WE, or more specificly, programmers and freedom lovers need to fight this with the best tool we have, code. It's time open source took a SERIOUS swing at writing a daemon that records IP/port numbers and type of attack of all hacking and breakin attempts and sends the data back to somplace like securityfocus.com for public review.
Raw data and meaningful statistics should be readily availible. And WE ALL HAVE TO RUN IT ON OUR MACHINES. WE have too or the FBI will hang our rights out to dry.
Internet Revolutionarys - White Hat
Crackers - Black Hat
Enablers through apathy to crackers. Squashed like grape. - Gray Hat.
Think about it, IF WE HAND THEM ALL NON-INVASIVE data they have a much harder case to make when tring to justify collection of INVASIVE DATA and we (freedom lovers) have a much better case to make.
Think about the consequences if noone ever reported gunshots outside their house ever again. That is what is happening right now, and that is why the Government is heading down the path of misery and death at our expense.
I do not know of such a program (or where to get my unencumbered data) If such a project currently exists please me/us to it so I can install it RIGHT NOW!
I mentioned this link on the Long Island Linux Users Group Mailing List. Unfortunatly I cannot make it there until this weekend if that, but at least one member can go down there.
One problem, he can't get through to the contact number for the red cross.
So if anyone figures out how to actually get them on the horn please post it here or on the LILUG Mailing List.
If the clerk asks what is wrong, you tell them your only cd player is your computer cdrom and your cd program can't play it. If they press further, you prefer a cdplayer program with a buffer and the music is noisy and distorted with it turned on.
People go out of your way to test the unmutilated status of audio cd's you buy. If it won't rip, it is broken, return it.
Just because people listen to country dosn't mean we shouldn't stand up for them.:)
We believe that the $BIG_MARKET industry leader $REALLY_BIG_COMPANY will dominate. Less established $SMALL_BUT_INTERESTING_COMPANY also competing for the $BIG_MARKET market, will flonder and fail making it's sharholders feel really dumb.
Disclaimer: The Garrner Group recives financial support from $REALLY_BIG_COMPANY the leader in $BIG_MARKET. It is a mere coincdence, we assure you.
Flamesuit and thinking cap ON.
on
Shirky On P2P
·
· Score: 2
I bet some people would pay alot for a gnutella (for example) anonymizer/redirect cache service.
How could a sane person say that Linux will eat your Intellectual Property, when the biggest (and most hypocritcal) IP holders in the world are flocking to it. They are laughing all the way to the bank.
Film at 11 Mundie and the blundering pundits. Technicolor rendered by Linux...
If the device used to enable fair use can't tell the difference between fair use and illegal use then the device must be illegal?
Well then we MUST make handguns illegal. A gun can't tell the difference between a legal use, and being used to commit a crime.
It MUST be made legal to SELL any tool that has a LEGAL purpose, even IF it can be used for an illegal one. Otherwise EVERYTHING is illegal. Guns, cars, screwdrivers, etc.
Dare I say that this logic is accurate and complete. It dosn't overreach, it dosn't gloss over anything. How can we possibly allow guns who's sole purpose is killing things, to be distributed? Simple, they have reasonable uses. Do people indiscriminatly kill each other? Very rarely.
Why?
The law gives gun owners reasonable leway, in return they are expected not fire except for practice, hunting animals, or unless necessary for their own defence. All good citizens in return assist in the enforcment process by calling in seen/heard gun shots to the police.
The RIAA/MPAA will enjoy no such cooperation until the freedom to obey the law or not is in the peoples hands. Expecting people to be encryption experts to excert their freedoms over their copy of the intellectual property is not reasonable, any more than building their own gun would be.
This story is nothing but mental Linux masturbation. It's an article posted on a Linux oriented website (dot.kde.org), linked to on an admittedly pro-Linux weblog, and being discussed by a group of pro-Linux computer users.
Your post is totally on topic. That's what I love about slashdot, the official blurb didn't mention the potential bias, so you did. The same thing happens with usefull links here too.
Hopefully a (linux) independant news site/paper will pick this up and confirm the numbers and get new quotes, stats, budget figures, and new interview material.
Such an article could be very powerfull once coaberated. Our government agencies occationally need a kick in the butt to resist slothy/financially stupid behavior.
Coble was also the one who moved to suspend the bylaws and pass the law by voice vote.
Some one in an earlier thread mentioned that the EFF can't post a roster of the vote because it would embarass members of the house so much that future disscussion/negotiation would be impossible.
But we do know there are few congressmen who are so bought there is no hope.
Is there a legal way to confront Coble in the senate during it's session and make him explain why he thought this matter required special consideration? Why should anyone request anonimity, in the face of overwhelming popular support?What is the motivation to keep the results a secret?
I'd like to see that on the CNN live broadcast.
Re:Ch1War on Drugs Ch2War on smart computer people
on
The End of Innovation?
·
· Score: 1
"If it cost five times as much and was a tenth as strong, you would be paying 50 times as much to the same high. I think people would stick to using their dealers.
Also, if you were going to make drugs legal, the idea is to make them less harmful than when they are illegal. You don't do that by forcing people to smoke ten times as much (and damage their lungs).
Making the other "drugs" legal would probably be bad. The psycogenic effects of pot are minimal.
It just emmulates the I just worked a long day, took a shower, ate a good meal, got all my bills paid for, made a million bucks, had sex, and ate some chocolate ice cream brain chemical.
My focus was on the fact that the THC levels in street pot are unnaturaly high. A study should probably be done on the amount of smoking done vs the high produced. At the least the amount of THC should be closer to it's natural state for US climates.
There were alot of figures I skipped researching in this:). I didn't want to go down the thesis path:).
It should be a percentage of THC that is less than current. It should still be high enough that the dealers are not apealing.
Ch1War on Drugs Ch2War on smart computer people
on
The End of Innovation?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The Congress/FBI is capable (morally and techincally ) of putting people in jail for many years for smoking marajuana.
Not discerning the difference between selling cocaine and smoking marajuana (most laws go by weight of item in posession.) is frightening.
Many drug users get high and dumb and rob, rape, fight and even kill. Most of the ones who get dumb are on a non-marajuana drug.
Voters get pissed when to many people are robbing raping, fighting and killing, so congress acting in self preservation is commited to the war on drugs. It doesn't seem to matter that these behaviors are no more common in pot smokers than in say alcohol drinkers. Do they care if a couple(of hundreds of thousands) pot smokers get locked up to? They don't seem to.
Marajuana is an introductory for drug dealers. They get started selling pot. see Dope wars for a tutorial. People say marjuana is an introductory drug for users, well that's because they meet dealers who can sell them other things. If pot was sold in Seven Elevens with 1/10 the THC at five times the price to people 21 or over, people would have no idea where to get crack, acid, or ecstecy. Steamroller action.
Now congresses revenue stream is being threatened by RIAA/MPAA. Now they must act in self preservation again. Do you think they diferentiate between a person who
*legally owns 2 copies of Genisis Invisible Touch and downloads the mp3s because it's saner than tring to burn them?
*a person who never contributes anything back to artist while downloading hundreds of songs?
*a person who distributes a.mp3 of vital information to the chinese underground about the democracy movment?
Why would they. Steamroller action is tolerated here.
Campain finance reform MUST go through so lack of support from the RIAA/MPAA is no longer a threat to these peoples careers. Congressmen in a panic seem to lose touch with the meaning of the word liberty.
This can get really ugly.
When they are done with us, any guesses who's next? What will they do when physical scarcity begins to end.
The way things are going, then next war will be fought over IP.
"I would say that a "flash of brilliance" invention has just as much right to be patented as a
carefully researched energy cell. The worrisome aspect of the U.S. patent system is that it allows
some patents which effectively block off entire areas of technology in favor of the patent
holder. Obviously this is wrong.
Someone shouldn't be allowed to patent "A mouse-killing device", but should be allowed to
patent "A device to kill mice". The first monopolizes all mouse-killing devices while the
second only patents a specific device, leaving room for other devices that kill mice."
You are exactly right, but not looking at the largest picture.
A corrupt congress should not have been able to subvert the patent process so quickly and broadly. Offices of the government should be able to run themselves and be resistant to change. Congress redirecting proceeds from patents granted implies that the value of interfering with patent office proceedures outweighed the risks to the officials that did that.
Working on the pricipal that more laws means gradually more corruption we should look at changing the type of value the patent office offers to patent holders. Further regulation of proceedure will only raise the legal cost of dealing with patented ideas/inventions by requiring even more legal ability to get anything done.
Handing out monopolies is a mediocre reward. It interferes with the market, and is too tempting target for manipulation by those with no virtue.
Conversely, rather than reducing the value of more patents to those of evil intention, we can look at methods of limiting the incentive for being in congress at all for those easily subject to corruption. Campain finance reform would be a good place to start.
As for the EU "syncronizing" to our maddness, I think they aren't serious and just kissing some Bushy butt. "Who is the bigger fool? The fool? or the fool who follows him?"
Open-source critics of Microsoft said the company would have the opportunity to
strangle an open-source project by demanding a licensing fee and royalty payments
each time an open-source version of its patent was implemented.
Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson just turned over in their graves.
Monopolies (even when they are introduced by the government) always hurt the market.
Just look at Wall St. We should look at different rewards for patents than monopolies.
EULA:
By the way, this is copyright me, protected by double ROT13 and the DMCA (bring Da Money, Congress Acts). To read you must donate $50 Dollars to the EFF by dawn tommorow.
Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely Place
Such a lovely Place (background)
Such a lovely face
They're Servin' it up at the Hotel California
What a nice surprise
What a nice surprise (background)
Bring your alibies
Mirrors at the protests
because flyers won't suffice
Hillary Rosen said
We are all just prisoners here
Of our own device
And in the judges chambers
They wreseled with the beast
They sue geeks with their witty lies
But they just won't disist and cease
Last thing I remember
I was running for the door
I had to find the passage back to the place I was before
Relax said the fed man
We are programed to recieve
You can check out any time you like
But you can never leave
That's B.S. Either change the law or
change the behavior.
Socrates would agree,
ultimatly he died for that very philosophy.
I agree but tend to be a little bit consequentialist. Ultimatly I believe Kant, a set of rules to live by is possible. The problem is the perfectly complete rule set is far to complex to understand and parse in order to be useable. (perhaps AI will ultimatly be more moral than us.) So we must resort to a wildcard action occationally (boston tea party, underground railroad) or risk losing humanity to a stalemate.
Perhaps the real problem here is that the US is turning the other cheek for the RIAA/MPAA isn't that unusual (hense your rage.) and therefore an immoral act. To expand this the US government must stop protecting companies in a manner contrary to it's own laws, or face the disgust and disapointment of the US people (not to be underestimated.)
One of the few things (former)govenor Whitman of New Jersey did right while she was in office was raise the speed limit on the New Jersey Turnpike. It used to be 55 miles an hour and people would do 80 miles an hour. The cops couldn't stop it because sooooo many people would drive like that. Then she announced a 65 mile an hour (much more reasonable) speed limit on the road with a warning "If you speed you will get a ticket." Now it's surprising to see someone doing more than 70.
By making the law more resonable in "exchange" for more responsible behavior on that road she lowered the average speed (a deadly) 10 or so miles an hour.
If I could buy.mp3/.ogg (no copy protection) song downloads at 50 cents a piece not only would I not download free versions, I might not be so quick to turn the other cheek when I see someone blasting down the road at a hundred and twenty.
Thank you for replying. I have been craving discourse on this subject. I actually wrote the EFF a few minuets ago about this for some feedback.
I have written an expanded analysis of what I think practical effects would be.
*Patent holders can wait for competing markets to mature and then
sell their patent (and subsequently their tax break) to the highest
bidder for a much higher price than they could under the current
system (only speculation as to possible profits is available now.)
*People/companies could register patents without grinding research
to a halt.
*Most IP lawyers won't oppose it since they get to keep their
jobs.
*Bodies of existing law will only need small adjustment. The
method for registering, transferring, etc. can stay the same. Only
the reward will change.
*Companies won't necessarily oppose it because their patents retain
value, perhaps even more if it is a good and useful patent.
*Congress will be very motivated to fix the patent office because
not doing so is like throwing money out the window. Desire for tax
breaks in the market will insure that.
*Patented technologies can be used as they were never intended
perhaps accumulating far more market power/usefulness than if it
was tied up in a monopoly.
*Ordinary people are scared by companies patenting genes (as am
I) and recognize the need for reform.
*And most importantly it's simple to explain. Joe Sixpack gets it (I know him, I asked.)
I've got two objections to this approach:
1. It does not solve the complaint about market interference by government. While you don't have an 'evil monopoly' any more, you still have distortion of the free market by government interference.
Yes but the level of the distortion can be regulated by adjusting the rate of the tax break.
This would work much like the federal reserve adjusts intrest rates. to slow or speed the economy. It might not even be a bad idea if the federal reserve were the ones to regulate the rates.
2. The tax break does not protect the inventor from being ripped off by a larger company that has a very strong financial position. Such a company through market power could easily expropriate an invention, leaving the actual inventor's commercial endeavor without any profits at all.
Ha HA, you are still thinking in terms of our monopoly patent world. In this kind of system there would as many companies making the product as the market would support. An inventer could, (and should) wait to sell the rights until the market is nearly mature. That represents the bigest tax break for a company that sells the invented/derived product.
The only way that he could benefit in such a circumstance would be to try to sell his patent rights to the large company, and hope that the tax benefits to said company would make it attractive enough to get compensation. This basically boils down to forced licensing to large companies, and is not what I think would lead to fair compensation of inventors.
If he/she/it has a good idea, a real vision, and noone is willing to be fair with buyout offers. The best piece of advice is... wait. When the companies can save a billion in tax breaks their offers should be a little more fair;)
"Make no mistake, this group may talk "rights" to the public, but they're thinking "structures," and even a cursory examination of the documents they produce will bear this out.
"
The exsistance of monopolies in free markets will always harm them. The current reward for getting a patent is a monopoly. The markets ability to "sort it out" is stripped from it as monopolies are added.
Inventors should be rewarded for their work. So we cannot abandon the system of giving a reward for inventions. Instead I think we should change the reward from a monopoly to a tax break for related profits for the patent holder.
The monopolies are squashing further research by creating impassible barriers. The stated goal of patents and copyright was to encourage creative works. We are now working against that goal.
For the naysayers there are many good angles to this but here is a bite. Patent holders can wait for competing markets to mature and then sell their patent (and subsequently their tax break) to the highest bidder for a much higher price than they could now.
This is pure briliance. Seriously, tax amnisty or at least seriously deep cuts for related profits for
18 years!!!
Someone invents something, but doesn't have the money to produce it. There's no way they can
protect their invention, so either they keep it secret, it's stolen by someone who can
manufacture it. In either case they make no money on the invention. A tax break on $0
amounts to a $0 benefit. Guess that inventor will be too busy flipping burgers to invent something else.
The players
Company A
Company B
Mr Brain.
Under the new system Mr. Brain would patent his new widget the same as he would now.
So Company A sees Mr Brain's (our hero scientist/engineer) widget. Company A decides to manufacture Mr. Brains widget and can do so without his permision under the new system.
Mr. Brain is very frustrated and continues flipping burgers.
Company A lets out a manical laugh as it rakes in gobbs of money from Mr. Brains brainy hard work. Big Ego(tm) CEO guy of company A meets Big Ego(tm) guy from company B for lunch and brags about how smart he is and how much money he is making selling widgets.
Company B CEO decides to make some money selling widgets too. His team crunches some numbers to determine his gross profit and decides to start makeing widgets. Then he remembers, "why don't we check the USPO?" He finds the patent #234507458734957349574985798457 and discovers it's for widgets and belongs to Mr. Brain. He contacts Mr. Brain and offers him a cut of their tax break if he sells them the patent. Mr Brain likes the sound of getting paid to do research so he decides to agree. Lawyers are dispatched.
CEO B meets CEO A for lunch and brags about how much money he is going to save with his tax breaks because he bought the rights to and the associated tax breaks for patent #234507458734957349574985798457. His numbers look good, widgets will be cheaper and he now will be making gobs of money.
Fuming that Mr Brain and CEO B has outwitted him CEO A dipatches high speed lawyers(TM) and gets to Mr. Brain first. He offers him more money for the patent. Since no deal was offically made Mr. brain stops, thinks about it and says "I'm waiting for a better offer".
Mr Brain now hires an economic anylist who tells him to wait 4 years and then the widget sales will be close to peaking. Mr Brain holds out and works on other things. And in 4 years plays company A and company B off each other making 25 times what he would have originaly.
Whats different than the current system? Markets can't develop because government granted MONOPOLIES stiffle them. Inventors sell at a much lower cost and profit than they could if they waited for the market to develop. They can't do that now as we know from the.gif situation.
This is the way for the "market to sort it out" Currently the government is sorting it out and that just isn't working. When the government has taxes at stake it will be more picky with patents.
As for copyrights that is another discussion and my hands are tired:)
Slashdot Mirror
Access == Accumulate Copyright IP
Acumulate Copyright IP == Wealth.
99%,1% vs 1%,99% Wealth == Just plain EVIL(tm)
Therfore...
FCC == Just plain EVIL(tm)
Time to elect FCC officals directly.
There goes any shot for an amature radio licence.
Can't run local municipal Internet access my ass.
Raw data and meaningful statistics should be readily availible. And WE ALL HAVE TO RUN IT ON OUR MACHINES. WE have too or the FBI will hang our rights out to dry.
Internet Revolutionarys - White Hat
Crackers - Black Hat
Enablers through apathy to crackers. Squashed like grape. - Gray Hat.
Think about it, IF WE HAND THEM ALL NON-INVASIVE data they have a much harder case to make when tring to justify collection of INVASIVE DATA and we (freedom lovers) have a much better case to make.
Think about the consequences if noone ever reported gunshots outside their house ever again. That is what is happening right now, and that is why the Government is heading down the path of misery and death at our expense.
I do not know of such a program (or where to get my unencumbered data) If such a project currently exists please me/us to it so I can install it RIGHT NOW!
I mentioned this link on the Long Island Linux Users Group Mailing List. Unfortunatly I cannot make it there until this weekend if that, but at least one member can go down there.
One problem, he can't get through to the contact number for the red cross.
So if anyone figures out how to actually get them on the horn please post it here or on the LILUG Mailing List.
Matthew Newhall
President of LILUG.
this page
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:UMjaQkVab38:
goes to this page
"http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:jROXIfaHOGQ
and contain these menus.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:4sEeLq-RWiU:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:FmV2KzkX_1E:
If the clerk asks what is wrong, you tell them your only cd player is your computer cdrom and your cd program can't play it. If they press further, you prefer a cdplayer program with a buffer and the music is noisy and distorted with it turned on.
People go out of your way to test the unmutilated status of audio cd's you buy. If it won't rip, it is broken, return it.
Just because people listen to country dosn't mean we shouldn't stand up for them.
This is pure genious. They should pay for their broken, misleading and Just Plain Evil(TM)analogy.
(in a british Monty Python style womans voice) I don't like the Digital Millenium Crowbar Assault much.
We believe that the $BIG_MARKET industry leader $REALLY_BIG_COMPANY will dominate. Less established $SMALL_BUT_INTERESTING_COMPANY also competing for the $BIG_MARKET market, will flonder and fail making it's sharholders feel really dumb.
Disclaimer: The Garrner Group recives financial support from $REALLY_BIG_COMPANY the leader in $BIG_MARKET. It is a mere coincdence, we assure you.
I bet some people would pay alot for a gnutella (for example) anonymizer/redirect cache service.
example:
[customer machine]
(connects too)
[SUPER NODE:file location cache,server cache,new anonymous name]
(connects too)
[gnutella network cloud.]
Slogan: Garrunteed anonimity barring court order, instant connects, instant searches.
Hey anonimity might work for ISP's too, but no infrastructure would be neccesary for the big cache service, just bandwidth.
PS:cmdrtaco "Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!" was trigered by an ASCII network diagram.
It looks like they have worked out some kind of AI Unit to manipulate the ball.
It looks pretty promising.
Hollywood turns to Linux, Linux can't turn away
How could a sane person say that Linux will eat your Intellectual Property, when the biggest (and most hypocritcal) IP holders in the world are flocking to it. They are laughing all the way to the bank.
Film at 11
Mundie and the blundering pundits.
Technicolor rendered by Linux...
If the device used to enable fair use can't tell the difference between fair use and illegal use then the device must be illegal?
Well then we MUST make handguns illegal. A gun can't tell the difference between a legal use, and being used to commit a crime.
It MUST be made legal to SELL any tool that has a LEGAL purpose, even IF it can be used for an illegal one. Otherwise EVERYTHING is illegal. Guns, cars, screwdrivers, etc.
Dare I say that this logic is accurate and complete. It dosn't overreach, it dosn't gloss over anything. How can we possibly allow guns who's sole purpose is killing things, to be distributed? Simple, they have reasonable uses. Do people indiscriminatly kill each other? Very rarely.
Why?
The law gives gun owners reasonable leway, in return they are expected not fire except for practice, hunting animals, or unless necessary for their own defence. All good citizens in return assist in the enforcment process by calling in seen/heard gun shots to the police.
The RIAA/MPAA will enjoy no such cooperation until the freedom to obey the law or not is in the peoples hands. Expecting people to be encryption experts to excert their freedoms over their copy of the intellectual property is not reasonable, any more than building their own gun would be.
No really I would. :)
This story is nothing but mental Linux masturbation. It's an article posted on a Linux oriented website (dot.kde.org), linked to on an admittedly pro-Linux weblog, and being discussed by a group of pro-Linux computer users.
Your post is totally on topic. That's what I love about slashdot, the official blurb didn't mention the potential bias, so you did. The same thing happens with usefull links here too.
Hopefully a (linux) independant news site/paper will pick this up and confirm the numbers and get new quotes, stats, budget figures, and new interview material.
Such an article could be very powerfull once coaberated. Our government agencies occationally need a kick in the butt to resist slothy/financially stupid behavior.
Coble was also the one who moved to suspend the bylaws and pass the law by voice vote.
Some one in an earlier thread mentioned that the EFF can't post a roster of the vote because it would embarass members of the house so much that future disscussion/negotiation would be impossible.
But we do know there are few congressmen who are so bought there is no hope.
Is there a legal way to confront Coble in the senate during it's session and make him explain why he thought this matter required special consideration? Why should anyone request anonimity, in the face of overwhelming popular support?What is the motivation to keep the results a secret?
I'd like to see that on the CNN live broadcast.
Also, if you were going to make drugs legal, the idea is to make them less harmful than when they are illegal. You don't do that by forcing people to smoke ten times as much (and damage their lungs).
Making the other "drugs" legal would probably be bad. The psycogenic effects of pot are minimal.
It just emmulates the I just worked a long day, took a shower, ate a good meal, got all my bills paid for, made a million bucks, had sex, and ate some chocolate ice cream brain chemical.
My focus was on the fact that the THC levels in street pot are unnaturaly high. A study should probably be done on the amount of smoking done vs the high produced. At the least the amount of THC should be closer to it's natural state for US climates.
There were alot of figures I skipped researching in this :). I didn't want to go down the thesis path :).
It should be a percentage of THC that is less than current. It should still be high enough that the dealers are not apealing.
Not discerning the difference between selling cocaine and smoking marajuana (most laws go by weight of item in posession.) is frightening.
Many drug users get high and dumb and rob, rape, fight and even kill. Most of the ones who get dumb are on a non-marajuana drug.
Voters get pissed when to many people are robbing raping, fighting and killing, so congress acting in self preservation is commited to the war on drugs. It doesn't seem to matter that these behaviors are no more common in pot smokers than in say alcohol drinkers. Do they care if a couple(of hundreds of thousands) pot smokers get locked up to? They don't seem to.
Marajuana is an introductory for drug dealers. They get started selling pot. see Dope wars for a tutorial. People say marjuana is an introductory drug for users, well that's because they meet dealers who can sell them other things. If pot was sold in Seven Elevens with 1/10 the THC at five times the price to people 21 or over, people would have no idea where to get crack, acid, or ecstecy. Steamroller action.
Now congresses revenue stream is being threatened by RIAA/MPAA. Now they must act in self preservation again. Do you think they diferentiate between a person who .mp3 of vital information to the chinese underground about the democracy movment?
*legally owns 2 copies of Genisis Invisible Touch and downloads the mp3s because it's saner than tring to burn them?
*a person who never contributes anything back to artist while downloading hundreds of songs?
*a person who distributes a
Why would they. Steamroller action is tolerated here.
Campain finance reform MUST go through so lack of support from the RIAA/MPAA is no longer a threat to these peoples careers. Congressmen in a panic seem to lose touch with the meaning of the word liberty.
This can get really ugly.
When they are done with us, any guesses who's next? What will they do when physical scarcity begins to end.
The way things are going, then next war will be fought over IP.
Someone shouldn't be allowed to patent "A mouse-killing device", but should be allowed to patent "A device to kill mice". The first monopolizes all mouse-killing devices while the second only patents a specific device, leaving room for other devices that kill mice."
You are exactly right, but not looking at the largest picture.
A corrupt congress should not have been able to subvert the patent process so quickly and broadly. Offices of the government should be able to run themselves and be resistant to change. Congress redirecting proceeds from patents granted implies that the value of interfering with patent office proceedures outweighed the risks to the officials that did that.
Working on the pricipal that more laws means gradually more corruption we should look at changing the type of value the patent office offers to patent holders. Further regulation of proceedure will only raise the legal cost of dealing with patented ideas/inventions by requiring even more legal ability to get anything done.
Handing out monopolies is a mediocre reward. It interferes with the market, and is too tempting target for manipulation by those with no virtue.
Conversely, rather than reducing the value of more patents to those of evil intention, we can look at methods of limiting the incentive for being in congress at all for those easily subject to corruption. Campain finance reform would be a good place to start.
As for the EU "syncronizing" to our maddness, I think they aren't serious and just kissing some Bushy butt. "Who is the bigger fool? The fool? or the fool who follows him?"
Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson just turned over in their graves.
Monopolies (even when they are introduced by the government) always hurt the market. Just look at Wall St. We should look at different rewards for patents than monopolies.
Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely Place
Such a lovely Place (background)
Such a lovely face
They're Servin' it up at the Hotel California
What a nice surprise
What a nice surprise (background)
Bring your alibies
Mirrors at the protests
because flyers won't suffice
Hillary Rosen said
We are all just prisoners here
Of our own device
And in the judges chambers
They wreseled with the beast
They sue geeks with their witty lies
But they just won't disist and cease
Last thing I remember
I was running for the door
I had to find the passage back to the place I was before
Relax said the fed man
We are programed to recieve
You can check out any time you like
But you can never leave
(cool guitar solo)
Socrates would agree, ultimatly he died for that very philosophy.
I agree but tend to be a little bit consequentialist. Ultimatly I believe Kant, a set of rules to live by is possible. The problem is the perfectly complete rule set is far to complex to understand and parse in order to be useable. (perhaps AI will ultimatly be more moral than us.) So we must resort to a wildcard action occationally (boston tea party, underground railroad) or risk losing humanity to a stalemate.
Perhaps the real problem here is that the US is turning the other cheek for the RIAA/MPAA isn't that unusual (hense your rage.) and therefore an immoral act. To expand this the US government must stop protecting companies in a manner contrary to it's own laws, or face the disgust and disapointment of the US people (not to be underestimated.)
That will be 5 cents please.
One of the few things (former)govenor Whitman of New Jersey did right while she was in office was raise the speed limit on the New Jersey Turnpike. It used to be 55 miles an hour and people would do 80 miles an hour. The cops couldn't stop it because sooooo many people would drive like that. Then she announced a 65 mile an hour (much more reasonable) speed limit on the road with a warning "If you speed you will get a ticket." Now it's surprising to see someone doing more than 70.
By making the law more resonable in "exchange" for more responsible behavior on that road she lowered the average speed (a deadly) 10 or so miles an hour.
If I could buy .mp3/.ogg (no copy protection) song downloads at 50 cents a piece not only would I not download free versions, I might not be so quick to turn the other cheek when I see someone blasting down the road at a hundred and twenty.
In the mean time the flow of traffic is eighty.
That said they meet every Monday at 41rst and 5th ave in front of the New York Public Library.
After all ultimatly, if publishers are to get their way, this way, libraries will lose, and we will lose the libraries.
Won't see you there next week but hopefully soon (or never it Dimitri is free and the DMCA thrown out.)
President of LILUG
http://LILUG.ORG
I have written an expanded analysis of what I think practical effects would be.
*Patent holders can wait for competing markets to mature and then sell their patent (and subsequently their tax break) to the highest bidder for a much higher price than they could under the current system (only speculation as to possible profits is available now.)
*People/companies could register patents without grinding research to a halt.
*Most IP lawyers won't oppose it since they get to keep their jobs.
*Bodies of existing law will only need small adjustment. The method for registering, transferring, etc. can stay the same. Only the reward will change.
*Companies won't necessarily oppose it because their patents retain value, perhaps even more if it is a good and useful patent.
*Congress will be very motivated to fix the patent office because not doing so is like throwing money out the window. Desire for tax breaks in the market will insure that.
*Patented technologies can be used as they were never intended perhaps accumulating far more market power/usefulness than if it was tied up in a monopoly.
*Ordinary people are scared by companies patenting genes (as am I) and recognize the need for reform.
*And most importantly it's simple to explain. Joe Sixpack gets it (I know him, I asked.)
I've got two objections to this approach:
1. It does not solve the complaint about market interference by government. While you don't have an 'evil monopoly' any more, you still have distortion of the free market by government interference.
Yes but the level of the distortion can be regulated by adjusting the rate of the tax break. This would work much like the federal reserve adjusts intrest rates. to slow or speed the economy. It might not even be a bad idea if the federal reserve were the ones to regulate the rates.
2. The tax break does not protect the inventor from being ripped off by a larger company that has a very strong financial position. Such a company through market power could easily expropriate an invention, leaving the actual inventor's commercial endeavor without any profits at all.
Ha HA, you are still thinking in terms of our monopoly patent world. In this kind of system there would as many companies making the product as the market would support. An inventer could, (and should) wait to sell the rights until the market is nearly mature. That represents the bigest tax break for a company that sells the invented/derived product.
The only way that he could benefit in such a circumstance would be to try to sell his patent rights to the large company, and hope that the tax benefits to said company would make it attractive enough to get compensation. This basically boils down to forced licensing to large companies, and is not what I think would lead to fair compensation of inventors.
If he/she/it has a good idea, a real vision, and noone is willing to be fair with buyout offers. The best piece of advice is... wait. When the companies can save a billion in tax breaks their offers should be a little more fair ;)
ooooo Ooooo more more. More Retoric.
This is a good idea damn it I know it is.
"Make no mistake, this group may talk "rights" to the public, but they're thinking "structures," and even a cursory examination of the documents they produce will bear this out. "
The exsistance of monopolies in free markets will always harm them. The current reward for getting a patent is a monopoly. The markets ability to "sort it out" is stripped from it as monopolies are added.
Inventors should be rewarded for their work. So we cannot abandon the system of giving a reward for inventions. Instead I think we should change the reward from a monopoly to a tax break for related profits for the patent holder.
The monopolies are squashing further research by creating impassible barriers. The stated goal of patents and copyright was to encourage creative works. We are now working against that goal.
For the naysayers there are many good angles to this but here is a bite. Patent holders can wait for competing markets to mature and then sell their patent (and subsequently their tax break) to the highest bidder for a much higher price than they could now.
Someone invents something, but doesn't have the money to produce it. There's no way they can protect their invention, so either they keep it secret, it's stolen by someone who can manufacture it. In either case they make no money on the invention. A tax break on $0 amounts to a $0 benefit. Guess that inventor will be too busy flipping burgers to invent something else.
The players
Company A
Company B
Mr Brain.
Under the new system Mr. Brain would patent his new widget the same as he would now. So Company A sees Mr Brain's (our hero scientist/engineer) widget. Company A decides to manufacture Mr. Brains widget and can do so without his permision under the new system. Mr. Brain is very frustrated and continues flipping burgers.
Company A lets out a manical laugh as it rakes in gobbs of money from Mr. Brains brainy hard work. Big Ego(tm) CEO guy of company A meets Big Ego(tm) guy from company B for lunch and brags about how smart he is and how much money he is making selling widgets.
Company B CEO decides to make some money selling widgets too. His team crunches some numbers to determine his gross profit and decides to start makeing widgets. Then he remembers, "why don't we check the USPO?" He finds the patent #234507458734957349574985798457 and discovers it's for widgets and belongs to Mr. Brain. He contacts Mr. Brain and offers him a cut of their tax break if he sells them the patent. Mr Brain likes the sound of getting paid to do research so he decides to agree. Lawyers are dispatched.
CEO B meets CEO A for lunch and brags about how much money he is going to save with his tax breaks because he bought the rights to and the associated tax breaks for patent #234507458734957349574985798457. His numbers look good, widgets will be cheaper and he now will be making gobs of money.
Fuming that Mr Brain and CEO B has outwitted him CEO A dipatches high speed lawyers(TM) and gets to Mr. Brain first. He offers him more money for the patent. Since no deal was offically made Mr. brain stops, thinks about it and says "I'm waiting for a better offer".
Mr Brain now hires an economic anylist who tells him to wait 4 years and then the widget sales will be close to peaking. Mr Brain holds out and works on other things. And in 4 years plays company A and company B off each other making 25 times what he would have originaly.
Whats different than the current system? Markets can't develop because government granted MONOPOLIES stiffle them. Inventors sell at a much lower cost and profit than they could if they waited for the market to develop. They can't do that now as we know from the .gif situation.
This is the way for the "market to sort it out" Currently the government is sorting it out and that just isn't working. When the government has taxes at stake it will be more picky with patents.
As for copyrights that is another discussion and my hands are tired :)