But since then they'd have to pay the actual creator of Spiderman royalties, I'm sure this one will still fail to make a profit.(at least on paper)
But remember kids, the MPAA insists you respect their intelluctual property and be fair to the all the "little people" who earn their living making movies.
Only CEO's and Lawyers are allowed to screw people over and make money off other peoples creations.
Know your role.
(This post sponsered by the MPAA{Stealing your dreams and dumbing down America one day at a time})
They've allowed all of microsoft's blatantly illegal monopolistic manueverings, and now that there are no legitimately widely used internet browers BUT IE they cry foul for not allowing the option for alternatives that don't exist?
MS is now set to use "security" and digital rights management to go to new and widely publicised monopolistic behavior... but not a word is said because "it's for safety".
Someone already brought up the preponderance of evidence "guilty" qualifier of civil case.
But there's also the nice little fact about self-incrimination, you have no 5th ammendment protection in civil court. So unless you're innocent, you'd have to be willing to ad perjury(an actual crime) in defense of a civil complaint.(which should be ridiculus... but almost seems appropriate since the civil courts are being used as a corporate 20 lashes)
I think this may be the first chain-spam-urban legend inspired peice of legislation.
Since the govt. has never considered taxing the internet, why the creation of a law with no support?
Well... no REAL support, but there are the 1000's of emails sent to lawmakers monthly asking that they not vote for a fictional internet tax bill proposed by a fictional senator.
The question is, do they truely think people just spontaneaously support a tax-free internet, or is this merely a ploy to get the reality-challenged to stop emailing them everyday?
While the costs, profit margins, and filesharing probably had an effect.
I think the true killer to this product is that technology just isn't up to doing recreational printed material. The readable font-size and eye comfort factors are still inferior to good old ink on paper. And it will still be that way for a few generations of screens.
I say there won't be a comeback for a good 5-10 years.
There's been VOIP for quite a while before Vonnage. If everyone had VOIP they'd pay $40 bucks for software, and another $40 for a headset.
Only the technically challenged would PAY somebody else, every month, for the privelege of using an internet connect that they already pay a monthly fee for.
You pay Vonnage for the interface to the phone system, that's their only real product(beside software and VOIP hardwired handset).
And yes, the Vonage customer's end is VOIP and independent of the existing phone line system(this is only true for cable, if the broadband is DSL then it's part of the phone system).
But the other isn't. In fact, it's that non VOIP other end that allows Vonage to exist at all. Anyone who says Vonage isn't a telephone service doesn't understand the system.
See, if two people had broadband(a requirement for the Vonage system) they could talk in stereo sound with video added for..... NOTHING.
That $40 a month Vonage charges people is for the phone system/internet interface it offers. Nothing else.
If EVERYONE had a broadband connection tommorrow, Vonage would file chapeter 11 the following day.
Vonage uses the existing phone system for half or more of it's buisiness, it should have to support that system like every other buisiness that profits from it's existence.
I'm an actual U.S. patriot, I study the constitution and the history surrounding it.
For over 200 years the "crime" of copyright infringement was only applied to commercial outfits who made profit off of copyrighted material. And copyright was ALWAYS meant to be temporary.
But with legal and legislative manipulation they've made copyrights basically eternal and all encompassing.
If you think you're a good citizen because you respect laws that were bought and paid for by international corporations, then you're nothing more than a lamb raised to fatten the wolves.
I am more than resource to be exploited, and while I don't trade music, I will speak out against the degredation of our country's legal system, and it's society by greedy CEO's and their pet lawyers.
If governments develop a competeting OS, how is Microsoft supposed to deal with them according to MS market stratedgy?
They can't drive governments out of buisiness, so it's not fair to microsoft.
From MS
"We'd like to see the market decide who the winners are in the software industry," Tom Robertson, Microsoft's Tokyo-based director for government affairs in Asia" (The market meaning Microsoft)
"Governments should not be in the position to decide who the winners are," Robertson said." (Only the wealthy corporations willing to operate at a loss, spend millions to secure trade and distribution lockout agreements, deserve to select who the winners are)
If you actually do something, you're nothing.
on
The Innovators' Ball
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
This is the modern buisiness environment.
If you're a programmer, engineer, or even a doctor, you're just worker. You don't matter except as an "overhead" figure.
The people that do matter don't actually produce anything, the lawyers and the CEO's, they try to see how little they can pay the "overhead" while still meeting various buisiness benchmarks(production, PE ratios, etc). Then they give the lionshare of profit to... themselves.
They enroll employee's in HMO's that are cheap so they can give that money as bonus to themselves for increasing the company's profits. They play fast and loose with the company savings funds and give themselves a share of that for being "innovative". Even if it bankrupts the saving fund. The bonus still stands.
More and more the american worker is just dirt that's tilled for whatever it can produce. And it's given the same consideration as dirt. Buisiness leaders paint Unions as greedy for wanting raises that keep pace with inflation, health care benefits that can be actually used, and decent working conditions. All while these same leaders tear the buisiness apart trying to squeeze everything they can personally take from it.(how many times do we see the CEO that led a company into Chapter 11 getting million dollar bonuses or golden parachutes as a reward for their sterling effort)
And they've made the laws and rules dealing with buisiness so convoluted that only someone who's never learned ANYTHING but buisiness can hope not to be screwed. There's nothing corporations love more than screwing over the neophyte who thinks just because they created something they should make money from it. (this story, Spiderman the movie, Forrest Gump)
Why does this happen? Because big buisiness makes all the rules, if the rules say they can't win, they have them changed. Or they just ignore them and "settle" if it goes bad, with a mandatory non-disclosure agreement of course.
MPAA, RIAA are on a war against illegal profitless file trading. Why is it illegal? Because they had the laws changed to MAKE it illegal. We sit through sanctimonius ads about "doing the right thing" and respecting the artists, the actors, and the industry workers. While at the same time those corporations "settle without admitting wrong doing" illegal price fixing on music CD's, and they're telling the creator of Spiderman and the writor of Forrest Gump that the movies didn't make a profit so they, the creators, get NOTHING.
But they insist everyone else be ethical about respecting IP laws that THEY wrote.
In some states criminal charges must be pursued by the victim, and the victim can choose not to press charges.
But in other states, the courts pursue ALL crimes, and any crime you have knowledge of must be reported.
" Dear File Sharer,
We promised not to sue you for copyright violations, but in accordance with the laws of "where-ever" we turned in your name, ID, and notarized statement to the local athorities.
Good luck, and while we wish WE could have personally violated you, we're sure someone in prison will take care of that.
As long as you provide them with all the information needed for criminal charges to be filed against you.
I'd laugh at the stupidity of this attempt, but then again I've been in IRC chat rooms and various message boards. So I realize they're bound to get some responses.
California lawyers picked up a big tip from the O.J trial.
Remember? No criminal conviction, but the families of the victims were able to win a wrongful death lawsuit.(from a legally innocent man)
These huge corporations have banded together in the RIAA to force laws apon the U.S. and to use the civil courts to make corporate profits equate to "justice".
They target middle-class, to lower middle people who have ZERO ability to face the pooled legal resourced of several corporations.
Corporate responsibility and control need to be SERIOUSLY addressed in this country. But since the corporations decide who makes the laws, we're in for a bad time.
At least not for JUST having them.
They sue people who make them available publically/widescale.
Since I have never shared my MP3 files(and since I own the albums) I have zero fear of a letter from the RIAA.
I'm only saying this because of the many responses by people who legally buy music, but prefer an MP3 format that seem to indicate they feel threatened by the actions of the RIAA.
I'm offended that multi-national corporations are banding together to shape U.S. law, and to the U.S. civil courts as their personal criminal punishment system.(if you're not aware,the standards for proff in civil court are MUCH lower than for criminal court. That's why you're hearing about lawsuits, not criminal proscecution)
Slashdot Mirror
At least in the US it is... but I thought that was a basic anti-monopoly legal concept.
Since their patent cliams rights on ANY derivative works, does this mean they'll be suing for a piece of the new Microsoft OS?
That way you only need one method of bypassing it, rather than let each corporation make a diff version.
But since then they'd have to pay the actual creator of Spiderman royalties, I'm sure this one will still fail to make a profit.(at least on paper)
But remember kids, the MPAA insists you respect their intelluctual property and be fair to the all the "little people" who earn their living making movies.
Only CEO's and Lawyers are allowed to screw people over and make money off other peoples creations.
Know your role.
(This post sponsered by the MPAA{Stealing your dreams and dumbing down America one day at a time})
Well it's nice we've decided to ignore the whole "paid their debt to society" nonsense and are branding these people for life.
But since it's a very social repellent crime it's ok.
Right now there's no way to generate either locomotive or electrical power that's as safe, cheap, and flexible as oil.
Till there is, all the greenpeace dreaming in the world won't change the fact that our economic pyramid is based on oil.
They've allowed all of microsoft's blatantly illegal monopolistic manueverings, and now that there are no legitimately widely used internet browers BUT IE they cry foul for not allowing the option for alternatives that don't exist?
MS is now set to use "security" and digital rights management to go to new and widely publicised monopolistic behavior... but not a word is said because "it's for safety".
Or are actually innocent.
Someone already brought up the preponderance of evidence "guilty" qualifier of civil case.
But there's also the nice little fact about self-incrimination, you have no 5th ammendment protection in civil court. So unless you're innocent, you'd have to be willing to ad perjury(an actual crime) in defense of a civil complaint.(which should be ridiculus... but almost seems appropriate since the civil courts are being used as a corporate 20 lashes)
I think this may be the first chain-spam-urban legend inspired peice of legislation.
:D
Since the govt. has never considered taxing the internet, why the creation of a law with no support?
Well... no REAL support, but there are the 1000's of emails sent to lawmakers monthly asking that they not vote for a fictional internet tax bill proposed by a fictional senator.
The question is, do they truely think people just spontaneaously support a tax-free internet, or is this merely a ploy to get the reality-challenged to stop emailing them everyday?
Either way, it's funny as heck.
Should have a city technology consultant, before making these types of rulings.
Who want's to bet that this judge is one of those "computer experts" who's call's to tech support make the christmas party laugh track.
While the costs, profit margins, and filesharing probably had an effect.
I think the true killer to this product is that technology just isn't up to doing recreational printed material. The readable font-size and eye comfort factors are still inferior to good old ink on paper. And it will still be that way for a few generations of screens.
I say there won't be a comeback for a good 5-10 years.
And you'll see you said the same thing I did.
Two broadbad users don't need Vonnage for VOIP.
There's been VOIP for quite a while before Vonnage. If everyone had VOIP they'd pay $40 bucks for software, and another $40 for a headset.
Only the technically challenged would PAY somebody else, every month, for the privelege of using an internet connect that they already pay a monthly fee for.
You pay Vonnage for the interface to the phone system, that's their only real product(beside software and VOIP hardwired handset).
And yes, the Vonage customer's end is VOIP and independent of the existing phone line system(this is only true for cable, if the broadband is DSL then it's part of the phone system).
But the other isn't. In fact, it's that non VOIP other end that allows Vonage to exist at all.
Anyone who says Vonage isn't a telephone service doesn't understand the system.
See, if two people had broadband(a requirement for the Vonage system) they could talk in stereo sound with video added for..... NOTHING.
That $40 a month Vonage charges people is for the phone system/internet interface it offers. Nothing else.
If EVERYONE had a broadband connection tommorrow, Vonage would file chapeter 11 the following day.
Vonage uses the existing phone system for half or more of it's buisiness, it should have to support that system like every other buisiness that profits from it's existence.
I'm an actual U.S. patriot, I study the constitution and the history surrounding it.
For over 200 years the "crime" of copyright infringement was only applied to commercial outfits who made profit off of copyrighted material. And copyright was ALWAYS meant to be temporary.
But with legal and legislative manipulation they've made copyrights basically eternal and all encompassing.
If you think you're a good citizen because you respect laws that were bought and paid for by international corporations, then you're nothing more than a lamb raised to fatten the wolves.
I am more than resource to be exploited, and while I don't trade music, I will speak out against the degredation of our country's legal system, and it's society by greedy CEO's and their pet lawyers.
Just pay attention to your kids.
Psychotics aren't born in a day.
Please remember the DMCA
So many people ignored it, simply because it was unconstitutional didn't stop it from becoming a law.
If governments develop a competeting OS, how is Microsoft supposed to deal with them according to MS market stratedgy?
They can't drive governments out of buisiness, so it's not fair to microsoft.
From MS
"We'd like to see the market decide who the winners are in the software industry," Tom Robertson, Microsoft's Tokyo-based director for government affairs in Asia"
(The market meaning Microsoft)
"Governments should not be in the position to decide who the winners are," Robertson said."
(Only the wealthy corporations willing to operate at a loss, spend millions to secure trade and distribution lockout agreements, deserve to select who the winners are)
This is the modern buisiness environment.
... themselves.
.
If you're a programmer, engineer, or even a doctor, you're just worker. You don't matter except as an "overhead" figure.
The people that do matter don't actually produce anything, the lawyers and the CEO's, they try to see how little they can pay the "overhead" while still meeting various buisiness benchmarks(production, PE ratios, etc). Then they give the lionshare of profit to
They enroll employee's in HMO's that are cheap so they can give that money as bonus to themselves for increasing the company's profits
They play fast and loose with the company savings funds and give themselves a share of that for being "innovative".
Even if it bankrupts the saving fund. The bonus still stands.
More and more the american worker is just dirt that's tilled for whatever it can produce. And it's given the same consideration as dirt. Buisiness leaders paint Unions as greedy for wanting raises that keep pace with inflation, health care benefits that can be actually used, and decent working conditions.
All while these same leaders tear the buisiness apart trying to squeeze everything they can personally take from it.(how many times do we see the CEO that led a company into Chapter 11 getting million dollar bonuses or golden parachutes as a reward for their sterling effort)
And they've made the laws and rules dealing with buisiness so convoluted that only someone who's never learned ANYTHING but buisiness can hope not to be screwed. There's nothing corporations love more than screwing over the neophyte who thinks just because they created something they should make money from it. (this story, Spiderman the movie, Forrest Gump)
Why does this happen? Because big buisiness makes all the rules, if the rules say they can't win, they have them changed. Or they just ignore them and "settle" if it goes bad, with a mandatory non-disclosure agreement of course.
MPAA, RIAA are on a war against illegal profitless file trading. Why is it illegal? Because they had the laws changed to MAKE it illegal. We sit through sanctimonius ads about "doing the right thing" and respecting the artists, the actors, and the industry workers.
While at the same time those corporations "settle without admitting wrong doing" illegal price fixing on music CD's, and they're telling the creator of Spiderman and the writor of Forrest Gump that the movies didn't make a profit so they, the creators, get NOTHING.
But they insist everyone else be ethical about respecting IP laws that THEY wrote.
And is going to try and revive his old fan-base.
:-)
Goodluck, no matter how great his work is, he'll always be the guy who sleeps with Tori Amos to me.
Most of the corporations in the RIAA are international and they probably own the companies that produced these "imports" of yours.
So while you can continue to view yourself as "not mainstream". Please don't delude yourself into thinking you're not lining these bastards pockets.
"Hey RIAA, how about I just stop sharing files, and we call it even? I know I own most of the CDs for the files I listen to"
"most" being the damning word. So you've decided to officially announce to the world that you have MP3 files that you don't own the CD for?
(I guess you could claim to have bought them from a site, but those sites probably keep sales records to which the RIAA has full access)
In some states criminal charges must be pursued by the victim, and the victim can choose not to press charges.
But in other states, the courts pursue ALL crimes, and any crime you have knowledge of must be reported.
"
Dear File Sharer,
We promised not to sue you for copyright violations, but in accordance with the laws of "where-ever" we turned in your name, ID, and notarized statement to the local athorities.
Good luck, and while we wish WE could have personally violated you, we're sure someone in prison will take care of that.
RIAA
"
As long as you provide them with all the information needed for criminal charges to be filed against you.
I'd laugh at the stupidity of this attempt, but then again I've been in IRC chat rooms and various message boards. So I realize they're bound to get some responses.
California lawyers picked up a big tip from the O.J trial.
Remember? No criminal conviction, but the families of the victims were able to win a wrongful death lawsuit.(from a legally innocent man)
These huge corporations have banded together in the RIAA to force laws apon the U.S. and to use the civil courts to make corporate profits equate to "justice".
They target middle-class, to lower middle people who have ZERO ability to face the pooled legal resourced of several corporations.
Corporate responsibility and control need to be SERIOUSLY addressed in this country. But since the corporations decide who makes the laws, we're in for a bad time.
At least not for JUST having them. They sue people who make them available publically/widescale. Since I have never shared my MP3 files(and since I own the albums) I have zero fear of a letter from the RIAA. I'm only saying this because of the many responses by people who legally buy music, but prefer an MP3 format that seem to indicate they feel threatened by the actions of the RIAA. I'm offended that multi-national corporations are banding together to shape U.S. law, and to the U.S. civil courts as their personal criminal punishment system.(if you're not aware,the standards for proff in civil court are MUCH lower than for criminal court. That's why you're hearing about lawsuits, not criminal proscecution)