No desire to be a barber, thank you. Did you ever notice that everyone in the places you hang out has similar hair to yours? Were you ever tempted to shave your head just so you didn't conform so much?
I almost did have my hair shaved off, when I went into the Army. I got up to the barber and was asked how much I wanted cut off. Thinking I wanted to get it over with I said everything, but the barber said he couldn't cut everything off. And of course having hair cut wasn't able being non-conformist, it was the opposite, about being a carbon copy. After I got out I cut my hair a couple of tyme, but only because I got sick and tired of people saying I needed to cut it.
Gosh, look at that graphic of Adam Smith, the father of modern economics and free markets. Is that a wig or long hair?
I especially like in Canada where they get money for any writable CD sold, because it's naturally being used to copy their music without permission. (Never mind independents that cut their own records.)
I don't know about Canada but in the US musicians don't have to pay the tax on blank media.
No, this is what is wrong with a free market system of distributing justice. Those with money can buy it, those without can not.
No, this shows your ignorance. Under a free market Warner never would have been legally able to demand MySpace takedown the music without first proving they owned the copyright.
As Adam Smith said, copyrights and patents are a necessary evil.
I say, the system encourages it, even if not strictly required by law. We have a system that is predicated on the idea that humans are selfish creatures
Ah but even Adam Smith said the best way to improve everyone's life was by people pursuing their own self interests. "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages." Quote from The Wealth Of Nations, Book IV, Chapter II, p. 456, para. 9..
And what will you find in the prospectus of all modern megacorporations? Morals? No, you will find, "We exist to make money.'
"In keeping with the unorthodox corporate image that Google presents -- the phrase "Don't be evil' was written into its I.P.O. prospectus -- the company used a modified Dutch auction to sell its shares. A Dutch auction is supposed to make it easier for individual investors to buy stock and minimize the usual first-day 'pop' by seeking out the fair-market price."
Perhaps you should read a little bit about the history of corporations.
And perhaps you should learn about history as well as stockholder activism and socially responsible investing. It was partially because of these that apartheid ended in South Africa. Many shareholder activists pressured the companies they owned stocks in to either push for freedom in South Africa or to disinvest from South Africa.
Back to the industrial revolution? Before the East India company? How far?
Back to when both East India companies, Dutch East India in 1602 and the British East India Company in 1604, were granted charters because they served the common good.
Any publicly traded corporation can be sued if they put anything else but the bottom line first.
And a corporation could have it's corporate charterrevoked if it no longer serves the common or public good. And if this behavior qualifies as a good then things are really screwed.
Yes, it is. Sue Warner for all the sales that they didn't pay him on and sue MySpace for Tortuous Interference. I'm not a sue first ask questions later type of guy but this guy has been trying to ask nicely for months.
Yea he's a nice guy trying to use informal channels to get this straighten out instead of suing and having a bunch of people complain and say he's sue happy.
It would cost a lot less than 585 million to have some large persistent gentlemen visit Eolas Prez, V.P., board members and major investors to convince them to drop their suit.
Another person who didn't RTFA.
Are you going to use a baseball bat on the University of California as well?
The patent filed in 2002 was for an extension of a patent granted in 1998.
IANAL, IAN even a legal hobbyist, but wouldn't this prior art insubstantiate the patent?
Java isn't prior art. Work started on Java in 1991, by James Gosling, but it wasn't released until 1995. "Eolas said it first demonstrated in 1993 -- and for which it received a U.S. patent in 1998". Java was developed concurrently.
I'm not supporting Eolas, I don't know what the patent covers or if it's a valid patent, here but I wanted to correct your information.
I wonder how much it would cost to simply buy 51% of Eolas?
I don't know how well that would work. The patent was granted to the University of California and Eolas. You're not going to buy the University of California.
I say develop, be inspired and when the "Big Guns" have stopped fighting, they will realise they have missed the boat after all their petty wranglings.
And what will you do when you're slapped with a lawsuit saying you're infringing on a patent?
And remember, corporations are fairly recent stuff. It has not existed until recently.
First, define "recently", ie what do you mean by saying "corporations are fairly recent stuff"?
Next, corporations' existence depends on ethics and morality. The first 2 corporations were granted corporate charters, which granted them their limited liability, in 1602 and 1604. This limited liability was only granted because it was for the better. The common or public good was improved it was thought by granting limited liability.
Absolutely. Not only that but most of them were doing what was economically imperative to compete in the current market of the day.
Actually you're wrong here. Owning slaves cost more than paying freemen a living wage. Economists studying economics and slavery in the US concluded southern slave owners could not compeat on price with northerners who paid living wages. Owning slaves have additional costs. For instance those watching or guarding slaves have to be paid and there's the cost of chains and shackles. If not for the Civil War slavery would have ended within another generation or two. If not for the "Fugitive Slave Act (which Abraham Lincoln strongly supported)" slavery who have ended sooner.
When everyone else is using slave labor (cheap immigrants, outsourced call centers, H1B Visaed IT)
That is not slavery. In every one of those cases the workers have a choice, and most get paid more than others in the same area, in the case of outsourcing, or more than those at home in the case of immigrants. These people are very much willing to work for what they get paid. Just because they are willing to work for less than you are does not make them slaves. But they do drive your cost of living down.
Slashdot Mirror
If Collins did send them a DMCA counter-notice and MySpace is ignoring it, then MySpace is violating the law.
What law requires MySpace to host the music?
Fslcon
The law is pretty clearly on Collins' side, it's just MySpace and/or Warner Music that are being assholes.
No, the law is clearly on MySpace's side. MySpace is not obligated to host anything.
Falcon
No desire to be a barber, thank you. Did you ever notice that everyone in the places you hang out has similar hair to yours? Were you ever tempted to shave your head just so you didn't conform so much?
I almost did have my hair shaved off, when I went into the Army. I got up to the barber and was asked how much I wanted cut off. Thinking I wanted to get it over with I said everything, but the barber said he couldn't cut everything off. And of course having hair cut wasn't able being non-conformist, it was the opposite, about being a carbon copy. After I got out I cut my hair a couple of tyme, but only because I got sick and tired of people saying I needed to cut it.
Gosh, look at that graphic of Adam Smith, the father of modern economics and free markets. Is that a wig or long hair?
Falcon
I especially like in Canada where they get money for any writable CD sold, because it's naturally being used to copy their music without permission. (Never mind independents that cut their own records.)
I don't know about Canada but in the US musicians don't have to pay the tax on blank media.
Falcon
Slander of title, perhaps.
Fraud implies intent.. I think this is just a case of horrendous negligence.
WB has been informed and they know they are wrong. If they have not fixed the problem after a number of months then that is intent.
Falcon
This is in the UK and the DMCA does not apply. That is unless the server is in the US.
Falcon
MySpace has no legal obligation to allow the music on their servers though, so it's not really about MySpace.
Falcon
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/115.html#c
That's only applicable in the US, he's in the UK.
Falcon
No, this is what is wrong with a free market system of distributing justice. Those with money can buy it, those without can not.
No, this shows your ignorance. Under a free market Warner never would have been legally able to demand MySpace takedown the music without first proving they owned the copyright.
As Adam Smith said, copyrights and patents are a necessary evil.
Falcon
I say, the system encourages it, even if not strictly required by law. We have a system that is predicated on the idea that humans are selfish creatures
Ah but even Adam Smith said the best way to improve everyone's life was by people pursuing their own self interests. "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages." Quote from The Wealth Of Nations, Book IV, Chapter II, p. 456, para. 9..
Falcon
And what will you find in the prospectus of all modern megacorporations? Morals? No, you will find, "We exist to make money.'
"In keeping with the unorthodox corporate image that Google presents -- the phrase "Don't be evil' was written into its I.P.O. prospectus -- the company used a modified Dutch auction to sell its shares. A Dutch auction is supposed to make it easier for individual investors to buy stock and minimize the usual first-day 'pop' by seeking out the fair-market price."
Perhaps you should read a little bit about the history of corporations.
And perhaps you should learn about history as well as stockholder activism and socially responsible investing. It was partially because of these that apartheid ended in South Africa. Many shareholder activists pressured the companies they owned stocks in to either push for freedom in South Africa or to disinvest from South Africa.
Falcon
Back to the industrial revolution? Before the East India company? How far?
Back to when both East India companies, Dutch East India in 1602 and the British East India Company in 1604, were granted charters because they served the common good.
Falcon
Any publicly traded corporation can be sued if they put anything else but the bottom line first.
And a corporation could have it's corporate charter revoked if it no longer serves the common or public good. And if this behavior qualifies as a good then things are really screwed.
Falcon
Having your content taken down and having to fight to get it back is pretty sucky.
It does suck but if Myspace doesn't take it down it can be held liable for copyright infringement. That is one of the criticisms of the DMCA.
Falcon
Seriously though, someone please tell this guy that myspace is done.
Myspace has a large audience and it make sense for an artist to want to use it.
Falcon
Yes, it is. Sue Warner for all the sales that they didn't pay him on and sue MySpace for Tortuous Interference. I'm not a sue first ask questions later type of guy but this guy has been trying to ask nicely for months.
Yea he's a nice guy trying to use informal channels to get this straighten out instead of suing and having a bunch of people complain and say he's sue happy.
Gosh, it's impossible to satisfy everybody.
Falcon
think of the artists?
The major labels have only ever thought of how much they can milk from the artists who create music.
Falcon
It would cost a lot less than 585 million to have some large persistent gentlemen visit Eolas Prez, V.P., board members and major investors to convince them to drop their suit.
Another person who didn't RTFA.
Are you going to use a baseball bat on the University of California as well?
Falcon
Why isn't Google or Microsoft don't just buy Eolas? then they would have the patent for themself and could sue more and get more money =)
RTFA! The University of California also owns the patent.
Falcon
The patent filed in 2002 was for an extension of a patent granted in 1998.
IANAL, IAN even a legal hobbyist, but wouldn't this prior art insubstantiate the patent?
Java isn't prior art. Work started on Java in 1991, by James Gosling, but it wasn't released until 1995. "Eolas said it first demonstrated in 1993 -- and for which it received a U.S. patent in 1998". Java was developed concurrently.
I'm not supporting Eolas, I don't know what the patent covers or if it's a valid patent, here but I wanted to correct your information.
Falcon
I wonder how much it would cost to simply buy 51% of Eolas?
I don't know how well that would work. The patent was granted to the University of California and Eolas. You're not going to buy the University of California.
Falcon
I say develop, be inspired and when the "Big Guns" have stopped fighting, they will realise they have missed the boat after all their petty wranglings.
And what will you do when you're slapped with a lawsuit saying you're infringing on a patent?
Falcon
annoying hog of resources, and no reputable websites even use it anymore.
How do you define "reputable websites"? By whether they use java?
How about A List Apart, are they bad because they include java programs?
Falcon
And remember, corporations are fairly recent stuff. It has not existed until recently.
First, define "recently", ie what do you mean by saying "corporations are fairly recent stuff"?
Next, corporations' existence depends on ethics and morality. The first 2 corporations were granted corporate charters, which granted them their limited liability, in 1602 and 1604. This limited liability was only granted because it was for the better. The common or public good was improved it was thought by granting limited liability.
Falcon
Absolutely. Not only that but most of them were doing what was economically imperative to compete in the current market of the day.
Actually you're wrong here. Owning slaves cost more than paying freemen a living wage. Economists studying economics and slavery in the US concluded southern slave owners could not compeat on price with northerners who paid living wages. Owning slaves have additional costs. For instance those watching or guarding slaves have to be paid and there's the cost of chains and shackles. If not for the Civil War slavery would have ended within another generation or two. If not for the "Fugitive Slave Act (which Abraham Lincoln strongly supported)" slavery who have ended sooner.
When everyone else is using slave labor (cheap immigrants, outsourced call centers, H1B Visaed IT)
That is not slavery. In every one of those cases the workers have a choice, and most get paid more than others in the same area, in the case of outsourcing, or more than those at home in the case of immigrants. These people are very much willing to work for what they get paid. Just because they are willing to work for less than you are does not make them slaves. But they do drive your cost of living down.
Falcon