while (law.topic=FLAMING HOT TOPIC) {
while (!law.topic.solved) {
law.topic.interested-parties.action=IGNORE ALL SIDES;
law.topic.interested-parties.action=CREATE BLACK MARKET;
law.topic.conscious.parties.action=DEBATE;
law.topic=FLAMING HOT TOPIC;
law.topic.solved=FALSE:
}
}
Ideas, the majority of them, do not require any investment on the part of the owner of those ideas.
Ideas, come about and are wholly determined according to the details of the problem one attempts to solve or any other gain that can be had by them.
Millions of people are capable of coming up with the same conclusions and ideas about how to solve problems. I sometimes use a knife instead of a flathead screwdriver. Should I be able to extort money from someone for having the same idea?
If so I'll be happy to list my ideas and you can pay me.
Copyright reduces the world to first come, first served. I'm sorry but in the 24 hours/day 7 days/week 52 weeks/year and average 80 years/life I have I would rather not spend every waking moment inventing just so I could get through the day.
Oh and another thing:
The notion of property is fundamental to a person who has produced. Not a society, nor someone who sits on his ass.
Because it isn't well thought out. He made some statements about his beliefs, some statement about the meaning of copyright, and the he skipped the aruments and jumped to the conclusion.
The very idea of copyright allows someone to produce a written work and then sit on his ass for
life + 50 years making money from copies.
I don't have a problem with people owning property and maintaining it for their descendants. I do however have a problem with copyright on copies made by others.
I personally believe the property system needs to take into account that modifying a copy does not modify the original. This is what the entire software industry is based on. The first copy may cost billions. The second and after cost only the price of media. Another case is the fact that open sourcing a piece of software does not cause all copies of such software to be modified. If I modify my copy I have not modified yours. If I want to modify your unbreakable firewall code to weaken it, I have to break into your firewall in the first place.
People ignore that this independence between copies exists, and it's leading to some bizarre conclusions.
Preferably copyright would be tiered. I have permanent copyright on any copy that I make by my own hands. Some long-term copyright over those hired to mass produce my work as it is an expense, and a very limited copyright over those who purchased my work, since it is an expense to them.
They don't make money by slacking off on the promotion and management. Perfect example: internet businesses who didn't see that their business was message in a bottle in the middle of a huge ocean.
You're missing one important point. There is law on the books that bars certain licensing schemes and bars their enforcement.
The crux is that if money has changed hands an exchange must occur. Just like you can't have fire without oxygen along with heat and hydrogen, you can't have an exchange without the right to use that content in ways that it is readily accepted that the item purchased is made valuable.
Barring destruction of the purchased item, I have rights to use it as one would expect the point of purchase to be.
I never heard of Usa1stop until now, they use ram not mp3 which would make it even less like I'd hear of them, you know it just mightbe they didn't promote themselves well like the way Orgy distributed their tape right to my dorm door.
Slashdot Mirror
How is XML going to help us if people don't create the support base that is the first rule of using XML?
By The Way what kruft. I've used old versions of browsers. They don't fuck up like the newer ones.
I have used the new tech. It sucks. You use yours, I'll use mine.
When newer browsers don't support anything anyaway, the Net will go down.
I don't care about teens staring at teens, but an old geezer looking at a teen makes me nervous!
Law is code:
while (law.topic=FLAMING HOT TOPIC) {
while (!law.topic.solved) {
law.topic.interested-parties.action=IGNORE ALL SIDES;
law.topic.interested-parties.action=CREATE BLACK MARKET;
law.topic.conscious.parties.action=DEBATE;
law.topic=FLAMING HOT TOPIC;
law.topic.solved=FALSE:
}
}
Because you're the 2^32ndth person to make that mistake.
2^32 generates an overfflow error. Therefore you get spanked.
Freenet prevents ensorship not authentication. It allows removing of the person the content.
Is that even a word?
Back it up or shut your trap.
I can't write songs with money and the software there is to buy isn't made for an experimenter like me.
Ideas, the majority of them, do not require any investment on the part of the owner of those ideas.
Ideas, come about and are wholly determined according to the details of the problem one attempts to solve or any other gain that can be had by them.
Millions of people are capable of coming up with the same conclusions and ideas about how to solve problems. I sometimes use a knife instead of a flathead screwdriver. Should I be able to extort money from someone for having the same idea?
If so I'll be happy to list my ideas and you can pay me.
Copyright reduces the world to first come, first served. I'm sorry but in the 24 hours/day 7 days/week 52 weeks/year and average 80 years/life I have I would rather not spend every waking moment inventing just so I could get through the day.
Oh and another thing:
The notion of property is fundamental to a person who has produced. Not a society, nor someone who sits on his ass.
He did not intend to create a scene. That would have been stupid purist crusading.
Making a point involves tact not "leadership".
Because it isn't well thought out. He made some statements about his beliefs, some statement about the meaning of copyright, and the he skipped the aruments and jumped to the conclusion.
The very idea of copyright allows someone to produce a written work and then sit on his ass for
life + 50 years making money from copies.
I don't have a problem with people owning property and maintaining it for their descendants. I do however have a problem with copyright on copies made by others.
I personally believe the property system needs to take into account that modifying a copy does not modify the original. This is what the entire software industry is based on. The first copy may cost billions. The second and after cost only the price of media. Another case is the fact that open sourcing a piece of software does not cause all copies of such software to be modified. If I modify my copy I have not modified yours. If I want to modify your unbreakable firewall code to weaken it, I have to break into your firewall in the first place.
People ignore that this independence between copies exists, and it's leading to some bizarre conclusions.
Preferably copyright would be tiered. I have permanent copyright on any copy that I make by my own hands. Some long-term copyright over those hired to mass produce my work as it is an expense, and a very limited copyright over those who purchased my work, since it is an expense to them.
They don't make money by slacking off on the promotion and management. Perfect example: internet businesses who didn't see that their business was message in a bottle in the middle of a huge ocean.
Not until they put Nice Large warnings about one's rights on them.
You're missing one important point. There is law on the books that bars certain licensing schemes and bars their enforcement.
The crux is that if money has changed hands an exchange must occur. Just like you can't have fire without oxygen along with heat and hydrogen, you can't have an exchange without the right to use that content in ways that it is readily accepted that the item purchased is made valuable.
Barring destruction of the purchased item, I have rights to use it as one would expect the point of purchase to be.
I'm saying the guy was completely inconsistent just to have the last word.
and I feel Fine......
Not me buddy. These assholes are why the only music I'll ever own from now on will be animation soundtracks and my own.
Classic excuse: I'm losing money must be pirates.
I never heard of Usa1stop until now, they use ram not mp3 which would make it even less like I'd hear of them, you know it just mightbe they didn't promote themselves well like the way Orgy distributed their tape right to my dorm door.
they have to make it secure so you can't just send your 5,000 closest friends copies.
Let's see cable caps of 15k/s/5,000 friends = 3 bytes per second. Oooh scary. DSL caps of 128k/5000 = 25.6 bps.
100Mbit/5,000 = 10Megabytes/5000 = 2k/s.
Oh and about napster.. they're full of shit too.
In the near future only 2.5 million Americans will high speed access. Read up on the statistics coming out.
Fewer from other continents because they think America is stupid for using the net so much.
Is it correct for the RIAA to suggest I be charged for CD media I use to make my own content.
Let the hypocrites go obsolete already.
Kant was happy to rationalize things to arguments like " Nature would have wanted it that way."
And Socrates that dork who kept bouncing between Natural Law and the Law of the State?
C'mon you have to do better than that.
Does the DVDCCA have a patent on the algorithm?
Because they waste resources, the users act like hyperactive toddlers, and they are unreliable.