First, a lot of my favourites don't have a girl's name in them. Heck, some don't have words at all.
(A) You are being small minded in assuming that the only customization that anyone might want is to put a girl's name into the song. Hell, I already mentioned parents doing their children's names. There are also opportunities for using family names and for using team names - pro and amatuer, business names, city and town names, product names, etc. Nor is it required that every name be an option for customization. You are arguing the equivalent of every single song needs to be purchased by every single person on the planet.
(B) Not every single song needs to be a money maker - it sure isn't that way now where only one or two songs on an album are able to support any sort of sales as singles. Nor does every artists need to rely on customization, that's why there is more than one way to earn money.
(C) Who says anyone has to make a million dollars? All an artist needs is to make a decent living. Under the current system 99.99% of musicians don't even make a decent living from their recorded music today.
Dumbshit copyright maximalists like yourself are set up for permanent fail when you argue for pie-in-the-sky results that don't even happen with the current system. How about you come back to me when the current system is able to meet your ridiculous assumptions, mmmmkay?
I won't even dignify your lame offtopic ad hominem attacks by replying to them. Leech.
You mean like:
Sounds awfully like PHB speak.
or You must be a manager or a lawyer.
and Nobody else could use so many words
The script is rather large because it has a lot of other customization in it.
All the more reason to share it. I bet you find that there is a sizable audience for a tool like that, including all the extra customizations that sound like they fall under the same general principle of better user control over their own security.
No one cares, really. You are not angry of him for claiming a title, you're pissed of because you feel he doesn't deserve the sort of hoola around him. That may be so, but really, who cares? Life is not fair, especially when it comes to social status.
University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small. --Henry Kissinger
If you and I disagree on what is an inherent right, who's the authority? You? Me? The government? The UN? The people? Wasn't the whole point of "inherent" that they can't be taken away by popular opinion or the government?
No. An inherent right is the same thing as a natural right, both are descriptions of the default state of the individual - a description of what a generic person is able to do if no one - private citizens, corporations or governemnts - interferes with that person. Think of the old saying which is the perfect example of how interference defines where one person's inherent right ends and another's starts - your right to swing your fist ends at my face.
I'm not aware of anybody being sued on the basis of a single joke.
Yeah... and so what of it? You claim that freedom of expression does not include copying "the exact full contents of" of a creation. I give you an example of a class of creations that are regularly copied verboten without copyright suits being filed and you basically agree with me. If I didn't know better, I'd say you just changed your mind. The kind of thing that you could cite to contradict me is a court ruling that jokes are not protected speech. Good luck.
But you could give somebody a sheet of paper with a joke on it that you haven't even read - how can that be considered speech?
The same way that a bookstore's right to sell books that neither the owner nor the clerks or anyone else in the bookstore has read is protected by the right to freedom of expression.
There is a recurrent theme here - you think the right to freedom of expression is this tiny little thing when in fact it is extremely broad and free ranging and has been constantly affirmed so by the courts in the US.
The baseline hardware requirement is probably going to be a system that can accept a 120Hz signal (so 60Hz for each eye) - most current systems on the market can accept a 60Hz signal and internally double it to 120Hz (or greater) so the remaining step is to move to a full bandwidth implementations of HDMI 1.3 (1.4 already being a finished standard as of about a month ago).
A professor is someone with a PhD who is tenured at the university in question.
So, a "visiting professor" is not a professor?
My buddy who just finished law school but hasn't found out if he passed the bar yet is a "half-lawyer."
So a formal education is the only way to become even "half" a lawyer? Does that mean that people who pass the bar examine without graduating from a law school are only "half" a lawyer too? Just the "other" half?
If you are going to get your panties in a twist over semantics, you probably should get your own semantic ducks in perfect formation.
If you're just parroting someone else's work, you aren't expressing anything.
Bullshit. There is nothing about expression that requires originality. It's not freedom of orginal speech, not freedom of original expression.
Hell, Joseph Campbell makes a pretty good case for their only really being one story - the monomyth - in all of humanity's culture, the names and places change but the core ideas never do.
But an oil rig is an expensive and relatively rare occurrence in n navigable ocean. But if they put these things in the water all over the world to produce electricity to make some districts to look luxury without clotheslines, it would be another level of complexity.
There are over 4000 oil rigs in the gulf of mexico alone. I think you underestimate just how common these things are.
Sun-wind-linen-cloth-drier is the most effective green power device. Still in some European and North America countries it is the tabu.
While I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote up until this point, I figured I would support this point and mention that many HOA's (home owner associations) in the US have rules forbidding the use of clotheslines in their neighborhoods. They think it makes the neighborhood look cheap and thus brings down property values. Like much of the way HOAs operate, those rules against clotheslines are just fucked up.
Of course you have an example of a new business model. One that will work. By work I mean in reality, on this planet. Care to share it?
First off, what's your definition of "in reality" - are you going to dismiss anything that is not already widely successful? Your snarkiness suggests you would be fond of circular arguments like that.
Assuming you aren't just being an ass, here are a couple off the top of my head:
1) Customization - give away the original recordings and then sell versions that have been customized to the buyer's wishes. Like how Elton John changed the lyrics of "Candle in the Wind" to be about Princess Diana. There are lots of pop songs the feature a girl's name as key to the lyrics, tons of guys would pay $10-$100 for a version customized with their girlfriend's name since it would totally get them laid. Parents would easily pay for certain songs with their kid's names in them. And the beauty of that is since lots of people have the same name, you only have to record a custom version once for each name but you still get to sell it multiple times just like you do now with copyright because very few buyers are going to want to share their own personalized versions with the world. Of course you would charge even more for more extensive customization than just a basic name substitution.
2) Ransom model - set an asking price and shop it around to multiple buyers. The internet is great at bringing people of like mind together, convince 100,000 people worldwide to put in 10 cents each and you can pay for an episode of a television show (if you leave out the coke-snorting middlemen and big name actors). Once everyone has paid in, production starts with a guaranteed return already locked in, that's something modern hollywood would kill for. If the show is good, word will get out because its free to copy the show - people who like it will send a copy to their friends. When it comes time to make the next episode or instalment, previous success will increase the size of the paying audience, which means bigger budgets for quality programming (and shrinking budgets for crappy programming). Similarly, the big-name actors and directors should have the brand recognition to bring in crowds far larger than 100,000 - Scorsese's name alone could probably get 100 million people across the entire globe to toss $1 each in to fund his next movie.
3) Merchandising - Action figures, posters, clothing lines, plateware, candy-bars, perfume, bobbleheads, etc. All with tie-ins to the show or movie - heck that model is already giant business today, the ticket revenue of the star wars movies has long been dwarfed by the merchandising revenue.
It's plausible that you might wish to convey an idea by referencing a small part of a large copyrighted work. It's not plausible that you wish to convey the exact full content of War and Peace.
Is it plausible that one would retell a joke in its entirety? Under your 'definition' of free speech it seems that one would only be allowed to say the punch line.
When we give lectures to the students that use the book,
Are you giving away these lectures for free or otherwise below market value? No? Well chances are you wouldn't be doing those lectures without the publicity of the book. Yes? Well WTF is wrong with you for doing work and not getting paid for its value?
Are current copyright limits too long? Sure. Can you guarantee if the limit is reduced to say 7 years it won't be shared on the torrent sites in two weeks after release or before? I thought not.
I can't tell if you did it on purpose or not, but you've just made the standard argument for abolishing copyright - it's not enforceable so we should top pretending (and get on to promoting new business models).
Seeing as I'm about to graduate from CS with a minor in Math, the thing that I find funny is that there is so much focus on "results" and so little attention to process,
Just you wait. Once you get into the corporate world with Six Sigma and ISO9000, etc you will have more process than you ever thought possible. You'll have so much process that you'll be puking up process on weekends.
Don't be silly. Natural rights are ones that essentially describe the default state if no one, government or other individuals, were to interfere with you.
No, we don't. We are talking about, whether creators -- of movies, music, literature, software, fashion designs -- have the inherent rights to control their creations, or whether whoever happens to be able to copy their work has the same rights to it as the creator.
Yes, we are. Freedom of speech must include the ability to repeat the same expressions in partial or complete form that one has heard themselves. Copyright is an infringement on the freedom of expression, no if's and's or but's. The only question is, is it a worthwhile trade-off?
Now, don't take this to mean that I don't think there are CEOs and management out there that are bad at their jobs and are vastly overpaid. There are. But for most of the successful people, "being in the right place at the right time" is a matter of always being there, so that when an opportunity comes they have the chance and skill to take it.
You have it precisely backwards - for every hard-working joe who was there at the right place and the right time, there are 99 other just as equally hard-working people who did not have the good fortune to be there at the right place and the right time. Sure there are plenty of slackards who also didn't have the fortune to be there at the right place and the right time, but that's not the point. The point is that the majority of the "successful" people don't have anything over their peers except good fortune.
That's the really pathetic thing about people like you. You actually believe that the only way to get ahead is through dumb luck. That's also why you won't be rich.
I've got a couple of million in the bank, all earned by my labor - not inherited, not from investing, its all cash - I sat out the markets during the previous 10 years or so.
I'm a smart guy, but I know plenty of people smarter than me with less money. The only reason that I have earned as much money as I have is because I was in the right place, at the right time and had the big brass balls to negotiate really hard for about 2 weeks. That's it. Being an audacious negotiator at one critical point in my life does not make me any more of a valuable contributor to the world than being a good long-distance spitter would. I do rub shoulders with a lot of other "self-made" men and I can tell you, most of them are in the same boat as me, they found themselves with the right set of circumstances and took advantage of the situation. That's all just dumb luck.
Sure there are some people who do work hard to climb the ladder, but I'm pretty sure that most of those guys only got the chance to apply themselves because of finding themselves in the right set of circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
First, a lot of my favourites don't have a girl's name in them. Heck, some don't have words at all.
(A) You are being small minded in assuming that the only customization that anyone might want is to put a girl's name into the song. Hell, I already mentioned parents doing their children's names. There are also opportunities for using family names and for using team names - pro and amatuer, business names, city and town names, product names, etc. Nor is it required that every name be an option for customization. You are arguing the equivalent of every single song needs to be purchased by every single person on the planet.
(B) Not every single song needs to be a money maker - it sure isn't that way now where only one or two songs on an album are able to support any sort of sales as singles. Nor does every artists need to rely on customization, that's why there is more than one way to earn money.
(C) Who says anyone has to make a million dollars? All an artist needs is to make a decent living. Under the current system 99.99% of musicians don't even make a decent living from their recorded music today.
Dumbshit copyright maximalists like yourself are set up for permanent fail when you argue for pie-in-the-sky results that don't even happen with the current system. How about you come back to me when the current system is able to meet your ridiculous assumptions, mmmmkay?
I won't even dignify your lame offtopic ad hominem attacks by replying to them. Leech.
You mean like:
Sounds awfully like PHB speak.
or
You must be a manager or a lawyer.
and
Nobody else could use so many words
Looks like the ass lives in a glass house.
The script is rather large because it has a lot of other customization in it.
All the more reason to share it. I bet you find that there is a sizable audience for a tool like that, including all the extra customizations that sound like they fall under the same general principle of better user control over their own security.
No one cares, really. You are not angry of him for claiming a title, you're pissed of because you feel he doesn't deserve the sort of hoola around him. That may be so, but really, who cares? Life is not fair, especially when it comes to social status.
University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small.
--Henry Kissinger
If you and I disagree on what is an inherent right, who's the authority? You? Me? The government? The UN? The people? Wasn't the whole point of "inherent" that they can't be taken away by popular opinion or the government?
No. An inherent right is the same thing as a natural right, both are descriptions of the default state of the individual - a description of what a generic person is able to do if no one - private citizens, corporations or governemnts - interferes with that person. Think of the old saying which is the perfect example of how interference defines where one person's inherent right ends and another's starts - your right to swing your fist ends at my face.
I'm not aware of anybody being sued on the basis of a single joke.
Yeah... and so what of it? You claim that freedom of expression does not include copying "the exact full contents of" of a creation. I give you an example of a class of creations that are regularly copied verboten without copyright suits being filed and you basically agree with me. If I didn't know better, I'd say you just changed your mind. The kind of thing that you could cite to contradict me is a court ruling that jokes are not protected speech. Good luck.
But you could give somebody a sheet of paper with a joke on it that you haven't even read - how can that be considered speech?
The same way that a bookstore's right to sell books that neither the owner nor the clerks or anyone else in the bookstore has read is protected by the right to freedom of expression.
There is a recurrent theme here - you think the right to freedom of expression is this tiny little thing when in fact it is extremely broad and free ranging and has been constantly affirmed so by the courts in the US.
Heck the new 3d that is popping up all over the place is pretty frickin cool, and you won't be seeing that in a home theater for a while yet.
About a year, according to Lucky Goldstar:
http://www.smpte.org/news/pr/view?item_key=460b9f2707af05257ba9de20cd6d1e8f9a7aceee
The baseline hardware requirement is probably going to be a system that can accept a 120Hz signal (so 60Hz for each eye) - most current systems on the market can accept a 60Hz signal and internally double it to 120Hz (or greater) so the remaining step is to move to a full bandwidth implementations of HDMI 1.3 (1.4 already being a finished standard as of about a month ago).
A professor is someone with a PhD who is tenured at the university in question.
So, a "visiting professor" is not a professor?
My buddy who just finished law school but hasn't found out if he passed the bar yet is a "half-lawyer."
So a formal education is the only way to become even "half" a lawyer?
Does that mean that people who pass the bar examine without graduating from a law school are only "half" a lawyer too? Just the "other" half?
If you are going to get your panties in a twist over semantics, you probably should get your own semantic ducks in perfect formation.
I've never heard of it, and if it did happen there'd have been a huge outcry from the jealous wankers[1] around here.
Hey, look! Even more dumbassery from Hognoxious, this time it's, "if I haven't heard of it, it didn't happen!"
Potter 'Twin' Causes Controversy
If you're just parroting someone else's work, you aren't expressing anything.
Bullshit. There is nothing about expression that requires originality. It's not freedom of orginal speech, not freedom of original expression.
Hell, Joseph Campbell makes a pretty good case for their only really being one story - the monomyth - in all of humanity's culture, the names and places change but the core ideas never do.
Hey! Look at that! I was right, you are a bright red orangutan ass after all.
Enjoy your buggy whips.
But an oil rig is an expensive and relatively rare occurrence in n navigable ocean. But if they put these things in the water all over the world to produce electricity to make some districts to look luxury without clotheslines, it would be another level of complexity.
There are over 4000 oil rigs in the gulf of mexico alone. I think you underestimate just how common these things are.
By that definition, it is my right to murder anyone. Doesn't seem like a very good definition, does it?
Gee, what part of no one interfering with you do you fail to understand?
Sun-wind-linen-cloth-drier is the most effective green power device. Still in some European and North America countries it is the tabu.
While I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote up until this point, I figured I would support this point and mention that many HOA's (home owner associations) in the US have rules forbidding the use of clotheslines in their neighborhoods. They think it makes the neighborhood look cheap and thus brings down property values. Like much of the way HOAs operate, those rules against clotheslines are just fucked up.
Of course you have an example of a new business model. One that will work. By work I mean in reality, on this planet. Care to share it?
First off, what's your definition of "in reality" - are you going to dismiss anything that is not already widely successful? Your snarkiness suggests you would be fond of circular arguments like that.
Assuming you aren't just being an ass, here are a couple off the top of my head:
1) Customization - give away the original recordings and then sell versions that have been customized to the buyer's wishes. Like how Elton John changed the lyrics of "Candle in the Wind" to be about Princess Diana. There are lots of pop songs the feature a girl's name as key to the lyrics, tons of guys would pay $10-$100 for a version customized with their girlfriend's name since it would totally get them laid. Parents would easily pay for certain songs with their kid's names in them. And the beauty of that is since lots of people have the same name, you only have to record a custom version once for each name but you still get to sell it multiple times just like you do now with copyright because very few buyers are going to want to share their own personalized versions with the world. Of course you would charge even more for more extensive customization than just a basic name substitution.
2) Ransom model - set an asking price and shop it around to multiple buyers. The internet is great at bringing people of like mind together, convince 100,000 people worldwide to put in 10 cents each and you can pay for an episode of a television show (if you leave out the coke-snorting middlemen and big name actors). Once everyone has paid in, production starts with a guaranteed return already locked in, that's something modern hollywood would kill for. If the show is good, word will get out because its free to copy the show - people who like it will send a copy to their friends. When it comes time to make the next episode or instalment, previous success will increase the size of the paying audience, which means bigger budgets for quality programming (and shrinking budgets for crappy programming). Similarly, the big-name actors and directors should have the brand recognition to bring in crowds far larger than 100,000 - Scorsese's name alone could probably get 100 million people across the entire globe to toss $1 each in to fund his next movie.
3) Merchandising - Action figures, posters, clothing lines, plateware, candy-bars, perfume, bobbleheads, etc. All with tie-ins to the show or movie - heck that model is already giant business today, the ticket revenue of the star wars movies has long been dwarfed by the merchandising revenue.
It's plausible that you might wish to convey an idea by referencing a small part of a large copyrighted work. It's not plausible that you wish to convey the exact full content of War and Peace.
Is it plausible that one would retell a joke in its entirety? Under your 'definition' of free speech it seems that one would only be allowed to say the punch line.
Bzzt! False dichotomy. For one thing it presumes the existence of a government in order to define an inherent right.
When we give lectures to the students that use the book,
Are you giving away these lectures for free or otherwise below market value?
No? Well chances are you wouldn't be doing those lectures without the publicity of the book.
Yes? Well WTF is wrong with you for doing work and not getting paid for its value?
Are current copyright limits too long? Sure. Can you guarantee if the limit is reduced to say 7 years it won't be shared on the torrent sites in two weeks after release or before? I thought not.
I can't tell if you did it on purpose or not, but you've just made the standard argument for abolishing copyright - it's not enforceable so we should top pretending (and get on to promoting new business models).
Interact != interfere.
Seeing as I'm about to graduate from CS with a minor in Math, the thing that I find funny is that there is so much focus on "results" and so little attention to process,
Just you wait. Once you get into the corporate world with Six Sigma and ISO9000, etc you will have more process than you ever thought possible. You'll have so much process that you'll be puking up process on weekends.
Whoever modded you flamebait deserves a metamod slap-down.
That's a pretty funny joke.
Don't be silly. Natural rights are ones that essentially describe the default state if no one, government or other individuals, were to interfere with you.
We're talking about restrictions on free speech.
No, we don't. We are talking about, whether creators -- of movies, music, literature, software, fashion designs -- have the inherent rights to control their creations, or whether whoever happens to be able to copy their work has the same rights to it as the creator.
Yes, we are. Freedom of speech must include the ability to repeat the same expressions in partial or complete form that one has heard themselves. Copyright is an infringement on the freedom of expression, no if's and's or but's. The only question is, is it a worthwhile trade-off?
Now, don't take this to mean that I don't think there are CEOs and management out there that are bad at their jobs and are vastly overpaid. There are. But for most of the successful people, "being in the right place at the right time" is a matter of always being there, so that when an opportunity comes they have the chance and skill to take it.
You have it precisely backwards - for every hard-working joe who was there at the right place and the right time, there are 99 other just as equally hard-working people who did not have the good fortune to be there at the right place and the right time. Sure there are plenty of slackards who also didn't have the fortune to be there at the right place and the right time, but that's not the point. The point is that the majority of the "successful" people don't have anything over their peers except good fortune.
That's the really pathetic thing about people like you. You actually believe that the only way to get ahead is through dumb luck. That's also why you won't be rich.
I've got a couple of million in the bank, all earned by my labor - not inherited, not from investing, its all cash - I sat out the markets during the previous 10 years or so.
I'm a smart guy, but I know plenty of people smarter than me with less money. The only reason that I have earned as much money as I have is because I was in the right place, at the right time and had the big brass balls to negotiate really hard for about 2 weeks. That's it. Being an audacious negotiator at one critical point in my life does not make me any more of a valuable contributor to the world than being a good long-distance spitter would. I do rub shoulders with a lot of other "self-made" men and I can tell you, most of them are in the same boat as me, they found themselves with the right set of circumstances and took advantage of the situation. That's all just dumb luck.
Sure there are some people who do work hard to climb the ladder, but I'm pretty sure that most of those guys only got the chance to apply themselves because of finding themselves in the right set of circumstances.