Find another ISP, cancel your service stating the P2P as reason.
Most people that are affected by this would switch... if that were an option. Far too often, thanks to the anticompetitive rules laid down by Congress and the FCC, it is not an option. At the core, that is the problem. If this were as truly competitive an industry as it should be, Comcast would be doing nothing here but giving it's competitors serious ammunition: "Dump your torrent-damaged Comcast account and come to OUR network, and experience the freedom of an unfettered Internet!" But Comcast is the only provider in a lot of places.
Personally, I think the whole thing is a giant, millennia-long intelligence test. God purposely set us up with ZERO evidence of his existence, got some flunkies to write a few Good Books and seed them around the planet, and then waited to see who would take the bait. Anyone that falls for a religion (any religion) is immediately sent to Hell because obviously they are mental defectives who are too stupid to go by the facts. It's the Atheists, the ones who saw through the scam all along, and suffered horribly down the ages at the hands of the True Believers (remember, if you want to go to the Good Place you have to suffer while you're on Earth) who will (to their great and everlasting surprise) be admitted to Heaven. At which point, the Atheists will be believers because, well... now they'll have some evidence, and they'll be able to believe in God without having to take it on "faith". Yeah, it'll suck that the zealots were right all along, but at least they'll have the satisfaction of having used their brains.
Besides, if were all supposed to be companions to God after we're dead, why the hell would he want to surround himself with stupid people?
Musicians can sell direct, Authors can't, at least not that I know of.
Sure they can! It's called self-publishing, and depending upon the expected circulation of your work, you might find it a viable alternative. To give you an example of an (admittedly already well-known) author that is doing just that, check out the Intergalactic Medicine Show. As it happens, Card is one of my favorite authors and I subscribed years ago.
In any event, I'm not a lawyer, but I'd strongly suggest you talk to a good attorney with experience in the field before you make any decisions regarding the disposition of your manuscript. Publishing houses know copyright law forwards and backwards, and will use it to exploit you to their advantage. That's what they do. The only way to go into a situation like that is if you've got some of the other guy's tools on your side. Don't make the same mistake that many first-time authors (and musicians, for that matter) do, by walking into a legal shooting gallery without proper representation.
Much better to just have people pay without actually being able to use the service they're paying for.
What they want are people who like broadband because it's always on, no dialing out, people that couldn't care about gigabytes or torrents or anything else but their browser, IM and email. That's actually the bulk of users: most people I know have probably never downloaded anything larger than an occasional Windows Update. Comcast though, rather than treating the heavy user as a legitimate cost of doing business and providing the service as advertised, is attempting to rope and hogtie that user instead.
Problem is, people don't like that kind of treatment, especially when they feel they are only using that for which they have already paid. Comcast obviously differs in their opinion as to what they are actually selling. Still, when that many millions of people disagree, I'd say it definitely indicates a failure to communicate. Comcast is dissembling, both in their marketing activities and their continued flat denial of documented RST packet forgery.
The only alternative to Comcast where I live is 1.5 mbit/sec DSL, although 3 mbit/sec is supposed to be coming soon, and from multiple providers. I'll get to pick among providers and service plans. When that happens: goodbye Comcast. I need you about as much as I need a major music studio.
Wow. A potentially entertaining flamefest headed off by an unusual and near-simultaneous demonstration of maturity on the part of multiple Slashdot posters.
> Copyright is actually the curtailing of the public's inherent rights
>> Is it?
Yeah, pretty much. The whole point of copyright is to enrich the public domain, in fact Jefferson went so far as to call copyright "a loan from the public domain." So yes, copyright is very much a curtailing of the public's rights, with the express expectation that the public would be the ultimate beneficiary from that very explicit tradeoff. The current state of affairs is, I'm afraid, not remotely aligned with the Supreme Law of the Land or the public interest.
Look, I certainly hope your book is successful and that you reap any rewards you are due. However, I hope you can understand that as a member of the general public, it is my expectation that that work should belong to all of us, after you have had a reasonable time to profit from your efforts. Unfortunately, what is reasonable has carried to new levels of absurdity by Congress.
Honestly, the lawsuits are the least of the concerns when it comes to the RIAA. The courts, and attorneys like Ray Beckerman, will eventually put paid to that nasty business: it's just a matter of time. The real damage they've done, and are continuing to do, is push for gross changes to the United States legal system. They've hurt everyone, not just music lovers, with their paid Congressmen and purchased law.
So yes, I do get angry with that bunch of arrogant, self-aggrandizing, hypocritical, blood-sucking leeches for ripping us off by locking creative works away from us, stealing from the public domain, violating the spirit and the letter of the Constitution... and then having the outright gall to accuse us of stealing from them! How much more of these people do we have to suffer before we kick them out of this country entirely? Hell, most of the big boys aren't even U.S. corporations anyway, yet they have no problem coming here and bribing our government officials and screwing around with our legal system. And for what? It doesn't change the fact that they still don't know how to survive in the Internet Age, and are going to keep losing money until they figure out what everyone here on Slashdot already knows and would tell them if they were willing to listen.
Any harm that has come to the "music industry", if you can call it that (criminal cartel is more apropos, I'd say) comes entirely from their own actions, and their own inability to perceive or accept that the world changed around them. Their way is not the only way. Non-mainstream outfits that are selling independent music are making money, treating their artists and customers decently to boot, and without any need whatsoever to head to Washington to buy some more protectionism.
So no, I don't respect them, I don't respect their goals or intentions, and they deserve no respect or understanding because they're criminals who abuse their customers and their suppliers alike. The truth, of which the studios are only dimly aware, is this: we don't need them. Not anymore.
Do you smell that? *sniff* *sniff* Yup, definitely lawyers. Definitely smells like lawyers preparing class-action suit paperwork. Definitely.
Put on John William's Imperial March from Star Wars, close your eyes, and imagine rank after rank of Armani-clad, briefcase-wielding warriors descending upon RIAA headquarters. Would that not be a sight to behold?
Depends. If the attorney thinks he has a good case, he may handle the proceedings at no charge to you, and take his cut when he wins. Either way, you're out nothing, and even though the attorney's fee will be a substantial percentage of any award you still get something for your pain and suffering. That's a lot better than squat.
The common (and entirely correct) perception is that the RIAA/MPAA and the corporations that support them are out for themselves only, and will do whatever it takes to maintain their hegemony, regardless of who is hurt in the process. The modifications to copyright and the DMCA, for example, were made at the behest of these organizations, and they have successfully damaged the fabric of our society with their naked greed. So yes, they are bad guys, and they have attacked us, and the RIAA lawsuit mill is actually the least of the problems. They are deserving of no sympathy whatsoever: whatever badness is happening to them now is entirely deserved.
President Bush is fundamentally anti-technology, anti-progress, and probably just doesn't see a reason to spend money on anything other than military research. It's too bad that just at the point in our history we are coming under fire from multiple directions, being forced to compete with the likes of China and India in the Global Economy, and desperately need all the progress we can muster... we get a goddamn Luddite in the Oval Office.
The ones who aren't afraid to lose their jobs because they're good enough to work just about anywhere.
Even more, I'd say these are the kind of people that would be snapped up in a heartbeat. The thing is, when you let that kind of talent loose, they often end up in places you'd rather wish they weren't. Worse yet, if you take somebody brilliant and basically kick him out or otherwise mistreat him after years or decades of service, he may not be too concerned about "national security" when he takes his next position because you've pissed him off rather thoroughly. Remember what happened to a lot of Russia's nuclear scientists.
Generally a stupid way to treat your best and brightest anyway.
They always make their product and release the source as a after thought.
Usually they wait until they get caught flatfooted, make a flurry of "oh, sorry, sorry, we didn't know" or "it was an honest mistake" or "some programmer we hired did it". What's odd is how they keep believing that they can do this and nobody will notice. If a device uses GPLed software, somebody will notice, and post that information for the world to see.
What irks me even more is when their attempts at coming into compliance are either half-hearted or simply not.
I dunno... given the number of SUV-driving female monomaniacs on the highway these days, I'd say that being feminized won't necessarily reduce violence or aggression.
but his creditability will be shot so it wont matter.
His credibility is already shot (beyond repair, even), and has been for some time now. That hasn't made much difference in terms of his media exposure, since those boys don't really care much about quality journalism anymore. If they did, he'd never have gotten ten seconds of airtime. However, he is bombastic and sensationalist, and the media folks just eat that right up.
You only have to look at Jesse Jackson to see how that works. Matter of fact, I believe that Jack Thompson received personal tutoring in the art directly from the Reverend himself.
Slashdot Mirror
Find another ISP, cancel your service stating the P2P as reason.
... if that were an option. Far too often, thanks to the anticompetitive rules laid down by Congress and the FCC, it is not an option. At the core, that is the problem. If this were as truly competitive an industry as it should be, Comcast would be doing nothing here but giving it's competitors serious ammunition: "Dump your torrent-damaged Comcast account and come to OUR network, and experience the freedom of an unfettered Internet!" But Comcast is the only provider in a lot of places.
Most people that are affected by this would switch
once they find that leaker, they should shut him up for good. Nobody likes a whistleblower.
Personally, I think the whole thing is a giant, millennia-long intelligence test. God purposely set us up with ZERO evidence of his existence, got some flunkies to write a few Good Books and seed them around the planet, and then waited to see who would take the bait. Anyone that falls for a religion (any religion) is immediately sent to Hell because obviously they are mental defectives who are too stupid to go by the facts. It's the Atheists, the ones who saw through the scam all along, and suffered horribly down the ages at the hands of the True Believers (remember, if you want to go to the Good Place you have to suffer while you're on Earth) who will (to their great and everlasting surprise) be admitted to Heaven. At which point, the Atheists will be believers because, well ... now they'll have some evidence, and they'll be able to believe in God without having to take it on "faith". Yeah, it'll suck that the zealots were right all along, but at least they'll have the satisfaction of having used their brains.
Besides, if were all supposed to be companions to God after we're dead, why the hell would he want to surround himself with stupid people?
Musicians can sell direct, Authors can't, at least not that I know of.
Sure they can! It's called self-publishing, and depending upon the expected circulation of your work, you might find it a viable alternative. To give you an example of an (admittedly already well-known) author that is doing just that, check out the Intergalactic Medicine Show. As it happens, Card is one of my favorite authors and I subscribed years ago.
In any event, I'm not a lawyer, but I'd strongly suggest you talk to a good attorney with experience in the field before you make any decisions regarding the disposition of your manuscript. Publishing houses know copyright law forwards and backwards, and will use it to exploit you to their advantage. That's what they do. The only way to go into a situation like that is if you've got some of the other guy's tools on your side. Don't make the same mistake that many first-time authors (and musicians, for that matter) do, by walking into a legal shooting gallery without proper representation.
But you've got admit, it's pretty cool how they address you by name throughout this carefully composed, personal email response made Just For You.
Yes, it's impressive how Comcast has turned the art of lying to one's customers into a fully automated process.
Much better to just have people pay without actually being able to use the service they're paying for.
What they want are people who like broadband because it's always on, no dialing out, people that couldn't care about gigabytes or torrents or anything else but their browser, IM and email. That's actually the bulk of users: most people I know have probably never downloaded anything larger than an occasional Windows Update. Comcast though, rather than treating the heavy user as a legitimate cost of doing business and providing the service as advertised, is attempting to rope and hogtie that user instead.
Problem is, people don't like that kind of treatment, especially when they feel they are only using that for which they have already paid. Comcast obviously differs in their opinion as to what they are actually selling. Still, when that many millions of people disagree, I'd say it definitely indicates a failure to communicate. Comcast is dissembling, both in their marketing activities and their continued flat denial of documented RST packet forgery.
The only alternative to Comcast where I live is 1.5 mbit/sec DSL, although 3 mbit/sec is supposed to be coming soon, and from multiple providers. I'll get to pick among providers and service plans. When that happens: goodbye Comcast. I need you about as much as I need a major music studio.
Wow. A potentially entertaining flamefest headed off by an unusual and near-simultaneous demonstration of maturity on the part of multiple Slashdot posters.
Now I think I need that beer.
That's actually a major nitpick. Everyone talks about downloaders, but it's the uploaders that have been getting sued.
{sigh} yeah. As an American, I have to say, it sure does sound familiar. And that's too bad.
If nothing else what happen if 10% of the people send in proof about their p2p activities? Will they jail them all for a year? ;D
No, just the first 50,000.
> Copyright is actually the curtailing of the public's inherent rights
>> Is it?
Yeah, pretty much. The whole point of copyright is to enrich the public domain, in fact Jefferson went so far as to call copyright "a loan from the public domain." So yes, copyright is very much a curtailing of the public's rights, with the express expectation that the public would be the ultimate beneficiary from that very explicit tradeoff. The current state of affairs is, I'm afraid, not remotely aligned with the Supreme Law of the Land or the public interest.
Look, I certainly hope your book is successful and that you reap any rewards you are due. However, I hope you can understand that as a member of the general public, it is my expectation that that work should belong to all of us, after you have had a reasonable time to profit from your efforts. Unfortunately, what is reasonable has carried to new levels of absurdity by Congress.
Honestly, the lawsuits are the least of the concerns when it comes to the RIAA. The courts, and attorneys like Ray Beckerman, will eventually put paid to that nasty business: it's just a matter of time. The real damage they've done, and are continuing to do, is push for gross changes to the United States legal system. They've hurt everyone, not just music lovers, with their paid Congressmen and purchased law.
... and then having the outright gall to accuse us of stealing from them! How much more of these people do we have to suffer before we kick them out of this country entirely? Hell, most of the big boys aren't even U.S. corporations anyway, yet they have no problem coming here and bribing our government officials and screwing around with our legal system. And for what? It doesn't change the fact that they still don't know how to survive in the Internet Age, and are going to keep losing money until they figure out what everyone here on Slashdot already knows and would tell them if they were willing to listen.
So yes, I do get angry with that bunch of arrogant, self-aggrandizing, hypocritical, blood-sucking leeches for ripping us off by locking creative works away from us, stealing from the public domain, violating the spirit and the letter of the Constitution
Any harm that has come to the "music industry", if you can call it that (criminal cartel is more apropos, I'd say) comes entirely from their own actions, and their own inability to perceive or accept that the world changed around them. Their way is not the only way. Non-mainstream outfits that are selling independent music are making money, treating their artists and customers decently to boot, and without any need whatsoever to head to Washington to buy some more protectionism.
So no, I don't respect them, I don't respect their goals or intentions, and they deserve no respect or understanding because they're criminals who abuse their customers and their suppliers alike. The truth, of which the studios are only dimly aware, is this: we don't need them. Not anymore.
Do you smell that? *sniff* *sniff* Yup, definitely lawyers. Definitely smells like lawyers preparing class-action suit paperwork. Definitely.
Put on John William's Imperial March from Star Wars, close your eyes, and imagine rank after rank of Armani-clad, briefcase-wielding warriors descending upon RIAA headquarters. Would that not be a sight to behold?
says Nimrod Kozlovski,
You mean there actually are people named Nimrod?
Depends. If the attorney thinks he has a good case, he may handle the proceedings at no charge to you, and take his cut when he wins. Either way, you're out nothing, and even though the attorney's fee will be a substantial percentage of any award you still get something for your pain and suffering. That's a lot better than squat.
The common (and entirely correct) perception is that the RIAA/MPAA and the corporations that support them are out for themselves only, and will do whatever it takes to maintain their hegemony, regardless of who is hurt in the process. The modifications to copyright and the DMCA, for example, were made at the behest of these organizations, and they have successfully damaged the fabric of our society with their naked greed. So yes, they are bad guys, and they have attacked us, and the RIAA lawsuit mill is actually the least of the problems. They are deserving of no sympathy whatsoever: whatever badness is happening to them now is entirely deserved.
President Bush is fundamentally anti-technology, anti-progress, and probably just doesn't see a reason to spend money on anything other than military research. It's too bad that just at the point in our history we are coming under fire from multiple directions, being forced to compete with the likes of China and India in the Global Economy, and desperately need all the progress we can muster ... we get a goddamn Luddite in the Oval Office.
Yes, but Bush didn't some chick a blowjob
We don't, actually, know that for a fact.
I think Sony probably has that title sewn up.
The ones who aren't afraid to lose their jobs because they're good enough to work just about anywhere.
Even more, I'd say these are the kind of people that would be snapped up in a heartbeat. The thing is, when you let that kind of talent loose, they often end up in places you'd rather wish they weren't. Worse yet, if you take somebody brilliant and basically kick him out or otherwise mistreat him after years or decades of service, he may not be too concerned about "national security" when he takes his next position because you've pissed him off rather thoroughly. Remember what happened to a lot of Russia's nuclear scientists.
Generally a stupid way to treat your best and brightest anyway.
They always make their product and release the source as a after thought.
Usually they wait until they get caught flatfooted, make a flurry of "oh, sorry, sorry, we didn't know" or "it was an honest mistake" or "some programmer we hired did it". What's odd is how they keep believing that they can do this and nobody will notice. If a device uses GPLed software, somebody will notice, and post that information for the world to see.
What irks me even more is when their attempts at coming into compliance are either half-hearted or simply not.
I dunno ... given the number of SUV-driving female monomaniacs on the highway these days, I'd say that being feminized won't necessarily reduce violence or aggression.
True enough. I do travel to Canada on business now and then and my Sprint phone works just fine there.
But seriously, can't a company appreciate a beneficial product? Or will greed always stand in the way of helping others?
Yes. And yes.
but his creditability will be shot so it wont matter.
His credibility is already shot (beyond repair, even), and has been for some time now. That hasn't made much difference in terms of his media exposure, since those boys don't really care much about quality journalism anymore. If they did, he'd never have gotten ten seconds of airtime. However, he is bombastic and sensationalist, and the media folks just eat that right up.
You only have to look at Jesse Jackson to see how that works. Matter of fact, I believe that Jack Thompson received personal tutoring in the art directly from the Reverend himself.