the story of binary plus comes to mind, ones, zeros, and somethimes even twos. (it's a joke people). it is expected that the new version is not widely excepted. the new iMacs are an example of this, how many people are really going to bye a computer with flowers on it? (besides of course people who like flowers, and like having their friends laughing at them) the percentage of people is really low in those catigories. how much longer until apple realises this and stops making things that are not liked, and/or not compatible with other systems?
while i agree that material should be copyrighted if it is used, this is really only needed for things where people can take the credit from others. the only reason that napster is really a target in this war is because the record industries feel threatened by the fact that people have taken new technology and used it to distribute copies of music before they could figure out how. noone ever mentions the other side, that the record companies are actually making more money now then they did before, all people care about is them making money. napster is only doing what people have done for years, taking an original product and copying it, like the first fans of rock bands who would copy tapes and sell them to people. and napster isn't even making money off of this, or at least that was the original idea. copyrights are great, but if people don't try to claim the material, are they really needed?
Slashdot Mirror
the story of binary plus comes to mind, ones, zeros, and somethimes even twos. (it's a joke people). it is expected that the new version is not widely excepted. the new iMacs are an example of this, how many people are really going to bye a computer with flowers on it? (besides of course people who like flowers, and like having their friends laughing at them) the percentage of people is really low in those catigories. how much longer until apple realises this and stops making things that are not liked, and/or not compatible with other systems?
while i agree that material should be copyrighted if it is used, this is really only needed for things where people can take the credit from others. the only reason that napster is really a target in this war is because the record industries feel threatened by the fact that people have taken new technology and used it to distribute copies of music before they could figure out how. noone ever mentions the other side, that the record companies are actually making more money now then they did before, all people care about is them making money. napster is only doing what people have done for years, taking an original product and copying it, like the first fans of rock bands who would copy tapes and sell them to people. and napster isn't even making money off of this, or at least that was the original idea. copyrights are great, but if people don't try to claim the material, are they really needed?