Some think copyrights should be defended at the expense of file sharing sites while others think that its up to the copyright holders to defend their rights and request content be removed.
The only trouble with both of these ideas is that they rely on a broken process or standard. When paper based products and other media that could not be easily created at home were the carriers of such copyrighted content, these arguments made sense. They no longer make sense. In one way or another, both lead to preposterous conclusions that leave one group or another in a state of loss.
If copyright holders were to imprint their copyright on the content in some way, it could clearly be argued that file sharing services should remove this content upon detection or request for removal. That currently is not the situation, so while the copyright owners do nothing to provide easier protection for their work, there is not much that can be done to help them without offending the rights of others.
There has been work to implant 'finger prints' in audio and video files that would have to be stripped out. This would make it difficult for the average joe to use copyrighted works without being told they are copyrighted. It would also make it easy for file sharing sites to automatically remove content containing listed copyright 'finger prints'.
As far as I can see, its up to copyright holders to make an effort to provide this type of method of protecting their works, or they get what they deserve.. more or less. If you don't chain your bicycle to the rack, don't complain when someone steals it. Oh sure, you can still complain, but you should expect it to be stolen if you don't lock it up. I am reasonably certain that insurance companies are not going to give artists insurance if they don't do something to help prevent continued abuse, just like they don't give you a break if you total a car every year.
NOTE: This is not a suggestion of using DRM, rather it is a suggestion that a copyright notice be embedded in the content.
On the one hand, I see their point. On the other hand all I can hear is them whining. They need to make an effort to get the respect they want. Simply suing is not the right way.
No, I don't have 'users' but I do have a family. So far, in my efforts to ween them from MS Windows and related products, I find that they ask the same damn questions they used to ask: How do you format the paragraph numbers? How can I insert a picture here? Can you change the colors on this heading? plus the typical spreadsheet questions, web browser questions, and why can't I download this file type questions. I can't tell the difference between them using MS products and F/OSS products.
In fact, I really don't think they give a damn as long as they can figure out how to do what they need to get done.
If you're going to switch, now is as good a time as any. The questions will stay about the same as far as I can tell. Data backups and protection should be managed carefully no matter what OS / APPs you use. If you have the backend taken care of, the tools used to manipulate the data should be about equal. My 'users' really didn't use calendaring too much, or other group productivity tools, so that might be something to be watchful of.
FTFA: Q:.. I know MIT has not been immune to breaches either, but what do you think when you hear about new breaches like these?
A:.. The problem we all have is the Microsoft patch of the week. I hate to say it, but it's sort of the payback for universities not paying attention to security for decades or being sloppy about administrative computing.....
Not that MS is the only problem, but they helped secure that mentality. I don't think Linux would have made it easier or better either. He goes on to talk about use of SSNs and other bad ideas. If only businesses would listen to this type of advice!!
I just read all 37 pages of the Home Owners Association guide. While it doesn't strictly forbid solar panels on the roof, They are going to have to be the right color and anything visible has to be approved before construction. They definitely don't want any windmills, decorative or otherwise, not even as part of the mailbox!
So how, exactly, can I put some of this technology to work in stealth mode? Apparently this is not part of the neighborhood beautification plan?
Here is yet another science fiction creation that is on its way to being real. In another couple of years, reading science fiction (on a flexible screen PDA) will be the guide for how stock traders invest.
I read somewhere that the **AA are not about money, or even copyright infringement; they are trying to create scarcity where there is none. That artificial scarcity will then create a demand for content that ONLY the *AAs will be able to satiate. This is typically termed manipulating the market in most circles, but they have paid the lawmakers to make it look legal.
The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.
So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAA's board of directors:
Polly Anthony Geffen Records Mitch Bainwol RIAA Glen Barros Concord Records Steve Bartels Island Records Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music Jose Behar Universal Music Group Tim Bowen SONY BMG Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music Mike Curb Curb Records Joe Galante SONY BMG Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group Dave Johnson Warner Music Group Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group Michael Koch Koch Entertainment Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group Kevin Liles Warner Music Group Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG David Munns EMI Recorded Music Jason Flom Virgin Records America Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records Andy Slater Capitol Records Rob Stringer SONY BMG Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records
If you want to know if someone's music is safe from **AA, try http://www.riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com]
I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.
"Overly optimistic. With the lion's share of computer users technically uneducated and using Windows, such regulation becomes possible, especially if what has been written about Vista DRM is true. Only a handful of users would be savvy enough to overcome all the inconveniences associated with video/music reproduction unauthorized by software and content producers."
What you have said is more or less true, but you unbelievably underestimate the industriousness of humans when they really want something. Trust me on this, if enough people want something they WILL find a way to get it. If that something happens to be getting around DRM in Vista... well, go get a six pack and sit back to enjoy the show, they will get around it. They will get around it even if it means having to learn how to load Linux on their machine. When the booty becomes large enough to warrant the risk, people will make all effort to thwart DRM mechanisms. On top of that, Linux is free, so its not going to cost much, just load Linux, then download some programs, and viola! Now they can watch DRM's movies etc. or whatever it was they were trying to do.
This would in fact be the biggest boost for Linux ever.
while almost everyone thinks its just fine for me to loan a friend a rented DVD before I return it, there are those that think if I share a video on the Internet it should be regulated, taxed, or scrutinized against IP and copyright laws.
The Internet has changed the world in many significant ways, but it has not changed basic human morals, and won't. I see nothing wrong with sharing things with others, and any regulatory body that wants to change that will find me looking for, and finding, other ways to do so.
Copyright and IP law as they currently are implemented.. well, they are fscked. No, I don't have a ready example of how to fix them all. I do know that simply wanting to fix things will not do so. Any regulations placed on Internet based services will not work if they fail to pass the 'basic human morals' test.
Lets say someone in highschool in Chicago makes some wacky video on their pc, and shares it with friends via CD. There is no way to police this sort of content production.
Now, lets say that they share it with several million of their friends via news groups? Still, not much hope of policing this. Okay, so our content creator now shares it with several million of their friends via YouTube. Suddenly, because of the visibility of the WWW, people think that it should be regulated, scrutinized, and by god, lets punish those evil copyright infringers.
Human behavior has not changed. The thing that changed is that now more people can more quickly see what others are doing. This doesn't mean that there is more infringement necessarily, only that more people can see what they think is infringement.
Regulating the viewing mechanism for that content will not stop its production. Result: This is a broken way to try to fix what was not a problem in the first place.
Additionally, by putting the burden on YouTube, MySpace and others, they are creating a sort of conscripted volunteer police force, which in the end will also fail.
The only way to fix these infringements is to make them legally not infringements. For many of the same reasons that we should not be fighting a war on drugs http://www.leap.org/, we shouldn't be fighting a war on copyright infringement. Those who fight copyright infringements (**AAs) are simply building sandcastles on the beach at low tide.
The UN, or any other body does not have enforcement authority, nor will they, UNLESS they decide to change / repeal the overreaching copyright laws that have to date been enacted.
- They are increasingly becoming a war power - The land of bicycles is increasingly becoming a land of car owners (greenhouse gases) - They are filling the west with cheap manufactured goods, and those goods make up the bulk of safety recalls for manufactured products
For some reason we decided to make them favored trading partners? I'm thinking that we need to start looking at these decisions more carefully. What I mean is that we should be using trade agreements to hold China to standards that we hold others to here in the west. Things like censorship, product safety, military issues, global warming contributions, and anything that seems enough of a problem to become a law in western countries should be forced upon the Chinese government.
When they are as busy taking care of their people and environment, perhaps they will find themselves on a level playing field with the west, and that after all is what they want.
I almost forgot; queue the spammers with links to software download sites to allow you to monitor your children's activities. Nothing like a legit reason to download a keylogger... sheesh I can see it now. The next big virus will come disguised as a child protection monitoring software from https://d0wnl0ads.myspace.com/protect.cgi
I thought that MS was the only company that could so effortlessly shoot themselves in the feet. Parental monitoring should pretty much put an end to much of the MySpace userbase.
Interestingly, if parents can do this with some software, is the government already doing it for them, but just not telling? I have to wonder about any company that will offer to 'spy' on you or your kids. I'm sort of interested in finding out how they will know that it is a parent of the account holder they are willing to spy on? Does the software have to be installed on the same computer as the child uses? That would only last about a week before its cracked.... expect YouTube videos on how to disable it within the week.
I'm sure that it would be much more lucrative if it also cured foot in mouth disease in politicians!
Today is a good day, cured bird flu and cancer all in one day. Alzhiemer's is near a cure, and there are more discoveries every day it seems. I think we need a cure for religion, or rather for militant religious zealotry.
No, my comment is not off topic or troll, militant religious zealotry is quickly becoming the last disease to cure!
intransitive verb : to conduct activities aimed at influencing public officials and especially members of a legislative body on legislation transitive verb 1 : to promote (as a project) or secure the passage of (as legislation) by influencing public officials 2 : to attempt to influence or sway (as a public official) toward a desired action
Shouldn't this then mean that when a blogger has 500 or more public officials as readers?
If a blogger is being paid by a lobby group, it simply makes them a shill, and has no more influence on lawmakers than actual public opinion might. This is, after all, how public opinion is formed, by listening to our peers, the news, and other sources and making up our own minds.
Should political magazines be required to register as lobbyists? Would a preacher/priest/etc. be required to register as a lobbyist if he mentions politics from the pulpit and the church has more than 500 members? This would cause tons of problems for certain demographic groups in the US.
The copyright holders are losing, not because TPB or ISOHunt will always pop back up, but because they are trusting the business and revenue to a group of people who are whole heartedly working overtime to ruin their business. The **AA are subhumans (more or less) who are trying to create a supply and demand situation where the demand is greater than the supply by choking off all supplies but their own. This is typically termed manipulating the market in most circles, but they have paid the lawmakers to make it look legal.
The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.
So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAAs board of directors:
Polly Anthony Geffen Records Mitch Bainwol RIAA Glen Barros Concord Records Steve Bartels Island Records Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music Jose Behar Universal Music Group Tim Bowen SONY BMG Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music Mike Curb Curb Records Joe Galante SONY BMG Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group Dave Johnson Warner Music Group Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group Michael Koch Koch Entertainment Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group Kevin Liles Warner Music Group Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG David Munns EMI Recorded Music Jason Flom Virgin Records America Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records Andy Slater Capitol Records Rob Stringer SONY BMG Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records
I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.
IANAL, but sometimes I'm told I'm anal. Aren't podcasts only for iPods? I hate that.
Second; this is another example, a fine one at that, of government types trying to show they know something about the intarwebs and failing miserably. This shows little understanding of the actual content on the intarwebs, or the licensing models currently in use. They might as well have said that all wheels need to have an extra tax on them, or that all chairs should be taxed unless rated for less than 45 lbs. None of it makes sense. The blind leading the sleeping.
In recent times, we've seen all kinds of credit given to companies that have nothing more than vaporware (I don't dare mention anything from Apple here or I'll get modded as troll) and yet Sun, like them or not, is giving back. Perhaps they are not giving back things that you will immediately use or notice, but they are giving back, making it open source, working to stay relevant. That last phrase was on purpose.
They are doing this in complete (nearly) opposition to the position that MS takes. I think Sun deserves a little credit. The did (sort of) open some of the hardware as well, and while that may not fall into hobbyists hands soon, it is a start. Opening (in any meaningful fashion) some high end hardware is a big thing.
No, I don't have tons of Sun hardware or software at home, but I do use it at work, and its incredibly stable, if not super easy to administrate.
Slashdot Mirror
Haven't we learned, don't pay for it till after sp2 or later.
Is the HAHA tag applicable here?
Some think copyrights should be defended at the expense of file sharing sites while others think that its up to the copyright holders to defend their rights and request content be removed.
The only trouble with both of these ideas is that they rely on a broken process or standard. When paper based products and other media that could not be easily created at home were the carriers of such copyrighted content, these arguments made sense. They no longer make sense. In one way or another, both lead to preposterous conclusions that leave one group or another in a state of loss.
If copyright holders were to imprint their copyright on the content in some way, it could clearly be argued that file sharing services should remove this content upon detection or request for removal. That currently is not the situation, so while the copyright owners do nothing to provide easier protection for their work, there is not much that can be done to help them without offending the rights of others.
There has been work to implant 'finger prints' in audio and video files that would have to be stripped out. This would make it difficult for the average joe to use copyrighted works without being told they are copyrighted. It would also make it easy for file sharing sites to automatically remove content containing listed copyright 'finger prints'.
As far as I can see, its up to copyright holders to make an effort to provide this type of method of protecting their works, or they get what they deserve.. more or less. If you don't chain your bicycle to the rack, don't complain when someone steals it. Oh sure, you can still complain, but you should expect it to be stolen if you don't lock it up. I am reasonably certain that insurance companies are not going to give artists insurance if they don't do something to help prevent continued abuse, just like they don't give you a break if you total a car every year.
NOTE: This is not a suggestion of using DRM, rather it is a suggestion that a copyright notice be embedded in the content.
On the one hand, I see their point. On the other hand all I can hear is them whining. They need to make an effort to get the respect they want. Simply suing is not the right way.
No, I don't have 'users' but I do have a family. So far, in my efforts to ween them from MS Windows and related products, I find that they ask the same damn questions they used to ask: How do you format the paragraph numbers? How can I insert a picture here? Can you change the colors on this heading? plus the typical spreadsheet questions, web browser questions, and why can't I download this file type questions. I can't tell the difference between them using MS products and F/OSS products.
In fact, I really don't think they give a damn as long as they can figure out how to do what they need to get done.
If you're going to switch, now is as good a time as any. The questions will stay about the same as far as I can tell. Data backups and protection should be managed carefully no matter what OS / APPs you use. If you have the backend taken care of, the tools used to manipulate the data should be about equal. My 'users' really didn't use calendaring too much, or other group productivity tools, so that might be something to be watchful of.
We are already worried about data center power usage. I'm pretty sure it costs a bit to have cesium gas hanging around the data center.
FTFA:
....
Q:.. I know MIT has not been immune to breaches either, but what do you think when you hear about new breaches like these?
A:.. The problem we all have is the Microsoft patch of the week. I hate to say it, but it's sort of the payback for universities not paying attention to security for decades or being sloppy about administrative computing.
Not that MS is the only problem, but they helped secure that mentality. I don't think Linux would have made it easier or better either. He goes on to talk about use of SSNs and other bad ideas. If only businesses would listen to this type of advice!!
I just read all 37 pages of the Home Owners Association guide. While it doesn't strictly forbid solar panels on the roof, They are going to have to be the right color and anything visible has to be approved before construction. They definitely don't want any windmills, decorative or otherwise, not even as part of the mailbox!
So how, exactly, can I put some of this technology to work in stealth mode? Apparently this is not part of the neighborhood beautification plan?
will not only bring the process of voting into the 20th century, but it will allow a much faster recount of dead people's votes.... /sarcasm
Here is yet another science fiction creation that is on its way to being real. In another couple of years, reading science fiction (on a flexible screen PDA) will be the guide for how stock traders invest.
guess I'll live a couple years longer than the rest of you
I read somewhere that the **AA are not about money, or even copyright infringement; they are trying to create scarcity where there is none. That artificial scarcity will then create a demand for content that ONLY the *AAs will be able to satiate. This is typically termed manipulating the market in most circles, but they have paid the lawmakers to make it look legal.
The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.
So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAA's board of directors:
Polly Anthony Geffen Records
Mitch Bainwol RIAA
Glen Barros Concord Records
Steve Bartels Island Records
Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music
Jose Behar Universal Music Group
Tim Bowen SONY BMG
Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music
Mike Curb Curb Records
Joe Galante SONY BMG
Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music
Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group
Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group
Dave Johnson Warner Music Group
Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group
Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group
Michael Koch Koch Entertainment
Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group
Kevin Liles Warner Music Group
Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records
Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG
David Munns EMI Recorded Music
Jason Flom Virgin Records America
Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records
Andy Slater Capitol Records
Rob Stringer SONY BMG
Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records
http://www.riaa.com/about/leadership/board.asp [riaa.com] Board of directors
If you want to know if someone's music is safe from **AA, try http://www.riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com]
I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.
in case one comes back wanting to be one with the creator - vger I anybody?
"Overly optimistic. With the lion's share of computer users technically uneducated and using Windows, such regulation becomes possible, especially if what has been written about Vista DRM is true. Only a handful of users would be savvy enough to overcome all the inconveniences associated with video/music reproduction unauthorized by software and content producers."
What you have said is more or less true, but you unbelievably underestimate the industriousness of humans when they really want something. Trust me on this, if enough people want something they WILL find a way to get it. If that something happens to be getting around DRM in Vista... well, go get a six pack and sit back to enjoy the show, they will get around it. They will get around it even if it means having to learn how to load Linux on their machine. When the booty becomes large enough to warrant the risk, people will make all effort to thwart DRM mechanisms. On top of that, Linux is free, so its not going to cost much, just load Linux, then download some programs, and viola! Now they can watch DRM's movies etc. or whatever it was they were trying to do.
This would in fact be the biggest boost for Linux ever.
while almost everyone thinks its just fine for me to loan a friend a rented DVD before I return it, there are those that think if I share a video on the Internet it should be regulated, taxed, or scrutinized against IP and copyright laws.
.. well, they are fscked. No, I don't have a ready example of how to fix them all. I do know that simply wanting to fix things will not do so. Any regulations placed on Internet based services will not work if they fail to pass the 'basic human morals' test.
The Internet has changed the world in many significant ways, but it has not changed basic human morals, and won't. I see nothing wrong with sharing things with others, and any regulatory body that wants to change that will find me looking for, and finding, other ways to do so.
Copyright and IP law as they currently are implemented
Lets say someone in highschool in Chicago makes some wacky video on their pc, and shares it with friends via CD. There is no way to police this sort of content production.
Now, lets say that they share it with several million of their friends via news groups? Still, not much hope of policing this. Okay, so our content creator now shares it with several million of their friends via YouTube. Suddenly, because of the visibility of the WWW, people think that it should be regulated, scrutinized, and by god, lets punish those evil copyright infringers.
Human behavior has not changed. The thing that changed is that now more people can more quickly see what others are doing. This doesn't mean that there is more infringement necessarily, only that more people can see what they think is infringement.
Regulating the viewing mechanism for that content will not stop its production. Result: This is a broken way to try to fix what was not a problem in the first place.
Additionally, by putting the burden on YouTube, MySpace and others, they are creating a sort of conscripted volunteer police force, which in the end will also fail.
The only way to fix these infringements is to make them legally not infringements. For many of the same reasons that we should not be fighting a war on drugs http://www.leap.org/, we shouldn't be fighting a war on copyright infringement. Those who fight copyright infringements (**AAs) are simply building sandcastles on the beach at low tide.
The UN, or any other body does not have enforcement authority, nor will they, UNLESS they decide to change / repeal the overreaching copyright laws that have to date been enacted.
Hey, actually it was a sarcastic post, but the tag didn't post?
- They are increasingly becoming a war power
- The land of bicycles is increasingly becoming a land of car owners (greenhouse gases)
- They are filling the west with cheap manufactured goods, and those goods make up the bulk of safety recalls for manufactured products
For some reason we decided to make them favored trading partners? I'm thinking that we need to start looking at these decisions more carefully. What I mean is that we should be using trade agreements to hold China to standards that we hold others to here in the west. Things like censorship, product safety, military issues, global warming contributions, and anything that seems enough of a problem to become a law in western countries should be forced upon the Chinese government.
When they are as busy taking care of their people and environment, perhaps they will find themselves on a level playing field with the west, and that after all is what they want.
I almost forgot; queue the spammers with links to software download sites to allow you to monitor your children's activities. Nothing like a legit reason to download a keylogger... sheesh I can see it now. The next big virus will come disguised as a child protection monitoring software from https://d0wnl0ads.myspace.com/protect.cgi
I thought that MS was the only company that could so effortlessly shoot themselves in the feet. Parental monitoring should pretty much put an end to much of the MySpace userbase.
Interestingly, if parents can do this with some software, is the government already doing it for them, but just not telling? I have to wonder about any company that will offer to 'spy' on you or your kids. I'm sort of interested in finding out how they will know that it is a parent of the account holder they are willing to spy on? Does the software have to be installed on the same computer as the child uses? That would only last about a week before its cracked.... expect YouTube videos on how to disable it within the week.
I'm sure that it would be much more lucrative if it also cured foot in mouth disease in politicians!
Today is a good day, cured bird flu and cancer all in one day. Alzhiemer's is near a cure, and there are more discoveries every day it seems. I think we need a cure for religion, or rather for militant religious zealotry.
No, my comment is not off topic or troll, militant religious zealotry is quickly becoming the last disease to cure!
The good folks at M-W.com http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/lobbyist have this to say about lobbyists:
intransitive verb : to conduct activities aimed at influencing public officials and especially members of a legislative body on legislation
transitive verb
1 : to promote (as a project) or secure the passage of (as legislation) by influencing public officials
2 : to attempt to influence or sway (as a public official) toward a desired action
Shouldn't this then mean that when a blogger has 500 or more public officials as readers?
If a blogger is being paid by a lobby group, it simply makes them a shill, and has no more influence on lawmakers than actual public opinion might. This is, after all, how public opinion is formed, by listening to our peers, the news, and other sources and making up our own minds.
Should political magazines be required to register as lobbyists? Would a preacher/priest/etc. be required to register as a lobbyist if he mentions politics from the pulpit and the church has more than 500 members? This would cause tons of problems for certain demographic groups in the US.
If we develop methane engine technology, could it possibly be used to return a space mission from planets with an abundance of frozen methane?
The copyright holders are losing, not because TPB or ISOHunt will always pop back up, but because they are trusting the business and revenue to a group of people who are whole heartedly working overtime to ruin their business. The **AA are subhumans (more or less) who are trying to create a supply and demand situation where the demand is greater than the supply by choking off all supplies but their own. This is typically termed manipulating the market in most circles, but they have paid the lawmakers to make it look legal.
The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.
So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAAs board of directors:
Polly Anthony Geffen Records
Mitch Bainwol RIAA
Glen Barros Concord Records
Steve Bartels Island Records
Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music
Jose Behar Universal Music Group
Tim Bowen SONY BMG
Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music
Mike Curb Curb Records
Joe Galante SONY BMG
Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music
Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group
Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group
Dave Johnson Warner Music Group
Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group
Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group
Michael Koch Koch Entertainment
Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group
Kevin Liles Warner Music Group
Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records
Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG
David Munns EMI Recorded Music
Jason Flom Virgin Records America
Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records
Andy Slater Capitol Records
Rob Stringer SONY BMG
Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records
http://www.riaa.com/about/leadership/board.asp Board of directors
If you want to know if someone's music is safe from **AA, try http://www.riaaradar.com/
I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.
but if you are going to establish a moon base, do you need to keep putting up satellites, or can you just use the moon base to monitor the Earth?
Sure, sure, sure, I know they will use it to monitor US citizens, but it could also be used to monitor the globe.
When you buy a new car, you don't buy spare tires at the same time?
I second that
IANAL, but sometimes I'm told I'm anal. Aren't podcasts only for iPods? I hate that.
Second; this is another example, a fine one at that, of government types trying to show they know something about the intarwebs and failing miserably. This shows little understanding of the actual content on the intarwebs, or the licensing models currently in use. They might as well have said that all wheels need to have an extra tax on them, or that all chairs should be taxed unless rated for less than 45 lbs. None of it makes sense. The blind leading the sleeping.
In recent times, we've seen all kinds of credit given to companies that have nothing more than vaporware (I don't dare mention anything from Apple here or I'll get modded as troll) and yet Sun, like them or not, is giving back. Perhaps they are not giving back things that you will immediately use or notice, but they are giving back, making it open source, working to stay relevant. That last phrase was on purpose.
They are doing this in complete (nearly) opposition to the position that MS takes. I think Sun deserves a little credit. The did (sort of) open some of the hardware as well, and while that may not fall into hobbyists hands soon, it is a start. Opening (in any meaningful fashion) some high end hardware is a big thing.
No, I don't have tons of Sun hardware or software at home, but I do use it at work, and its incredibly stable, if not super easy to administrate.