You give yet another example of how it's harder to make profit if you are a company and then say "see how it hurts open source?"
Duh... what? If you want to run a "click and shop store then you are, by definitoin, doing business. That means you have taken the impetus to play in the corporate world, which means taking on their rules.
OTOH, nothing at all to stop me from creating (and maintaining) an open source software project that provides "click and shop" functionality to those who do business in countries with sensible IP laws.
That last comment you made was even stupider than the first. So a company would hire you to work for them and then sue you for doing it? duuueeehhhhh.... hello, anyone home?
between the lines. I never mentioned p2p in that "rant" for a very good reason. Nor did I rebuke decss. In fact, it would appear you completely missed everything I actually said. I admit that's a danger from that sort of post, but still.. you could at least try.
Since you didn't get it I'll make it easy: patents (like copyrights) DO NOT HARM INNOVATION. If you want to produce art you damn well can - and you can distribute it your heart's content, all because of this wonderful invention of communications. In fact, you can even "sample" all you like and there's little those mean and nasty corporations can do about it if your work becomes popular.
Patents and copyrights make it harder to profit in the corporate world. That's an entirely different argument, and one for which a great many of us do NOT harbor the least bit of sympathy. If you want to program, all you need do is pick a project to contribute to - meanwhile those big mean and evil corporations might even use a bit of that brainpower of yours as motivation to cut you a paycheck. If you want to sell or support computers, they're cheaper than ever now thanks to mass production (by those evil corporations) and some fantastic free software. If you want to make and sell music, fucking well do it - and if you want to run a radio station, then walk the walk and you got nothing to bitch about when you talk the talk - not many indie artists are going to turn down the chance for radioplay even if it's just a small internet station.
Boohoo, IP laws make it harder for corporations to profit, and harder for small players to tie up even more in the system that never should have been in the first place... waaaah, cry me a fucking river.
Mkay, lemme see if I get this: linux is supposed to be "of the people, for the people" and all that... right? I mean, it is, at its core, about freedom with one of those BIG F's... right?
You jest... but consider: I can hit a repository and download decss for virtually any distribution I want, and all I need to do is hit a search engine to find it. So... what's the plan? Outlaw search engines? Ban them from carrying lists of files? Or are we going to commandeer the entire internet, lock it up in a vault, and throw away the key?
I'm really sick of these chicken little rants. I like groklaw and I actually have a good bit of respect for pj and crew (pj crew?) but this is absurd even from them - or maybe especially from them.
So, whoopdeefuck, patents lock up corporations and cause them to waste money fighting each other - great! Let the lawyers eat while the system fights itself.
These arguments are all nonsensical. Like the folks who bitch all the time about not being able to play Madonna and Britney on their internet stations for free because the record companies have that content all locked up - but insist "the internet is the future" and "one day" we'll all be able to be our own publishers. Just not now... because there's no money in it.
Fuck that. Fuck you all who insist on co-opting the system while you talk big about overthrowing it. The internet is a revolution, but if you think you're part of that revolution because you share pop songs for free, bootleg commercial software and bitch about how "the man" is keeping you down, you ain't part of that solution - you're just another part of the problem... and doomed to share the fate of "the system."
It might be a good way for a weekend band to make a few extra bucks, but someone who wants to make a career in music would have a much harder time.
Hmmm... well, it worked for a very long time for Aphex Twin before he became MTV fodder. And it's worked for quite a long time for Siouxsie and Budgie - who, after their breakaway from SATB became "the creatures" full time. They produce several releases a year and most all of them manage to sell out the 1000-20,000 units produced. Doesn't sound like much? Multiply $15USD (avg) times 1000, then times 4-6 releases a year - then realize they pay the record companies NOTHING from that take. Now add in the money from live shows - which, if nothing else, allows them to travel the world and get paid for it. Are they multi-millionaires? Not off this. But they somehow manage to live comfortably enough in their french country home to report to their fans they are quite happy, and they get to travel the world on a regular basis. Spent a few weeks in japan a year or two ago, performed with some drummers, made a couple of CDs and a DVD...
There's plenty "amateurs" can do... without becoming limo riding rock stars. I have no problem supporting artists, but I do have a problem funding extravagance and being told it's necessary in order for them to produce "art." The world doesn't need more velvet revolvers, sorry.
Silly person, listen: the RIAA does not represent the recording artists. The RIAA represents the record labels - the RIAA often lobbies for things that go directly against the artists. And it is the RIAA (members) that control these recordings, not the artists. And it is the RIAA (members) that get the money from their sale.
You have swallowed the kool-aid completely; This isn't about artists - it's about corporate profits.
And the notion of subsidies has come up before, and it is still an utterly stupid idea. I personally will move out of the country before I will allow one of my tax dollars to go to subsidizing the suits in hotown.
And Florida. Both "harbored," through their inaction, Al Quaida operatives - for a very long time. Some US flight schools even taught these murderers to fly. Perhaps the US military should invade Germany and Florida?
duh.. yeah, they're still spending money on "research." Of course they are... spending ten million dollars to put off a three hundred million dollar cleanup is a cheap investment.
You may know how the chemical companies claim to work, but it seems quite apparent you've no idea how the world works.
Most responsible chemical corporations? Is that like jumbo shrimp and military intelligence?
You're talking to a native Detroit boy, bud. Gonna have a hard time convincing me how "responsible" these folks are. Why, look! here's an article from just this week...
Actually, Ukraine isn't doing most of that publishing. The FACT is the copies are, by and large, produced in Russia. Ukraine has been closing down plants, although enforcement of copyright within Ukraine (or Russia, for that matter) is unlikely to increase in the near future, as most see it as undesirable. The spoken policy within Verkhovna Rada has been "increasing enforcement would simply drive up the price of entertainment, taking income away from the people at large while providing them no greater benefit."
It doesn't help that, by and large, the money would mostly just go to Hollywood.
And I doubt bullying is going to work for us much longer, either - for example, Ukraine sits on one of the largest deposits of coal in the world... and most of their mines have been sitting idle in spite of the comparatively low standard of living there and high unemployment. Meanwhile, our own energy needs seem to be going up exponentially. Now, which is more likely in the long term? The US comes knocking on Ukraine's door for coal - or the Ukraine coming to the US asking if we need it?
I would suggest it's not your ears, but more likely some cheap-ass computer speakers. Which means you will hear a difference if you ever upgrade - at which time, you will likely be wishing you'd never upgraded.
Given that you can now buy a 160GB hard drive for less than 100 bucks, and a spindle of 50 CDRs for about ten bucks, it's just stupid to waste time encoding music to anything less than (the quality of) 256mp3.
Actually, according to Strunk and White, that's optional. I would say it depends more on whether you want to sound like Shakespeare, or Shakespeare's sister.
"I choose tonot park there"
"I choose notto park there."
The split infiinitive is technically more correct, since the shakespearean version is ambiguous - is a choice being made, or is it not?
"To be, or not to be.. that is the question."
To be, or to not be - that is the choice.
There are very good reasons language evolves, you know.
I didn't say that they are piratical because they are inexpensive. I said that common sense should be telling you that when a deal seems too good to be true, it probably is.
ROTFL. You did it again! and after I just pointed out to you how silly this is!
You cannot make a rational argument by appealing to emotion. Your argument is (amazingly, given your apparent credentials) completely oblivious to matters of international commerce and, when that fails, you resort to the very same fallacious posits as all the rest of the laynaysayers... but... but... it's too cheap! It must be bad!
Sorry bud. You know I look for your posts and I enjoy these exchanges, but on this one you've really not proven your mettle. Gotta get back to work now on something that actually might mean something... someday...
I really don't think most of the people who shop at wal-mart care if factory workers have jobs. I mean, look at the comments on this board. They want what they want when they want it at the price they want it--which is--essentially, free. And they create all manner of tortured justifications for why they shouldn't pay more for goods and services...
It's called capitalism, bud. pay less for more is the way of the buck, and we've spent a century moving toward this ideal. Only problem is somewhere along the way the capitalists in charge forgot what could happen once it became too easy for the proletariat to utilize their very same international channels of commerce.
Look... you say it's not "importation" because it's a reproduction. But if it were illegal to reproduce music via the internet we wouldn't have itunes and all the others. So how do they get away with it? They have contracts in the US, based on US copyright protection, and enforced by US law. Then you say "but these copies are "piratical" because they're cheap" (or "not rom the US" - or something.. frankly, I don't know what the hell you're saying there) - but cost doesn't get mentioned in any of these laws you cite. And these companies all do business in russia and, therefore, are bound in russia by russian laws the same way they are bound in the US by US laws, and in canada by canadian laws (etc). These nations have all signed the same relevant IP treaties.
Basically you seem to be grasping at straws here - but every one of them comes up short. Don't feel bad... I'm sure the sharks in hotown are experiencing the same frustration. That's why they've been unable to do anything about this legal service which offers downloads licensed according to the national laws of a TRIPS signatory.
And you still seem to be ignoring the fact that, as costs go, asking someone to pay $2 or more for MP3 downloads of a CD in russia isn't much different than asking someone in the US to pay $8. And once we get to the high quality custom encodes... two cents a MB x 350MB? that's like seven bucks - roughly the equivalent of itunes charging damn near thirty bucks in the US!
Most of the rebukes against this service seem to spring from the cost - "it's so cheap, it must be illegal because the copyright holders get nothing." But the fact is they do get something: they get their works protected in russia, by russian law. This exchange is provably lucrative for them, as they continue to increase their business affiliations (ever seen "red dot" CDs in a record store? Rememeber TATU? Ever heard of MTV?) and spend money marketing US artists there. The simple fact is the laws are just different - because the culture is different. I've heard no one arguing japanese record stores are all pirates because they allow consumers to rent CDs and encourage them to make copies. The only difference here is the copies are easier to transport because of the internet... big whoopee.
Until some relevant laws are changed, this service is legal... even in the US. You may claim it isn't.. but thus far you've done a really poor job of proving it.
If it's reproduction then there is a historical chain of SCOTUS protection for the user. And the RIAA and IFPI could put an end to the problem as simply as getting onto the credit card agencies.
Last I looked, they still take a number of them. So again...
Arrogant and stupid? Arrogant perhaps, but stupidity is trying to pretend the artists are not responsibe for the hole they dig themselves into. So jimi Hendrix signed everything they put in front of him.. sorry, but that was one of the least of jimi's problems. What is rational (or even ethical) about watching someone paint themselves into a corner and then treating them like it's not their fault? What is ethical about denying someone responsibility for their own fate?
Artists are part of this game just as much as the record execs. The reason the record execs have that power is, in large part, because the stupid artists allow them to have it. If things are going to change the pressure has to be applied across the entire industry.
That's really funny. Record companies routinely "cutout" releases within weeks of their release, which means any release that is not wildly successful goes into the loss leaders bin. That means the record company gets all the money and the artist gets to try again to get out of the immense creative debt she put herself in.
Citing "ethics" in defense of hollywood record companies is like citing Joan Crawford as a model for child rearing methodology.
That said, no one forced those artists to sign to those labels. It's simply not my problem that they are unable to obtain my money. If they were not slaves to the landsharks they would be able to (for example) release their work through magnatune, or even sell via their own website (as many - successful - artists already do).
You're still losing. Provide some reference that supports your insistance these copies are "piratical" when they comply with all local laws.
In a case where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable.
And 601 says:
The provisions of subsection (a) do not apply -
where importation, for use and not for sale, is sought -
by any person with respect to no more than one copy of any work at any one time;
That's from the very code you keep parroting.
This isn't a case of offshore material being lifted - as I have pointed out to you repeatedly, these corporations are actively doing business in russia and are, therefore, both knowledgable and compliant with local laws. Maybe Britney's CDs are being pressed by the bazillions in pirate CD factories in russia - but that has nothing to do with this site, which provides full credentials regarding their legality.
So far as "undercutting US copyright holders" - well, there again: where is the difference between "undercutting US copyright holders" (record companies) by employing our telecommunications capabilities and "undercutting US workers" by offshoring call center jobs? Near as I can see, the only difference is who gets screwed out of their "potential income." What goes around...
Both morally and legally, your argument lacks consistency and - from what I have seen thus far - utterly lacks any objective merit.
you know the rest. The reason Magnatune doesn't have the "success" Apple does is because Apple has close affiliations in Hollywood (ever heard of Disney? Pixar?) and, therefore, a rack of mainstream artists - while Magnatune has... a bunch of altruistic geeks and a business model built on anti-industry ideals.
Dude, I didn't say kiddie porn. These sites are largely based in the US, feature US models, and are still around. And right after I hit submit I remembered the name of the company - it's called verotel. As you can see they list themselves as being in the netherlands, but a little (maybe a lot) of pressure from visa caused them to drop dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of sites.
You are completely overlooking several important facts, cap'n.
The exchange rate. Perhaps you don't know this because you don't buy Russian music, but ALL russian CDs are dirt cheap. The exchange rate might not mean much if you want a nice apartment in Kyiv or Moscow, but music from there - even after importation through "legit" channels - is dirt cheap. I have a whole stack of CDs here of Russian artists, and the most expensive one of the lot was six bucks.
To do business (legitimately) in Russian means complying with their laws - just as here. So, who do you think runs MTV Russia? Fully half the artists on the top ten over there are American recording artists - on labels like RCA and Elektra and Columbia. Even with all this evil mean and nasty piracy over there - by all estimates I've seen only about a third of the music sold in stores being legitimate copies, these companies still find it worthwhile to spend money there on mearketing and selling their wares.
Why haven't they complained about them doing business? These companies are legit under Russian law, and the record companies do business there of their own volition. There's simply nothing they can do except spend some of that barely earned money on lobbying for different laws - just as they do here (oh, and good luck with that).
It's not illegal for me to import for my personal use, and it's not illegal for them to sell abroad. Both Ukraine and Russia are Berne member states and WIPO signatories. What it comes down to is this: the very same factors - cheap communications, ease of international commerce - will have the net effect of lowering prices to the lowest common denominator. What goes around comes around... god bless the internet and new capitalism!
What's that credit card processor that all the porn sites use? I can't remember which one it was, but they were also apparently used by just about ALL the "teen model" sites - and many of the offshore gambling sites as well. The the bosses in washington started cracking down on the credit card companies and bingo, they suddenly decided they couldn't use that sort of business anymore, and now it seems a new grey market moneychanger pops up every month to fill the niche, leaving the gambling and child model site operators scrambling for income. No more visa, no more trustworthy US billing agent.
Slashdot Mirror
Duh... what? If you want to run a "click and shop store then you are, by definitoin, doing business. That means you have taken the impetus to play in the corporate world, which means taking on their rules.
OTOH, nothing at all to stop me from creating (and maintaining) an open source software project that provides "click and shop" functionality to those who do business in countries with sensible IP laws.
That last comment you made was even stupider than the first. So a company would hire you to work for them and then sue you for doing it? duuueeehhhhh.... hello, anyone home?
what the fuck do they know about it, anyway?
Since you didn't get it I'll make it easy: patents (like copyrights) DO NOT HARM INNOVATION. If you want to produce art you damn well can - and you can distribute it your heart's content, all because of this wonderful invention of communications. In fact, you can even "sample" all you like and there's little those mean and nasty corporations can do about it if your work becomes popular.
Patents and copyrights make it harder to profit in the corporate world. That's an entirely different argument, and one for which a great many of us do NOT harbor the least bit of sympathy. If you want to program, all you need do is pick a project to contribute to - meanwhile those big mean and evil corporations might even use a bit of that brainpower of yours as motivation to cut you a paycheck. If you want to sell or support computers, they're cheaper than ever now thanks to mass production (by those evil corporations) and some fantastic free software. If you want to make and sell music, fucking well do it - and if you want to run a radio station, then walk the walk and you got nothing to bitch about when you talk the talk - not many indie artists are going to turn down the chance for radioplay even if it's just a small internet station.
Boohoo, IP laws make it harder for corporations to profit, and harder for small players to tie up even more in the system that never should have been in the first place... waaaah, cry me a fucking river.
the truth gets instantly modded to "flamebait."
You jest... but consider: I can hit a repository and download decss for virtually any distribution I want, and all I need to do is hit a search engine to find it. So... what's the plan? Outlaw search engines? Ban them from carrying lists of files? Or are we going to commandeer the entire internet, lock it up in a vault, and throw away the key?
I'm really sick of these chicken little rants. I like groklaw and I actually have a good bit of respect for pj and crew (pj crew?) but this is absurd even from them - or maybe especially from them.
So, whoopdeefuck, patents lock up corporations and cause them to waste money fighting each other - great! Let the lawyers eat while the system fights itself.
These arguments are all nonsensical. Like the folks who bitch all the time about not being able to play Madonna and Britney on their internet stations for free because the record companies have that content all locked up - but insist "the internet is the future" and "one day" we'll all be able to be our own publishers. Just not now... because there's no money in it.
Fuck that. Fuck you all who insist on co-opting the system while you talk big about overthrowing it. The internet is a revolution, but if you think you're part of that revolution because you share pop songs for free, bootleg commercial software and bitch about how "the man" is keeping you down, you ain't part of that solution - you're just another part of the problem... and doomed to share the fate of "the system."
Hmmm... well, it worked for a very long time for Aphex Twin before he became MTV fodder. And it's worked for quite a long time for Siouxsie and Budgie - who, after their breakaway from SATB became "the creatures" full time. They produce several releases a year and most all of them manage to sell out the 1000-20,000 units produced. Doesn't sound like much? Multiply $15USD (avg) times 1000, then times 4-6 releases a year - then realize they pay the record companies NOTHING from that take. Now add in the money from live shows - which, if nothing else, allows them to travel the world and get paid for it. Are they multi-millionaires? Not off this. But they somehow manage to live comfortably enough in their french country home to report to their fans they are quite happy, and they get to travel the world on a regular basis. Spent a few weeks in japan a year or two ago, performed with some drummers, made a couple of CDs and a DVD...
There's plenty "amateurs" can do... without becoming limo riding rock stars. I have no problem supporting artists, but I do have a problem funding extravagance and being told it's necessary in order for them to produce "art." The world doesn't need more velvet revolvers, sorry.
Silly person, listen: the RIAA does not represent the recording artists. The RIAA represents the record labels - the RIAA often lobbies for things that go directly against the artists. And it is the RIAA (members) that control these recordings, not the artists. And it is the RIAA (members) that get the money from their sale.
You have swallowed the kool-aid completely; This isn't about artists - it's about corporate profits.
And the notion of subsidies has come up before, and it is still an utterly stupid idea. I personally will move out of the country before I will allow one of my tax dollars to go to subsidizing the suits in hotown.
And Florida. Both "harbored," through their inaction, Al Quaida operatives - for a very long time. Some US flight schools even taught these murderers to fly. Perhaps the US military should invade Germany and Florida?
You may know how the chemical companies claim to work, but it seems quite apparent you've no idea how the world works.
You're talking to a native Detroit boy, bud. Gonna have a hard time convincing me how "responsible" these folks are. Why, look! here's an article from just this week...
Responsible chemical corporation at work
It doesn't help that, by and large, the money would mostly just go to Hollywood.
And I doubt bullying is going to work for us much longer, either - for example, Ukraine sits on one of the largest deposits of coal in the world... and most of their mines have been sitting idle in spite of the comparatively low standard of living there and high unemployment. Meanwhile, our own energy needs seem to be going up exponentially. Now, which is more likely in the long term? The US comes knocking on Ukraine's door for coal - or the Ukraine coming to the US asking if we need it?
Given that you can now buy a 160GB hard drive for less than 100 bucks, and a spindle of 50 CDRs for about ten bucks, it's just stupid to waste time encoding music to anything less than (the quality of) 256mp3.
"I choose to not park there"
"I choose not to park there."
The split infiinitive is technically more correct, since the shakespearean version is ambiguous - is a choice being made, or is it not?
"To be, or not to be.. that is the question."
To be, or to not be - that is the choice.
There are very good reasons language evolves, you know.
Fuck you all. I'm leaving. Red, white, blew by you...
ROTFL. You did it again! and after I just pointed out to you how silly this is!
You cannot make a rational argument by appealing to emotion. Your argument is (amazingly, given your apparent credentials) completely oblivious to matters of international commerce and, when that fails, you resort to the very same fallacious posits as all the rest of the laynaysayers... but... but... it's too cheap! It must be bad!
Sorry bud. You know I look for your posts and I enjoy these exchanges, but on this one you've really not proven your mettle. Gotta get back to work now on something that actually might mean something... someday...
It's called capitalism, bud. pay less for more is the way of the buck, and we've spent a century moving toward this ideal. Only problem is somewhere along the way the capitalists in charge forgot what could happen once it became too easy for the proletariat to utilize their very same international channels of commerce.
Basically you seem to be grasping at straws here - but every one of them comes up short. Don't feel bad... I'm sure the sharks in hotown are experiencing the same frustration. That's why they've been unable to do anything about this legal service which offers downloads licensed according to the national laws of a TRIPS signatory.
And you still seem to be ignoring the fact that, as costs go, asking someone to pay $2 or more for MP3 downloads of a CD in russia isn't much different than asking someone in the US to pay $8. And once we get to the high quality custom encodes... two cents a MB x 350MB? that's like seven bucks - roughly the equivalent of itunes charging damn near thirty bucks in the US!
Most of the rebukes against this service seem to spring from the cost - "it's so cheap, it must be illegal because the copyright holders get nothing." But the fact is they do get something: they get their works protected in russia, by russian law. This exchange is provably lucrative for them, as they continue to increase their business affiliations (ever seen "red dot" CDs in a record store? Rememeber TATU? Ever heard of MTV?) and spend money marketing US artists there. The simple fact is the laws are just different - because the culture is different. I've heard no one arguing japanese record stores are all pirates because they allow consumers to rent CDs and encourage them to make copies. The only difference here is the copies are easier to transport because of the internet... big whoopee.
Until some relevant laws are changed, this service is legal... even in the US. You may claim it isn't.. but thus far you've done a really poor job of proving it.
Last I looked, they still take a number of them. So again...
Artists are part of this game just as much as the record execs. The reason the record execs have that power is, in large part, because the stupid artists allow them to have it. If things are going to change the pressure has to be applied across the entire industry.
Citing "ethics" in defense of hollywood record companies is like citing Joan Crawford as a model for child rearing methodology.
That said, no one forced those artists to sign to those labels. It's simply not my problem that they are unable to obtain my money. If they were not slaves to the landsharks they would be able to (for example) release their work through magnatune, or even sell via their own website (as many - successful - artists already do).
In a case where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable.
And 601 says:
The provisions of subsection (a) do not apply -
where importation, for use and not for sale, is sought -
by any person with respect to no more than one copy of any work at any one time;
That's from the very code you keep parroting.
This isn't a case of offshore material being lifted - as I have pointed out to you repeatedly, these corporations are actively doing business in russia and are, therefore, both knowledgable and compliant with local laws. Maybe Britney's CDs are being pressed by the bazillions in pirate CD factories in russia - but that has nothing to do with this site, which provides full credentials regarding their legality.
So far as "undercutting US copyright holders" - well, there again: where is the difference between "undercutting US copyright holders" (record companies) by employing our telecommunications capabilities and "undercutting US workers" by offshoring call center jobs? Near as I can see, the only difference is who gets screwed out of their "potential income." What goes around...
Both morally and legally, your argument lacks consistency and - from what I have seen thus far - utterly lacks any objective merit.
they'd catch him first. why do you think radio shack records your name and address every time you buy batteries?
You are completely overlooking several important facts, cap'n.
The exchange rate. Perhaps you don't know this because you don't buy Russian music, but ALL russian CDs are dirt cheap. The exchange rate might not mean much if you want a nice apartment in Kyiv or Moscow, but music from there - even after importation through "legit" channels - is dirt cheap. I have a whole stack of CDs here of Russian artists, and the most expensive one of the lot was six bucks.
To do business (legitimately) in Russian means complying with their laws - just as here. So, who do you think runs MTV Russia? Fully half the artists on the top ten over there are American recording artists - on labels like RCA and Elektra and Columbia. Even with all this evil mean and nasty piracy over there - by all estimates I've seen only about a third of the music sold in stores being legitimate copies, these companies still find it worthwhile to spend money there on mearketing and selling their wares.
Why haven't they complained about them doing business? These companies are legit under Russian law, and the record companies do business there of their own volition. There's simply nothing they can do except spend some of that barely earned money on lobbying for different laws - just as they do here (oh, and good luck with that).
It's not illegal for me to import for my personal use, and it's not illegal for them to sell abroad. Both Ukraine and Russia are Berne member states and WIPO signatories. What it comes down to is this: the very same factors - cheap communications, ease of international commerce - will have the net effect of lowering prices to the lowest common denominator. What goes around comes around... god bless the internet and new capitalism!
Gee, wonder why they can't do that here?