You can't publish, but you can put it on your blog? Huh? If they can claim copyright, they CAN dictate what you can do with the image INCLUDING your weblog, making duplicate photos at a photo shop, making copies on your computer, or even viewing them if they happen to be digital pics.
Copyright is the right to control ALL copies. That's what software licenses are all about remember.
The fact that they don't enforce all these rights is entirely beside the point that they should not have them in the first place.
You can't photograph the Eiffel Tower either. At least not at night.
This is just yet another nail in the coffin of freedom, in another (once democratic) country.
Just how much money do you think the federal government makes, in order that it can then pay it out as compensation, eh? Here's a clue: Absolutely none! Zero, nada, bupkis, zilch.
As much as it is capable in collecting in taxes of course. The government acts on it's citizens behalf. If the government screws up in that duty then it is responsible for compensation (at least it should be) and it's citizens are responsible to pick up the tab!
Short answer, no. You basically cannot sue the Government or a Government agency directly. It has soverign immunity under the Constitution from most civil suits.
wow, thank you.
I find that utterly amazing. Up here in in the Great White North (Canada) people can and do sue the government. There have been several wrongful murder convictions and there was the whole Native schools thing for which the federal government did have to deliver financial compensation.
I am generally critical about the Americans predisposition to sue. However, not being able to sue an authority which misused it's power, (however well intentioned) is quite scary.
Considering the purpose of tort law (as I understand it) is to compensate for injustice, not to punish, I think it shows yet another way in which Americans are less free than other democracies. Their Government is actually allowed to abuse its own people.
So someone please tell me why RIM isn't suing the USPTO. They granted the patents and are now admitting they shouldn't have. The cost to RIM because of this 'goof' is huge.
Isn't there some sort of negligence of duty tort which can be brought against the US government here?
I would also suggest heavy penalties for companies that produce junk patents. If all NTPs patents were declared void because (is it up to 5 now?) patents found wanting, then that would make them (and others) think harder before submitting their patents. It would quickly relieve RIM of its problems as well.
As a side note I can't figure out why RIM is not counter-suing NTP and also suing the USPTO for negligence.
If there is no copyright, why do we need the GPL? The GPL and creative commons were both created in reaction to oppressive copyright laws. Without the laws, we don't need these licenses.
So what if big corporations take all the code and incorporate it in their own works. The point is that these companies will not be able to prevent you from doing the same thing.
Linux, and GPL software is becoming more successful because of their philosophies of sharing. This would be the same with or without copyrights.
I predict we'll start seeing things like proprietary derivatives of GPL software emerge and not get challenged.
Maybe, but it will all be free software. You wont be able to exploit it commercially without following the terms of the GPL. Just as you wont be able to exploit (sell) commercial software or music or whatever, without following those terms.
This seems reasonable to me. So what if the GPL loses some of its wind. If copyright laws are less powerful, the GPL does not need to blow so hard.
There was no time limit on how long they could stall the process, and since the date of the original filing was the date used to decide first invention, the second company got "torpedoed" with no way of protecting themselves. The law change, as I understand it, is to now give the filer protection for 20 years from the date of filing, rather than 17 years from the date of issue.
And this works better how? The second company is still going to find themselves modeling a very fasionable torpedoe up their back side.
It is a huge problem in that states. Some of the other examples show the loss of democracy through putting more power in the hands of undemocratic corporations. Less direct, but still a huge loss in democracy. Things like the patriot act put power into the hands of government agencies which are not required to be publicly acountable. Without public acountability, the people cannot know what their government is doing. Without knowing what government is doing, how can you excersize any sort of democratic control over it?
Errr, yea I guess... Your right freedom is not the same as democracy. But it is rather difficult to have one without the other.
My points in the grandparent have everything to do with either democracy or freedom or both.
To suggest that by criticizing the States for their ever increasing loss of both democracy and freedom can somehow jeopardize either is insane. Only by challenging the powers that be when they do these things is there ever going to be any hope of keeping these values.
So many of you flag waving 'support the troops' 'go get'em' Americans have completely lost it. It would be a joke if the ramifications for the rest of the world weren't so damn serious.
Who modded the parent as Flamebait? The US has moved far from it's democratic ideals. It may not be any China or North Korea, but it is a far sight less free and democratic then it ever use to be.
To wit:
1) DMCA
2) Patriot Act
3) Congressional gerrymandering.
4) Copyright extentions and patent law broadening.
5) Air travel ID requirements
The web is in trouble as programs like AdBlock and the like gain use. I know many of you use AdBlock, but if you use it on a website you like, turn it off. Click the damn ads. How do you think that site is being provided for?
Rubbish. Block all the ads on all the sites. The site owners can put up text ad links which are not nearly as annoying, or they can put in a pay wall for some/all of their content. You have no obligation to view or click on their ads. The market will adapt!
Actually C-64 is An Act to amend the Criminal Code (vehicle identification number)
Bill C-60 is the evil copyright stuff.
another good paranoid plot bites the dust. coincidence?
That must be why you can't reply to any of my points? What the heck does "it's some politicians idea of Canadian culture." mean? Do you think we have MPs moonlighting as programme producers, or maybe telling producers what to produce through secret memos? It is not some politicians idea of Canadian culture. It is my idea of Canadian culture. And millions of other people too.
I gave you many examples of why it is Canadian culture, and why it is necessary to support it too. You offer nothing but sound bites.
Please either refute my argument with at least a minimally compelling argument, or make a completely new and reasoned argument. But please offer something more then a cute sound bite.
BTW, I figured you were Canadian, but I think you missed why I suggested maybe you aren't. Maybe you should reread my post.
Are you kidding me? Do you really think there would be any Canadian television without the CBC and other government subsidies? Without these, anything that was produced here would still be produced for American interests because of their vastly larger market. How is that Canadian culture? That's just us absorbing and producing American culture.
Thankfully the CBC, for the most part, is not in the business of competing with commercial interests. That is both what sets it apart from commercial interests and why it should not be seen as a threat to commercial interests.
TV series like Anne of Green Gables, Red-Green, or Air Farce, or mini-series like the Avro-Arrow or movies like H20, (there are many many more) which would have no appeal in the USA, but at the same time could not be made in a commercial environment without a similar market to the USA is what we need the CBC for. These are ALL productions which tell a Canadian story that would not otherwise ever be told, due to the heavy infiltration of US media.
As I said if US media did not exist I would not support the CBC because we would not need the CBC. Americans do not make appealing shows because they are any better then we are; Only because they have bigger budgets as a result of their bigger market.
Sadly your idea of Canadian culture is probably limited to Hockey Night in Canada. You should watch the CBC once in a while, or listen to Radio One. Richardson's round-up, Definitely Not The Opera, O'Rylie On Advertising, and many many more fabulous shows on the radio.
Without the CBC you CANNOT know much about other Canadians in other parts of the country. Your perspective will come from the States rather than other Canadians, and that will unfortunately make you more of an American than a Canadian, because your identity is not determined by the passport you carry, or even where you live, but by the other people that you relate to. By that definition I am most definitely Canadian, but it just might make you an American (who can't vote)
So you don't need the CBC, but I do. You may be an 'American' and complain about supporting the CBC. But my suggestion to you, rather than complaining about the CBC, apply for your green card. You are obviously much more comfortable down there anyway.
If there was such a thing as a free market in this context I would agree with you. American television is paid for by the American population which is 10 times bigger than ours. Once paid for they can sell it cheaply here and elsewhere http://magazine.carleton.ca/2000_Fall/254.htm
Unfortunatly since we are not their target audience we get US centric rot and our culture suffers as it becomes more Americanized as a result.
The bottom line is that there would be no need for the CBC if there was no American media. There is American media (being dumped here) so we need the CBC with state financing to counter act it. This along with government grants for Canadian productions does no more than level the playing field in the Canadian market.
Without this Government intervention the US media would take over. Not because it is any better, but because it is already paid for back in the US. How do you compete with that?
If I am not redistributing the material (only downloading) I am denying them nothing. Copyright laws and licence agreements should ONLY have effect when redistributing. That goes for GPL as well! No hypocrisy here.
Now you could argue that they are loosing my sale, but so what. They can't prove I would have bought it. And the burden of ensuring that something is permitted to be distributed should be on the guy doing the distributing, not me.
Now the guy I downloaded from, that is a different issue. He is redistributing. He should be accountable for what he does.
Now notice I say 'should' here a lot. I have no delusions about how things are in practice.
Neither do I. I download it perfectly legally over P2P networks. In Canada downloading music over P2P IS NOT ILLEGAL!!!
Both our Copyright Board and our Federal Court have said as much, and no higher court has said otherwise.
As in many European countries this is justified through a blank media tax. The CRIA wants it both ways.
Personally though, I do not believe that such justification is required. If what I do with my computer in the privacy of my own home has no negative effect on the copyright owner, I should be free to do as I like with MY property.
In other words; if the effect of my actions upon a particular copyright holder is the same as it would be if I did not exist in this world then there is nothing that I should be held lible for. To say otherwise is to say that they have a right to profit from my existance, and that that right is greater than my right to control my own physical property.
Although the new legislation will prevent circumventing digital locks, it still allows copying for personal use. Personally, I don't see this as a big deal. The digital lock thing I can completely understand - as long as they don't take away my rights to use what's mine everything seems to be good.
Ah, but they do take away your rights to use what is yours. No more watching YOUR DVDs under linux. No more cracking your YOUR windows video games (or any other windows software) so they will run under linux. No more watching YOUR non-region 1 videos on your hacked DVD player.
Want to do a review of the latest hot DVD and place clips on your website? Forget it!
There could be software compatibility issues with M$ and others using TPMs to keep the competition from interoperating with their software. a'la StorageTek.
The list goes on, but I think you get the general idea here.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't publish, but you can put it on your blog? Huh? If they can claim copyright, they CAN dictate what you can do with the image INCLUDING your weblog, making duplicate photos at a photo shop, making copies on your computer, or even viewing them if they happen to be digital pics.
Copyright is the right to control ALL copies. That's what software licenses are all about remember.
The fact that they don't enforce all these rights is entirely beside the point that they should not have them in the first place.
You can't photograph the Eiffel Tower either. At least not at night.
This is just yet another nail in the coffin of freedom, in another (once democratic) country.
Just how much money do you think the federal government makes, in order that it can then pay it out as compensation, eh? Here's a clue: Absolutely none! Zero, nada, bupkis, zilch.
As much as it is capable in collecting in taxes of course. The government acts on it's citizens behalf. If the government screws up in that duty then it is responsible for compensation (at least it should be) and it's citizens are responsible to pick up the tab!
Short answer, no. You basically cannot sue the Government or a Government agency directly. It has soverign immunity under the Constitution from most civil suits.
wow, thank you.
I find that utterly amazing. Up here in in the Great White North (Canada) people can and do sue the government. There have been several wrongful murder convictions and there was the whole Native schools thing for which the federal government did have to deliver financial compensation.
I am generally critical about the Americans predisposition to sue. However, not being able to sue an authority which misused it's power, (however well intentioned) is quite scary.
Considering the purpose of tort law (as I understand it) is to compensate for injustice, not to punish, I think it shows yet another way in which Americans are less free than other democracies. Their Government is actually allowed to abuse its own people.
So someone please tell me why RIM isn't suing the USPTO. They granted the patents and are now admitting they shouldn't have. The cost to RIM because of this 'goof' is huge.
Isn't there some sort of negligence of duty tort which can be brought against the US government here?
I would also suggest heavy penalties for companies that produce junk patents. If all NTPs patents were declared void because (is it up to 5 now?) patents found wanting, then that would make them (and others) think harder before submitting their patents. It would quickly relieve RIM of its problems as well.
As a side note I can't figure out why RIM is not counter-suing NTP and also suing the USPTO for negligence.
If there is no copyright, why do we need the GPL? The GPL and creative commons were both created in reaction to oppressive copyright laws. Without the laws, we don't need these licenses.
So what if big corporations take all the code and incorporate it in their own works. The point is that these companies will not be able to prevent you from doing the same thing.
Linux, and GPL software is becoming more successful because of their philosophies of sharing. This would be the same with or without copyrights.
There can't ever be another Einstein. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem holds the trademark and they'd never allow it.
I predict we'll start seeing things like proprietary derivatives of GPL software emerge and not get challenged.
Maybe, but it will all be free software. You wont be able to exploit it commercially without following the terms of the GPL. Just as you wont be able to exploit (sell) commercial software or music or whatever, without following those terms.
This seems reasonable to me. So what if the GPL loses some of its wind. If copyright laws are less powerful, the GPL does not need to blow so hard.
There was no time limit on how long they could stall the process, and since the date of the original filing was the date used to decide first invention, the second company got "torpedoed" with no way of protecting themselves. The law change, as I understand it, is to now give the filer protection for 20 years from the date of filing, rather than 17 years from the date of issue.
And this works better how? The second company is still going to find themselves modeling a very fasionable torpedoe up their back side.
Well the gerrymandering that goes on with Congress is certainly less democratic in a very direct way.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
It is a huge problem in that states. Some of the other examples show the loss of democracy through putting more power in the hands of undemocratic corporations. Less direct, but still a huge loss in democracy. Things like the patriot act put power into the hands of government agencies which are not required to be publicly acountable. Without public acountability, the people cannot know what their government is doing. Without knowing what government is doing, how can you excersize any sort of democratic control over it?
Errr, yea I guess... Your right freedom is not the same as democracy. But it is rather difficult to have one without the other.
My points in the grandparent have everything to do with either democracy or freedom or both.
To suggest that by criticizing the States for their ever increasing loss of both democracy and freedom can somehow jeopardize either is insane. Only by challenging the powers that be when they do these things is there ever going to be any hope of keeping these values.
So many of you flag waving 'support the troops' 'go get'em' Americans have completely lost it. It would be a joke if the ramifications for the rest of the world weren't so damn serious.
then it ever use to be.
Who modded the parent as Flamebait? The US has moved far from it's democratic ideals. It may not be any China or North Korea, but it is a far sight less free and democratic then it ever use to be.
To wit:
1) DMCA
2) Patriot Act
3) Congressional gerrymandering.
4) Copyright extentions and patent law broadening.
5) Air travel ID requirements
The web is in trouble as programs like AdBlock and the like gain use. I know many of you use AdBlock, but if you use it on a website you like, turn it off. Click the damn ads. How do you think that site is being provided for?
Rubbish. Block all the ads on all the sites. The site owners can put up text ad links which are not nearly as annoying, or they can put in a pay wall for some/all of their content. You have no obligation to view or click on their ads. The market will adapt!
Nope. How about some ad blocking though? http://adblock.mozdev.org/. You'll never have to view such bunk again!
Actually C-64 is An Act to amend the Criminal Code (vehicle identification number) Bill C-60 is the evil copyright stuff. another good paranoid plot bites the dust. coincidence?
ignorance is truly bliss.
That must be why you can't reply to any of my points? What the heck does "it's some politicians idea of Canadian culture." mean? Do you think we have MPs moonlighting as programme producers, or maybe telling producers what to produce through secret memos? It is not some politicians idea of Canadian culture. It is my idea of Canadian culture. And millions of other people too.
I gave you many examples of why it is Canadian culture, and why it is necessary to support it too. You offer nothing but sound bites.
Please either refute my argument with at least a minimally compelling argument, or make a completely new and reasoned argument. But please offer something more then a cute sound bite.
BTW, I figured you were Canadian, but I think you missed why I suggested maybe you aren't. Maybe you should reread my post.
Are you kidding me? Do you really think there would be any Canadian television without the CBC and other government subsidies? Without these, anything that was produced here would still be produced for American interests because of their vastly larger market. How is that Canadian culture? That's just us absorbing and producing American culture.
Thankfully the CBC, for the most part, is not in the business of competing with commercial interests. That is both what sets it apart from commercial interests and why it should not be seen as a threat to commercial interests.
TV series like Anne of Green Gables, Red-Green, or Air Farce, or mini-series like the Avro-Arrow or movies like H20, (there are many many more) which would have no appeal in the USA, but at the same time could not be made in a commercial environment without a similar market to the USA is what we need the CBC for. These are ALL productions which tell a Canadian story that would not otherwise ever be told, due to the heavy infiltration of US media.
As I said if US media did not exist I would not support the CBC because we would not need the CBC. Americans do not make appealing shows because they are any better then we are; Only because they have bigger budgets as a result of their bigger market.
Sadly your idea of Canadian culture is probably limited to Hockey Night in Canada. You should watch the CBC once in a while, or listen to Radio One. Richardson's round-up, Definitely Not The Opera, O'Rylie On Advertising, and many many more fabulous shows on the radio.
Without the CBC you CANNOT know much about other Canadians in other parts of the country. Your perspective will come from the States rather than other Canadians, and that will unfortunately make you more of an American than a Canadian, because your identity is not determined by the passport you carry, or even where you live, but by the other people that you relate to. By that definition I am most definitely Canadian, but it just might make you an American (who can't vote)
So you don't need the CBC, but I do. You may be an 'American' and complain about supporting the CBC. But my suggestion to you, rather than complaining about the CBC, apply for your green card. You are obviously much more comfortable down there anyway.
Why not let free market decide?
If there was such a thing as a free market in this context I would agree with you. American television is paid for by the American population which is 10 times bigger than ours. Once paid for they can sell it cheaply here and elsewhere http://magazine.carleton.ca/2000_Fall/254.htm
Unfortunatly since we are not their target audience we get US centric rot and our culture suffers as it becomes more Americanized as a result.
The bottom line is that there would be no need for the CBC if there was no American media. There is American media (being dumped here) so we need the CBC with state financing to counter act it. This along with government grants for Canadian productions does no more than level the playing field in the Canadian market. Without this Government intervention the US media would take over. Not because it is any better, but because it is already paid for back in the US. How do you compete with that?
They don't have the government mandated 95% crap canadian content forced down our throats
No, "they" are more into dumping their crap American content on other nations and destroying other countries' cultural industries.
Patrick Ross is a vice president of The Progress & Freedom Foundation in Washington, D.C.
I think I've heared of these guys before, AKA the 'Ministry of Truth'.
If I am not redistributing the material (only downloading) I am denying them nothing. Copyright laws and licence agreements should ONLY have effect when redistributing. That goes for GPL as well! No hypocrisy here.
Now you could argue that they are loosing my sale, but so what. They can't prove I would have bought it. And the burden of ensuring that something is permitted to be distributed should be on the guy doing the distributing, not me.
Now the guy I downloaded from, that is a different issue. He is redistributing. He should be accountable for what he does.
Now notice I say 'should' here a lot. I have no delusions about how things are in practice.
Whatever. I don't pirate music.
Neither do I. I download it perfectly legally over P2P networks. In Canada downloading music over P2P IS NOT ILLEGAL!!!
Both our Copyright Board and our Federal Court have said as much, and no higher court has said otherwise.
As in many European countries this is justified through a blank media tax. The CRIA wants it both ways.
Personally though, I do not believe that such justification is required. If what I do with my computer in the privacy of my own home has no negative effect on the copyright owner, I should be free to do as I like with MY property.
In other words; if the effect of my actions upon a particular copyright holder is the same as it would be if I did not exist in this world then there is nothing that I should be held lible for. To say otherwise is to say that they have a right to profit from my existance, and that that right is greater than my right to control my own physical property.
Although the new legislation will prevent circumventing digital locks, it still allows copying for personal use. Personally, I don't see this as a big deal. The digital lock thing I can completely understand - as long as they don't take away my rights to use what's mine everything seems to be good.
Ah, but they do take away your rights to use what is yours. No more watching YOUR DVDs under linux. No more cracking your YOUR windows video games (or any other windows software) so they will run under linux. No more watching YOUR non-region 1 videos on your hacked DVD player.
Want to do a review of the latest hot DVD and place clips on your website? Forget it!
There could be software compatibility issues with M$ and others using TPMs to keep the competition from interoperating with their software. a'la StorageTek.
The list goes on, but I think you get the general idea here.