... "If I am an author, how can I expect to survive if I may sell only one copy of the book?"...
Can a farmer only cultivate a single harvest, and receive payment forever for that single harvest?
Can a factory worker build one widget, and receive payment forever for that single widget?
Can a Doctor see a single patient just once, and receive payment forever for that single treatment?
Can a teacher teach a single session, and receive payment forever for that single session?
Can a cook prepare a single meal, and receive payment forever for that single meal?
How many times was Michelangelo paid to paint the Sistine Chapel?
How many times was Leonardo da Vinci paid to invent the helicopter?
How many times was Beethoven paid to compose his Symphony no. 9?
After the plumbers visit and unclog the drain, do you pay them a royalty for every flush?
After the mechanics repair your car, do you pay them a royalty every time you drive?
Can you breath one single breath, can you eat one single meal, can you drink one single glass of water, and continue to live?
Continuing life requires continuing activity. And so, the author survives by composing many books. Not just one!
There was art and invention long before copyrights. There will be art and invention long after copyrights.
...xxx or maybe.N17 - then filtering programs become unnecessary - you just set browsers not to allow those sites...
This solution, however, misses a very important issue. Individuals always have had the right (and the technology) to "NOT" view material they find objectionable. You just "turn the page" or "change the channel" or "put down the magazine", or "walk out on the movie" or "FF the video"...
The issue is that SOME want to prevent OTHERS from viewing/hearing/accessing material that the SOME find ojectionable.
Hence this facination with filters/blockers... Not to block what I can access, but to block what YOU can access based on MY moral viewpoint.
I just don't believe that I should be imposing my moral viewpoint on you. And I absolutely don't believe that anyone should be imposing their moral viewpoint on ME.
As for children, I believe a child viewing adult content in a "free speech" nation, is far better off than a child protected from "adult content" in an nation where ideas can be censored by someone declaring them to be adult in nature.
I use BestCrypt. BestCrypt uses a "container" file to hold the encrypted data. You can create any filesystem inside of the container, and then "mount" the container (of course using bestcrypt to do the mount). The file can be encrypted with a variedy of algorithms including des, twofish, and blowfish (but no rijndeal yet). The container can be copied and moved like any ordinary file (including onto CD, zips or floppies). I have a laptop (PII 266) and I don't see any performance problems. I can play MPEGs, RealVideo, and MP3's from the encrypted system.
But beware of a problem that I have. When you create a big (over 170MB) container, and create an EXT2 filesystem inside that container, once the data exceeds 170MB the system hangs (SOLID!!!!). I don't know whats magic about 170MB, and I have tried to debug but to no avail. It happens every time. And for me it has happened under RedHat 6, Mandrake 7.0, 7.1, and beta 7.2.
The point is a single device, and it's getting closer to what I want and would buy. I want a single, small, Palm(PDA)/Phone/Walkman(or MP3)/voice recorder that fits in my pocket (without excess bulges).
I have a Visor, and a Cellphone, and a digital voice recorder, and a CD Walkman. I usually only carry one at a time and that is usually my phone.
When I need to carry more, that means a backpack or briefcase. And I personally like to go light without bringing along extra baggage.
If you believe that this suit is about piracy, you are correct, it won't help with the problems of piracy. But it is not about piracy. It is about control. Specifically, control of (quasi) legal distribution.
The problem that Napster poses to the RIAA is a new model of music distribution that is well funded (Venture Capital backed!) but, not under RIAA control.
RIAA currently has (virtual) monopoly control of all current music distribution. With that control comes immense profits.
Those profits are at the expense of the consumers, who have no other avenue but RIAA for music entertainment - so the RIAA can charge what it wants - $16.99 for the TLC Waterfalls CD for example - 12+ million copies sold - do the math!
Those profits are at the expense of the artist who have no other avenue but the RIAA for distribution of their work - so the RIAA can pay what it wants - $150,000 (net) to the entertainers TLC for example - after selling 12+ million copies of the CD Waterfalls - do the math!
It is that legal theft from consumers and artists that the RIAA is trying to protect by stopping Napster. And if they can scare away the VC money from this new form of music distribution, they can maintain that monopoly a little longer.
It is unfortunate that more consumers and artists don't see the RIAA as the threat that it is to competition, and fairness.
And don't expect the mainstream media to share this view as CNN/Time/Warner/(almost AOL) is a part of the RIAA, and ABC/ESPN/Disney is a part of the RIAA, and CBS/Paramount/Viacom/MTV/HBO is a part of the RIAA...
And the Judge who pulled the plug is a part RIAA...
Re:Maybe I'll just avoid buying software all toget
on
Fighting UCITA
·
· Score: 2
Laws in the USA DO affect "foreigners in other countries".
Just ask the teen (or his father) who created the decss program. He is a citizen of (and resides in) a country that specifically allows reverse engineering for compatibility by their law. And even then he was arrested, and his equipment confiscated at the behest of a United States corporation, for violation of a United States Law.
Even if the case is eventually dropped, incarceration (for any amount of time), and the disruption of the family livelihood is a BIG EFFECT!
I read once that most of the live action was filmed in widescreen, but the special effects (space battles etc...) were only done in normal TV format to save money (as those effects were very expensive).
The prohibition on alcohol failed and was repealed. But the prohibition on drugs (and its associated "WAR on drugs") failed, but IS STILL IN EFFECT! We as a nation are paying vast sums of money to stop drug use. After all the years and all the dollars we are no closer than we were at the beginning of this prohibition. We (who pay taxes) pay a double toll, once for the toll of drug use, and again for the war against drug use.
And I want to make it clear to all of the future George "no-comment" Bush's, or the future Bill "I did not inhale" Clinton's, this war will not be successful.
So, it is very likely that many of the attempts at various controls or prohibitions on the net will also fail (porn, piracy, invasion of privacy, taxes...), but some of those costly attempts at control will remain in effect. And we (who pay taxes) will again pay a double toll. Once for the toll of the real problem, and again for the taxes to fight the next useless "War on porn", or "War on piracy", or "War against invasion of privacy".
p.s. Does anybody else see that the "solutions" proposed for porn, piracy, and collection of taxes (that is to somehow log what everybody downloads or views) are at odds with the "solution" for invasion of privacy (that is to allow full anonymous surfing and downloading)?
There is an additional way that I can think of. (Although technically, it is NOT creating a replacement word processor). Create standard XML "word processing document" tags (maybe they already exits?). Submit these tags's as standards to whatever world body controls software standards. Then, documents saved in this format are interchangeable no mater the program or platform that created the documents.
The important step is to lobby government agencies (all around the world) to require all electronic documents to be in XML with only the standardized "word processing document" tags.
Once businesses and consumers are required to send docs to the "government" in this standard XML format, it won't take very long for this to become the default document format of choice from any Word Processor.
Then use whatever program/platform you like to create you doc, but save it as "WDF" World Document Format (or whatever clever name is assigned to this format).
To emphasize, that is not $100,000 per Year, but $100,000 TOTAL!
So 17,000,000 CD's times $11 per CD = $187,000,000 in revenue, and the artists share was $300,000 total! (And people wondered why "the artist formerly know as Prince" walked around with SLAVE tattooed on his face)
The record companies have a virtual oligarchy on the distribution of music. The lack of viable alternative distribution channels not only hurts the artist, it also hurts the consumer (as in why do CD's retail MORE than cassettes, but cost LESS to produce and distribute?)
There is real opportunity for the Internet to become a viable independent distribution channel. MP3's help the artists by opening up additional sources for distributing their music.
This situation DOES prevent this minority from receiving these benefits. I have a DVD player hooked up to my AV system. I legally purchased "The Matrix", (and many other DVD's) from http://www.reel.com , and paid for these DVD's. The Matrix has content that can only be view via a PC. Content that I PAID FOR, but that I can not use because my home computer is linux, and there are NO linux drivers for the DVD's
WHY have none of those 100's of providers of DVD technology that you mention produced any DVD technology for linux?
When the Spaniards cruised up the pacific coast of the USA (to log all the traffic using the various ports) around the early 1600's they pulled into a natural port (now called the Monterey Bay) and found a populous nation (The Esselen Nation) of organized and peaceful people at that port.
"The land [is] well populated with Indians without number... They seem to be gentle and peaceful people..." - Sebastian Vizcaino Dec., 1602
They also found those peaceful and numerous people stark naked! (egadds... porn over an open port)
"...They go naked at this port." - Fray Antonio de la Ascencion Dec, 1602
And the battle over nudity over the open ports in the infrastructure begins in California.
1770 Mission San Carlos Borromeo was founded. 1846 US forces claimed possession of California. 1851 the first of many (always broken) treaties were signed with the Esselen Nation 1800s-1900s Massive eradication of the nude elements (and their sympathizers) 1999 there are only about 350 enrolled members of the Esselen Nation. (down substantially from "without number")
The battle is won. The (remaining) naked "heathens" are fully clothed, and all ports are preserved for decent law abiding non-naked traffic.
But wait. There is a new port. An electronic port in an electronic infrastructure. And we have discovered a nation using this port. And guess what....."They go naked at this port".
Your task, Sr. Cliff, (should you choose to accept) is to clean up this new port and make it safe for decent law abiding (fully clothed) citizens to tread. You must eliminate the naked nation which is using this corporate port.
You are right about the punishment, but I NEVER mentioned punishing (or imprisoning) the descendents. Only redressing the wrongs (by returning the car). Return the stolen property. That is not punishing the descendants.
If you inherited a work of art that was looted from a Jewish family during the nazi era, you should give that work of art back to descendants of its rightful owner. That is not a punishment to you. The artwork should never have come to you.
How can returning stolen goods be seen as a punishment?
Slaveholders provided good lives for their children. They did it at the expense of the slaves in their possession and at the expense of the Indians whose land they stole. But the children of the slaveholders were provided a good life. I'm sure that most of the slaveholders would say they were doing it all for the benefit of their children.
The problem is not providing a good life for your kids. The problem is HOW you provide that good life.
As for Adam and Eve, the kids were descendents of BOTH (unless there was someone else in the garden that Eve kept secret!)
So what you are really saying is that, if I steal a car from you, and keep it long enough (after you, your children, and your grand children have passed on), then my heirs should keep that stolen car (which should now be a classic, and worth tons of money).
And If you loose your job because you can't get to work (because I have your car), and you loose your house because you can't pay the mortgage (because I have your car), and your children suffer and do poorly in school because they have no home (because I have your car), and your children don't get good jobs because they don't have a good education, and their children don't get good jobs because they did not have a good education...... then my heirs with their bounty (a classic car) don't owe your heirs that car (at a minimum)?
Heirs should not benefit because ancestors were clever enough to hold on to stolen property.
"... are not responsible for your ancestors". If that's a valid point, then we should eliminate inheritance. You are not responsible for your ancestors' mistakes, then why should you inherit wealth accumulated from those mistakes?
Let's also eliminate private schools. Why should the children of the rich have extra opportunities because of their wealthy parents (ancestors)? The same children are not responsible for those parents (ancestors) mistakes, why should they benefit from the ancestors' wealth?
Let's also eliminate parents raising their own kids. Kids do not choose their own parents. Why should some kid benefit from loving/caring parents when other kids have monsters?
If kids don't pay for the sins of their parents, than kids should not benefit from those sins either.
Lets gather all of the wealth accumulated in the United States from slavery, and from land theft (from those indigenous to this land). And redistribute that wealth (with 250+ years of interest of course) to the ancestors of the former slaves, and ancestors of the tribal peoples whose land was stolen.
Universal freedom of speech has never been a popular concept within the structure of political, religious or corporate power. Our current concept of universal freedom of speech was not even the goal of the original US Constitution. When the document was drafted and approved, only wealthy White Christian males had freedom of speech. Africans, Asians, The Indigenous (Indians), Women, Children, non-Christian, all were excluded from the right of free speech.
So now as our political, religious and corporate leaders attempt to convince us that they only have the best interests of our children in mind, remember this fact. - In spite of the great increase in accessibility of "violent" and "sexually explicit" media to kids, the rate of teen pregnancy is falling! And school violence is declining! Check the facts for your self.
Technology is finally giving universal freedom of speech to those of us not included the first time around. And a lot of powerful people are attempting to take that freedom away (using the protection of our innocent children as a very potent argument). Let us not sit back and silently give that freedom away.
I saw it this weekend. Cool. But, I wasn't scared. At least not until.....
I hope that a huge chunk of the $28 mil. that the movie made this weekend goes to the actual film makers. To the writers, directors, actors, camera and sound men and women, grips,... that made this film, I say, "This film rocks".
Slashdot Mirror
Can a farmer only cultivate a single harvest, and receive payment forever for that single harvest?
Can a factory worker build one widget, and receive payment forever for that single widget?
Can a Doctor see a single patient just once, and receive payment forever for that single treatment?
Can a teacher teach a single session, and receive payment forever for that single session?
Can a cook prepare a single meal, and receive payment forever for that single meal?
How many times was Michelangelo paid to paint the Sistine Chapel?
How many times was Leonardo da Vinci paid to invent the helicopter?
How many times was Beethoven paid to compose his Symphony no. 9?
After the plumbers visit and unclog the drain, do you pay them a royalty for every flush?
After the mechanics repair your car, do you pay them a royalty every time you drive?
Can you breath one single breath, can you eat one single meal, can you drink one single glass of water, and continue to live?
Continuing life requires continuing activity. And so, the author survives by composing many books. Not just one!
There was art and invention long before copyrights. There will be art and invention long after copyrights.
...xxx or maybe .N17 - then filtering programs become unnecessary - you just set browsers not to allow those sites...
This solution, however, misses a very important issue. Individuals always have had the right (and the technology) to "NOT" view material they find objectionable. You just "turn the page" or "change the channel" or "put down the magazine", or "walk out on the movie" or "FF the video"...
The issue is that SOME want to prevent OTHERS from viewing/hearing/accessing material that the SOME find ojectionable.
Hence this facination with filters/blockers... Not to block what I can access, but to block what YOU can access based on MY moral viewpoint.
I just don't believe that I should be imposing my moral viewpoint on you. And I absolutely don't believe that anyone should be imposing their moral viewpoint on ME.
As for children, I believe a child viewing adult content in a "free speech" nation, is far better off than a child protected from "adult content" in an nation where ideas can be censored by someone declaring them to be adult in nature.
I use BestCrypt. BestCrypt uses a "container" file to hold the encrypted data. You can create any filesystem inside of the container, and then "mount" the container (of course using bestcrypt to do the mount). The file can be encrypted with a variedy of algorithms including des, twofish, and blowfish (but no rijndeal yet). The container can be copied and moved like any ordinary file (including onto CD, zips or floppies). I have a laptop (PII 266) and I don't see any performance problems. I can play MPEGs, RealVideo, and MP3's from the encrypted system.
But beware of a problem that I have. When you create a big (over 170MB) container, and create an EXT2 filesystem inside that container, once the data exceeds 170MB the system hangs (SOLID!!!!). I don't know whats magic about 170MB, and I have tried to debug but to no avail. It happens every time. And for me it has happened under RedHat 6, Mandrake 7.0, 7.1, and beta 7.2.
The point is a single device, and it's getting closer to what I want and would buy. I want a single, small, Palm(PDA)/Phone/Walkman(or MP3)/voice recorder that fits in my pocket (without excess bulges).
I have a Visor, and a Cellphone, and a digital voice recorder, and a CD Walkman. I usually only carry one at a time and that is usually my phone.
When I need to carry more, that means a backpack or briefcase. And I personally like to go light without bringing along extra baggage.
If you believe that this suit is about piracy, you are correct, it won't help with the problems of piracy. But it is not about piracy. It is about control. Specifically, control of (quasi) legal distribution.
The problem that Napster poses to the RIAA is a new model of music distribution that is well funded (Venture Capital backed!) but, not under RIAA control.
RIAA currently has (virtual) monopoly control of all current music distribution. With that control comes immense profits.
Those profits are at the expense of the consumers, who have no other avenue but RIAA for music entertainment - so the RIAA can charge what it wants - $16.99 for the TLC Waterfalls CD for example - 12+ million copies sold - do the math!
Those profits are at the expense of the artist who have no other avenue but the RIAA for distribution of their work - so the RIAA can pay what it wants - $150,000 (net) to the entertainers TLC for example - after selling 12+ million copies of the CD Waterfalls - do the math!
It is that legal theft from consumers and artists that the RIAA is trying to protect by stopping Napster. And if they can scare away the VC money from this new form of music distribution, they can maintain that monopoly a little longer.
It is unfortunate that more consumers and artists don't see the RIAA as the threat that it is to competition, and fairness.
And don't expect the mainstream media to share this view as CNN/Time/Warner/(almost AOL) is a part of the RIAA, and ABC/ESPN/Disney is a part of the RIAA, and CBS/Paramount/Viacom/MTV/HBO is a part of the RIAA...
And the Judge who pulled the plug is a part RIAA...
Laws in the USA DO affect "foreigners in other countries".
Just ask the teen (or his father) who created the decss program. He is a citizen of (and resides in) a country that specifically allows reverse engineering for compatibility by their law. And even then he was arrested, and his equipment confiscated at the behest of a United States corporation, for violation of a United States Law.
Even if the case is eventually dropped, incarceration (for any amount of time), and the disruption of the family livelihood is a BIG EFFECT!
We all should be concerned and active.
I read once that most of the live action was filmed in widescreen, but the special effects (space battles etc...) were only done in normal TV format to save money (as those effects were very expensive).
The prohibition on alcohol failed and was repealed. But the prohibition on drugs (and its associated "WAR on drugs") failed, but IS STILL IN EFFECT! We as a nation are paying vast sums of money to stop drug use. After all the years and all the dollars we are no closer than we were at the beginning of this prohibition. We (who pay taxes) pay a double toll, once for the toll of drug use, and again for the war against drug use.
...), but some of those costly attempts at control will remain in effect. And we (who pay taxes) will again pay a double toll. Once for the toll of the real problem, and again for the taxes to fight the next useless "War on porn", or "War on piracy", or "War against invasion of privacy".
And I want to make it clear to all of the future George "no-comment" Bush's, or the future Bill "I did not inhale" Clinton's, this war will not be successful.
So, it is very likely that many of the attempts at various controls or prohibitions on the net will also fail (porn, piracy, invasion of privacy, taxes
p.s. Does anybody else see that the "solutions" proposed for porn, piracy, and collection of taxes (that is to somehow log what everybody downloads or views) are at odds with the "solution" for invasion of privacy (that is to allow full anonymous surfing and downloading)?
There is an additional way that I can think of. (Although technically, it is NOT creating a replacement word processor). Create standard XML "word processing document" tags (maybe they already exits?). Submit these tags's as standards to whatever world body controls software standards. Then, documents saved in this format are interchangeable no mater the program or platform that created the documents.
The important step is to lobby government agencies (all around the world) to require all electronic documents to be in XML with only the standardized "word processing document" tags.
Once businesses and consumers are required to send docs to the "government" in this standard XML format, it won't take very long for this to become the default document format of choice from any Word Processor.
Then use whatever program/platform you like to create you doc, but save it as "WDF" World Document Format (or whatever clever name is assigned to this format).
To emphasize, that is not $100,000 per Year, but $100,000 TOTAL!
So 17,000,000 CD's times $11 per CD = $187,000,000 in revenue, and the artists share was $300,000 total! (And people wondered why "the artist formerly know as Prince" walked around with SLAVE tattooed on his face)
The record companies have a virtual oligarchy on the distribution of music. The lack of viable alternative distribution channels not only hurts the artist, it also hurts the consumer (as in why do CD's retail MORE than cassettes, but cost LESS to produce and distribute?)
There is real opportunity for the Internet to become a viable independent distribution channel. MP3's help the artists by opening up additional sources for distributing their music.
This situation DOES prevent this minority from receiving these benefits. I have a DVD player hooked up to my AV system. I legally purchased "The Matrix", (and many other DVD's) from http://www.reel.com , and paid for these DVD's. The Matrix has content that can only be view via a PC. Content that I PAID FOR, but that I can not use because my home computer is linux, and there are NO linux drivers for the DVD's
WHY have none of those 100's of providers of DVD technology that you mention produced any DVD technology for linux?
When the Spaniards cruised up the pacific coast of the USA (to log all the traffic using the various ports) around the early 1600's they pulled into a natural port (now called the Monterey Bay) and found a populous nation (The Esselen Nation) of organized and peaceful people at that port.
"The land [is] well populated with Indians without number...
They seem to be gentle and peaceful people..."
- Sebastian Vizcaino Dec., 1602
They also found those peaceful and numerous people stark naked! (egadds... porn over an open port)
"...They go naked at this port."
- Fray Antonio de la Ascencion Dec, 1602
And the battle over nudity over the open ports in the infrastructure begins in California.
1770 Mission San Carlos Borromeo was founded.
1846 US forces claimed possession of California.
1851 the first of many (always broken) treaties were signed with the Esselen Nation
1800s-1900s Massive eradication of the nude elements (and their sympathizers)
1999 there are only about 350 enrolled members of the Esselen Nation. (down substantially from "without number")
The battle is won. The (remaining) naked "heathens" are fully clothed, and all ports are preserved for decent law abiding non-naked traffic.
But wait. There is a new port. An electronic port in an electronic infrastructure. And we have discovered a nation using this port. And guess what....."They go naked at this port".
Your task, Sr. Cliff, (should you choose to accept) is to clean up this new port and make it safe for decent law abiding (fully clothed) citizens to tread. You must eliminate the naked nation which is using this corporate port.
Wrong on two counts.
1. Some Jewish people did colaborate with the nazis.
2. Coastal African tribes did not sell their own people, they sold people of other tribes.
You are right about the punishment, but I NEVER mentioned punishing (or imprisoning) the descendents. Only redressing the wrongs (by returning the car). Return the stolen property. That is not punishing the descendants.
If you inherited a work of art that was looted from a Jewish family during the nazi era, you should give that work of art back to descendants of its rightful owner. That is not a punishment to you. The artwork should never have come to you.
How can returning stolen goods be seen as a punishment?
Slaveholders provided good lives for their children. They did it at the expense of the slaves in their possession and at the expense of the Indians whose land they stole. But the children of the slaveholders were provided a good life. I'm sure that most of the slaveholders would say they were doing it all for the benefit of their children.
The problem is not providing a good life for your kids. The problem is HOW you provide that good life.
As for Adam and Eve, the kids were descendents of BOTH (unless there was someone else in the garden that Eve kept secret!)
So what you are really saying is that, if I steal a car from you, and keep it long enough (after you, your children, and your grand children have passed on), then my heirs should keep that stolen car (which should now be a classic, and worth tons of money).
And If you loose your job because you can't get to work (because I have your car), and you loose your house because you can't pay the mortgage (because I have your car), and your children suffer and do poorly in school because they have no home (because I have your car), and your children don't get good jobs because they don't have a good education, and their children don't get good jobs because they did not have a good education...... then my heirs with their bounty (a classic car) don't owe your heirs that car (at a minimum)?
Heirs should not benefit because ancestors were clever enough to hold on to stolen property.
"... are not responsible for your ancestors". If that's a valid point, then we should eliminate inheritance. You are not responsible for your ancestors' mistakes, then why should you inherit wealth accumulated from those mistakes?
Let's also eliminate private schools. Why should the children of the rich have extra opportunities because of their wealthy parents (ancestors)? The same children are not responsible for those parents (ancestors) mistakes, why should they benefit from the ancestors' wealth?
Let's also eliminate parents raising their own kids. Kids do not choose their own parents. Why should some kid benefit from loving/caring parents when other kids have monsters?
If kids don't pay for the sins of their parents, than kids should not benefit from those sins either.
Lets gather all of the wealth accumulated in the United States from slavery, and from land theft (from those indigenous to this land). And redistribute that wealth (with 250+ years of interest of course) to the ancestors of the former slaves, and ancestors of the tribal peoples whose land was stolen.
That's fair isn't it?
Universal freedom of speech has never been a popular concept within the structure of political, religious or corporate power. Our current concept of universal freedom of speech was not even the goal of the original US Constitution. When the document was drafted and approved, only wealthy White Christian males had freedom of speech. Africans, Asians, The Indigenous (Indians), Women, Children, non-Christian, all were excluded from the right of free speech.
So now as our political, religious and corporate leaders attempt to convince us that they only have the best interests of our children in mind, remember this fact. - In spite of the great increase in accessibility of "violent" and "sexually explicit" media to kids, the rate of teen pregnancy is falling! And school violence is declining! Check the facts for your self.
Technology is finally giving universal freedom of speech to those of us not included the first time around. And a lot of powerful people are attempting to take that freedom away (using the protection of our innocent children as a very potent argument). Let us not sit back and silently give that freedom away.
I saw it this weekend. Cool. But, I wasn't scared. At least not until .....
... that made this film, I say, "This film rocks".
I hope that a huge chunk of the $28 mil. that the movie made this weekend goes to the actual film makers. To the writers, directors, actors, camera and sound men and women, grips,