is trying to cordon off something that by its own nature can't be cordonned off, specially now when it should be patently obvious that anything that is presented in a digital means will be copied.
Laws and regulations that close the eyes to this most simple of realities are wrong.
Artists could still make a living, but it will not be by equating ideas with physical objects.
Interest groups invest millions in lobbying groups because they don't work.
So if a USian goes to Russia, downloads a song there, and goes back to the US, all of the suddden it is legit according to your warped view of the Universe?
And what about a Russian moving to the US with a terabyte of music downloaded legally in Russia?
If the RUssian company is not breaching copyright law (where they are based) and the downloaders are not breaking the law (where they are based) I fail to see what legal claim they may have.
If anything that only shows that maybe RUssian copyright law is not what US based cartels would like it to be, but frankly that is just bad luck for recording companies.
Selling civil liberties for a false sense of security.
All the 9-11 guys had valid documents, several of them had been identified as potential terrorists, but the sharing of information between different US government agencies was crap to say the least.
You are advocating giving more information to agencies that have demonstrated are hopeless at handling it.
Great way to combat terrorism that of yours buddy.
Comparing Hamburg to Austin is frankly ridiculous.
What are you waiting then to stop the illegal immigrants going there?
Please let us know when US citizens and legal residents are ready to clean toilettes, do the gardening, pick up produce in farms, flip burgers, clean your houses, care for your children.
You will have your precious public services back.
And a collapsed economy.
Which is why your double faced government does absolutely nothing to stop illegal immigration.
The way of the fuckin dodo for bunnies sakes!
But at least you tried to figure this enigma....
A team of people of normal weight and height has absolutely no chance against a heavier team.
It would be interesting to know how a Jumbo jet is built, most likely it is not done in one US state only.
MS does not make laptops.
If MS wants its products reviewed they can send a DVD, or they could lend you a machine with their wares installed for a couple of months.
In my current job I would have to report such a present and most likely would be told to return it, in many industries it would be illegal to give such "gifts".
The immorality of such actions is beyond question, if it is a widespread practice does not make it any better.
You can fool yourself into thinking that such a thing is a "promo".
People with the most basic level of decency and morals know that such a thing is never strings free.
Lets make it flexible.
Not.
Sometimes compromise betrays lack of character and principle.
And frankly to honour somebody to for reaching a position of responsibility without regard for the consequences of his actions is frankly abhorrent to me, nobody should be accorded honours for his poisition but for his actions.
Mr Ford failed miserably and should be remembered as the failure he was, no matter how much positive spin some of the media are trying to put on his demise.