Thank you both for your concern about my grammar. I've never really thought about that one, and you're both right. I'll nod to your knowledge.
However, slashdot is not known as a haven for good grammar. There are greater grammar issues on slashdot than this one, such as the famous loose/lose. Heck, this peeve isn't even in the Everything 2 list of grammar pet peeves. Perhaps one of you could add it so that other clueless clods like me don't have to be prodded.
Hehe, that's fairly funny. Hope it get's modded up.
On the serious side, the news that shows up for Canada and the US is wildy different from google news. I get tidbits of news from the cities where my family lives. I don't think anything that happens in Calgary will make the US news page unless it affects US Interests.
That's an excellent idea, you should develop it some more and sell it to Google:) I'm sure they's find good use for it. As I find myself moving about in this world, being able to get the information most relevant to my situation is becoming more difficult.
One example would be very useful, I think, would be the ability to select one or more countries to search in from the main Web search. Currently Google does this for the country specific subdomains (google.cl lets me restrict search to Chilean pages), but not enabled for multiple countries at the same time.
I think it's great. I'm a Canadian, currently in Chile, and in preparations for a move to Mexico. I am interested in US News, Canadian News, Mexican News, and International News. I could care less about Sports, Entertainment, and Health News, so I get rid of them. This is even better than workspaces for me.
Our company is arriving a bit late to the 'intranet' party, and I'm developing our Intranet in this style. Where you really notice the difference is:
1. Speed - It f'ing fast 2. Startup time - Instant 3. Footprint - small 4. Browser support - surprisingly consistent. Event models need some work, including Firefox.
Did I mention that it's fast? Check out google suggest, realize that there's a round trip to the server going on in the background, and you'll get the picture.
It also maintains suprisingly light code. You just register an event handler of some DOM element, and let the teensy bits of javascript pull up some fresh XHTML. This technique fits very well with simple event driven programming.
Another nice thing is that you can use most whatever as a callback. I'm using good old PHP, as PHP snippets are fast and lightweight.
I suspect we will be seeing alot much more of this.
Maybe I'm not very good. Maybe that's a result of my job, where 20% of the time is programming and the rest of the time is tons of other stuff that keeps the company running smoothly. I've had to learn like many different programming languages over the years. Powerful autocomplete helps clear the cobwebs. If you mostly program in Java, do you remember your C++? How about javascript/PHP/perl and all of the other web languages, how about all of the associated standard and custom libraries? Sure I can read a man page, or heck, a paper page to remember the arguments; but why should I? Good autocomplete will tell you the function arguments, their types, reference styles and return values as you type. You simply cannot compare this to anything that requires additional keystrokes, window changes, book opening. I know the syntax, I know how to program effectively, but what was the name of that function? Did it take one argument,2 or 20? Modern programming requires access to a lot of information, and autocomplete is one of the best things I've seen. Add to that an annotated class/library browser and wow, holy productivity.
Being an effective programmer often means picking up new tools. As these new tools inevitably come with reams of new functions / objects etc. Having a powerful editor flattens the learning curve greatly. How much quicker is it to become productive in a New language when you have autocomplete?
btw: the point of this message is not 'difficult and itimidating', the point is 'getting the job done'. If having imperfect memory means 'frankly not being good', then welcome to the human race, mate.
Many Viruses disable antivirus systems as part of their payloads. Some even write to the hosts file so that all antivirus update requests go staright to localhost. Some are clever enough to do this while leaving even experienced users unaware that their virus protection isn't working.
We had a virus on a machine here that didn't do any serious degrading of system performance, it just set up a backddor, downloaded some file transferring software, and was being used as a warez droppoint. The Antivirus icon was still in the system tray, and there were no indications that anything was wrong.
I'm not blaming Monsanto for anything. What concerns me the most about Monsanto is that they are currently leaders, and are doing what most every large corporation tries to do: create a monopoly.
Imagine a Microsoft style monopoly on, for example, wheat (which Monsanto has round-up resistant versions of). Along comes a 'virus' and 96% of the wheat on the planet dies.
The fault would not be Monsanto's, it would actually be the Intellectual Property laws that allowed Monsanto to take control. I don't regularly blame companies for anything, as corporations will always try to behave in their 'best interests'. The problem is the creation of a 'monopoly' (the definition of what patent and copyright give) with respect to things like genes and plants.
I know all about phylloxera, as I live in Chile where most of the grapes survived:) Good wine here.
In the late 19th century, more than a million Irish diead because their entire food structure was built on a specific breed of potato. All of those potatoes died, and so did a bunch of Irishmen.
Imagine a Monopoly in seeds. Gives a whole new meaning to the thoughts of 'Virus'
Librarians have small budgets, and worry about getting the books that most people want.
The other problem with computer books is many librarians don't understand what makes a Library worthy computer book. Our college library was full of 'Learn Paradox in 21 days' type books. This was in 1999 when Paradox basically ceased to exist.
There are classic computer books that should be in every library. Books by Knuth, Tannenbaum, Foley, etc, that form the fundamentals of our knowledge about computers.
For most librarians, it's hard to know the difference between 'fashion fluff' and 'real stuff'.
Not in Vancouver BC, they weren't. Not just closeouts either. At the height of the vinyl/cassette replacement period new realeases were cheap. The record companies have done a very good job of inflating the price. That's not to say they should be sold for marginal cost (about.75). But the record companies gouged ALL consumers during the 90's.
While I'm mostly in agreement with your points, I'd like to try and hone your argument a bit more.
Number 3: Piracy is driven by overpriced CD's
The RIAA lost a judgement because they colluded to artificially inflate the price of CD's. At one point, CD's were extremely cheap. I remember buying CD's for an average price of 10.49 or 9.99 Canadian, about 6 bucks US at the time. That price in Canada has now climbed up to an average of 18.00 (almost DOUBLE).
Guess what: I buy the same number of CD's now in a year as I used to buy in a month Becuase 1. I'm buying DVD's (over 150 now) 2. I'm buying diapers for my baby (not in my 20's anymore) 3. I've replaced all my vinyl and cassettes. 4. The number of artists creating music that I enjoy has decreased significantly.
I am the RIAA's worst nightmare, because I prove that they distort the facts to suit their purpose. I don't download MP3's but my CD buying habits have decreased by 80% annually. They lose probably 1000 a year because of me...
There are thousands more like me. I just think it's a bit ridiculous that the governments of the world have swallowed the content industries argument so wholly. We are going to lose control of our open systems and hardware becausse of what is basically a lie, that mp3 sharing is the downfall of the record industry.
I see I've gotten offtopic here, so I'll get back into it. As I mentioned before, I think you're pretty much bang on in your post. I just think number 3 might be stricken out of it to make it that much more effective.
Not that I like it, but the US DoJ effectively sets it's own agenda as to which crimes it will attack most heavily. This is done through it's budgeting and tasking offices. The US DoJ can crow about this wonderful operation, but it's actually the result of shifting money from counterterrorism into cybercrime, one of the 'top priorites' of the DoJ during the early parts of 2001. Counterterrorism didn't even make the short list when the money was being divvied up to launch an operation of this scale. That's pretty much 'on record'. A little bit chilling thinking about John Ashcroft hunting down smut peddlers and warez kiddies instead of terrorists.
If the DoJ decides that oral sex in Kentucky (state?) is no longer relevant, they stop enforcing it. If your local police department decides that the city needs more cash, they'll step up speed traps in areas that have little or no effect on traffic safety and a large effect on income.
Law Enforcement always has, and always will, maintain it's own agenda. It would be nice if they followed my agenda, though:)
While most would agree that all reasonable laws should be enforced, there are many antiquated laws that no longer serve their purpose. There are laws against oral sex, laws about compensation for damaged slaves, etc, still on the books today. Questioning copyright is completely valid. They are an old set of laws based on completely different circumstances. The traditional copyright balance is completely skewed in favour of the copyright owner. The most recent changes to copyright law (extensions and felony charges) are completely new and were pruchased by the copyright holders. 10 years ago this was not a felony.
One must also consider the purpose of the law. In the case of your speeding ticket example, it is to improve traffic safety. However I'm sure that most can share an experience of the radar trap at the bottom of a long hill or in some other place that is designed to maximize ticket revenue instead of improving traffic safety. Even enforcement of the law is just as critical as the fairness of the law.
I think iTunes without the DRM would be just fine. I think most people would buy. I definitely don't feel sorry for advertisers losing money.
Maybe Pop stars will have to start doing product placement within the music. Hip Hop stars already do. They love to spout off about their brands.
I remeber shooting a sailing/cruising movie with a family friend years ago. It made it onto very small scrrens (think auditoriums). He got 500 bucks CDN (.80 US:) for always drinking Miller and making sure it was occaisionally visible.
Anyway. we've probably run this thread into the ground, I imagine there's noone reading at this point other than us:) If you wan't to keep jabbing, feel free to write me r_k_e_r_r_@_n_o_s_p_am_b_c_b_e_a_r_i_n_g_._c_l, drop the nospam and the underscores.
He may look like Eddie Van Halen while soloing, but at least he's entertaining:) He also didn't sign on to invading Iraq this time, though he did in Gulf War I. Canada is still holding on to a relatively positive economic outlook.
There was a protester that violated his personal space once. Front page picture of Jean gripping this guy by the collar and pushing him away. He was wearing dark glasses. When he was interviewed and asked what happened, he said in a Terminator monitone: "He was in my face.... So I took him out..."
Good points. I still don't know what is actually the right way to go on the whole digital media thing. People do need to get paid. The question is, what's the most equitable way to do it that leaves the majority of control over purchased works in the hands of the Consumer. I don't believe DRM (any DRM) has much to do with consumer control, as it is ultimately tied to unique identifiers and other privacy unenhancing features.
I guess I'm still a bit closer to supporting types of compulsory licensing, based on the following argument:" The Internet Users have decided that they wish to share copyrighted content whenever and wherever they want without anyone getting in their way and without tracking them. They will win that fight. How can we still make money"
Good point. Thankfully I don't live in California having to pay the property taxes:)
Any carefully crafted legislation could prevent that. Fortunately for Canadians, the lobby groups are not as powerful in the US, so our members of parliament only rob from us to pay themselves, not an industry lobby.
hehe:) more taxes for sure. Funny, but pursuing that more would definitely be offtopic:)
Have you checked the difference in price between CDRs in Canada and CDRs in the states? Fairly similar. The supplier eats most of the levy to stay competitive. I don't believe that this will spiral out of control down the slippery slope.
Fortunately, Canada has not ratified its WIPO obligations re: the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA. That's because after Canada saw the result in the US, it realised what a mistake it was. Much better to levy someone and hope they don't notice instead of slapping them in the face with 'we own this, you can't copy it'. Lesser of two evils, for sure. If any new levy were applied, it would need to include a review period. The problem is that there aren't enough legitimate sources for copyrighted material.
The levy expansion failed because it was ridiculous. The thought is to charge for megabyte of storage, how dumb. The computer market would die with a levy like that and they knew it. On the other hand, if there was a 5 dollar levy on your 200GB hard drive, the end difference to you would probably be 2 bucks as the manufacturer/supplier/distributor eats the rest.
Not a bad deal for unlimited copying. I suspect we'll see 2 markets for electronics shortly, DRM loaded electronics for anti-circumvention laden countries, and compulory licensing for non anti-circumvention countries.
Re: Canadian style solution. More of a socialist way of approaching problems, as compared to the hardcore capitlast viewpoint south of the border.
While I agree that the result of your example is correct, I don't believe that it would happen that way in practice.
The Levy on CD's in Canada makes no appreciable difference in the price of the CD. The supplier eats it to stay competitive. What it actually means is 'less profit' for ISPs, which they surely would be against.
The intereseting thing about this royalty is its based on 'performance rights', which is what SOCAN controls. ASCAP and BMI in the US are similar. I'm not sure what the group is that collects those types of rights for the motion picture industry (Screenwriters Guild?).
Bottom line is that this type of royalty will not raise the price in any appreciable manner. An attempt to relegislate the CD levy is not doing very well.
That this works in Canada has very much to do with Canadians and their approach to problem solving. We're real communists up here.
Actually, SOCAN covers all musicians and all songs, even if recorded in your garage. You register with them, and every once in a while you get paid. They maintain a giant registry of copyrighted works, claim royalties for performance of copyrighted works, and distribute the money to ARTISTS.
The RIAA is not a publisher, but the holder of the mechanical rights (the right to reproduce). In the US, the guardian of copyrights is ASCAP. They pay money directly to artists. If you analyze the famous Courtney Love math quiz on royalties, she conspicuously leaves out ASCAP royalties.
As to the 'legally downloading' bit, how many legal tunes do you have? If you have none, you are amongst the 1%, and I applaud you for that.
What I was hoping you might take issue with was the key point of my argument, which is that this type of licensing removes the control over use. No DRM, no lawsuits, use it how you want it.
SOCAN is actually pretty good at what they do. A friend of mine recorded a jazz record that got played maybe twice on the CBC, and he gets a check for about $100 every couple of years. Now if the RIAA started to get in on it, that would definitely fall under 'capital cronyism', as holders of mechanical rights already get their share based on CDR sales in Canada.
Now if you compare CDR prices in Canada to the US, you will see that there is very little difference in the price.
If you ask the RIAA, et al, if they like these types of licensing schemes, the answer is generally 'no'. Because they lose control of the product.
Thanks for your response. It made me realize that I wasn't being clear enough.
This isn't so bad. It actually means that they're giving up the fight over control. They still get paid, but I can download whatever I want. It's the same logic as the CDR levy. It's really not that heavy for the end user. I suspect that the pool will be expanded at some point to include movie publishers, software publishers, etc.
Once that is law, just imagine how easy it would be to find a high quality copy of your latest favourite song instead of a buzzy Kazaa mp3.
It doesn't imply that the end user is a criminal, it does imply that it's an activity that almost everyone partakes in. This seems like an equitable way to solve the problema and make it go away. Very Canadian.
Doesn't seem like a bad thing. Actually, it would allow the base Debian distribution the freedom to completely dump the non-free section. All the people currently working on contrib will go over to UserLinux leaving core Debian as 100% Free software. Many of the core Debian developers have been clamoring for this.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you both for your concern about my grammar. I've never really thought about that one, and you're both right. I'll nod to your knowledge.
However, slashdot is not known as a haven for good grammar. There are greater grammar issues on slashdot than this one, such as the famous loose/lose. Heck, this peeve isn't even in the Everything 2 list of grammar pet peeves. Perhaps one of you could add it so that other clueless clods like me don't have to be prodded.
Cheers,
HamfistHehe, that's fairly funny. Hope it get's modded up.
On the serious side, the news that shows up for Canada and the US is wildy different from google news. I get tidbits of news from the cities where my family lives. I don't think anything that happens in Calgary will make the US news page unless it affects US Interests.
That's an excellent idea, you should develop it some more and sell it to Google
One example would be very useful, I think, would be the ability to select one or more countries to search in from the main Web search. Currently Google does this for the country specific subdomains (google.cl lets me restrict search to Chilean pages), but not enabled for multiple countries at the same time.
I think it's great. I'm a Canadian, currently in Chile, and in preparations for a move to Mexico. I am interested in US News, Canadian News, Mexican News, and International News. I could care less about Sports, Entertainment, and Health News, so I get rid of them. This is even better than workspaces for me.
Good work google.
Our company is arriving a bit late to the 'intranet' party, and I'm developing our Intranet in this style. Where you really notice the difference is:
1. Speed - It f'ing fast
2. Startup time - Instant
3. Footprint - small
4. Browser support - surprisingly consistent. Event models need some work, including Firefox.
Did I mention that it's fast? Check out google suggest, realize that there's a round trip to the server going on in the background, and you'll get the picture.
It also maintains suprisingly light code. You just register an event handler of some DOM element, and let the teensy bits of javascript pull up some fresh XHTML. This technique fits very well with simple event driven programming.
Another nice thing is that you can use most whatever as a callback. I'm using good old PHP, as PHP snippets are fast and lightweight.
I suspect we will be seeing alot much more of this.
Maybe I'm not very good. Maybe that's a result of my job, where 20% of the time is programming and the rest of the time is tons of other stuff that keeps the company running smoothly. I've had to learn like many different programming languages over the years. Powerful autocomplete helps clear the cobwebs. If you mostly program in Java, do you remember your C++? How about javascript /PHP /perl and all of the other web languages, how about all of the associated standard and custom libraries? Sure I can read a man page, or heck, a paper page to remember the arguments; but why should I? Good autocomplete will tell you the function arguments, their types, reference styles and return values as you type. You simply cannot compare this to anything that requires additional keystrokes, window changes, book opening. I know the syntax, I know how to program effectively, but what was the name of that function? Did it take one argument,2 or 20? Modern programming requires access to a lot of information, and autocomplete is one of the best things I've seen. Add to that an annotated class/library browser and wow, holy productivity.
Being an effective programmer often means picking up new tools. As these new tools inevitably come with reams of new functions / objects etc. Having a powerful editor flattens the learning curve greatly. How much quicker is it to become productive in a New language when you have autocomplete?
btw: the point of this message is not 'difficult and itimidating', the point is 'getting the job done'. If having imperfect memory means 'frankly not being good', then welcome to the human race, mate.
Many Viruses disable antivirus systems as part of their payloads. Some even write to the hosts file so that all antivirus update requests go staright to localhost. Some are clever enough to do this while leaving even experienced users unaware that their virus protection isn't working.
We had a virus on a machine here that didn't do any serious degrading of system performance, it just set up a backddor, downloaded some file transferring software, and was being used as a warez droppoint. The Antivirus icon was still in the system tray, and there were no indications that anything was wrong.
I'm not blaming Monsanto for anything. What concerns me the most about Monsanto is that they are currently leaders, and are doing what most every large corporation tries to do: create a monopoly.
:) Good wine here.
Imagine a Microsoft style monopoly on, for example, wheat (which Monsanto has round-up resistant versions of). Along comes a 'virus' and 96% of the wheat on the planet dies.
The fault would not be Monsanto's, it would actually be the Intellectual Property laws that allowed Monsanto to take control. I don't regularly blame companies for anything, as corporations will always try to behave in their 'best interests'. The problem is the creation of a 'monopoly' (the definition of what patent and copyright give) with respect to things like genes and plants.
I know all about phylloxera, as I live in Chile where most of the grapes survived
In the late 19th century, more than a million Irish diead because their entire food structure was built on a specific breed of potato. All of those potatoes died, and so did a bunch of Irishmen.
e .html
Imagine a Monopoly in seeds. Gives a whole new meaning to the thoughts of 'Virus'
For more on the Irish Potato Blight, check here
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~eas5e/Irish/Famin
Absolutely,
Librarians have small budgets, and worry about getting the books that most people want.
The other problem with computer books is many librarians don't understand what makes a Library worthy computer book. Our college library was full of 'Learn Paradox in 21 days' type books. This was in 1999 when Paradox basically ceased to exist.
There are classic computer books that should be in every library. Books by Knuth, Tannenbaum, Foley, etc, that form the fundamentals of our knowledge about computers.
For most librarians, it's hard to know the difference between 'fashion fluff' and 'real stuff'.
Actually I like Hip-Hop, Punk, and techno. Just that most of that has been washed out too.
Though I must admit the mega pants look funny.
Not in Vancouver BC, they weren't. Not just closeouts either. At the height of the vinyl/cassette replacement period new realeases were cheap. The record companies have done a very good job of inflating the price. That's not to say they should be sold for marginal cost (about
While I'm mostly in agreement with your points, I'd like to try and hone your argument a bit more.
Number 3: Piracy is driven by overpriced CD's
The RIAA lost a judgement because they colluded to artificially inflate the price of CD's. At one point, CD's were extremely cheap. I remember buying CD's for an average price of 10.49 or 9.99 Canadian, about 6 bucks US at the time. That price in Canada has now climbed up to an average of 18.00 (almost DOUBLE).
Guess what: I buy the same number of CD's now in a year as I used to buy in a month Becuase
1. I'm buying DVD's (over 150 now)
2. I'm buying diapers for my baby (not in my 20's anymore)
3. I've replaced all my vinyl and cassettes.
4. The number of artists creating music that I enjoy has decreased significantly.
I am the RIAA's worst nightmare, because I prove that they distort the facts to suit their purpose. I don't download MP3's but my CD buying habits have decreased by 80% annually. They lose probably 1000 a year because of me...
There are thousands more like me. I just think it's a bit ridiculous that the governments of the world have swallowed the content industries argument so wholly. We are going to lose control of our open systems and hardware becausse of what is basically a lie, that mp3 sharing is the downfall of the record industry.
I see I've gotten offtopic here, so I'll get back into it. As I mentioned before, I think you're pretty much bang on in your post. I just think number 3 might be stricken out of it to make it that much more effective.
Not that I like it, but the US DoJ effectively sets it's own agenda as to which crimes it will attack most heavily. This is done through it's budgeting and tasking offices. The US DoJ can crow about this wonderful operation, but it's actually the result of shifting money from counterterrorism into cybercrime, one of the 'top priorites' of the DoJ during the early parts of 2001. Counterterrorism didn't even make the short list when the money was being divvied up to launch an operation of this scale. That's pretty much 'on record'. A little bit chilling thinking about John Ashcroft hunting down smut peddlers and warez kiddies instead of terrorists.
If the DoJ decides that oral sex in Kentucky (state?) is no longer relevant, they stop enforcing it. If your local police department decides that the city needs more cash, they'll step up speed traps in areas that have little or no effect on traffic safety and a large effect on income.
Law Enforcement always has, and always will, maintain it's own agenda. It would be nice if they followed my agenda, though
While most would agree that all reasonable laws should be enforced, there are many antiquated laws that no longer serve their purpose. There are laws against oral sex, laws about compensation for damaged slaves, etc, still on the books today. Questioning copyright is completely valid. They are an old set of laws based on completely different circumstances. The traditional copyright balance is completely skewed in favour of the copyright owner. The most recent changes to copyright law (extensions and felony charges) are completely new and were pruchased by the copyright holders. 10 years ago this was not a felony.
One must also consider the purpose of the law. In the case of your speeding ticket example, it is to improve traffic safety. However I'm sure that most can share an experience of the radar trap at the bottom of a long hill or in some other place that is designed to maximize ticket revenue instead of improving traffic safety. Even enforcement of the law is just as critical as the fairness of the law.
Then what are these guys talking about?
.cl would be chile.
Ass end of the world.
I'm Canadian, but I've been down here for 5 years.
I think iTunes without the DRM would be just fine. I think most people would buy. I definitely don't feel sorry for advertisers losing money.
:) for always drinking Miller and making sure it was occaisionally visible.
:) If you wan't to keep jabbing, feel free to write me r_k_e_r_r_@_n_o_s_p_am_b_c_b_e_a_r_i_n_g_._c_l, drop the nospam and the underscores.
Maybe Pop stars will have to start doing product placement within the music. Hip Hop stars already do. They love to spout off about their brands.
I remeber shooting a sailing/cruising movie with a family friend years ago. It made it onto very small scrrens (think auditoriums). He got 500 bucks CDN (.80 US
Anyway. we've probably run this thread into the ground, I imagine there's noone reading at this point other than us
Hamfist
Aww, don't make fun of Chretien. He's not so bad.
:) He also didn't sign on to invading Iraq this time, though he did in Gulf War I. Canada is still holding on to a relatively positive economic outlook.
He may look like Eddie Van Halen while soloing, but at least he's entertaining
There was a protester that violated his personal space once. Front page picture of Jean gripping this guy by the collar and pushing him away. He was wearing dark glasses. When he was interviewed and asked what happened, he said in a Terminator monitone: "He was in my face.... So I took him out..."
Good points. I still don't know what is actually the right way to go on the whole digital media thing. People do need to get paid. The question is, what's the most equitable way to do it that leaves the majority of control over purchased works in the hands of the Consumer. I don't believe DRM (any DRM) has much to do with consumer control, as it is ultimately tied to unique identifiers and other privacy unenhancing features.
I guess I'm still a bit closer to supporting types of compulsory licensing, based on the following argument:" The Internet Users have decided that they wish to share copyrighted content whenever and wherever they want without anyone getting in their way and without tracking them. They will win that fight. How can we still make money"
Good point. Thankfully I don't live in California having to pay the property taxes :)
Any carefully crafted legislation could prevent that. Fortunately for Canadians, the lobby groups are not as powerful in the US, so our members of parliament only rob from us to pay themselves, not an industry lobby.
hehe
Have you checked the difference in price between CDRs in Canada and CDRs in the states? Fairly similar. The supplier eats most of the levy to stay competitive. I don't believe that this will spiral out of control down the slippery slope.
Fortunately, Canada has not ratified its WIPO obligations re: the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA. That's because after Canada saw the result in the US, it realised what a mistake it was. Much better to levy someone and hope they don't notice instead of slapping them in the face with 'we own this, you can't copy it'. Lesser of two evils, for sure. If any new levy were applied, it would need to include a review period. The problem is that there aren't enough legitimate sources for copyrighted material.
The levy expansion failed because it was ridiculous. The thought is to charge for megabyte of storage, how dumb. The computer market would die with a levy like that and they knew it. On the other hand, if there was a 5 dollar levy on your 200GB hard drive, the end difference to you would probably be 2 bucks as the manufacturer/supplier/distributor eats the rest.
Not a bad deal for unlimited copying. I suspect we'll see 2 markets for electronics shortly, DRM loaded electronics for anti-circumvention laden countries, and compulory licensing for non anti-circumvention countries.
Re: Canadian style solution. More of a socialist way of approaching problems, as compared to the hardcore capitlast viewpoint south of the border.
Thanks for the reply.
While I agree that the result of your example is correct, I don't believe that it would happen that way in practice.
The Levy on CD's in Canada makes no appreciable difference in the price of the CD. The supplier eats it to stay competitive. What it actually means is 'less profit' for ISPs, which they surely would be against.
The intereseting thing about this royalty is its based on 'performance rights', which is what SOCAN controls. ASCAP and BMI in the US are similar. I'm not sure what the group is that collects those types of rights for the motion picture industry (Screenwriters Guild?).
Bottom line is that this type of royalty will not raise the price in any appreciable manner. An attempt to relegislate the CD levy is not doing very well.
That this works in Canada has very much to do with Canadians and their approach to problem solving. We're real communists up here.
Actually, SOCAN covers all musicians and all songs, even if recorded in your garage. You register with them, and every once in a while you get paid. They maintain a giant registry of copyrighted works, claim royalties for performance of copyrighted works, and distribute the money to ARTISTS.
The RIAA is not a publisher, but the holder of the mechanical rights (the right to reproduce). In the US, the guardian of copyrights is ASCAP. They pay money directly to artists. If you analyze the famous Courtney Love math quiz on royalties, she conspicuously leaves out ASCAP royalties.
As to the 'legally downloading' bit, how many legal tunes do you have? If you have none, you are amongst the 1%, and I applaud you for that.
What I was hoping you might take issue with was the key point of my argument, which is that this type of licensing removes the control over use. No DRM, no lawsuits, use it how you want it.
SOCAN is actually pretty good at what they do. A friend of mine recorded a jazz record that got played maybe twice on the CBC, and he gets a check for about $100 every couple of years. Now if the RIAA started to get in on it, that would definitely fall under 'capital cronyism', as holders of mechanical rights already get their share based on CDR sales in Canada.
Now if you compare CDR prices in Canada to the US, you will see that there is very little difference in the price.
If you ask the RIAA, et al, if they like these types of licensing schemes, the answer is generally 'no'. Because they lose control of the product.
Thanks for your response. It made me realize that I wasn't being clear enough.
This isn't so bad. It actually means that they're giving up the fight over control. They still get paid, but I can download whatever I want. It's the same logic as the CDR levy. It's really not that heavy for the end user. I suspect that the pool will be expanded at some point to include movie publishers, software publishers, etc.
Once that is law, just imagine how easy it would be to find a high quality copy of your latest favourite song instead of a buzzy Kazaa mp3.
It doesn't imply that the end user is a criminal, it does imply that it's an activity that almost everyone partakes in. This seems like an equitable way to solve the problema and make it go away. Very Canadian.
Doesn't seem like a bad thing. Actually, it would allow the base Debian distribution the freedom to completely dump the non-free section. All the people currently working on contrib will go over to UserLinux leaving core Debian as 100% Free software. Many of the core Debian developers have been clamoring for this.