Yeah, everyone I know has had this discussion with the wedding photographer:
Friend: How much will it cost? Photographer: $800 Friend: Wow, that's a lot, what do we get for that. Photographer: well, we take the photos and we give you a disc with the images and you can choose the ones you want and then we'll make prints for you. Friend: How many do we get to choose? Photographer: oh, you can choose 30 or 40, we don't mind. Friend: Great, can I print my own copies, I know people in printing. Photographer: No, we own the copyright. Friend: Yeah, that's not going to work. Here's how it's going to happen. You take the photos, and supply us with the digital images, full quality. We'll choose the ones we want you to print, you print them. When we're happy with the prints we'll pay you. Photographer: Uhh, no, that's not how we work.. as I said.. Friend: Ok, well thanks for your time, I'll just be opening the phone book now and calling someone else.. Photographer: You'll find that everyone does it like this. Friend: Yes, I'm sure I'll have a real hard time finding someone who is willing to break ranks.. did I mention that my friend's father is a professional photographer and the only reason we're not getting him to do it is because we were going to invite him to the wedding. He'll do it for free if we ask nice enough. Photographer: Well, I suppose we could work something out....
I hear this story all the time.. because I happen to be the guy with the father who happens to be the professional photographer.
Photographers who try to pull this shit are just fishing for suckers. They're trying to make an industry that has been based on service for decades be suddenly based on prints and copyright. It's a shame that software is the opposite.
Oh, I see, I *do* have to make a stupid analogy. What's wrong with you people who insist that we make stupid analogies. Fine. Here goes.
If you're a whaler and people tell you to stop whaling your response is most likely going to be "but how will I feed my family?" And the response will likely be "look, I know you've been a whaler all your life, and I know your whole family were whalers for generations and generations, but whales are becoming extinct and to continue whaling them into extinction is just wrong!" To which the whaler may reply "you didn't answer my question!"
It's irrelevant. It's his problem. Go become a fisherman.. or drive an oil tanker, err, cruise ship, or something.
People are doing something you find amoral. They ask you how they are supposed to pay the rent/mortgage. You tell them that it's not your problem, they should just stop doing what you find amoral.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Do I have to make a stupid analogy or do you get why?
The argument RMS puts forward is that Copyright was a good deal for the public when the only people it affected was a small percentage of the population.. when it was seen as a restriction on trade. Now, with the PC, we all copy, all the time and Copyright is just in the way. It's no longer just a restriction on trade.. it's a restriction on private acts and requires intrusive policing to enforce.
If an individual intentionally vandalizes something, then he should face penalties for it. Ok, my head is nodding, well done.
'I was just having some fun' is not an excuse. Damn, you're right!!
If someone gets their jollies off of making themselves a nuisance then they deserve a criminal record that makes it tough for them to find a job. WTF? Wow, you almost had me there. You should be a politician.
Meh. OTOH, there is beginning to be some precedent that merely making a work available for others is distribution, even if nothing else happens. There is absolutely no such precedent.. in fact, that argument has been presented and rejected already. That's the precedent.
Downloading is reproduction, a different type of potentially infringing conduct. Which is specifically described in the legislation as not being infringing.
I've seen you make this claim before and I've told you before that you're wrong. The act of downloading a song is not distribution. The act of uploading a song is distribution. However, in Canada, which is what we're supposed to be talking about, even uploading is not considered distribution. Even in the US, proving that someone has uploaded a song is next to impossible which the record companies have been finding out in recent months. All in all, the threat of litigation for file sharing is slowly going away.. not that too many people took it seriously in the first place.
If you think kids, or anyone, should be jailed for causing a couple of idiots to lose a few hours work or have to pay to have someone fix their computer after doing something stupid.
Your society is fucked up not because people tolerate crime.. it's fucked up because you've made everything a crime, and you've made even a minor infraction of the law a black mark that follows people for the rest of their lives.
I suppose. It's so strange these days. You see people doing research, then posing for a photo and making a press release. Then.. nothing. The promises and predictions don't amount to actual products that people can buy. But I suppose they do get you more grant money.
Yep, and you'd probably push charges against a kid who breaks your window with a baseball too. Maybe even sue the family for pain and suffering. Was a time, not too long ago, when people could sort out their own problems without flooding the courts and filling up the jails.
I might. I will have to see how things are doing. It is just a state up the road:) You going? Tis the plan.
Though to be honest, my interest is in bigelow, spacex, and scaled. I am fare more interested in seeing us get into space CHEAPLY. ahh.. yes. SpaceX, interesting launch schedule, and it's going to be great to watch! But, their disposable approach has limits to how far they can get costs down, which I think they won't hit in the short term, but eventually we're going to need to see a change in strategy from them. Armadillo (and the others in the reusable crowd) have a great advantage here, if only they can make it scale.
As for Scaled Composites, I don't see any chance of them going orbital in the next 10 years. There's been such a significant investment in SS2 that they have to make that back before they can even think about another vehicle. Suborbital is good fun and there's a market there for joyrides and testing of space bound equipment but, in the end, it's orbit that matters and if you're pouring money into a design that can't be scaled to orbit then you're in the wrong business, I feel.
It's unfortunate that even Carmack and Musk are still obsessed with the Von Braun, Station, Shuttle, Moon, Mars plan. The revolution in our understanding of space between 1980 and today wasn't the shuttle, or even CATS (although that's important), it was the realization that there's billions of tonnes of perfectly good materials already sitting in orbit in the NEAs. A robotic or even a manned mission to process and return to earth orbit materials from NEAs is not only a great way to make money, it's also our best bet for doing anything significant in space in the short term. Better even than using lunar materials. Building massive O'Neil colonies will provide a much better "place to go" than the Moon or Mars. Maybe there's hope in Bigelow.
Err, there's a lot of difference between discriminating against someone because of their choices vs their skin color.
People who choose a career that contributes only marginally to society should not receive the ridiculous amounts of attention from the legislature that they do.
It's like giving surfers power over when and where you can go to the beach so they can maximize their surfing time. It's just absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, everyone I know has had this discussion with the wedding photographer:
Friend: How much will it cost?
Photographer: $800
Friend: Wow, that's a lot, what do we get for that.
Photographer: well, we take the photos and we give you a disc with the images and you can choose the ones you want and then we'll make prints for you.
Friend: How many do we get to choose?
Photographer: oh, you can choose 30 or 40, we don't mind.
Friend: Great, can I print my own copies, I know people in printing.
Photographer: No, we own the copyright.
Friend: Yeah, that's not going to work. Here's how it's going to happen. You take the photos, and supply us with the digital images, full quality. We'll choose the ones we want you to print, you print them. When we're happy with the prints we'll pay you.
Photographer: Uhh, no, that's not how we work.. as I said..
Friend: Ok, well thanks for your time, I'll just be opening the phone book now and calling someone else..
Photographer: You'll find that everyone does it like this.
Friend: Yes, I'm sure I'll have a real hard time finding someone who is willing to break ranks.. did I mention that my friend's father is a professional photographer and the only reason we're not getting him to do it is because we were going to invite him to the wedding. He'll do it for free if we ask nice enough.
Photographer: Well, I suppose we could work something out....
I hear this story all the time.. because I happen to be the guy with the father who happens to be the professional photographer.
Photographers who try to pull this shit are just fishing for suckers. They're trying to make an industry that has been based on service for decades be suddenly based on prints and copyright. It's a shame that software is the opposite.
Oh, I see, I *do* have to make a stupid analogy. What's wrong with you people who insist that we make stupid analogies. Fine. Here goes.
If you're a whaler and people tell you to stop whaling your response is most likely going to be "but how will I feed my family?" And the response will likely be "look, I know you've been a whaler all your life, and I know your whole family were whalers for generations and generations, but whales are becoming extinct and to continue whaling them into extinction is just wrong!" To which the whaler may reply "you didn't answer my question!"
It's irrelevant. It's his problem. Go become a fisherman.. or drive an oil tanker, err, cruise ship, or something.
People are doing something you find amoral. They ask you how they are supposed to pay the rent/mortgage. You tell them that it's not your problem, they should just stop doing what you find amoral.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Do I have to make a stupid analogy or do you get why?
No-one said it did.
The argument RMS puts forward is that Copyright was a good deal for the public when the only people it affected was a small percentage of the population.. when it was seen as a restriction on trade. Now, with the PC, we all copy, all the time and Copyright is just in the way. It's no longer just a restriction on trade.. it's a restriction on private acts and requires intrusive policing to enforce.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, if any.
I'm rude? You're the one who has butted into this conversation with nothing to say.
Stop wasting our time.
The mainstream public.. not publishers, you and me.
Yes, we've established that you're only interested in making emotional arguments and have nothing to contribute to this conversation.
Go away.
He talking about the importance of derivative works for some works. Typically, functional works.
600+ megs linked off the front page.. you must hate these guys.
Although I agree with you, I can't help but notice your Planetary Chauvinism.
My mistake was thinking that you were interested in making any argument.
Go fuck yourself.
Make a real argument.
research idea to actual product == venture capital.
17 USC 512 is what I was going to cite. Transmission isn't copying was my understanding of that. Wasn't aware there was much debate on the matter.
This is hardly basic research. It's clearly applied research and should be commercialized.
In the mean time, these guys should stop making false claims (it's cheap!) as it discredits the entire research community.
I've seen you make this claim before and I've told you before that you're wrong. The act of downloading a song is not distribution. The act of uploading a song is distribution. However, in Canada, which is what we're supposed to be talking about, even uploading is not considered distribution. Even in the US, proving that someone has uploaded a song is next to impossible which the record companies have been finding out in recent months. All in all, the threat of litigation for file sharing is slowly going away.. not that too many people took it seriously in the first place.
Well, the kid can claim it's an accident.. wouldn't be the first kid to say "bet I can take out that window" and then claim later it was an accident.
No, you're the idiot.
If you think kids, or anyone, should be jailed for causing a couple of idiots to lose a few hours work or have to pay to have someone fix their computer after doing something stupid.
Your society is fucked up not because people tolerate crime.. it's fucked up because you've made everything a crime, and you've made even a minor infraction of the law a black mark that follows people for the rest of their lives.
I suppose. It's so strange these days. You see people doing research, then posing for a photo and making a press release. Then.. nothing. The promises and predictions don't amount to actual products that people can buy. But I suppose they do get you more grant money.
Yep, and you'd probably push charges against a kid who breaks your window with a baseball too. Maybe even sue the family for pain and suffering. Was a time, not too long ago, when people could sort out their own problems without flooding the courts and filling up the jails.
Ok, from this response I have to think that perhaps you're incapable of making an argument and feel it necessary to put words in my mouth.
You also seem to think your own opinion is self evident and all others are wrong, so I don't think I want to talk to you anymore.
As for Scaled Composites, I don't see any chance of them going orbital in the next 10 years. There's been such a significant investment in SS2 that they have to make that back before they can even think about another vehicle. Suborbital is good fun and there's a market there for joyrides and testing of space bound equipment but, in the end, it's orbit that matters and if you're pouring money into a design that can't be scaled to orbit then you're in the wrong business, I feel.
It's unfortunate that even Carmack and Musk are still obsessed with the Von Braun, Station, Shuttle, Moon, Mars plan. The revolution in our understanding of space between 1980 and today wasn't the shuttle, or even CATS (although that's important), it was the realization that there's billions of tonnes of perfectly good materials already sitting in orbit in the NEAs. A robotic or even a manned mission to process and return to earth orbit materials from NEAs is not only a great way to make money, it's also our best bet for doing anything significant in space in the short term. Better even than using lunar materials. Building massive O'Neil colonies will provide a much better "place to go" than the Moon or Mars. Maybe there's hope in Bigelow.
Err, there's a lot of difference between discriminating against someone because of their choices vs their skin color.
People who choose a career that contributes only marginally to society should not receive the ridiculous amounts of attention from the legislature that they do.
It's like giving surfers power over when and where you can go to the beach so they can maximize their surfing time. It's just absurd.