Seriously what would happen if we start removing all this kinetic energy from the atmosphere. I know we have been doing it with windmills but have we studied the effects of those windmills? Up till now we have been removing a trifling amount of energy and all we draw may prove to be a trifling amount but what if it isn't. Do we start having fewer and gentler storms causing currents in the ocean to not do what they do or do we lose the ability of that wind somewhere else to pollinate a field? Seriously I don't think it's been thought out any more than "What do we do when the oil runs out" was 100 years ago.
But it's a 25 year old pop culture icon that nearly every one of us here gets. Quite a few other people as well. They could do worse. I mean the 1984 commercial was aimed at the literati that had bothered to read 1984. George Orwell was hardly mainstream at the time.
If you take it back or walk out of the movie you can many times get your money back. But you pays your money and you takes yer chances. Just like it's been since entertainment began.
I still fail to see how it is keeping anyone from creating anything. This part of the logic just doesn't add up!
It does seem to be keeping a bunch of people without an original thought in their heads from mashing together a bunch of other peoples work and calling it original.
Ahhh an example of circular logic
The state legislature of Indiana once passed a law that said "3 times the diameter of a circle is the circumference". So everyone who calculated the true circumference of a circle using Pi was in violation of the law.
parent's diatribe is the most repugnant smelly piece of tripe.
"Authors have an inherent right as to whether or not to create a work to begin with" yup and if I want to starve I won't create anything at all or we'll let you have it the minute I produce it and still I'll starve.
It's my work, You can buy it, you can use it for your own amusement. You CAN NOT make copies of it and give it away.
That's not free speech. You certainly have a right to say the same thing I said in your own words you can even quote me on specific points THAT IS FREE SPEECH. After my ability to make money from it runs out it can become public domain but not until it has run the course of being MY FUCKING WORK ASSHOLE!
You are supposed to be enriched by what I write for you and teach you or make you think about. It is for you to repeat what I say or disagree with it vocally if you wish. But taking my work and copying it and giving it away at your whim is not free speech.
I don't understand how anyone can support this obvious garbage. That this "public domain first" crap exists I just don't see how in any society you could think that!
Copyright wasn't created to benefit creators. Copyright was invented to benefit the people, and if it doesn't do so, it should be revoked.
You seem to assume that creators aren't people. I beg to differ with your opinion which you state as fact.
How dare the owners of the copyright to these works attempt to dictate what you can and can't do with the copy you purchased with your hard-earned dollars?
How dare you assume that since I granted you the ability to play my work in the format you bought that you should be able to play it in any other format without paying me again.
Who has the paramount right here? You seem to assume that you have all the rights but the copyright holder by right of either paying for it's creation or creating it himself has rights that you seem intent in walking all over? This needs to be adjudicated better.
Well there is no DRM on an oil painting. Suppose I want to format shift it to acrylics. Assuming a device that could do it, would it be ethical?
Would I have the "right" to sell the oil painting and keep the acrylic version? Would the acrylic version be just as valuable as the oil version? Would the oil version retain it's value if a copy existed?
Somehow I feel like the "spirit of copyright" is used as a red herring by people who'd rather all this just came free to them.
That is unfortunately exactly the vibe I get from most of the people on/. who rail against DRM and copyrights in general. It feels like petulant children who have been told that they are not entitled to the cookie after all.
Sad but true?
Your post point by point...
a) I owned(licensed) it before on vinyl/tape/or scratched CD : Ok you can have your copy I see no ethical violation here, though the label may disagree with me.
b) I could have taped it from the radio/a friend,: Radio-OK, Friend-violation of copyright!
c) I only liked one track and $20 for an album for ONE SONG is robbery: Too bad, vote with your dollars and don't buy it. You don't get to make those kind decisions for the record label or artist, sorry!
d) its out of print and even if I beg the label they refuse to sell it to me: Rule of scarcity - the copies in existence get even more valuable. e)if you are going to assume I'm a thief, don't be surprised if I decide to fuck you over. REMEMBER, this was/is OUR world, if you want your bullshit music not to play by OUR rules, keep it OUT of OUR fucking world.
This one doesn't even deserve a reply but Ok if you feel that way prepare to be fucked back, It's my world too and if I want to be creative and be able to make a decent living I want some protections from the "I want it and I'll rationalize anything I have to to justify stealing it" crowd. Huge fines and long prison sentences are a result of not following the rules to make social/commercial law changes. Work within the laws and ethics to make those changes. Civil disobedience only goes so far. Be prepared to go to jail or pay huge fines for your beliefs. And thanks for actually using your name.
One last I Wish... I wish that the rule of law really was "the rule of law" but apparently I am asking too much from the idiots that assume that if I put it out there they have a "right" to do with it as they wish.
"corrupt, law-breaking FUCKERS, then AND ONLY THEN, does anyone get to start preaching to everyday people about ETHICS." So in other words your actions won't be yours until theirs are theirs. Nice rationalization there. my point proven.
Wish that the ethical definition of copyright violation were more important than the "definition" of theft as they are ethically the same.
Wish that non commercial copyright had the same ethical weight as commercial copyright violations (it actually does but not here apparently)
Wish that the straw man of "non-commercial copying has no measurable impact on the sale" would be seen as the smoke and mirrors that it is.
Wish that people would start taking responsibility for their actions and stop rationalizing their ethical lapses into a 'cause celebre'.
Wish that the idiots that post these things had the cojones to use their own names and not hide behind "AC" like a sniveling little girl hiding behind her mothers skirts.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously what would happen if we start removing all this kinetic energy from the atmosphere. I know we have been doing it with windmills but have we studied the effects of those windmills? Up till now we have been removing a trifling amount of energy and all we draw may prove to be a trifling amount but what if it isn't. Do we start having fewer and gentler storms causing currents in the ocean to not do what they do or do we lose the ability of that wind somewhere else to pollinate a field? Seriously I don't think it's been thought out any more than "What do we do when the oil runs out" was 100 years ago.
Everywhere else we call it navigation. I don't know what you would call it.
Oooh sorry I stepped on toes. Whoosh in any case!
But it's a 25 year old pop culture icon that nearly every one of us here gets. Quite a few other people as well. They could do worse. I mean the 1984 commercial was aimed at the literati that had bothered to read 1984. George Orwell was hardly mainstream at the time.
This also explains why they had to violate anti-truest laws to succeed!
This explains why they had to violate anti-trust laws to succeed!
I love that 50% figure that you pulled out of thin air. First time I've heard of an ass being called thin air!
If you take it back or walk out of the movie you can many times get your money back. But you pays your money and you takes yer chances. Just like it's been since entertainment began.
This is called commerce. I generate a desire in you to exchange money for entertainment. You give money I give entertainment.
Here Here!
Yes I can.
I still fail to see how it is keeping anyone from creating anything. This part of the logic just doesn't add up!
It does seem to be keeping a bunch of people without an original thought in their heads from mashing together a bunch of other peoples work and calling it original.
Ahhh an example of circular logic
The state legislature of Indiana once passed a law that said "3 times the diameter of a circle is the circumference". So everyone who calculated the true circumference of a circle using Pi was in violation of the law.
parent's diatribe is the most repugnant smelly piece of tripe.
"Authors have an inherent right as to whether or not to create a work to begin with" yup and if I want to starve I won't create anything at all or we'll let you have it the minute I produce it and still I'll starve.
It's my work, You can buy it, you can use it for your own amusement. You CAN NOT make copies of it and give it away.
That's not free speech. You certainly have a right to say the same thing I said in your own words you can even quote me on specific points THAT IS FREE SPEECH. After my ability to make money from it runs out it can become public domain but not until it has run the course of being MY FUCKING WORK ASSHOLE!
You are supposed to be enriched by what I write for you and teach you or make you think about. It is for you to repeat what I say or disagree with it vocally if you wish. But taking my work and copying it and giving it away at your whim is not free speech.
I don't understand how anyone can support this obvious garbage. That this "public domain first" crap exists I just don't see how in any society you could think that!
There is no difference and if you think there is go back to 4th grade do not pass go do not collect your adult card.
Copyright wasn't created to benefit creators. Copyright was invented to benefit the people, and if it doesn't do so, it should be revoked.
You seem to assume that creators aren't people. I beg to differ with your opinion which you state as fact.
How dare the owners of the copyright to these works attempt to dictate what you can and can't do with the copy you purchased with your hard-earned dollars?
How dare you assume that since I granted you the ability to play my work in the format you bought that you should be able to play it in any other format without paying me again.
Who has the paramount right here? You seem to assume that you have all the rights but the copyright holder by right of either paying for it's creation or creating it himself has rights that you seem intent in walking all over? This needs to be adjudicated better.
Well there is no DRM on an oil painting. Suppose I want to format shift it to acrylics. Assuming a device that could do it, would it be ethical? Would I have the "right" to sell the oil painting and keep the acrylic version? Would the acrylic version be just as valuable as the oil version? Would the oil version retain it's value if a copy existed? /. who rail against DRM and copyrights in general. It feels like petulant children who have been told that they are not entitled to the cookie after all.
Somehow I feel like the "spirit of copyright" is used as a red herring by people who'd rather all this just came free to them.
That is unfortunately exactly the vibe I get from most of the people on
Sad but true?
or pronouns even.
Your post point by point... a) I owned(licensed) it before on vinyl/tape/or scratched CD : Ok you can have your copy I see no ethical violation here, though the label may disagree with me.
b) I could have taped it from the radio/a friend,: Radio-OK, Friend-violation of copyright!
c) I only liked one track and $20 for an album for ONE SONG is robbery: Too bad, vote with your dollars and don't buy it. You don't get to make those kind decisions for the record label or artist, sorry!
d) its out of print and even if I beg the label they refuse to sell it to me: Rule of scarcity - the copies in existence get even more valuable.
e)if you are going to assume I'm a thief, don't be surprised if I decide to fuck you over. REMEMBER, this was/is OUR world, if you want your bullshit music not to play by OUR rules, keep it OUT of OUR fucking world.
This one doesn't even deserve a reply but Ok if you feel that way prepare to be fucked back, It's my world too and if I want to be creative and be able to make a decent living I want some protections from the "I want it and I'll rationalize anything I have to to justify stealing it" crowd. Huge fines and long prison sentences are a result of not following the rules to make social/commercial law changes. Work within the laws and ethics to make those changes. Civil disobedience only goes so far. Be prepared to go to jail or pay huge fines for your beliefs. And thanks for actually using your name.
One last I Wish... I wish that the rule of law really was "the rule of law" but apparently I am asking too much from the idiots that assume that if I put it out there they have a "right" to do with it as they wish.
"corrupt, law-breaking FUCKERS, then AND ONLY THEN, does anyone get to start preaching to everyday people about ETHICS."
So in other words your actions won't be yours until theirs are theirs.
Nice rationalization there. my point proven.
Personally I:
Wish that the ethical definition of copyright violation were more important than the "definition" of theft as they are ethically the same.
Wish that non commercial copyright had the same ethical weight as commercial copyright violations (it actually does but not here apparently)
Wish that the straw man of "non-commercial copying has no measurable impact on the sale" would be seen as the smoke and mirrors that it is.
Wish that people would start taking responsibility for their actions and stop rationalizing their ethical lapses into a 'cause celebre'.
Wish that the idiots that post these things had the cojones to use their own names and not hide behind "AC" like a sniveling little girl hiding behind her mothers skirts.
You must be new here...
Point taken...