The concept of new original ideas isn't dead, it's the absence of new original ideas in successful implementations that's the problem.
I'm suddenly reminded of concept cars in the auto industry. Designers are given leeway and resources to design and build a concept car to try out new ideas, to expand the horizon of thinking. Most cars disappear into obscurity and are expected to do so, but elements of these innovative creations show up in what you and I (want to) drive around today.
Something else that came to mind is the PT cruiser. a 'throwback' design that parallels to a certain extent remakes of classic games. Another example is the new VW beetle. Both cars with very old designs, which have been updated for the new times with a mixture of instantly recognizable traits and new technology. There are really only two or three major car companies in the world, but the industry is structured to promote innovation in defined areas and in structured ways.
Rather than looking at standard manufacturing or business processes for ways to develop great games, why not look at something like the car industry? I'm not suggesting mimicking the industry is the answer, but you have to admit that there are things car makers have learnt, which games makers can apply to their creations.
.. so you're saying the entire world, with the exception of the U.S. lives under a rock? Did you have to insult the person you're trying to inform?
Space Above and Beyond kicked space battle arse!
on
Best Sci-Fi Space Battles?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think I watched every episode of this show on late night BBC, back in europe. It's got some really engrossing battles in it, not just relating to space but to ground forces as well.
The plot was continuous and you could really feel the eb and flow of war in ever episode. The battles actually meant something to the plot, they weren't just TV versions of X-wing vs Tie-fighter, or something like that.
I could swear a lot of the battles and themes were based on WWII naval and air campaigns. I think it surpasses Babylon 5 in its handling of space combat physics (it was even part of the plot of some episodes). I love that show.. I miss that show.... being region 4 (Australia and Brazil among others.. go figure!), I doubt I'll ever see it on DVD...:(
oh, for those who haven't seen it: Chiggy von Richthofen is the name the wildcards gave an alien ace pilot, which was flying a prototype fighter. I forget what he'd written on his ship.. anyone remember?
It's a shame they didn't test butter as well. I always wanted to know what would stick my sandwich slices together better: butter or mayonaise.
There's a whole bunch of other foodstuffs you can test for this phenomenon: peanut butter, egg yolks and/or whites, gravy... hmmmm.. gravy. argl-argl-argl....
I'm aware the whole telstra thing involves a different set of companies, but the same business economic foundations apply.
It kind of proves my point, though doesn't it? Telstra can make bucketloads more money distributing its games- er.. I mean its broadband services than reselling it to others. It just so happens in this case Telstra is the 800kg gorilla*. Game publishing companies like EA are large primates in their own right. If anyone was to successfully cut out the retailers from the chain, they'd have to be big enough to say "we don't mind pissing you off, because it makes us more money". There aren't many game designers who can survive without that income and support their own distribution.
I'd like to see a public torrent-style network, either subscription based or "pay-per-download", where game developers can easily disseminate their games and still have that "retail" feel. Download and play now, and get the printed stuff later. You wouldn't necessarily be paying for the download but instead for the immediate start in playing after purchase. Having a scheme like that wouldn't necessarily eliminate standard retail outlet distribution, but could augment it with something value-added or significantly different as to not overtly undercut a retailer.
*I'll take my gorilla over your 800 pound gorilla any day.:)
There's also the issue that undercutting your retailers doesn't make them very happy...
An current example here in Oz: telstra supplies broadband services to smaller ISP's and telco's, but also sells it under its own brand. Telstra recently dropped their own retail broadband price to below their wholesale prices, gaining the ire of the ACCC (australian competition comission) and getting a lot of their retailers angry.
Now, telstra, being a goverment monopoly has a lot of power and so far has withstood the torrent of complaint. But imagine a game-publisher and EB, with a different balance of power and influence. You do not want to get EB upset at you for seriously undercutting them... It would be the first and last time you'd deal with them and any other upset retailer.
Even ignoring the inventory and sales maintenance issues involved with acting as an online retail outlet, competing with dedicated retailers you supply isn't always the bestlong-term approach for a game-design company. Stick with what you know.
It was creative, just not as revolutionary as you might think. In fact, if you're talking about features, they dropped the overhead perspective in GTA3, so creative != more features. I'd call GTA3:VC the pinnacle of GTA evolution, in the way it took good concepts developed in previous incarnations and pushed the positive effect they have on gameplay. The effect of the radio stations on atmosphere is a good example. excellent improvement, but hardly a revolution...
You have to admit, putting a patch for a game on a different platform into a game is unique as far as I know. And I can't think of any other gaming hardware company where that's possible. Neither Sony nor MS have any peripheral components that communicate like Nintendo with its GC/GBA connection.
The way Nintendo did it sounds a hell of a lot cooler than the standard "would you upgrade your DirectX" you get with PC games.
"okaaay.. you're psychotic!" (Maurice Chavez, VCPR 1985)
naah.. just kidding!;)
Seriously though, you need to chill... I'm almost certain that the majority of people who've watched the movie have never read the book, either by choice or by ignorance of its existence.
I have been a fan of Robert Heinlein all my life.
Good on you.:) Me? never heard of the guy.
...and while interpretation of the novel remains controversial...
The same can be said about the movie. Maybe not on the same scale, but then the scale is very much dependent on those debating the interpretations. Nice conditional statement though.
The film Starship Troopers, on the other hand, rips off some superficial aspects of the novel, ignores Heinlein's honest philosophical questions about freedom and responsibility in a civil society, and recasts the characters and the society depicted -- and by extension, Mr. Heinlein -- as purely Fascistic, warmed-over cardboard-cutout sadistic Nazis.
wait.. are you ranting? I couldn't tell through all the viciousness. I'll assume that Verhoeven licensed the book, thereby nullifying any claim of it being "ripped off". And I'm sure he didn't want to transcribe the entire novel onto film, but give his own interpretation to the material. I mean, Peter Jackson added elves to Helm's Deep. What was he thinking?! Tolkien must be rolling in his grave!
the film is an abominable piece of shit
Well, I kinda liked it. *shrugs* to each their own. I also liked Matrix 2+3, but that's ANOTHER story.
which is wholly unlike the novel and which
besmirches the reputation of the novel's author.
I'm sure it varies from the novel to a great degree. I just read Dune again after seeing the Lynch movie version. Some really strange differences there, but then Lynch is a weird one.
The film is neither faithful to the original novel, nor in any way fair to Robert Heinlein or his beliefs.
I don't think many would match the characters in "last temptation of christ" to anything they believe in. It was an interesting adaptation, though. In the end It's the director's prerogative to deviate from any source material in the interests of their view of the movie. As to Heinlein's beliefs. I'm not sure how they come into another person's adaptation.
Jackson loved what Tolkien did with the book and his interpretation happened to match peoples' expectations of it. Scorsese didn't quite match people's expectations of a movie about christ. Gibson, I think, managed to interpret the story for the masses. I still think the body suit was totally disrespectful of what Jesus would've looked like back then. noone's ribs moves like that!
the next time that you want to refer to Paul Verhoeven's bastardized abortion of a film version of Starship Troopers as the real article, .. hold on, where's he doing that? you're infering a fair bit, aren't you?
Just for reference, the whole nazi-"look and feel" was in the movie, is because Verhoeven was referencing his own beliefs and views on government, partly based on his WWII experiences. Admittedly it didn't show up with the gravity it would in most other places you'd find it, but it's there nonetheless. I didn't think it was a miltiaristic-fascistic propagande, but it sure was a good romp!
*ehem* sorry about that.. anyways.. with a dire attempt at getting on topic, all this movie discussion has me thinking: When technologies were first invented, business usually came on later, sometimes streamrolling initial practices in the process. That's the case again with tiVo to a certain extent with the "30 second skip" issue. I'd like to see this stuff in the hands of TV and film-makers, rather than the stubby fingers of ad-execs. Imagine the art and entertainment value of being able to branch through movies at will, going deeper into technical aspects of a techno-thriller, or instead fleshing out the flashbacks of a tearjerker. There are always times when "I want to know more", not just in a purchasing mindset, but also from a "expand the mind" point of view.
if you proofread the update, you'd realise they're referencing the article...
But it goes to show how inherent assumptions and habit are made and what happens when they're broken. Noone assumes MB anymore... Remember the days when 600 MHz was blazing fast? now people might say "0.6 GHz" just to be able to express speed on the same order of magnitude..
I know because I got one with my motherboard. it was a flat orange USB "smart key". Apparently, it would prevent the computer from booting if you enabled it in the BIOS and it wasn't connected. I'm not sure if it was restricted to a single computer but if you lostthekey, you were in trouble...
Suffice to say, I wasn't game enough to enable it... I can barely remember what I had for lunch yesterday...
I was going to bring this up, you you beat me to it. Crassius (and Morrowind as a whole) is an interesting example of the way different genders are treated, developed for and perceived in computer games.
Crassius had different scripts to cater for female and male avatars. The developers made the assumption that the avatar is straight and made Crassius act lewd towards females and simple haughty to males (ie, charging them more money). As it happened, a coding glitch caused only the female-oriented script to be used. As a consequence of this, some people asked "if Crassius is gay". Not because he was scripted as such, but because he came across as such to them. I thought he was just daintily eccentric as people in high positions are... *shrugs*
Morrowind makes a distinction between males and females in the character scripting and voice-comments, but not in the general storyline or skill development. Since most people are wearing robes and/or armour, gender-biased clothing isn't really an critical issue (but it does exist, as female armour meshes were added as a plugin). I got comments from my male cousin on my choice of skirt to embue with magical powers (I could've picked pants for my male breton, but my robe covers them and the skirt is all I had handy at the time). It doesn't bother me. I didn't even notice anything, until he said it.
With the examples here I'm trying to put the point forward that player perception determines for a part the experience playing a game, as well as what developers put in. Leaving things out of a game is a developer choice, but that choice is motivated more by an inability to reasonably include, than by a specific intent to exclude. To infer otherwise is to needlessly bring PC (the other PC) into the discussion.
When a game feature isn't a major factor in the game, then the need to cater for all variations diminishes. How developers implement a feature is their discretion. Back in the days, developers made certain assumptions about their market and had limitations on what the hardware could achieve. Today, the market has evolved, assumptions made are more complex, hardware limitations have dissolved and we're seeing the implementation of game features which make a game compelling to the playing audience.
So you're saying a computer will know in a 200 page natural language document, from where something needs to be copied, if I just say "paste"?
The reason the calculator works, is because it defaults to the last displayed number. What happens if I want to copy the second-last displayed number? or just a partial (after/before the decimal)?
If "copy" wasn't a required component of the action, you can be sure a lot more developers would leave it out for simplity's sake.
Autosave has existed in software as a concept and as an implementation for a very long time. The most basic example is keeping the settings when a program shuts down. You don't tell it where to save unless you want to in almost every case.
But I still want to be able to save explicitly. Taking away the save button for whatever reason, limits the user to "expected behaviour" or whatever configurable options are available for the automatic feature. Even when I set Word to autosave every 2 minutes, after having lost large chunks of formatting work and many minute changes, I still like to make a "feel-good" save every 30 seconds, if I'm doing something highly incremental.
Changing the "floppy disk/television/square blue thingy" defeats the purpose of using icons in the first place. Icons are used because clear pictoral representations are identified by the human brain faster than text. This is in part, because these representation are used consistently. go to Europe: male/female, homme/femme, man/vrouw are all represented with the same basic icon. In general computing, save is associated with the image of a floppy disk, whether people know it consciously or not. Go to any program on a computer in a foreign language (japanese is fun to see!) and try and find the save button based on icons. non-geek or not, you'd probably find it a lot faster if it looked like a floppy disk (I won't get into arrows pointing this way and that). Go to any foreign public place and look for the bathroom on signs alone. What do you look for first? the male/female signs.
How can you differentiate between a men's bathroom and a women's bathroom? It's not because most of the women around you are wearing skirts (I'd assume in peak hour pants to be in the majority). It's because the icon is historically associated in your head with the female bathroom in public places.
As it is, save will always be around. The other posters noting "Jesus saves" are correct in their use of the word. Save stands for exactly that. To keep for later. It doesn't matter what the representation of save is, as long as people can identify the representation. History has given us the floppy disk. Why change it?
When you think a sizeable portion of our interstellar and -galactic sight is obscured by our own galaxy, to see "mostly galaxies" just boggles the mind. If there are billions of stars in each galaxy, and you're seeing more galaxies than you see stars in your own galaxy, how mindbogglingly many stars are there to eventually to look at?
what if the enemy of your enemy isn't your enemy? Does he become your enemy because his enemy is your enemy? I would imagine the logic options like this:
You:
My.Enemy = My.Enemy.Enemy
Most other people:
My.Friend = My.Enimy.Enemy
Me:
IF Enemy == My.Enemy AND Enemy.Enemy != My.Enemy THEN My.Enemy.Enemy = My.Friend
(that makes 19 uses of the word "enemy". I'm quite proud of myself! Lets hope this post doesn't make me enemies...better make that 20)
...UNLESS the spammers know the private key of the poor slob that they're impersonating.
So you're saying it's not 100% effective? isn't that the whole problem? If that's the loophole that breaks this system, you can be sure a spammer will attempt to use it. They already break several laws and ethical boundaries. What reason would they have not to attempt getting people's private keys?
Although I'd agree ripping your own stuff is a very low-risk activity in australia, I doubt that laws will change for the interests of the individual any time soon around here.
Currently with the Free Trade Agreement negotiated with (or forced on us by) the U.S., australia is set to introduce the "mickey mouse" clause into copyright and bring the whole place more in line with ill-considered U.S. laws. The Sharman networks raid caught me by surprise, but there has been very little said about it in official political circles. It's an election year here too and Australian political parties aren't really known for their tech-saviness at the best of times. It will be extremely difficult for the current government politically if the FTA isn't accepted.
As far as copyright goes, there's a reason it was sacrificed on the altar of free trade: it's expend- extendable..
Slashdot Mirror
I'm suddenly reminded of concept cars in the auto industry. Designers are given leeway and resources to design and build a concept car to try out new ideas, to expand the horizon of thinking. Most cars disappear into obscurity and are expected to do so, but elements of these innovative creations show up in what you and I (want to) drive around today.
Something else that came to mind is the PT cruiser. a 'throwback' design that parallels to a certain extent remakes of classic games. Another example is the new VW beetle. Both cars with very old designs, which have been updated for the new times with a mixture of instantly recognizable traits and new technology. There are really only two or three major car companies in the world, but the industry is structured to promote innovation in defined areas and in structured ways.
Rather than looking at standard manufacturing or business processes for ways to develop great games, why not look at something like the car industry? I'm not suggesting mimicking the industry is the answer, but you have to admit that there are things car makers have learnt, which games makers can apply to their creations.
.. so you're saying the entire world, with the exception of the U.S. lives under a rock? Did you have to insult the person you're trying to inform?
The plot was continuous and you could really feel the eb and flow of war in ever episode. The battles actually meant something to the plot, they weren't just TV versions of X-wing vs Tie-fighter, or something like that.
I could swear a lot of the battles and themes were based on WWII naval and air campaigns. I think it surpasses Babylon 5 in its handling of space combat physics (it was even part of the plot of some episodes). I love that show.. I miss that show.... being region 4 (Australia and Brazil among others.. go figure!), I doubt I'll ever see it on DVD... :(
oh, for those who haven't seen it: Chiggy von Richthofen is the name the wildcards gave an alien ace pilot, which was flying a prototype fighter. I forget what he'd written on his ship.. anyone remember?
ah.. intentional. I see. Well, thanks for clarifying that for me.
Since that's all you have to say, I want to make sure I understood you right.
You'd better hope you don't switch tracks with the wrong hand...
So you're saying they should be next to eachother? Or are you saying McBride is worse, because he's preaching insanity for the money?
There's a whole bunch of other foodstuffs you can test for this phenomenon: peanut butter, egg yolks and/or whites, gravy... hmmmm.. gravy. argl-argl-argl....
I'd like to see a public torrent-style network, either subscription based or "pay-per-download", where game developers can easily disseminate their games and still have that "retail" feel. Download and play now, and get the printed stuff later. You wouldn't necessarily be paying for the download but instead for the immediate start in playing after purchase. Having a scheme like that wouldn't necessarily eliminate standard retail outlet distribution, but could augment it with something value-added or significantly different as to not overtly undercut a retailer.
*I'll take my gorilla over your 800 pound gorilla any day. :)
An current example here in Oz: telstra supplies broadband services to smaller ISP's and telco's, but also sells it under its own brand. Telstra recently dropped their own retail broadband price to below their wholesale prices, gaining the ire of the ACCC (australian competition comission) and getting a lot of their retailers angry.
Now, telstra, being a goverment monopoly has a lot of power and so far has withstood the torrent of complaint. But imagine a game-publisher and EB, with a different balance of power and influence. You do not want to get EB upset at you for seriously undercutting them... It would be the first and last time you'd deal with them and any other upset retailer.
Even ignoring the inventory and sales maintenance issues involved with acting as an online retail outlet, competing with dedicated retailers you supply isn't always the bestlong-term approach for a game-design company. Stick with what you know.
The way Nintendo did it sounds a hell of a lot cooler than the standard "would you upgrade your DirectX" you get with PC games.
... yes. I'm an idiot for trusting an anonymous coward link. it's the first bogus debian redirect I've seen. Fool me once, shame on me, etc. etc.
naah.. just kidding!
Seriously though, you need to chill... I'm almost certain that the majority of people who've watched the movie have never read the book, either by choice or by ignorance of its existence.
I have been a fan of Robert Heinlein all my life. :) Me? never heard of the guy.
Good on you.
The same can be said about the movie. Maybe not on the same scale, but then the scale is very much dependent on those debating the interpretations. Nice conditional statement though.
The film Starship Troopers, on the other hand, rips off some superficial aspects of the novel, ignores Heinlein's honest philosophical questions about freedom and responsibility in a civil society, and recasts the characters and the society depicted -- and by extension, Mr. Heinlein -- as purely Fascistic, warmed-over cardboard-cutout sadistic Nazis.
wait.. are you ranting? I couldn't tell through all the viciousness. I'll assume that Verhoeven licensed the book, thereby nullifying any claim of it being "ripped off". And I'm sure he didn't want to transcribe the entire novel onto film, but give his own interpretation to the material. I mean, Peter Jackson added elves to Helm's Deep. What was he thinking?! Tolkien must be rolling in his grave!
the film is an abominable piece of shit
Well, I kinda liked it. *shrugs* to each their own. I also liked Matrix 2+3, but that's ANOTHER story.
which is wholly unlike the novel and which besmirches the reputation of the novel's author.
I'm sure it varies from the novel to a great degree. I just read Dune again after seeing the Lynch movie version. Some really strange differences there, but then Lynch is a weird one.
The film is neither faithful to the original novel, nor in any way fair to Robert Heinlein or his beliefs.
I don't think many would match the characters in "last temptation of christ" to anything they believe in. It was an interesting adaptation, though. In the end It's the director's prerogative to deviate from any source material in the interests of their view of the movie. As to Heinlein's beliefs. I'm not sure how they come into another person's adaptation. Jackson loved what Tolkien did with the book and his interpretation happened to match peoples' expectations of it. Scorsese didn't quite match people's expectations of a movie about christ. Gibson, I think, managed to interpret the story for the masses. I still think the body suit was totally disrespectful of what Jesus would've looked like back then. noone's ribs moves like that!
the next time that you want to refer to Paul Verhoeven's bastardized abortion of a film version of Starship Troopers as the real article,
.. hold on, where's he doing that? you're infering a fair bit, aren't you?
Just for reference, the whole nazi-"look and feel" was in the movie, is because Verhoeven was referencing his own beliefs and views on government, partly based on his WWII experiences. Admittedly it didn't show up with the gravity it would in most other places you'd find it, but it's there nonetheless. I didn't think it was a miltiaristic-fascistic propagande, but it sure was a good romp!
*ehem* sorry about that.. anyways.. with a dire attempt at getting on topic, all this movie discussion has me thinking: When technologies were first invented, business usually came on later, sometimes streamrolling initial practices in the process. That's the case again with tiVo to a certain extent with the "30 second skip" issue. I'd like to see this stuff in the hands of TV and film-makers, rather than the stubby fingers of ad-execs. Imagine the art and entertainment value of being able to branch through movies at will, going deeper into technical aspects of a techno-thriller, or instead fleshing out the flashbacks of a tearjerker. There are always times when "I want to know more", not just in a purchasing mindset, but also from a "expand the mind" point of view.
But it goes to show how inherent assumptions and habit are made and what happens when they're broken. Noone assumes MB anymore...
Remember the days when 600 MHz was blazing fast? now people might say "0.6 GHz" just to be able to express speed on the same order of magnitude..
Suffice to say, I wasn't game enough to enable it... I can barely remember what I had for lunch yesterday...
Crassius had different scripts to cater for female and male avatars. The developers made the assumption that the avatar is straight and made Crassius act lewd towards females and simple haughty to males (ie, charging them more money). As it happened, a coding glitch caused only the female-oriented script to be used. As a consequence of this, some people asked "if Crassius is gay". Not because he was scripted as such, but because he came across as such to them. I thought he was just daintily eccentric as people in high positions are... *shrugs*
Morrowind makes a distinction between males and females in the character scripting and voice-comments, but not in the general storyline or skill development. Since most people are wearing robes and/or armour, gender-biased clothing isn't really an critical issue (but it does exist, as female armour meshes were added as a plugin). I got comments from my male cousin on my choice of skirt to embue with magical powers (I could've picked pants for my male breton, but my robe covers them and the skirt is all I had handy at the time). It doesn't bother me. I didn't even notice anything, until he said it.
With the examples here I'm trying to put the point forward that player perception determines for a part the experience playing a game, as well as what developers put in. Leaving things out of a game is a developer choice, but that choice is motivated more by an inability to reasonably include, than by a specific intent to exclude. To infer otherwise is to needlessly bring PC (the other PC) into the discussion.
When a game feature isn't a major factor in the game, then the need to cater for all variations diminishes. How developers implement a feature is their discretion. Back in the days, developers made certain assumptions about their market and had limitations on what the hardware could achieve. Today, the market has evolved, assumptions made are more complex, hardware limitations have dissolved and we're seeing the implementation of game features which make a game compelling to the playing audience.
If "copy" wasn't a required component of the action, you can be sure a lot more developers would leave it out for simplity's sake. Autosave has existed in software as a concept and as an implementation for a very long time. The most basic example is keeping the settings when a program shuts down. You don't tell it where to save unless you want to in almost every case.
But I still want to be able to save explicitly. Taking away the save button for whatever reason, limits the user to "expected behaviour" or whatever configurable options are available for the automatic feature. Even when I set Word to autosave every 2 minutes, after having lost large chunks of formatting work and many minute changes, I still like to make a "feel-good" save every 30 seconds, if I'm doing something highly incremental.
Changing the "floppy disk/television/square blue thingy" defeats the purpose of using icons in the first place. Icons are used because clear pictoral representations are identified by the human brain faster than text. This is in part, because these representation are used consistently. go to Europe: male/female, homme/femme, man/vrouw are all represented with the same basic icon. In general computing, save is associated with the image of a floppy disk, whether people know it consciously or not. Go to any program on a computer in a foreign language (japanese is fun to see!) and try and find the save button based on icons. non-geek or not, you'd probably find it a lot faster if it looked like a floppy disk (I won't get into arrows pointing this way and that). Go to any foreign public place and look for the bathroom on signs alone. What do you look for first? the male/female signs. How can you differentiate between a men's bathroom and a women's bathroom? It's not because most of the women around you are wearing skirts (I'd assume in peak hour pants to be in the majority). It's because the icon is historically associated in your head with the female bathroom in public places.
As it is, save will always be around. The other posters noting "Jesus saves" are correct in their use of the word. Save stands for exactly that. To keep for later. It doesn't matter what the representation of save is, as long as people can identify the representation. History has given us the floppy disk. Why change it?
*head explodes*
I suppose It's using the "path of least resistance" when it comes to getting addresses...
You:
My.Enemy = My.Enemy.Enemy
Most other people:
My.Friend = My.Enimy.Enemy
Me:
IF Enemy == My.Enemy AND Enemy.Enemy != My.Enemy THEN My.Enemy.Enemy = My.Friend
(that makes 19 uses of the word "enemy". I'm quite proud of myself! Lets hope this post doesn't make me enemies...better make that 20)
So you're saying it's not 100% effective? isn't that the whole problem? If that's the loophole that breaks this system, you can be sure a spammer will attempt to use it. They already break several laws and ethical boundaries. What reason would they have not to attempt getting people's private keys?
Now I'm worried!
Currently with the Free Trade Agreement negotiated with (or forced on us by) the U.S., australia is set to introduce the "mickey mouse" clause into copyright and bring the whole place more in line with ill-considered U.S. laws. The Sharman networks raid caught me by surprise, but there has been very little said about it in official political circles. It's an election year here too and Australian political parties aren't really known for their tech-saviness at the best of times. It will be extremely difficult for the current government politically if the FTA isn't accepted.
As far as copyright goes, there's a reason it was sacrificed on the altar of free trade: it's expend- extendable..