I only watch TV one night a week, Fox on Sunday, and I do like Malcom and family, I have teenage boys and that's how I learn to raise them. And it's one of the few shows I watch that isn't a cartoon.
The problem with the US is that the bulk of the responsible people work long hours with very little vacation, have time-consuming commutes, kids to raise, etc. They barely have time to read the news, much less get involved in a political system that has huge hurdles to those who don't have a business interest in being involved. And then there is the "bipartisan system" which would be illegal in any other industry. The Justice Department would get involved quite actively if IBM and Microsoft ran the computer industry as a duopoly.
And once they get the email system going, they will have the world's best testbed for developing a great spam filtration system, and someday, they will have that, too.
Although the press release looked like a joke, I signed up to be a volunteer for the Beta test or the Alpha test, or whatever they need volunteers for. Although the press release was written with humor, I wouldn't be surprised if a real product was in there somewhere.
I'd love to permenently archive my email, except for the spam. Google may have the brains and the plans to build the world's best spam filtration system. This mail system could be the world's best testbed to develop it.
It only infringes on copyright because they haven't come up with a way to include this technology in their rules. Look at radio, look at public libraries. These are two technologies that gave IP people fits until they organized tracking and royalty systems that all sides could live with.
It gets songs out to the public. In almost all cases, that is good for the artists. Most artists benefit from the exposure. And the ones who don't need the free publicity, are so good they can charge outragous prices for their live shows.
It is the recording industry that must change. The basic infrastructure will be needed for years to come, but they no longer have the almost exclusive responsibility/right to find and promote new artists. And frankly, based on what I hear when I veer away from the oldies stations, they aren't doing so hot at that either. Word of mouth and P2P are so much better. And it isn't that good music isn't made anymore, it just isn't promoted. The recording industry and big corporate radio are shooting each other in the feet.
That is believable. P2P is a great way to give out free samples. The recording industry needs to learn that as long as most people are still using dialup, the fastest way to download is to drive to the store. They need to change their business model while they still have the chance.
I understand how P2P can hurt niche artists. Record stores don't like to stock things that move slowly. In a way, P2P relieves them of that responsibility. It's good for the stores, only the traditional system gets hurt. Let's hope that niche artists have loyal fans that can support them in spite of this problem.
One lousy CD, it doesn't sound like much of a loss, but I'm surprised that the record sellers didn't come out ahead. They should. P2P should function just like any other marketing channel that allows a free sample. They could even have a few restrictions. Honest people will follow rules they think are reasonable, but if you treat people like thieves, they will steal.
Just think of all the people who download a song or two and then decide they want the whole album, more than they care to download. As long as the record companies don't waste the space by filling the CD up with just one good song and a bunch of trash, I think that kills more album sales than downloading, especially with most of the US market still on dialup.
That's what the Dana is, just a large Palm OS with an oversized screen and a keyboard. Plus it has Documents To Go built in and wireless. And USB ports, so it has more than a typical PDA for about the same cost. It just won't fit in your pocket.
It really does a disservice to everybody when articles seem to imply that these problems are unavoidable. Because then it seems like the user has no options, that the problems are inevitable and he is at the mercy of his ISP or Microsoft to fix the problem. It perpetuates the problem and makes a happy solution seem beyond hope for "normal" people since by leaving out obvious solutions like Linux, OSX, and even other email clients on Widnows, it makes those options seem to be too far out of the mainstream for serious nongeeky users.
Opera is supposed to work okay on Windows. You can even set it to identify itself as Outlook Express if you'd like. Of course, I took the easy way out. My computer is dual book linus and windows and I haven't used the windows partition in months. It's too easy to find linux apps for everything I want to do and it's easier to add printers and networking and such.
People get extremely set in their ways. People who have never used a typewriter would get very upset if their keyboard were rearranged, even though QWERTY has no special advantage anymore than familiarity.
Sure you can get cheap little receivers and it wouldn't cost much to incorporate the electronics, but the iPod isn't just about electronics, it is about design. Where would they put the tuning controls? And they'd need a mode switch. They could put it all on the screen I suppose, but how would that affect ease of use? I'm not asking you these questions - these are the questions that Apple would need to ask itself. Maybe it did and didn't like the answers.
This proposal takes us even further away from the original intent of the copyright law. It in essence grants perpetual copyright to works of commercial value as long as the holder remembers to pay the fee. Works with no commercial value still stay out of public domain for 50 years unless the holder specifically puts them into public domain.
Copyright is intended to be a short term benefit to provide an incentive for creators of IP to publish their ideas on the way to eventually being public domain. Since all creative effort builds on the work of those who have come before, this would make any decent idea a potential copyright suit. Good ideas are supposed to be used and shared.
I don't see any reason to support a proposal that limits creativity except for lawyers (who are allowed to use precedent when building a case).
this proposal is stated in such a way to direct your attention to the works of no commercial value whose situation won't be changed by this action and away from the valuable ideas where it really matters.
The traditional justifaction in granting a temporary copyright is that it is good for authors to use existing good ideas as long as the original creator is given a sufficient headstart to provide an incentive to his work.
Slashdot Mirror
And I love Futurama, this is great news to me, sorry for replying to my own post. It seems to be a no-no.
I only watch TV one night a week, Fox on Sunday, and I do like Malcom and family, I have teenage boys and that's how I learn to raise them. And it's one of the few shows I watch that isn't a cartoon.
I wish you weren't anonymous, that was so exciting, I wanted to sign up as your fan and maybe get invited to one of your lan parties.
The problem with the US is that the bulk of the responsible people work long hours with very little vacation, have time-consuming commutes, kids to raise, etc. They barely have time to read the news, much less get involved in a political system that has huge hurdles to those who don't have a business interest in being involved.
And then there is the "bipartisan system" which would be illegal in any other industry. The Justice Department would get involved quite actively if IBM and Microsoft ran the computer industry as a duopoly.
And once they get the email system going, they will have the world's best testbed for developing a great spam filtration system, and someday, they will have that, too.
I'd love to permenently archive my email, except for the spam. Google may have the brains and the plans to build the world's best spam filtration system. This mail system could be the world's best testbed to develop it.
It better be real, I signed up to be in their special group last night. Wonder how many others did?
Email is Number One; "Heck, Yeah," Say Google Founders
that just sounds too dumb to be a serious headline: http://www.google.com/press/pressrel/gmail.html
It gets songs out to the public. In almost all cases, that is good for the artists. Most artists benefit from the exposure. And the ones who don't need the free publicity, are so good they can charge outragous prices for their live shows.
It is the recording industry that must change. The basic infrastructure will be needed for years to come, but they no longer have the almost exclusive responsibility/right to find and promote new artists. And frankly, based on what I hear when I veer away from the oldies stations, they aren't doing so hot at that either. Word of mouth and P2P are so much better. And it isn't that good music isn't made anymore, it just isn't promoted. The recording industry and big corporate radio are shooting each other in the feet.
I understand how P2P can hurt niche artists. Record stores don't like to stock things that move slowly. In a way, P2P relieves them of that responsibility. It's good for the stores, only the traditional system gets hurt. Let's hope that niche artists have loyal fans that can support them in spite of this problem.
One lousy CD, it doesn't sound like much of a loss, but I'm surprised that the record sellers didn't come out ahead. They should. P2P should function just like any other marketing channel that allows a free sample. They could even have a few restrictions. Honest people will follow rules they think are reasonable, but if you treat people like thieves, they will steal.
Just think of all the people who download a song or two and then decide they want the whole album, more than they care to download. As long as the record companies don't waste the space by filling the CD up with just one good song and a bunch of trash, I think that kills more album sales than downloading, especially with most of the US market still on dialup.
That's what the Dana is, just a large Palm OS with an oversized screen and a keyboard. Plus it has Documents To Go built in and wireless. And USB ports, so it has more than a typical PDA for about the same cost. It just won't fit in your pocket.
It really does a disservice to everybody when articles seem to imply that these problems are unavoidable. Because then it seems like the user has no options, that the problems are inevitable and he is at the mercy of his ISP or Microsoft to fix the problem. It perpetuates the problem and makes a happy solution seem beyond hope for "normal" people since by leaving out obvious solutions like Linux, OSX, and even other email clients on Widnows, it makes those options seem to be too far out of the mainstream for serious nongeeky users.
Opera is supposed to work okay on Windows. You can even set it to identify itself as Outlook Express if you'd like. Of course, I took the easy way out. My computer is dual book linus and windows and I haven't used the windows partition in months. It's too easy to find linux apps for everything I want to do and it's easier to add printers and networking and such.
Someone finally phrased it right. Don't people here know English?
People get extremely set in their ways. People who have never used a typewriter would get very upset if their keyboard were rearranged, even though QWERTY has no special advantage anymore than familiarity.
Sure you can get cheap little receivers and it wouldn't cost much to incorporate the electronics, but the iPod isn't just about electronics, it is about design. Where would they put the tuning controls? And they'd need a mode switch. They could put it all on the screen I suppose, but how would that affect ease of use? I'm not asking you these questions - these are the questions that Apple would need to ask itself. Maybe it did and didn't like the answers.
Copyright is intended to be a short term benefit to provide an incentive for creators of IP to publish their ideas on the way to eventually being public domain. Since all creative effort builds on the work of those who have come before, this would make any decent idea a potential copyright suit. Good ideas are supposed to be used and shared.
I don't see any reason to support a proposal that limits creativity except for lawyers (who are allowed to use precedent when building a case).
this proposal is stated in such a way to direct your attention to the works of no commercial value whose situation won't be changed by this action and away from the valuable ideas where it really matters.
The traditional justifaction in granting a temporary copyright is that it is good for authors to use existing good ideas as long as the original creator is given a sufficient headstart to provide an incentive to his work.