I think the more interesting question is the if Pirate Bay is liable for copyright violations without themselves actually violating copyright, are media companies liable for violent crimes violations without themselves actually committing violent crimes? A large part of modern cinema and music quite obviously glamorizes violent behavior, shouldn't action be taken against the media companies for these, now that this precedent is in place?
Maybe it will involve skinning puppies or pulling the horns off unicorns? Perhaps ripping the wings from butterflies? There must be and endless supply of ideas for the RIAA, given all their experience.
That surely is a poor comment on the quality of audiobooks, when a vocal performance by a professional can be compared so evenly by a cold unfeeling computer algorithm. I can see listening to the Kindle for a few pages while driving but wouldn't think of listening to an entire book that way. This is nothing but content producers trying to find just another drop of blood to squeeze out of the consumer.
My God, what will they do if they find out that books can be read aloud by parents at bed time. Or pretty much any other time. Do you think they might push the government to prohibit procreation? Is this how humanity is doomed to end??
All the automakers are working on similar vehicles. The problem is battery tech isn't quite there yet. Once a good battery comes along that can last more than a couple years in a car at a price that isn't insane these cars will be everywhere.
Well come on RIAA, get with the program. Instead of creaming the college students who will someday rule this country start destroying the lives of these untold thousands of copyright violators who are literally and flagrantly violating copyrights for all ears to hear! Catching them would be as easy as driving the streets with your windows down. Heck, offer me a twenty each and I'll turn in my co-workers. Come on man, this dude needs gas money!
When is the RIAA going to finally crack down on people that play music loudly enough to be heard by others? There are many times during the day that I can plainly hear music from other automobiles while on the road and from co-workers radios while at work. This is plainly a violation. Anyone that plays music at a volume that can be heard by others should be charged for a special license to redistribute and violators should be crushed by the full weight of the mighty music industry. I cannot believe these intellectual rights violators have been getting away with this obviously criminal activity for so long!
I think the last paragraphs of your post are perfectly reasonable, a good protection for individual ownership with exception for "content mills" Society would surely flourish under such a change.
I've enjoyed this rant and feel at least a little enlightened. Thank you.
I am not a writer, although I have done more than a little reading over the years. As a reader I do appreciate the value of writers.
Every 7 years increase the fees by an order of magnitude. At some point these companies will either release them to the public or cease to operate, releasing them to the public. Personally I would like EVERYTHING to fall to public domain after 7 years. Those that create content will be compelled to create more instead of just milking their first idea until the end of time.
Not a problem. If you want to hold them forever just never publish. Otherwise you own them completely and freely for 7 years from the time you make them available to the public.
I don't see the problem, after the initial period be it 7 years or whatever the owner assigns a value to the "property" and pays the appropriate tax. But that value is binding. The property could also be purchased by another at that price. Or if a violation occurs any payments would be based on that assigned value.
I don't refer to my clothes or car as "property" and don't have the same legal protections for these that I have for my home (business, whatever). Copyright owners are demanding property rights so I think property taxes based on whatever value they give to that property is fair.
Nothing wrong with this, a lot of copyright problems would disappear if holders were required to renew every year after the first 7 years, with escalating fees with each renewal. Maybe that would reduce the number of works that are simply hoarded for decades without end.
And while I'm ranting, "intellectual property" holders should be assessed property taxes on them properties.
I really don't know what the big deal is. You buy a DVD, take it home and play it on your computer. If it doesn't work you take it back for exchange. If the replacement doesn't work, take it back again. Keep at it until you've gone through their stock and get your refund. Repeat with another movie.
I have absolutely no interest at all in "new music", but if they can get the classic stuff I do like out at say, a nickel a song I might be persuaded to buy. If of course it isn't crippled with DRM.
My GOD, I sure hope that doesn't lead them (Hezbollah) to even more horrific crimes like maybe listening to Brittany Spears MP3's downloaded from Kazaa!
What if say Microsoft is charged with violating the copyright laws of say Iran. Would Gates and Balmer be extradited to Iran for possible beheading? I guess we would be forced to take the good with the bad eh?
Brainwashed? Perhaps. But I have bought many dozens of movies and a really embarassing number of cd's plus a small mountain of books and really don't as of now know what I actually own. Tangible property is easy. When I buy a t-shirt and it is new it is "fancy party clothes". As it ages it moves down the line to "wearing to work clothes", "working around the house clothes", to "you better not wear that outside the house or when my friends are here clothes" to finally "dusting my desk rags". Beyond that I really don't know what happens to them, they just kind of disappear.
But disks and music, they don't follow the rules. They are either functional or not. Take away a few pages of a book and even that is pretty much landfill fodder.
But you are right, something needs to be done. And that something should make sense as more than just a bullet-proof protection for corporation profits.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the more interesting question is the if Pirate Bay is liable for copyright violations without themselves actually violating copyright, are media companies liable for violent crimes violations without themselves actually committing violent crimes? A large part of modern cinema and music quite obviously glamorizes violent behavior, shouldn't action be taken against the media companies for these, now that this precedent is in place?
As long as they're pulling things out of their butts, why not add global warming and the japanese whale hunting?
Maybe it will involve skinning puppies or pulling the horns off unicorns? Perhaps ripping the wings from butterflies? There must be and endless supply of ideas for the RIAA, given all their experience.
That surely is a poor comment on the quality of audiobooks, when a vocal performance by a professional can be compared so evenly by a cold unfeeling computer algorithm. I can see listening to the Kindle for a few pages while driving but wouldn't think of listening to an entire book that way. This is nothing but content producers trying to find just another drop of blood to squeeze out of the consumer.
My God, what will they do if they find out that books can be read aloud by parents at bed time. Or pretty much any other time. Do you think they might push the government to prohibit procreation? Is this how humanity is doomed to end??
Or just do what I do, keep the harddrive. Store archival data to it, label it and stack it with others on the shelf.
All the automakers are working on similar vehicles. The problem is battery tech isn't quite there yet. Once a good battery comes along that can last more than a couple years in a car at a price that isn't insane these cars will be everywhere.
I think Palin's damn lucky she isn't a democrat or she would be crucified. As it is, I think it's probably perfectly legal.
Well come on RIAA, get with the program. Instead of creaming the college students who will someday rule this country start destroying the lives of these untold thousands of copyright violators who are literally and flagrantly violating copyrights for all ears to hear! Catching them would be as easy as driving the streets with your windows down. Heck, offer me a twenty each and I'll turn in my co-workers. Come on man, this dude needs gas money!
When is the RIAA going to finally crack down on people that play music loudly enough to be heard by others? There are many times during the day that I can plainly hear music from other automobiles while on the road and from co-workers radios while at work. This is plainly a violation. Anyone that plays music at a volume that can be heard by others should be charged for a special license to redistribute and violators should be crushed by the full weight of the mighty music industry. I cannot believe these intellectual rights violators have been getting away with this obviously criminal activity for so long!
What's a shame is that Honda won't offer me a million bucks to let that goofy thing mow my lawn.
Would that list of "repressive regimes" include the good old USofA?
I think the last paragraphs of your post are perfectly reasonable, a good protection for individual ownership with exception for "content mills" Society would surely flourish under such a change. I've enjoyed this rant and feel at least a little enlightened. Thank you. I am not a writer, although I have done more than a little reading over the years. As a reader I do appreciate the value of writers.
Every 7 years increase the fees by an order of magnitude. At some point these companies will either release them to the public or cease to operate, releasing them to the public. Personally I would like EVERYTHING to fall to public domain after 7 years. Those that create content will be compelled to create more instead of just milking their first idea until the end of time.
Not a problem. If you want to hold them forever just never publish. Otherwise you own them completely and freely for 7 years from the time you make them available to the public.
I don't see the problem, after the initial period be it 7 years or whatever the owner assigns a value to the "property" and pays the appropriate tax. But that value is binding. The property could also be purchased by another at that price. Or if a violation occurs any payments would be based on that assigned value.
I don't refer to my clothes or car as "property" and don't have the same legal protections for these that I have for my home (business, whatever). Copyright owners are demanding property rights so I think property taxes based on whatever value they give to that property is fair.
Nothing wrong with this, a lot of copyright problems would disappear if holders were required to renew every year after the first 7 years, with escalating fees with each renewal. Maybe that would reduce the number of works that are simply hoarded for decades without end. And while I'm ranting, "intellectual property" holders should be assessed property taxes on them properties.
One time I farted and it kind of sounded like Metallica. Should I b talking to a lawyer?
I really don't know what the big deal is. You buy a DVD, take it home and play it on your computer. If it doesn't work you take it back for exchange. If the replacement doesn't work, take it back again. Keep at it until you've gone through their stock and get your refund. Repeat with another movie.
I have absolutely no interest at all in "new music", but if they can get the classic stuff I do like out at say, a nickel a song I might be persuaded to buy. If of course it isn't crippled with DRM.
My GOD, I sure hope that doesn't lead them (Hezbollah) to even more horrific crimes like maybe listening to Brittany Spears MP3's downloaded from Kazaa!
Could that be the "content" old Billy is promising us?
What if say Microsoft is charged with violating the copyright laws of say Iran. Would Gates and Balmer be extradited to Iran for possible beheading? I guess we would be forced to take the good with the bad eh?
Brainwashed? Perhaps. But I have bought many dozens of movies and a really embarassing number of cd's plus a small mountain of books and really don't as of now know what I actually own. Tangible property is easy. When I buy a t-shirt and it is new it is "fancy party clothes". As it ages it moves down the line to "wearing to work clothes", "working around the house clothes", to "you better not wear that outside the house or when my friends are here clothes" to finally "dusting my desk rags". Beyond that I really don't know what happens to them, they just kind of disappear. But disks and music, they don't follow the rules. They are either functional or not. Take away a few pages of a book and even that is pretty much landfill fodder. But you are right, something needs to be done. And that something should make sense as more than just a bullet-proof protection for corporation profits.