Enough with the slashdot-speak. At any point in time there have been people complaining that the music now sucks compared to what was out when they were younger. Also, given the availability of cd-burners, p2p sharing, and large percentage of the fact that teenagers are a significant % of the market, it's not unreasonable to conclude that more teenagers are illegally copying music than in the past. When I was a teenager, like most other teenagers, I didn't care one bit about copyright.
Only if congress decides to extend copyrights. Congress is elected by voters. If people really cared about this issue, they would vote accordingly. Most people don't care.
Can you read? She spent millions restoring those films. Without copyright protection, she could never have raised that kind of money. Even a communist would need to admit that copyright benefitted society in this case.
You are naive if you think companies making money don't pay taxes. The standard saying is that the govt. is a silent investor in every company since they take a significant share of the profits of successful businesses.
good example of advantage of extended copyright
on
Beyond Eldred v. Ashcroft
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The LA Times gives a good example of an advantage of extending film copyright. The grand-daughter of Harold Lloyd is spending a lot of money restoring and digitizing Harold Lloyd films. Without copyright protection, there's no way this could have been done since the guarantee of a return on the investment goes to zero if people can simply share the restored files over the internet.
"The problem here is that even though it can be disabled by the end user, and can't be software-enabled through the OS on the fly, the mere inclusion of it as a standard feature in a bios will encourage the DRM software author to say: "If you don't enable your bios control, you won't get any standard functionality out of our software." The mere fact that it is in the bios will be enough to spur software development in that direction."
What's wrong with that. DRM and TCPA offers a secure system for digital media. You have the option to disable it. The media distributers have the option to say it will only work with TCPA/DRM. The only people I see trying to take away choice are slashdot extremist who don't want anyone to have the option to use TCPA/DRM.
Someone mod this up as funny. I assume you're joking. What motive does MS have to spend money writing code to piss off it's customers. DRM, on the other hand, enables new markets that won't exist without it, such as anything dealing with movie rentals online.
And they haven't affected the general public at all. Only a small minority were affected and their motives were questionable in most cases. Again, I'm not saying it's right, but the effect is hardly a blip on the radar screen compared to something like Roe v. Wade
Sun's version of Java has terrible performance under Windows. Will we be able to uninstall it, and download and install the MS version, or is the govt. mandating that we can only run Sun Java under Windows from now on?
MS hasn't broken any laws either, unless you consider them a monopoly. The 1.1 billion dollar settlement is somewhat unfair, if you consider the fact that the govt. didn't bother to declare MS a monopoly 1st, and then make them act under new news. They simply said, you should have known we'd cosider you a monopoly, so now you must give back all this money you earned. Somewhat unfair, if you ask me, given there is no strict definition about how much market share you need before you are considered a monopoly.
In the 90's, Apple refused to allow their BIOS to be modified to support a PowerPC chip by Exponential, so that it would boot MacOS. The clone makers wanted this ability. Shortly, thereafter, Exponential went out of business. These type of things were around long before the DMCA. The DMCA simply puts additional restrictions making it illgeal to circumvent copy-protection. Apple did try to sue MS, and lost, BTW.
Chamberlain claims Skylink violated their patented technology by reverse engineering and creating a poor compatible device that circumvents the security. They claim skylink doesn't have the right to sell you this device in the 1st place.
My guess is they bought a garage door opener setup, read the code, and figured out what the resync code was, which I'm assuming isn't easily available on the Chamberlain remote.
Slashdot Mirror
Enough with the slashdot-speak. At any point in time there have been people complaining that the music now sucks compared to what was out when they were younger. Also, given the availability of cd-burners, p2p sharing, and large percentage of the fact that teenagers are a significant % of the market, it's not unreasonable to conclude that more teenagers are illegally copying music than in the past. When I was a teenager, like most other teenagers, I didn't care one bit about copyright.
Supply and demand.
When did they raise prices? Prices have actually gone down slightly since cd were 1st introduced a decade ago.
So your plan is: 1. Sign good artists
2. Sell mp3's w/o DRM
3. ???
4. Profit
Yeah, that'll work.
Napster comes out First decline ever in cd sales Must be the economy and bad music Your theory is no better than the RIAA's theory.
Only if congress decides to extend copyrights. Congress is elected by voters. If people really cared about this issue, they would vote accordingly. Most people don't care.
Can you read? She spent millions restoring those films. Without copyright protection, she could never have raised that kind of money. Even a communist would need to admit that copyright benefitted society in this case.
You are naive if you think companies making money don't pay taxes. The standard saying is that the govt. is a silent investor in every company since they take a significant share of the profits of successful businesses.
The LA Times gives a good example of an advantage of extending film copyright. The grand-daughter of Harold Lloyd is spending a lot of money restoring and digitizing Harold Lloyd films. Without copyright protection, there's no way this could have been done since the guarantee of a return on the investment goes to zero if people can simply share the restored files over the internet.
Why would you want to switch off a perfectly good key authentication system under linux, unless you don't trust open-source code either?
The cost to buld fabrication facilities is going up, not down.
"The problem here is that even though it can be disabled by the end user, and can't be software-enabled through the OS on the fly, the mere inclusion of it as a standard feature in a bios will encourage the DRM software author to say: "If you don't enable your bios control, you won't get any standard functionality out of our software." The mere fact that it is in the bios will be enough to spur software development in that direction."
What's wrong with that. DRM and TCPA offers a secure system for digital media. You have the option to disable it. The media distributers have the option to say it will only work with TCPA/DRM. The only people I see trying to take away choice are slashdot extremist who don't want anyone to have the option to use TCPA/DRM.
He made it pretty clear that any OS can run on this platform and use the encryption key system any way they like.
Eventually, Linux coders will realize the benefits of TCPA and write open source code that takes advantage of it.
The bigger point is that patents should be respected. Skylink clearly violated Chamberlain's patents.
Someone mod this up as funny. I assume you're joking. What motive does MS have to spend money writing code to piss off it's customers. DRM, on the other hand, enables new markets that won't exist without it, such as anything dealing with movie rentals online.
And they haven't affected the general public at all. Only a small minority were affected and their motives were questionable in most cases. Again, I'm not saying it's right, but the effect is hardly a blip on the radar screen compared to something like Roe v. Wade
Ever heard of a start-up?
Sun's version of Java has terrible performance under Windows. Will we be able to uninstall it, and download and install the MS version, or is the govt. mandating that we can only run Sun Java under Windows from now on?
The MS version of Java may not be pure, but their not lying when they say it performs a hell of a lot better under Windows than the Sun version.
MS hasn't broken any laws either, unless you consider them a monopoly. The 1.1 billion dollar settlement is somewhat unfair, if you consider the fact that the govt. didn't bother to declare MS a monopoly 1st, and then make them act under new news. They simply said, you should have known we'd cosider you a monopoly, so now you must give back all this money you earned. Somewhat unfair, if you ask me, given there is no strict definition about how much market share you need before you are considered a monopoly.
In the 90's, Apple refused to allow their BIOS to be modified to support a PowerPC chip by Exponential, so that it would boot MacOS. The clone makers wanted this ability. Shortly, thereafter, Exponential went out of business. These type of things were around long before the DMCA. The DMCA simply puts additional restrictions making it illgeal to circumvent copy-protection. Apple did try to sue MS, and lost, BTW.
Chamberlain claims Skylink violated their patented technology by reverse engineering and creating a poor compatible device that circumvents the security. They claim skylink doesn't have the right to sell you this device in the 1st place.
My guess is they bought a garage door opener setup, read the code, and figured out what the resync code was, which I'm assuming isn't easily available on the Chamberlain remote.
You missed the point of the case. It's an issue of circumventing security and patent violation