Scientologists were able to get a judge to rule that the DMCA protected one of their documents - a document which those websites made available online. It was a copyright issue, the websites merely had to remove the offending content.
So the Americans use copyright to censor offending content. How is that different from how other countries censor their net? Same results, different tools. Copyright is being used to censor Google and others. These laws are selectively enforced. So yes, these laws are there for the benefit of specific organizations. The first amendment is toothless when it runs up against copyright. So, if you want to ban "offensive" speech, simply copyright it. And do your best to bully the world into enacting similar laws to the Americans.
...the licensing fees paid by those making his engines is what made Diesel an incredibly rich man, for crying out loud.
And very paranoid and apparently suicidal. He wasn't able to enjoy those millions for very long. You're trying to imply that without IP law these things would never be brought into existance. That is patently false. Not only would they continue to build, they would build to make a good product, instead of making a possibly dangerous piece of junk looking for a fast buck. Considering the way most pharmaceuticals operate, a very small percentage goes to R&D. Exclusivity helps nobody except the one being protected. The only laws that we should apply to these companies is RICO. The certification rules only serve to keep out the competition that could possibly produce low cost alternatives. It is this and IP law that keep the prices so high. And now they are attempting to outlaw natural medicines. The real reason being is that nobody can patent them, unless Monsanto produces a GM version. Their claims about safety just don't wash. Big pharm drugs are proving to be pretty dangerous themselves. I would rather take my chances with a herbal tea than some anti-depressent(fully certified) that might give me a heart attack. When people get sick and die, any talk about patents should be thrown right out the window. Money needn't be the only thing to motivate humans. To think that it's ok to let people die because there's no profit in making a cure is pretty sick. I guess to some, property rights are more important than (somebody else's)life itself.
There are reasons pecuiliar to medicine - you know, that involve insuring lots of people don't die because of this device - require extremely expensive testing and no one will be willing to foot that bill unless they have a good chance of making money on it.
So, they are perfectly willing to let those people die if they can't get a patent and guaranteed profits? If one of those people is in their families, you can bet they will do their best to come up with a cure, with or without a patent. If they're only in it for the money, then I would expect a shoddy product put on to the market long before it's ready. Kind of like certain computer operating systems and applications. I would wager that much more money goes to lobbying than to actual R&D.
Without some kind of assurance that they can make their money back, no one in their right mind will foot those kinds of certification costs.
Nonsense. People take risks all the time. Not knowing if there will be any return. They are hoping there will be, but there's no guarantee. Nor should there be. If large amounts of money is needed, then large groups of people can invest, minimizing the individual loss if that's what happens. IP law didn't hit the mainstream until the 18th century. People were inventing things before that. Why? because they needed the invention. IP law just brings more junk inventions, whose sole purpose is to move money, not bring any real benefit. And besides, the drug industry is rife with featherbedding, nepotism, etc. Most of the money goes to hiring and overpaying the "wife's useless nephew so the boss can get some nookie tonight". Or lobbying for lax laws and tough IP enforcement. And let's forget the huge costs of good old marketing. Every part of it is way overpriced. And I consider many of the drugs coming out today to be worse than the disease. The fact that so much money flows through just corrupts the process. Most companies work to develope treatments instead of a cure.
Incidentally, Rudolf Diesel had become a millionaire from his invention (from patent licensing fees) less than 5 years after his first engine ran on its own power...
I'm sure he did, but further developement really took off when the patents expired, and other people could make their own versions. His patents may have defensive in that the coal and petroleum industries weren't particularly friendly towards him. But then the need for defensive patents just fortifies my point. Just like GPL is a defensive copyright. Only needed as long as we have copyright law.
Doesn't work too well if you use a sun dial. Time is local. It needs to relate to the position of the sun at your location. However, UTC should be located at the International Date Line.
The point is that without a patent, nobody will pay for testing, the device will sit on a shelf, and it will do no one any good.
Yeah, just like the diesel engine...oh wait...that one rotted on the shelf until the patent expired. Fancy that. Did Mr. Armstrong(FM radio) a lot of good also. You got it backwards. If not for IP privileges, we might have had this thing fifty years ago or more. IP rewards the first. I'd rather reward the best.
You mean there's a difference? Actually, I would consider the study of economics more along the lines of meteorology. Both are equally competent at predicting the future.
I think it's worth it also, but doing your taxes can get pretty complicated, and you might find yourself paying into unemployement, workman's comp, etc. Self employment can be bureaucratic hell.
"Willful employment" is a common practice, even amongst full time "permanent" employees. So what if they don't want you back. They still have to pay. They do have to honor a contract...unless there's a stipulation that says otherwise...or they can afford a decent lawyer to help them weasel out of it.
Will VHS vs. Betamax turn out differently this time?
Which is actually technically superior? With that in mind, I can assure you that the other one will win out. I know of three instances(and there's probably many more) since 1970 where superior tech lost out to superior marketing. One of them cost almost 1000 people their lives.
Well, seeing that we are responsible for the actions of our govt, and it is suppose to represent us(if it doesn't, you know what to do), I can't think of a better place to concentrate that power. In reality, it disperses it amongst all of us. If the govt is out of control, it's because we let it happen through our own negligence. It's because we aren't vigilant. The solution is obvious. The only obligation a corporation has is to maximize profits. And we all know they will do whatever it takes to accomplish that.
Privatization strikes again. You put the infrastructure into the hands of a few powerful people and this is what you will get. Those big power outages happened for the same reason. We aren't holding those in charge responsible. There is no redundancy when there is only one provider. They can cut you off and what are you going to do? Only community services and coops can provide the necessary robustness. But it seems to be more convenient to just hand it over to corporate pirates.
Actually they're protecting the company that has what I assume to ba an exclusive contract to print and distribute the map. Another attempt to protect an outmoded business model. If the map can be distributed over the net, they won't get a juicy contract next year...and the politicians won't get the bribes from those "competing" for that contract.
...because VHS is not durable enough for my money.
I have some 20 year old tapes that look just fine. In light of how badly the digital media is being made, I can only hope that your DVDs will last as long. Small tracking problems and dropouts are much less annoying than the pixelation and sometimes complete lockup that the DVD provides. All this even on new disks and players. Lots of my friends can still play their 30-40 year old records. Let's see if digital holds up as long without having to constantly re-record it to new media as the old one rots. I remember hearing all the promises of digital back in the late 70s when laser discs(I know, not digital, blah, blah, blah. I'm talking about the medium) came out(try to find a player for one of those now). So far they're not holding up. If you want your grandkids to see what you recorded, you will need to archive it to film. It will play on 100 year old equipment. What are you going to play your DVDs on when a new format comes out and your player breaks down?
Radio may be dying for music delivery, but talk and news radio are doing as well as ever. The three "T"s are pretty important for some, especially up in the frozen north where the climate changes by the hour. If anything kills radio, it will be the electric bill for the transmitter. I'm not sure how it compares to the price of leasing a satellite channel.
I have to ask when was the last time you actually listened to an ad?
Hardly ever, but I think I got "Gold Bond" on the brain.
I know there's nothing wrong with the proven tech, but why do CDs still run $16 a pop?
Because that's what people will pay. That's the nature of the beast. Charge what the market will bear. Don't think a boycott will help. These people sell a wide variety of different products from soap to chemical weapons to make up for it. If you want to have an influence on the economy, you're better off boycotting cocaine.
Slashdot Mirror
Scientologists were able to get a judge to rule that the DMCA protected one of their documents - a document which those websites made available online. It was a copyright issue, the websites merely had to remove the offending content.
So the Americans use copyright to censor offending content. How is that different from how other countries censor their net? Same results, different tools. Copyright is being used to censor Google and others. These laws are selectively enforced. So yes, these laws are there for the benefit of specific organizations. The first amendment is toothless when it runs up against copyright. So, if you want to ban "offensive" speech, simply copyright it. And do your best to bully the world into enacting similar laws to the Americans.
I wouldn't count on it. He died when he was 18. Evidently, those bugs are really nasty.
And the US is trying to bully them out of it.
I'll believe that when they demand proper labeling for GM contamination and other artificial ingredients.
...the licensing fees paid by those making his engines is what made Diesel an incredibly rich man, for crying out loud.
And very paranoid and apparently suicidal. He wasn't able to enjoy those millions for very long. You're trying to imply that without IP law these things would never be brought into existance. That is patently false. Not only would they continue to build, they would build to make a good product, instead of making a possibly dangerous piece of junk looking for a fast buck. Considering the way most pharmaceuticals operate, a very small percentage goes to R&D. Exclusivity helps nobody except the one being protected. The only laws that we should apply to these companies is RICO. The certification rules only serve to keep out the competition that could possibly produce low cost alternatives. It is this and IP law that keep the prices so high. And now they are attempting to outlaw natural medicines. The real reason being is that nobody can patent them, unless Monsanto produces a GM version. Their claims about safety just don't wash. Big pharm drugs are proving to be pretty dangerous themselves. I would rather take my chances with a herbal tea than some anti-depressent(fully certified) that might give me a heart attack. When people get sick and die, any talk about patents should be thrown right out the window. Money needn't be the only thing to motivate humans. To think that it's ok to let people die because there's no profit in making a cure is pretty sick. I guess to some, property rights are more important than (somebody else's)life itself.
There are reasons pecuiliar to medicine - you know, that involve insuring lots of people don't die because of this device - require extremely expensive testing and no one will be willing to foot that bill unless they have a good chance of making money on it.
So, they are perfectly willing to let those people die if they can't get a patent and guaranteed profits? If one of those people is in their families, you can bet they will do their best to come up with a cure, with or without a patent. If they're only in it for the money, then I would expect a shoddy product put on to the market long before it's ready. Kind of like certain computer operating systems and applications. I would wager that much more money goes to lobbying than to actual R&D.
Without some kind of assurance that they can make their money back, no one in their right mind will foot those kinds of certification costs.
Nonsense. People take risks all the time. Not knowing if there will be any return. They are hoping there will be, but there's no guarantee. Nor should there be. If large amounts of money is needed, then large groups of people can invest, minimizing the individual loss if that's what happens. IP law didn't hit the mainstream until the 18th century. People were inventing things before that. Why? because they needed the invention. IP law just brings more junk inventions, whose sole purpose is to move money, not bring any real benefit. And besides, the drug industry is rife with featherbedding, nepotism, etc. Most of the money goes to hiring and overpaying the "wife's useless nephew so the boss can get some nookie tonight". Or lobbying for lax laws and tough IP enforcement. And let's forget the huge costs of good old marketing. Every part of it is way overpriced. And I consider many of the drugs coming out today to be worse than the disease. The fact that so much money flows through just corrupts the process. Most companies work to develope treatments instead of a cure.
Incidentally, Rudolf Diesel had become a millionaire from his invention (from patent licensing fees) less than 5 years after his first engine ran on its own power...
I'm sure he did, but further developement really took off when the patents expired, and other people could make their own versions. His patents may have defensive in that the coal and petroleum industries weren't particularly friendly towards him. But then the need for defensive patents just fortifies my point. Just like GPL is a defensive copyright. Only needed as long as we have copyright law.
Doesn't work too well if you use a sun dial. Time is local. It needs to relate to the position of the sun at your location. However, UTC should be located at the International Date Line.
The point is that without a patent, nobody will pay for testing, the device will sit on a shelf, and it will do no one any good.
Yeah, just like the diesel engine...oh wait...that one rotted on the shelf until the patent expired. Fancy that. Did Mr. Armstrong(FM radio) a lot of good also. You got it backwards. If not for IP privileges, we might have had this thing fifty years ago or more. IP rewards the first. I'd rather reward the best.
This book is philosophy not economics.
You mean there's a difference? Actually, I would consider the study of economics more along the lines of meteorology. Both are equally competent at predicting the future.
I think it's worth it also, but doing your taxes can get pretty complicated, and you might find yourself paying into unemployement, workman's comp, etc. Self employment can be bureaucratic hell.
"Willful employment" is a common practice, even amongst full time "permanent" employees. So what if they don't want you back. They still have to pay. They do have to honor a contract...unless there's a stipulation that says otherwise...or they can afford a decent lawyer to help them weasel out of it.
Will VHS vs. Betamax turn out differently this time?
Which is actually technically superior? With that in mind, I can assure you that the other one will win out. I know of three instances(and there's probably many more) since 1970 where superior tech lost out to superior marketing. One of them cost almost 1000 people their lives.
Well, seeing that we are responsible for the actions of our govt, and it is suppose to represent us(if it doesn't, you know what to do), I can't think of a better place to concentrate that power. In reality, it disperses it amongst all of us. If the govt is out of control, it's because we let it happen through our own negligence. It's because we aren't vigilant. The solution is obvious. The only obligation a corporation has is to maximize profits. And we all know they will do whatever it takes to accomplish that.
Privatization strikes again. You put the infrastructure into the hands of a few powerful people and this is what you will get. Those big power outages happened for the same reason. We aren't holding those in charge responsible. There is no redundancy when there is only one provider. They can cut you off and what are you going to do? Only community services and coops can provide the necessary robustness. But it seems to be more convenient to just hand it over to corporate pirates.
...Auto-landing is used all the time...
Let's hope it doesn't land too softly
--
Problem - Test flight OK, except autoland very rough.
Solution - Autoland not installed on this aircraft.
Actually they're protecting the company that has what I assume to ba an exclusive contract to print and distribute the map. Another attempt to protect an outmoded business model. If the map can be distributed over the net, they won't get a juicy contract next year...and the politicians won't get the bribes from those "competing" for that contract.
iPod is not P2P.
But...the $64,000 question is...Who's doing the stealing???
against "unauthorized" civilian communications. Especially wireless networking that can bypass the gatekeepers(corporate ISPs).
...because VHS is not durable enough for my money.
I have some 20 year old tapes that look just fine. In light of how badly the digital media is being made, I can only hope that your DVDs will last as long. Small tracking problems and dropouts are much less annoying than the pixelation and sometimes complete lockup that the DVD provides. All this even on new disks and players. Lots of my friends can still play their 30-40 year old records. Let's see if digital holds up as long without having to constantly re-record it to new media as the old one rots. I remember hearing all the promises of digital back in the late 70s when laser discs(I know, not digital, blah, blah, blah. I'm talking about the medium) came out(try to find a player for one of those now). So far they're not holding up. If you want your grandkids to see what you recorded, you will need to archive it to film. It will play on 100 year old equipment. What are you going to play your DVDs on when a new format comes out and your player breaks down?
Radio may be dying for music delivery, but talk and news radio are doing as well as ever. The three "T"s are pretty important for some, especially up in the frozen north where the climate changes by the hour. If anything kills radio, it will be the electric bill for the transmitter. I'm not sure how it compares to the price of leasing a satellite channel.
I have to ask when was the last time you actually listened to an ad?
Hardly ever, but I think I got "Gold Bond" on the brain.
I know there's nothing wrong with the proven tech, but why do CDs still run $16 a pop?
Because that's what people will pay. That's the nature of the beast. Charge what the market will bear. Don't think a boycott will help. These people sell a wide variety of different products from soap to chemical weapons to make up for it. If you want to have an influence on the economy, you're better off boycotting cocaine.
And now you know who's really behind these lawsuits.
Well, more importantly, USA is moving rapidly to being an IP only country.
The arms market and contraband will keep them afloat. That's where the real money is. It's ten times bigger than the entertainment industry.