So basically it is the user's fault they used the software simply because software is free speech? That is a silly argument.
Under your argument the customer should have been liable for any problems caused from Y2K bugs. Instead what happened was laws were passed that created a financial incentive for IT pros to certify everything was y2K compliant.
If you want to write software that absolves you of any kind of product liability then you should not be charging for it. You can then hide your product up in the free speech argument all you want. Name me any other industry where a manufacturer can pawn off ALL (not just gross negligence or imporoper use of the product) but ALL responsibilities for product defects onto the customer.
Re:Will the SSSCA kill publishers?
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 2
I'm going out on a limb here becuase I don't know enough specifics.
Digimarc several years ago introduced a watermarking plugin for PhotoShop. Now let's say that that watermarking technolgy becomes the chosen DRM technology for images. The SSSCA allows Digimarc to sell the plugin. IIRC the SSSCA explicitly allows for monopoly control of DRM technologies. So what prevents Digimarc from making money here? I read the SSSCA to explicitly allow money making off DRM in the same way that the DVD forum makes money off licsensing the DVD playback to manufacturers.
Also remember that real power arrives from distribution, but also from exposure. You may have the best program since sliced bread but if nobody can see it then you are very unlikely to ever recoup your costs.
Thanks for the reply. I hope you are right and I am wrong!
We'll never see (more) secure products until the manufacturers become legally liable for losses due to the software. There's simply no financial incentive to improve security, especially if you're the biggest player.
My guess is, this letter was an attempt to secure a cheaper license from MS. They're not going to simply switch over to something else.
Re:Will the SSSCA kill publishers?
on
SSSCA Editorials
·
· Score: 2
YOu have an intersting point. My guess is as a creator, you'd be paying extra for the privelage of being able to create. Perhaps the publishers become a rubber stamp organization where they merely certify your work is in a DRM format. You'd pay a fee for that and that fee would go to the publishers.
I'm sure the publishers have thought of this and will move to some kind of service or certification clearinghouse. Maybe they'll even provide the tools squeezing software comapnies to work for them or not at all.
Why are you using a blog tool without an HTML entry option? It sounds like you know enough that you could easily type in what you want and wrap it in the MATH tag.
Id be more concerned that not many people can see the MathML in their browser anyway.
I felt lke I was reading Ed Anger in the Weekly World News. Yes, I realized the linked piece is an opinion. But it is a poorly written one doing little mroe than spreading FUD. The Slashdot summary suggests the article is a serious piece that would inform mainstream America.
Wow. Some good points in there. I hope you get modded up.
Along with the art film you might be able to see an increase in exposure to films that are not of the 90-110 minute duration. Maybe more shorts and other types of film would be able to make a buck for everybody. Heck, even foregin film (not even shown outside most large cities in the US) may be able to make some money.
Sadly I see the opposite happening. There are rumors Disney is behind the consolidation of HK DVD (which are almost always region free) distribution to a single vendor. I don't want that asset in the hands of any one entity, especially one with Disney connections.
If SSSCA is passed you won't be able to afford to make your own digital content becuase creating it could also be used to circumvent copy protection. Ergo, you pay to see other people's stuff, but can't make your own without paying commercial rates to create it.
After all, can't Japanese pay utility bills and purchase phone cards at conveinence stores? I'd think this would be a great place to collect info since you can link bill payments, phone usage (to an extent) and impulse buys all from one place.
Maybe it'd also spur asset management software since that seems to be one of the central techs behind TOL. It's like being e-mailed books Barnes adn Nobles thinks you'd like and telling you they have 3 in stock at various San Diego bookstores.
Re:wait a minute, what's the story here?
on
iWarez
·
· Score: 2
So you're just going to stand around waiting for Bluetooth to download that 100meg app? Isn't Bluetooth's transfer rate worse than USB? And how do you select what you want to "pick up" anyway?
Thank you for the civil and well-reasoned reply. I also do not think that CD sales are attributable to anything other than normal market fluctuation. I do have another obervation and question for yout hough.
You state: "That had to translate into CD sales since copying music works has never been a real chore."
That is true, but remember the price of a CD-R unit has declined tremendously during the past 2-3 years. I think that price drop is what made copying much easier, not the technology or product (CD, cassette etc) itself. Once a recording technology gets to the $100 - $150 range they tend to gain mass acceptance (exclusing other factors like built in limitations of course)
I'm from Minneapolis, and wrote my rep and Senators in September(?) about this issue. Only Dayton responded, with a form letter.
And you think Coleman is any better? This is the guy with a model wife and the Kennedy smile who cozied up to big business in his tenure as Mayor. You don't think downtown went through all that building simply becuase it needed it do you?
Listen to the February 26 broadcast of Marketplace (www.markeplace.org). It's in Real Audio. The last story is a peice written by a teen girl about the Grammys, but it really, really applies to this article and your reply.
If your assumption is correct that Napster users are "into music" and presumably buying more, then why aren't sales UP? After all, the new P2P services are supposedly more popular than Napster at its height.
No the cause for a slight downturn in sales (in the UK sales are up 5%) are:
1. a weakened US economy wherein a large amount of people are unemployed or underemployed 2. a year in which big name artists didn't release material 3. the fractured music market. This is the REAL legacy of Napster. With Napster and other P2P services people were exposed to more variety in music. People want more variety in their music purchases. Unfortunately, distribution doesn't favor the small guys, you need to search for it. P2P makes it easy and conveinent for lazy Americans to get smaller artists' works more easily than before.
Look, I made $11K last year (thanks dot com economy). I didn't download an illegal song file (thanks epitonic) and yet I bought 7 CDs last year. I'm just more choosy what I buy and can preview artists and genres more easily thanks to music streams. But recent royalty moves there may dry that option as players simply cannot afford the royalties demanded.
" Not to disrespect Mac folks, but I bet the profit involved in putting out Ultradev 5 with dot-Net authoring will result in a lot more sales than Dreamweaver in native OSX, but of course, that's just my betting."
You're probably right. But, OSX has been out almost a year. While not finished, it is further along than dot net, so why not work on that until dot net gets figured out?
Or are you saying that dot net features of UltraDev/Dreamweaver won't be on the Mac?
Charge for access for that information for 3rd party developers. Sure, you broadcasters could get it free from various sources, but its not practical. Enter a licensed database held by BMI, ASCAP, and the RIAA members. Suddenly, you can automate your streaming software to grab all the required info from the database. Something like Gracenote or FreeDB, but for streaming servers.
Now imagine what you'll need to pay for that info access. They get you coming and going.
Really, i believe most of these requirements can be easily overcome, but the Big Boys don't want to play fair.
Yeah and why we're at it we can do the following to strike back against media:
1. stop going to movies 2. stop listening to the radio 3. stop using broadband 4. stop renting movies 5. stop reading newspapers 6. stop reading most magazines
Since these are all things the media either directly controls or has great influence over. If these things were to happen we'd also probably see the death of advertising as we know it.
Of course, if people would turn off TV they might have time to do things like raise their kids or volunteer for something. But this is America!
It's very clear the FCC lives in a world where deregulation solves all problems. You'd think past behavior (S&Ls, Enron, etc) would clue peopel in that self regulation, especially in the case of current or virtual monopolies.
What's intersting is that Qwest has been accused by my state this very morning of setting sweetheart deals with a small set of businesses. This is anti-competitive, but they want to have long distance and deregulated DSL. Do you think they'd allow competition then? A Qwest rep refused to comment on the case specifically but said since their competitors have acombined *17-20%* market share, that is proof of competition in the marketplace.
Whether these deregualtors know it or not they are subsidizing the big guys and setting up a future of fewer providers. In a few years after the industry has busted they'll ask for more subsidies (they are already) or declare ignorance as the company collapses around them.
Wouldn't this cause the trial penalties to be further delayed? I mean delaying plays into MS hands as it gains further marketshare. How long would it possibly take to have an indepedent team verify MS's claims it cannot offer a stripped down Windows?
Yeah, so Bloggs can't run and a second stringer does. Where does th emoney for that election come from? And how long does the government wait for a second election? If 20% of the initial elections result in NOTA, do people need to wait for the second election results before the first batch go into office? Right now elections are in November and sessions start in January. Not much time to run a second election.
Why not just make a "Not Candidate X" for every candidate. The "Not candidate X" counts as a negative vote for that candidate. So it counters one vote for candidate X. Add up the votes and the highest number of positive votes wins.
Slashdot Mirror
So basically it is the user's fault they used the software simply because software is free speech? That is a silly argument.
Under your argument the customer should have been liable for any problems caused from Y2K bugs. Instead what happened was laws were passed that created a financial incentive for IT pros to certify everything was y2K compliant.
If you want to write software that absolves you of any kind of product liability then you should not be charging for it. You can then hide your product up in the free speech argument all you want. Name me any other industry where a manufacturer can pawn off ALL (not just gross negligence or imporoper use of the product) but ALL responsibilities for product defects onto the customer.
I'm going out on a limb here becuase I don't know enough specifics.
Digimarc several years ago introduced a watermarking plugin for PhotoShop. Now let's say that that watermarking technolgy becomes the chosen DRM technology for images. The SSSCA allows Digimarc to sell the plugin. IIRC the SSSCA explicitly allows for monopoly control of DRM technologies. So what prevents Digimarc from making money here? I read the SSSCA to explicitly allow money making off DRM in the same way that the DVD forum makes money off licsensing the DVD playback to manufacturers.
Also remember that real power arrives from distribution, but also from exposure. You may have the best program since sliced bread but if nobody can see it then you are very unlikely to ever recoup your costs.
Thanks for the reply. I hope you are right and I am wrong!
We'll never see (more) secure products until the manufacturers become legally liable for losses due to the software. There's simply no financial incentive to improve security, especially if you're the biggest player.
My guess is, this letter was an attempt to secure a cheaper license from MS. They're not going to simply switch over to something else.
YOu have an intersting point. My guess is as a creator, you'd be paying extra for the privelage of being able to create. Perhaps the publishers become a rubber stamp organization where they merely certify your work is in a DRM format. You'd pay a fee for that and that fee would go to the publishers.
I'm sure the publishers have thought of this and will move to some kind of service or certification clearinghouse. Maybe they'll even provide the tools squeezing software comapnies to work for them or not at all.
Why are you using a blog tool without an HTML entry option? It sounds like you know enough that you could easily type in what you want and wrap it in the MATH tag.
Id be more concerned that not many people can see the MathML in their browser anyway.
I felt lke I was reading Ed Anger in the Weekly World News. Yes, I realized the linked piece is an opinion. But it is a poorly written one doing little mroe than spreading FUD. The Slashdot summary suggests the article is a serious piece that would inform mainstream America.
Wow. Some good points in there. I hope you get modded up.
Along with the art film you might be able to see an increase in exposure to films that are not of the 90-110 minute duration. Maybe more shorts and other types of film would be able to make a buck for everybody. Heck, even foregin film (not even shown outside most large cities in the US) may be able to make some money.
Sadly I see the opposite happening. There are rumors Disney is behind the consolidation of HK DVD (which are almost always region free) distribution to a single vendor. I don't want that asset in the hands of any one entity, especially one with Disney connections.
If SSSCA is passed you won't be able to afford to make your own digital content becuase creating it could also be used to circumvent copy protection. Ergo, you pay to see other people's stuff, but can't make your own without paying commercial rates to create it.
What percentage of the movies you download are in commercial release (shown intheaters) at that time?
stores?
After all, can't Japanese pay utility bills and purchase phone cards at conveinence stores? I'd think this would be a great place to collect info since you can link bill payments, phone usage (to an extent) and impulse buys all from one place.
Maybe it'd also spur asset management software since that seems to be one of the central techs behind TOL. It's like being e-mailed books Barnes adn Nobles thinks you'd like and telling you they have 3 in stock at various San Diego bookstores.
So you're just going to stand around waiting for Bluetooth to download that 100meg app? Isn't Bluetooth's transfer rate worse than USB? And how do you select what you want to "pick up" anyway?
Obviously, I don't use Bluetooth products.
I think it would be a good idea. But then aren't you dealing with different distros? How do you distribute such a thing? Would downloads or CDs work?
How would AOL handle it? Woudl they switch to Mozilla or just tweak IE to be their client?
While a good idea I suspect it would just fragment IE even more.
Thank you for the civil and well-reasoned reply. I also do not think that CD sales are attributable to anything other than normal market fluctuation. I do have another obervation and question for yout hough.
You state: "That had to translate into CD sales since copying music works has never been a real chore."
That is true, but remember the price of a CD-R unit has declined tremendously during the past 2-3 years. I think that price drop is what made copying much easier, not the technology or product (CD, cassette etc) itself. Once a recording technology gets to the $100 - $150 range they tend to gain mass acceptance (exclusing other factors like built in limitations of course)
Thanks again for a nice reply and cool head.
I'm from Minneapolis, and wrote my rep and Senators in September(?) about this issue. Only Dayton responded, with a form letter.
And you think Coleman is any better? This is the guy with a model wife and the Kennedy smile who cozied up to big business in his tenure as Mayor. You don't think downtown went through all that building simply becuase it needed it do you?
Listen to the February 26 broadcast of Marketplace (www.markeplace.org). It's in Real Audio. The last story is a peice written by a teen girl about the Grammys, but it really, really applies to this article and your reply.
If your assumption is correct that Napster users are "into music" and presumably buying more, then why aren't sales UP? After all, the new P2P services are supposedly more popular than Napster at its height.
No the cause for a slight downturn in sales (in the UK sales are up 5%) are:
1. a weakened US economy wherein a large amount of people are unemployed or underemployed
2. a year in which big name artists didn't release material
3. the fractured music market. This is the REAL legacy of Napster. With Napster and other P2P services people were exposed to more variety in music. People want more variety in their music purchases. Unfortunately, distribution doesn't favor the small guys, you need to search for it. P2P makes it easy and conveinent for lazy Americans to get smaller artists' works more easily than before.
Look, I made $11K last year (thanks dot com economy). I didn't download an illegal song file (thanks epitonic) and yet I bought 7 CDs last year. I'm just more choosy what I buy and can preview artists and genres more easily thanks to music streams. But recent royalty moves there may dry that option as players simply cannot afford the royalties demanded.
" Not to disrespect Mac folks, but I bet the profit involved in putting out Ultradev 5 with dot-Net authoring will result in a lot more sales than Dreamweaver in native OSX, but of course, that's just my betting."
You're probably right. But, OSX has been out almost a year. While not finished, it is further along than dot net, so why not work on that until dot net gets figured out?
Or are you saying that dot net features of UltraDev/Dreamweaver won't be on the Mac?
So what about the indies who can't afford the fees? Just screw them too, huh? Very constructive.
Charge for access for that information for 3rd party developers. Sure, you broadcasters could get it free from various sources, but its not practical. Enter a licensed database held by BMI, ASCAP, and the RIAA members. Suddenly, you can automate your streaming software to grab all the required info from the database. Something like Gracenote or FreeDB, but for streaming servers.
Now imagine what you'll need to pay for that info access. They get you coming and going.
Really, i believe most of these requirements can be easily overcome, but the Big Boys don't want to play fair.
Yeah and why we're at it we can do the following to strike back against media:
1. stop going to movies
2. stop listening to the radio
3. stop using broadband
4. stop renting movies
5. stop reading newspapers
6. stop reading most magazines
Since these are all things the media either directly controls or has great influence over. If these things were to happen we'd also probably see the death of advertising as we know it.
Of course, if people would turn off TV they might have time to do things like raise their kids or volunteer for something. But this is America!
It's very clear the FCC lives in a world where deregulation solves all problems. You'd think past behavior (S&Ls, Enron, etc) would clue peopel in that self regulation, especially in the case of current or virtual monopolies.
What's intersting is that Qwest has been accused by my state this very morning of setting sweetheart deals with a small set of businesses. This is anti-competitive, but they want to have long distance and deregulated DSL. Do you think they'd allow competition then? A Qwest rep refused to comment on the case specifically but said since their competitors have acombined *17-20%* market share, that is proof of competition in the marketplace.
Whether these deregualtors know it or not they are subsidizing the big guys and setting up a future of fewer providers. In a few years after the industry has busted they'll ask for more subsidies (they are already) or declare ignorance as the company collapses around them.
for XP. It has to replace all those copies of Win9x and NT4/2000.
MS knows it is its own biggest competitor.
Wouldn't this cause the trial penalties to be further delayed? I mean delaying plays into MS hands as it gains further marketshare. How long would it possibly take to have an indepedent team verify MS's claims it cannot offer a stripped down Windows?
Yeah, so Bloggs can't run and a second stringer does. Where does th emoney for that election come from? And how long does the government wait for a second election? If 20% of the initial elections result in NOTA, do people need to wait for the second election results before the first batch go into office? Right now elections are in November and sessions start in January. Not much time to run a second election.
Why not just make a "Not Candidate X" for every candidate. The "Not candidate X" counts as a negative vote for that candidate. So it counters one vote for candidate X. Add up the votes and the highest number of positive votes wins.
Wouldn't NOTA and a second election double the cost again?