Naturally the creator certainly has the right to distribute on his terms but naturally the creator has no right to control after it leaves his hand. If I have a cd I naturally have the right to do anything I want with it, including copying and distributing it.
Now that the technology exists to copy and distribute materials digitally it is perfectly natural to do so.
Last I checked, people created plenty of works before copyright. People copied their works as well, plays, songs, etc that were easy to copy and even modify with the technology of the day. Some people did get annoyed about that, wanting to own and possess something just because they happened to release it into the world with a barely a token acknowledgement for the shoulders they stood on to do so. Others did not. Many starved, many were bejeweled in courts. All in all, the arts did just fine and the most prized art I know of comes from an era with no copyright.
The best art is created by those who love art and those who love art will create whether they can make a living that way or not. And those who love art but can't create will sponsor or support those whose art they love if they are able. Sorry but you don't have a right to own and possess and control ideas and the flow of art, beauty, and knowledge into the world whether you contribute to it or not. And if you do so just to make a living, the arts are better off without you anyway. People like that are the reason there are no decent new actors and we have to hear the spice girls and ben affleck movies.
Sort of but you are forgetting some critical details.
That 15% that is expenses to produce and advertise the album, including those technical guys you mentioned who are paid from past profits... well the artist has to pay the studio back all of that from their cut. If an album is successful the studio pays NOTHING and their cut becomes 100% profit because the artist doesn't get anything until their advance plus all the expenses required to produce their music is paid off.
What if there aren't enough sales for the artist to pay back those things? Well they either get a job at Denny's to pay it back or file bankruptcy. That's really the only way a studio loses money, when they are unable to recoup the expenses because they have bankrupt the artist.
The studios collecting royalties on all internet radio and thus blocking independents from having their stuff broadcast and advertised without the studios is a crime.
" The 'link up' between the Space Shuttle and Hubble was a very delicate one as the two were flying through space at 17,200 MPH"
That's nothing, the linkup between me and my laptop was a very delicate one as we were both flying through space at roughly 67,000 MPH; 91,000,000 miles above the surface of the sun!
Lets not confuse this issue, this isn't about someone having a right its about taking one away.
In the case of a gene the key to isolating it is just a sequence of DNA.
It seems to me to be a pretty reasonable barrier that you can patent something you create but not something you discover.
Mathematics (even math that is really complex and so mystifies people like algorithms, software, etc), chemical compounds, genetics. These are all things that were already there waiting for someone to stumble upon them. In other words, no matter how much time and effort you spent hunting for them they are a discovery and not an invention. There is nothing to stop you from utilizing your discovery (or sharing it for that matter but somehow I think companies would quickly find themselves hobbled without being able to read about the discoveries of others) to make inventions but the discovery itself should not be patentable.
'This would bolster the advocates of national health care and create another (unwritten) constitutional right.'
Every right is a natural right. As someone else already pointed out, government doesn't grant rights, it takes rights away. You are freest without any government at all. What is the purpose of society if it isn't to keep the people who form it safe, healthy, and secure? Sounds to me like you are a moderately successful individual who just doesn't want to pay his fair share of taxes and thinks his success entitles him to priority when hes sick.
The way to find and isolate these genes is actually a sequence of DNA that indicates the start and finish of the gene. The rest is just standard lab techniques. So that really just brings us back to the core issue.
Isn't the cost of the seed that people are upset about. It is the vicious seed company that first of all has the audacity to patent and license life and then has the nerve to punish farmers who dare to produce seed from their own plants. Last but not least they prosecute everyone who ever thought about buying or selling a seed and many who didn't.
There have been thousands of small shops that don't even sell seeds of any kind put out of business because Monsanto suddenly decided they were stealing their seed and threw their legal might against them. It doesn't matter if did it, if the other guy has a few billion to throw at you and you don't have a pot to piss in you lose.
No doubt, the two party system is a scam. We went from having every candidate as an open possibility to be judged on their own merit to only having two choices judged by the merits of a letter next to their name.
Nice idea but wrong location. Arizona is already heavily sprawled. To justify that kind of price tag it needs to enable people to spread out. A rail like this running from NYC to upstate NY that could relieve the load on the seriously overcrowded city and allow people to live in more affordable areas in the largely empty upstate... that has benefits that are hard to quantify but massive.
Yup, it goes hand in hand with other people paying taxes for things don't want, need, or use that you do.
If you wanted fair you shouldn't have joined a society. Society is about the weak banding together to take from the strong and prevent the strong from taking from them. Whether the strong are the physically strong, militarily strong, intellectually strong, or economically strong.
Last I checked Desktops and Laptops can't receive tv signals without a tv tuner card of some sort. Most desktops don't have these cards. From the sound of things they would tie the tax to software pvr programs that would use the tuner.
"Have salaries paid into holding accounts, take out business expenses, then pay taxes only on personal profits, rather than income."
Actually that would simplify taxes a great deal and close a good portion of the loopholes. You wouldn't need to tax different income brackets at different rates, those who can't afford taxes wouldn't have personal profits to tax. It would also encourage spending on assets which would boost the economy overall. If you buy a house you might have just avoided paying taxes on up to half a million dollars while gaining a half million dollar asset but you've also put half a million dollars into the economy. That is stimulus.
The problems with corporations could mostly be solved by making the officers and directors personally criminally liable for the corporations actions instead of just fining them.
A better way is discourge the actions you refer to by requiring them in the law and then making corporate officers and directors personally criminally liable for violations of those laws.
Trust me, they will magically stop the unavoidable practices right away.
No kidding. The average idiot doesn't even realize they pay about 30% in income tax, their income is reduced by another 10% because of sales tax, and then there is property tax, motor vehicle tax, etc, etc, etc.
We already pay as much in tax as they pay in europe, we just don't realize the same returns.
'For example, when you write off you mortgage interest you are avoiding taxes.'
If you give money to a charity and write it off you are well within your rights. But if you give to charity to intentionally manipulate your tax bracket and pay a reduced tax amount then you are evading taxes. It is a violation of the tax code to intentionally avoid paying taxes.
Actually its not perfectly legal. Conducting business and then taking advantage of any deductions to which you are entitled is perfectly legal. Intentionally manipulating your business and accounting practices in order to avoid taxes is tax evasion even if the method of evasion is to exploit the tax code.
Ultimately, what is and isn't tax evasion is at the discretion of the IRS.
hey you can certainly use a lot more than that. But that is what most people with a job smoke. Get paid on friday (or whatever), buy a quarter oz, rinse and repeat. If you were smoking 1/2oz a day then first of all, you were smoking low grade stuff with seeds in it and such and you were sharing with friends.
'Remind me to never come to your house for a spliff'
I'm working on the assumption that we can grow for personal use and everyone who comes over has their own weed now.
If you are smoking an OZ a week, yourself, without sharing with a group of friends then I have to laugh at you. You must really have some dirt weed buddy.
Besides that, you must do almost nothing else besides smoke weed.
An OZ per month is what pretty much any heavy smoker goes through. Someone with severe pain would need at least that much.
Someone who just smokes a joint or two on the weekends obviously would not need so much. A 1/4oz a week is not enough to keep someone high all the time. You'd go through it about two days like that.
'I think is simplistic to say cannabis isn't addictive, in fact its simplistic to say that cannabis is cannabis.'
Why? The bogus addiction numbers come from addiction and drug abuse clinics. These are for profit organizations that make a profit is mommy finds a pipe in jimmies drawer and carts him right off to rehab.
Additionally, if someone comes in addicted to say, heroin and also admits to smoking marijuana they automatically get labeled as a marijuana abuser by the addiction clinics.
Last but not least, people who are admitting themselves often like to admit themselves for marijuana rather than heroine or cocaine because they don't think it sounds as bad to others.
Heroine, Morphine, any opiate, alcohol in people with the right genetics, these things convert directly into highly addictive neurochemicals. Marijuana on the other hand stimulates pleasure centers in the brain which in turn makes neurochemicals that are addictive. What the addiction clinics don't tell you is that if you love soccer (football for the foreigners) your brain will produce the same potentially addictive neurochemicals.
In other words, being addicted to pot is being addicted to being happy. You can literally do anything else that makes you happy instead of smoking pot. There really aren't many people who want to quit smoking pot in the first place. Not because they are addicted but because it is a relatively harmless and enjoyable activity.
Slashdot Mirror
The creator doesn't have rights, he has privileges granted to him by the people... you know the downloaders.
Naturally the creator certainly has the right to distribute on his terms but naturally the creator has no right to control after it leaves his hand. If I have a cd I naturally have the right to do anything I want with it, including copying and distributing it.
Now that the technology exists to copy and distribute materials digitally it is perfectly natural to do so.
Last I checked, people created plenty of works before copyright. People copied their works as well, plays, songs, etc that were easy to copy and even modify with the technology of the day. Some people did get annoyed about that, wanting to own and possess something just because they happened to release it into the world with a barely a token acknowledgement for the shoulders they stood on to do so. Others did not. Many starved, many were bejeweled in courts. All in all, the arts did just fine and the most prized art I know of comes from an era with no copyright.
The best art is created by those who love art and those who love art will create whether they can make a living that way or not. And those who love art but can't create will sponsor or support those whose art they love if they are able. Sorry but you don't have a right to own and possess and control ideas and the flow of art, beauty, and knowledge into the world whether you contribute to it or not. And if you do so just to make a living, the arts are better off without you anyway. People like that are the reason there are no decent new actors and we have to hear the spice girls and ben affleck movies.
Sort of but you are forgetting some critical details.
That 15% that is expenses to produce and advertise the album, including those technical guys you mentioned who are paid from past profits... well the artist has to pay the studio back all of that from their cut. If an album is successful the studio pays NOTHING and their cut becomes 100% profit because the artist doesn't get anything until their advance plus all the expenses required to produce their music is paid off.
What if there aren't enough sales for the artist to pay back those things? Well they either get a job at Denny's to pay it back or file bankruptcy. That's really the only way a studio loses money, when they are unable to recoup the expenses because they have bankrupt the artist.
The studios collecting royalties on all internet radio and thus blocking independents from having their stuff broadcast and advertised without the studios is a crime.
" The 'link up' between the Space Shuttle and Hubble was a very delicate one as the two were flying through space at 17,200 MPH"
That's nothing, the linkup between me and my laptop was a very delicate one as we were both flying through space at roughly 67,000 MPH; 91,000,000 miles above the surface of the sun!
The only way to do it is one step at a time, so I think I'll start by getting myself a piece.
Lets not confuse this issue, this isn't about someone having a right its about taking one away.
In the case of a gene the key to isolating it is just a sequence of DNA.
It seems to me to be a pretty reasonable barrier that you can patent something you create but not something you discover.
Mathematics (even math that is really complex and so mystifies people like algorithms, software, etc), chemical compounds, genetics. These are all things that were already there waiting for someone to stumble upon them. In other words, no matter how much time and effort you spent hunting for them they are a discovery and not an invention. There is nothing to stop you from utilizing your discovery (or sharing it for that matter but somehow I think companies would quickly find themselves hobbled without being able to read about the discoveries of others) to make inventions but the discovery itself should not be patentable.
'This would bolster the advocates of national health care and create another (unwritten) constitutional right.'
Every right is a natural right. As someone else already pointed out, government doesn't grant rights, it takes rights away. You are freest without any government at all. What is the purpose of society if it isn't to keep the people who form it safe, healthy, and secure? Sounds to me like you are a moderately successful individual who just doesn't want to pay his fair share of taxes and thinks his success entitles him to priority when hes sick.
The way to find and isolate these genes is actually a sequence of DNA that indicates the start and finish of the gene. The rest is just standard lab techniques. So that really just brings us back to the core issue.
Isn't the cost of the seed that people are upset about. It is the vicious seed company that first of all has the audacity to patent and license life and then has the nerve to punish farmers who dare to produce seed from their own plants. Last but not least they prosecute everyone who ever thought about buying or selling a seed and many who didn't.
There have been thousands of small shops that don't even sell seeds of any kind put out of business because Monsanto suddenly decided they were stealing their seed and threw their legal might against them. It doesn't matter if did it, if the other guy has a few billion to throw at you and you don't have a pot to piss in you lose.
No doubt, the two party system is a scam. We went from having every candidate as an open possibility to be judged on their own merit to only having two choices judged by the merits of a letter next to their name.
Your one of those people who fails to recognize that not voting is a vote.
Nice idea but wrong location. Arizona is already heavily sprawled. To justify that kind of price tag it needs to enable people to spread out. A rail like this running from NYC to upstate NY that could relieve the load on the seriously overcrowded city and allow people to live in more affordable areas in the largely empty upstate... that has benefits that are hard to quantify but massive.
Yup, it goes hand in hand with other people paying taxes for things don't want, need, or use that you do.
If you wanted fair you shouldn't have joined a society. Society is about the weak banding together to take from the strong and prevent the strong from taking from them. Whether the strong are the physically strong, militarily strong, intellectually strong, or economically strong.
Last I checked Desktops and Laptops can't receive tv signals without a tv tuner card of some sort. Most desktops don't have these cards. From the sound of things they would tie the tax to software pvr programs that would use the tuner.
Actually there is an additional hefty self employment tax.
"Have salaries paid into holding accounts, take out business expenses, then pay taxes only on personal profits, rather than income."
Actually that would simplify taxes a great deal and close a good portion of the loopholes. You wouldn't need to tax different income brackets at different rates, those who can't afford taxes wouldn't have personal profits to tax. It would also encourage spending on assets which would boost the economy overall. If you buy a house you might have just avoided paying taxes on up to half a million dollars while gaining a half million dollar asset but you've also put half a million dollars into the economy. That is stimulus.
The problems with corporations could mostly be solved by making the officers and directors personally criminally liable for the corporations actions instead of just fining them.
A better way is discourge the actions you refer to by requiring them in the law and then making corporate officers and directors personally criminally liable for violations of those laws.
Trust me, they will magically stop the unavoidable practices right away.
No kidding. The average idiot doesn't even realize they pay about 30% in income tax, their income is reduced by another 10% because of sales tax, and then there is property tax, motor vehicle tax, etc, etc, etc.
We already pay as much in tax as they pay in europe, we just don't realize the same returns.
I think we should tax people the way we tax corporations. I only want to pay tax on my profits and be able to deduct all my expenses.
'For example, when you write off you mortgage interest you are avoiding taxes.'
If you give money to a charity and write it off you are well within your rights. But if you give to charity to intentionally manipulate your tax bracket and pay a reduced tax amount then you are evading taxes. It is a violation of the tax code to intentionally avoid paying taxes.
Actually its not perfectly legal. Conducting business and then taking advantage of any deductions to which you are entitled is perfectly legal. Intentionally manipulating your business and accounting practices in order to avoid taxes is tax evasion even if the method of evasion is to exploit the tax code.
Ultimately, what is and isn't tax evasion is at the discretion of the IRS.
hey you can certainly use a lot more than that. But that is what most people with a job smoke. Get paid on friday (or whatever), buy a quarter oz, rinse and repeat. If you were smoking 1/2oz a day then first of all, you were smoking low grade stuff with seeds in it and such and you were sharing with friends.
'Remind me to never come to your house for a spliff'
I'm working on the assumption that we can grow for personal use and everyone who comes over has their own weed now.
If you are smoking an OZ a week, yourself, without sharing with a group of friends then I have to laugh at you. You must really have some dirt weed buddy.
Besides that, you must do almost nothing else besides smoke weed.
An OZ per month is what pretty much any heavy smoker goes through. Someone with severe pain would need at least that much.
Someone who just smokes a joint or two on the weekends obviously would not need so much. A 1/4oz a week is not enough to keep someone high all the time. You'd go through it about two days like that.
'I think is simplistic to say cannabis isn't addictive, in fact its simplistic to say that cannabis is cannabis.'
Why? The bogus addiction numbers come from addiction and drug abuse clinics. These are for profit organizations that make a profit is mommy finds a pipe in jimmies drawer and carts him right off to rehab.
Additionally, if someone comes in addicted to say, heroin and also admits to smoking marijuana they automatically get labeled as a marijuana abuser by the addiction clinics.
Last but not least, people who are admitting themselves often like to admit themselves for marijuana rather than heroine or cocaine because they don't think it sounds as bad to others.
Heroine, Morphine, any opiate, alcohol in people with the right genetics, these things convert directly into highly addictive neurochemicals. Marijuana on the other hand stimulates pleasure centers in the brain which in turn makes neurochemicals that are addictive. What the addiction clinics don't tell you is that if you love soccer (football for the foreigners) your brain will produce the same potentially addictive neurochemicals.
In other words, being addicted to pot is being addicted to being happy. You can literally do anything else that makes you happy instead of smoking pot. There really aren't many people who want to quit smoking pot in the first place. Not because they are addicted but because it is a relatively harmless and enjoyable activity.
you've upset me with your comments. Good thing I'm taking lithium or I might do something crazy.