Hmmm. Could they have stolen the idea from the free-as-in-beer Beatnik Turtle song I.T. Department (Super Heroes of I.T.)? (OK, not likely, but if you're on Vista, you must now downgrade your video and audio, because they *might* have.)
The nice thing about the CD levy is that it does not assume that you are a crook because the same act that introduced that also made it legal to copy the music for your own private use. Hence it assumes that people buy blank CDs to copy music. I would argue that this is most definitely true since for computer data you would buy DVDs and these do not (yet) have a levy.
OK, so when I use my CD-Rs to back up my data, which artist get paid?
Nope,we have no love for the movie and music industries and it's simply hilarious to watch them thrash and grasp at clumps of grass as they sink deeper into their graves.
If by "hilarious" you mean "despairing at our loss of privacy and civil rights due to the perceived need to prop up an outdated, but well-heeled, distribution system" then, yeah. Hi-fraking-larious.
On what grounds would you refuse them this power? Surely they should have the right to pursue litigation if they feel they, or their property, is being abused. Whether or not that's intellectual or actual property, though I do agree that they should be treated differently.
'Refusing them this power' IS treating them differently. We are in apparent agreement.
BTW, the basic idea is to add this string to a google query: search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=intitle%3Aindex.of+%22mp3%22+%2B%22YOURSONGHERE%22+-htm+-html+-php+-asp+%22Last+Modified%22&btnG=Search
It should definitely not be tied to the life of the creator, after all it may be seen in some quarters as an acceptable risk to kill someone in order to remove copyright protection:).
Plus it just complicates figuring out if the content is in or out of the public domain. You have to determine if the creator is still alive, after all. Dates are much more reliable.
Also, if there must be additional registration periods (bad idea, see above) the fee should increase exponentially each time, to discourage squatting on barely profitable properties.
Talk about mass rebellion all you want, it's people like him who will do far more to make things balanced (as opposed to the lopsided solution piracy presents).
While I wish him well, he's really just trying to maintain/regain ground. Ultimately, the upcoming generation that refuses to engage in the ridiculous game of "pretend" that the distribution agencies insist we all play (as in, pretend these bits are really hard to copy) will do more. It'll just take a while.
"Piracy" (sharing) isn't a "solution", it's just a description of reality. The sooner everyone accepts that, the better we'll all be.
It can only do our stagnant societies good to make some cheaper megaphones.
Unfortunately, just as the megaphones get cheaper, the big guys claim a patent on megaphones, copyright all forms of expression, and sue critics for "trademark dilution."
Yes, but you wont get the same profitable yeilds without heavy fertilization.
I haven't RTFA (hey, this is slashdot) but that NOT what I've heard from switchgrass growers. Aside from an initial establishment period, you don't have to do much besides harvest the stuff. You don't have to replant, fertilize, or, for the most part, water it. (And this is from the eastern shore, not its native area.)
Now, I'm sure you can get more out of it if you put more into it, but you get so much out of the box that it becomes much more a matter of "can I get X more out if I put X more in" versus corn, where it's a matter of "if I don't put X more in, I'm get nothing."
Love to see it happen, doubt it will. They may renegotiate their fees, but there's too much benefit to the lobbying muscle of a *AA organization for them to ditch it entirely.
I know you're joking, but does buy it include being able to keep your job for voting a particular way?
I suppose we'll have to define Dems and Repubs as protected classes...
I'm actually for secret ballots, BTW, but I did hear that people in Kenya are being attacked because they voted at all, so the secrecy did them no good (I assume they're presumed to have voted among tribal lines? That wasn't clear from the story I heard.)
If ballots weren't secret, how would you keep people from coercing voters? How would you keep people from selling their votes? Ballots are secret for good reason.
Oh please. This is America; nobody's going to coerce my vote. They're going to buy it, fair and square.
While known for months in tech circles, the issue wasn't given broad attention until an Associated Press report last year,
Can't slip anything by those techies...
Re:The best tools stay out of the way...
on
Goodbye Cruel Word
·
· Score: 1
Creating a document is inherently a three-step process. Write, edit, layout. Any attempt to subvert this order results in unnecessary iteration and task-switching overhead.
I'm going to hang that on my wall.
I've always thought that Adobe or Quark would be smart to put out a very cheap app that was a very simple text editor, BUT it used the layout program's text engine and it had a "rules" script that would read a file set up by the designer. It would read the rules (fonts allowed, leading, etc.) and show the writer how the text was going to look in whatever publication they were submitting to. It could even show where the end of their alloted column inches was, so they would know if they needed to pad the text or whatnot. That way they could just concentrating on filling their 'hole' and not fiddle with useless stuff that will be striped out anyway.
Quark's Copydesk may actually do something like that (I'm not sure,) but it's way too pricey regardless. Scribus would probably be the place to do that, but they have a ways to go yet.
The advantage the bad guys have, beyond institutional stupidity and negligence, is that there's so many of them willing to exchange the data once acquired.
Huh. So the more "open source" approach of the crackers is beating the "closed source" defensive model of the defenders?
I'm not a zealot one way or the other (in particular I've always thought that "security through obscurity" actually has some value) but that point seems telling.
Slashdot Mirror
The churches are just seeking the same exemption that bars already have. (not that I see why anyone needs one.)
Is this now a yearly tradition for churches to whine about their Superbowl parties...
Yes. This follows the new yearly tradition of the NFL to abuse its copyright in a manner that can only suggest RIAA envy.
Hmmm. Could they have stolen the idea from the free-as-in-beer Beatnik Turtle song I.T. Department (Super Heroes of I.T.)? (OK, not likely, but if you're on Vista, you must now downgrade your video and audio, because they *might* have.)
The nice thing about the CD levy is that it does not assume that you are a crook because the same act that introduced that also made it legal to copy the music for your own private use. Hence it assumes that people buy blank CDs to copy music. I would argue that this is most definitely true since for computer data you would buy DVDs and these do not (yet) have a levy.
OK, so when I use my CD-Rs to back up my data, which artist get paid?
So who gets a share of the money? Who is legitimately a rights holder? How do you divide the money?
Exactly. That's the problem with these schemes. They end up diverting revenue from the small artists to the large 'rights holders.'
Screw it, just let the Internet do what the Internet was designed to do: make copies.
I don't think "backwards" is sufficiently descriptive ... I'd say "corrupt" more closely resembles the situation with regards to Imaginary Property.
Yeah, I thought Lessig was making a huge error in trying to go after corruption in general.
Now, I'm thinking he's just ahead of me on this one.
Isn't this the exact same as going after sites that host torrents rather than the servers hosting trackers?
Rare to be able to say this on /., but yes, it's the exact same thing.
Coincidence?
Nope,we have no love for the movie and music industries and it's simply hilarious to watch them thrash and grasp at clumps of grass as they sink deeper into their graves.
If by "hilarious" you mean "despairing at our loss of privacy and civil rights due to the perceived need to prop up an outdated, but well-heeled, distribution system" then, yeah. Hi-fraking-larious.
On what grounds would you refuse them this power? Surely they should have the right to pursue litigation if they feel they, or their property, is being abused. Whether or not that's intellectual or actual property, though I do agree that they should be treated differently.
'Refusing them this power' IS treating them differently. We are in apparent agreement.
BTW, the basic idea is to add this string to a google query:
search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=intitle%3Aindex.of+%22mp3%22+%2B%22YOURSONGHERE%22+-htm+-html+-php+-asp+%22Last+Modified%22&btnG=Search
I don't think you guys are using your imagination. "milk.com" does not necessarily need to sell milk to be a marketing goldmine.
You're almost there...
Bingo! With that and "meat.com" and you can almost print money...
Do Not Want!
It should definitely not be tied to the life of the creator, after all it may be seen in some quarters as an acceptable risk to kill someone in order to remove copyright protection :) .
Plus it just complicates figuring out if the content is in or out of the public domain. You have to determine if the creator is still alive, after all. Dates are much more reliable.
Also, if there must be additional registration periods (bad idea, see above) the fee should increase exponentially each time, to discourage squatting on barely profitable properties.
Talk about mass rebellion all you want, it's people like him who will do far more to make things balanced (as opposed to the lopsided solution piracy presents).
While I wish him well, he's really just trying to maintain/regain ground. Ultimately, the upcoming generation that refuses to engage in the ridiculous game of "pretend" that the distribution agencies insist we all play (as in, pretend these bits are really hard to copy) will do more. It'll just take a while.
"Piracy" (sharing) isn't a "solution", it's just a description of reality. The sooner everyone accepts that, the better we'll all be.
It's a consumer device and was never meant (in its current incarnation) to be used for corporate uses.
Also, it does not toast my bread AT ALL evenly. I am sorely disappointed with my purchase!
Also, what does that link have to do with the rest of the summary?
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property...but I have three stories on Slashdot's front page.
SHHH! Don't discourage him. He's doing swell, so far.
It can only do our stagnant societies good to make some cheaper megaphones.
Unfortunately, just as the megaphones get cheaper, the big guys claim a patent on megaphones, copyright all forms of expression, and sue critics for "trademark dilution."
Yes, but you wont get the same profitable yeilds without heavy fertilization.
I haven't RTFA (hey, this is slashdot) but that NOT what I've heard from switchgrass growers. Aside from an initial establishment period, you don't have to do much besides harvest the stuff. You don't have to replant, fertilize, or, for the most part, water it. (And this is from the eastern shore, not its native area.)
Now, I'm sure you can get more out of it if you put more into it, but you get so much out of the box that it becomes much more a matter of "can I get X more out if I put X more in" versus corn, where it's a matter of "if I don't put X more in, I'm get nothing."
Modded down for declaiming the 'n-word' AND slavery?! I bow to you, sir.
Hope I'm wrong, though.
I know you're joking, but does buy it include being able to keep your job for voting a particular way?
I suppose we'll have to define Dems and Repubs as protected classes...
I'm actually for secret ballots, BTW, but I did hear that people in Kenya are being attacked because they voted at all, so the secrecy did them no good (I assume they're presumed to have voted among tribal lines? That wasn't clear from the story I heard.)
If ballots weren't secret, how would you keep people from coercing voters? How would you keep people from selling their votes? Ballots are secret for good reason.
Oh please. This is America; nobody's going to coerce my vote. They're going to buy it, fair and square.
I don't know about you, but for me, nine days ago was last year.
So was 'over a year ago.' :-P
While known for months in tech circles, the issue wasn't given broad attention until an Associated Press report last year,
Can't slip anything by those techies...
Creating a document is inherently a three-step process. Write, edit, layout. Any attempt to subvert this order results in unnecessary iteration and task-switching overhead.
I'm going to hang that on my wall.
I've always thought that Adobe or Quark would be smart to put out a very cheap app that was a very simple text editor, BUT it used the layout program's text engine and it had a "rules" script that would read a file set up by the designer. It would read the rules (fonts allowed, leading, etc.) and show the writer how the text was going to look in whatever publication they were submitting to. It could even show where the end of their alloted column inches was, so they would know if they needed to pad the text or whatnot. That way they could just concentrating on filling their 'hole' and not fiddle with useless stuff that will be striped out anyway.
Quark's Copydesk may actually do something like that (I'm not sure,) but it's way too pricey regardless. Scribus would probably be the place to do that, but they have a ways to go yet.
The advantage the bad guys have, beyond institutional stupidity and negligence, is that there's so many of them willing to exchange the data once acquired.
Huh. So the more "open source" approach of the crackers is beating the "closed source" defensive model of the defenders?
I'm not a zealot one way or the other (in particular I've always thought that "security through obscurity" actually has some value) but that point seems telling.