they just can't stop others from using the content as they please. And exactly this is wrong in my opinion.
Why feed a disney with free material to exploit to make movies? Sorry, if they want to use a book, and make a movie from it, they should pay.
If you can't make money off of an artistic work within 20 years, there's a strong chance that your work simply sucks or you suck at marketing it. Of course. But what has sucking me in marketing to do with your idea that you can exploit my work for free?
you'll be further compelled to make something that's newer and better instead of trying to sell your sucky eBook for your entire life. Are you really such an idiot?
How exactly does one make a living, by working 40h the week, to pay his rent and feed the kids, and spend another 20h to write his eBook? And then you come and say: hey if he can not market it, it must suck? And now as he spent so much time for a work that sells bad at the moment he should write a new work?
The united states should just switch to the german/european model. And then you for funk sake ask the original author or his heirs for permission and let them participate on the profits you make. I'm funk tired about this free rider attitude when it comes to copyrights in the US. You can not feed your poor, because you don't want higher taxes... or what ever. But then again you want everything for free someone else made. Just because of "copyrights are to long" ????
Tolkien made nearly no money at all during his life time. Sure, his works sucked in some way, but now they are world literature. And the movies brought in billions. Do you really think it is fair to not have the family participate in the revenue LOTR made?
The Berne convention requires that a country extend their own copyright law protections to works made in other signatory countries, ensuring that they are treated with the same amount of protection that they would have if they had been made locally Unfortunately wrong.
See: However, if the identity of the author becomes known, the copyright term for known authors (50 years after death) applies.[7]
However it varies on the type of work. As I'm only interested in software and books, I don't know the details:D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
How many people do you know that like to walk, bike in a tunnel, 30m below the surface for 500m or 1500m? I only know one, me. I would do that once for the giggles but not as typical means of going from A to B.
If I have a restaurant, I have daily customers: they bring the money. If I die my son inherits it, and if he runs it, he gets daily money.
Same with my book.
That is the sole reason why we here in Europe invented "author rights"... we don't have the bollocks idea of your copyrights.
Hence you don't grasp the concept.
There is no difference between a work of art versus a work made from stone, at least not here. We don't have the concept that a piece of art is a work for hire and can be compensated with the lousiest shit as long as the creator is poor. And then the "copyright" falls to a company exploiting it.
In my world the "copyright" sticks with the creator. And when the filthy corporation who "bought it" wants to transform the good selling book into a movie, the author has to agree and be payed again. In my world. In your world only filthy corporations trade copyrights back and force.
In short, you're a stupid shit, and you deserve pain. I would say the stupid shit is you. And that someone deserves pain because he does not agree with you is a strong sign that you have a mental problem.
Well, it is not the same cost if you have multiple people in a car.
I guess your american problems with mass transit is mainly driven by gasoline prices.
If I would go by car from Karlsruhe to Paris, 450km is about 45EUR for fuel and about 90EUR road tolls and 5:30h trip (train is 2:30h). Or you take the long route and save the road tolls but then it is 7:00h and more money for the fuel.
In Europe it is basically never cheaper to use a car. The cheapest train tickets from Karlsruhe to Paris are 39EUR, you start in Stuttgart and go via Karlsruhe (why those tickets don't exist from Karlsruhe on, I don't know).
If I write a book in the U.S. and somebody in India makes copies of it illegally, I can't sue for violation of U.S. law, because a person in India is not bound by U.S. law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The map in the upper right corner shows you where it is valid. I guess you can recognize Africa and Australia? The country in the middle of it, looking like a V poking its nose into the Indian Ocean, that is India. It is blue isn't it?
So yes, you can sue and get your claim recognized in India. No idea if you have to sue in India or in US, though.
The entire notion that an organization in one country can be sued for violations of the law in another country is a fundamental affront to the viability of the Internet as a whole, and simply cannot be tolerated. Well, but this is not the case here... and it has nothing to do with internet anyway. Except that Gutenberg.org distributes its archive via internet. They would be sued as well if they distributed printed copies or audio books.
Well, more interesting is the synergy between Martin Lutter who translated the Bible into german. The books Lutter distributed were mainly printed by Gutenberg.
As I mostly download english versions, I don't care.
Project Gutenberg claimed that the German language works are for consumption of German readers in the US, Then the next law suit will be in the US. US has signed the Bern Convention, hence the European copyright rules hold for european works, even in the USA.
Sucks that so many people here talk trash who never even bothered to learnt the basics about copyright how greatly it differs in other countries from the stupid american idea of "work for hire".
It is morally no difference if I build a house with my own hands and my kids and then grand kids inherit it, or if I write a book.
It is just in your mind that both should be treated differently... because YOU want the book for free, but somehow accept you can not have the house. Strange, isn't it?
20 years seems to be plenty of time for a creator to be fairly compensated for their work. No, usually it is not.
Most musicians don't even make a single buck in that period. Or look at eBook authors. Why the funk would you restrict an ebook author to 20 years of selling his book? Or in other words allow his competitors to sell it, too?
I would add a kind of blockchain to digital goods. If the good gets transferred all in the blockchain get a fraction of the "profit".
Even Disney wouldn't pay $1 billion to renew Steamboat Willie - their shareholders would riot. As long as they make more than $1B in revenues, of course they will pay. And particular will throw law suits against infringers.
What's more, as illustrated by the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act in the U.S., copyright law in most countries tends to reflect the wishes and power of lobbyists more than it does the commonweal. In Europe there never was an idea to balance "commonweal" (I guess that should be commonwealth?) versus author rights. Bottom line we have no copyrights but moral rights. That means the "copyright" more precisely "moralright" or "authors right" sticks with the original creator. And he hands out licenses to publishers and similar entities to "copy" it.
And that is valid... uh, roughly 70 years after the death of the author or something like that.
There not only Amsterdamers who want to travel somewhere there are plenty of people that want to travel to Amsterdam, too. And for them a train stopping in the center of the city is convenient.
Slashdot Mirror
they just can't stop others from using the content as they please.
And exactly this is wrong in my opinion.
Why feed a disney with free material to exploit to make movies? Sorry, if they want to use a book, and make a movie from it, they should pay.
If you can't make money off of an artistic work within 20 years, there's a strong chance that your work simply sucks or you suck at marketing it.
Of course. But what has sucking me in marketing to do with your idea that you can exploit my work for free?
you'll be further compelled to make something that's newer and better instead of trying to sell your sucky eBook for your entire life.
Are you really such an idiot?
How exactly does one make a living, by working 40h the week, to pay his rent and feed the kids, and spend another 20h to write his eBook? And then you come and say: hey if he can not market it, it must suck? And now as he spent so much time for a work that sells bad at the moment he should write a new work?
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The united states should just switch to the german/european model. And then you for funk sake ask the original author or his heirs for permission and let them participate on the profits you make. I'm funk tired about this free rider attitude when it comes to copyrights in the US. You can not feed your poor, because you don't want higher taxes ... or what ever. But then again you want everything for free someone else made. Just because of "copyrights are to long" ????
Tolkien made nearly no money at all during his life time. Sure, his works sucked in some way, but now they are world literature. And the movies brought in billions.
Do you really think it is fair to not have the family participate in the revenue LOTR made?
I don't.
The Berne convention requires that a country extend their own copyright law protections to works made in other signatory countries, ensuring that they are treated with the same amount of protection that they would have if they had been made locally
Unfortunately wrong.
See:
However, if the identity of the author becomes known, the copyright term for known authors (50 years after death) applies.[7]
However it varies on the type of work. As I'm only interested in software and books, I don't know the details :D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
How many people do you know that like to walk, bike in a tunnel, 30m below the surface for 500m or 1500m?
I only know one, me. I would do that once for the giggles but not as typical means of going from A to B.
We should all fear him!
For he has rockets!
The problem is the USA are to dangerous (perceived):
* you could be robbed
* murdered
* kidnapped
You can not walk to the next super market because they only have paper backs, how would you carry your goods home?
Friends of mine were in areas, 1000m walk to a super big super market: there was no food way to it, you could only go there by car.
The country of the ridiculousness and they think the rest of the world should do it like they do. Facepalm.
For the money I save not having a car, I can fly two times a year to Asia and spend 2 times 2 month there. (And still have left over money)
No,
the problem is that you are the stupid shit.
If I have a restaurant, I have daily customers: they bring the money.
If I die my son inherits it, and if he runs it, he gets daily money.
Same with my book.
That is the sole reason why we here in Europe invented "author rights" ... we don't have the bollocks idea of your copyrights.
Hence you don't grasp the concept.
There is no difference between a work of art versus a work made from stone, at least not here. We don't have the concept that a piece of art is a work for hire and can be compensated with the lousiest shit as long as the creator is poor. And then the "copyright" falls to a company exploiting it.
In my world the "copyright" sticks with the creator. And when the filthy corporation who "bought it" wants to transform the good selling book into a movie, the author has to agree and be payed again. In my world. In your world only filthy corporations trade copyrights back and force.
In short, you're a stupid shit, and you deserve pain.
I would say the stupid shit is you.
And that someone deserves pain because he does not agree with you is a strong sign that you have a mental problem.
Because they milk at a different time of the day.
Suppose you milk 5:00 in the morning and 17:00 afternoon.
Now with DST on you have to milk at 4:00 and 16:00. Perhaps your kids come home from school at 16:00 and you are busy with milking ...
Well,
it is not the same cost if you have multiple people in a car.
I guess your american problems with mass transit is mainly driven by gasoline prices.
If I would go by car from Karlsruhe to Paris, 450km is about 45EUR for fuel and about 90EUR road tolls and 5:30h trip (train is 2:30h). Or you take the long route and save the road tolls but then it is 7:00h and more money for the fuel.
In Europe it is basically never cheaper to use a car. The cheapest train tickets from Karlsruhe to Paris are 39EUR, you start in Stuttgart and go via Karlsruhe (why those tickets don't exist from Karlsruhe on, I don't know).
Actually I have not, but thanks for the link. :D
If I could run Java on it or Android apps, that would be great.
I will investigate
In Europe the times don't get extended indefinitely.
They are like this since hundreds of years. ~70 years after the death of the author.
If I write a book in the U.S. and somebody in India makes copies of it illegally, I can't sue for violation of U.S. law, because a person in India is not bound by U.S. law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The map in the upper right corner shows you where it is valid. I guess you can recognize Africa and Australia? The country in the middle of it, looking like a V poking its nose into the Indian Ocean, that is India. It is blue isn't it?
So yes, you can sue and get your claim recognized in India. No idea if you have to sue in India or in US, though.
The entire notion that an organization in one country can be sued for violations of the law in another country is a fundamental affront to the viability of the Internet as a whole, and simply cannot be tolerated. ... and it has nothing to do with internet anyway. Except that Gutenberg.org distributes its archive via internet. They would be sued as well if they distributed printed copies or audio books.
Well, but this is not the case here
it's a sad testament to greed that these ridiculous lawsuits aren't thrown out. :D
In this case, we have a law. So the law suit can not be thrown out
and in those jurisdictions the books have since entered the public domain.
No they have not. If at all the english translations "might" have.
The USA is a signer of the Bern Convention, hence the original German acts are still under copyright.
Well, more interesting is the synergy between Martin Lutter who translated the Bible into german.
The books Lutter distributed were mainly printed by Gutenberg.
As I mostly download english versions, I don't care.
Project Gutenberg claimed that the German language works are for consumption of German readers in the US,
Then the next law suit will be in the US. US has signed the Bern Convention, hence the European copyright rules hold for european works, even in the USA.
Sucks that so many people here talk trash who never even bothered to learnt the basics about copyright how greatly it differs in other countries from the stupid american idea of "work for hire".
But not their great grand-children.
Yes, they do.
It is morally no difference if I build a house with my own hands and my kids and then grand kids inherit it, or if I write a book.
It is just in your mind that both should be treated differently ... because YOU want the book for free, but somehow accept you can not have the house. Strange, isn't it?
20 years seems to be plenty of time for a creator to be fairly compensated for their work.
No, usually it is not.
Most musicians don't even make a single buck in that period. Or look at eBook authors. Why the funk would you restrict an ebook author to 20 years of selling his book? Or in other words allow his competitors to sell it, too?
I would add a kind of blockchain to digital goods. If the good gets transferred all in the blockchain get a fraction of the "profit".
Even Disney wouldn't pay $1 billion to renew Steamboat Willie - their shareholders would riot.
As long as they make more than $1B in revenues, of course they will pay.
And particular will throw law suits against infringers.
What's more, as illustrated by the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act in the U.S., copyright law in most countries tends to reflect the wishes and power of lobbyists more than it does the commonweal.
In Europe there never was an idea to balance "commonweal" (I guess that should be commonwealth?) versus author rights.
Bottom line we have no copyrights but moral rights.
That means the "copyright" more precisely "moralright" or "authors right" sticks with the original creator. And he hands out licenses to publishers and similar entities to "copy" it.
And that is valid ... uh, roughly 70 years after the death of the author or something like that.
But we launch in South America, not in Europe.
But that they are banned, I doubt. I think we simply never found a nice place for a launch site.
And how would they do that? ... but not spiegel.de or wetter.de or https://www.japantimes.co.jp/ or god forbid https://www.thesun.co.uk/
Sure, they can make slashdot.org unreachable for me
Ha ha, that was a good one!
Why should the train ticket be such expensive?
I had expected a price around $50, perhaps $60.
For EUR75 I ride from my town to Paris, 450km, 2:30h, city center to city center.
There not only Amsterdamers who want to travel somewhere there are plenty of people that want to travel to Amsterdam, too.
And for them a train stopping in the center of the city is convenient.
Well, then thinking is not your strength.
If every retiree would be a multi millionaire and spent a few $100,000 every year it would be a great contribution to the GPD.
So yes: retirees can have an influence.