Selling higher quality products with more features. Example: Blu-Ray. The digital version of a blu-ray disc is so incredibly large that most people will not download it (8GB, fuck that!)... some people truly appreciate the higher 1080p quality of blu-ray, esp. for sci-fi movies (I just bought myself the Matrix collection last week... fucking awesome in blu-ray)!
Those products have a limited market.
- Sell Collections of products that would be difficult to download. Example: TV shows. Sell the entire collection of Lost/House/etc in one boxed set. Make it easy for people to get and easy to store.
Just as easy to pirate
- Sell Physical items along with the digital content. Example: Video Games Maps & Game guides. Rather than selling those game guys separately, sell the game guides along with the game. Example 2: Music - Sell the tab to the guitar, or sell the music on vinyl. include a rare book etc (see of NIN sold their last couple of albums).
Just as easy to pirate. Game guides or tabulatures can be scanned.
Here's the thing about media products: no matter what, it's cheaper to buy pirated goods. When you start talking about niche-market products, then we're talking about products that make little difference to the bottom line for the megacorps which source most of our media.
I understand that content sellers can try to differentiate their product from that offered by pirates. But I fail to see how the things they use to differentiate their product won't eventually be pirated just as easily. Sure, Blu-Ray (at 8 GB) seems like too big a file to pirate... but in ten years will we feel the same way? What about people who use sneakernet for piracy (like on college campuses)? 8 GB is a small fraction of a sub-$100 USB drive. Sure, sneakernet can't be captured by data aggregating totals from torrent trackers... but you can bet that the media industries include some kind of estimation in their rationale.
Media is going full-digital. Media sellers are shifting (dragged kicking and screaming, really) to digital distribution. With digital distribution, how exactly can they differentiate their product from that offered by piracy?
"I've got mine, screw you Jack" is a grown-up attitude?
You think that's my attitude? You're far from accurate.
Since you seem to be a little dense, let me explain my position in full:
In a market-based system, actors in the system make choices that depend on information.
If I were to pirate an album, or a movie, the information I'm giving to the rights holder of that IP is that I want their product, but I'm not going to pay for it because I can get it for free. Their options are then to compete on price (by giving it away for free or nearly free, a losing proposition for them) or to lean on government to enforce and/or change the law re: copyright infringement.
Pirating goods actually makes copyright law *worse*. It is the justification media companies use to get legislatures to pass laws that make punishments for copyright violation harsher. It is a justification media companies use to overprice their goods for people who purchase the goods legally. It is the justification used to lean on governments to sign ridiculous over-the-top IP treaties.
My attitude has nothing to do with "I've got mine, screw you Jack". I honestly cannot comprehend how you would read that attitude from my post.
I think our copyright laws are ridiculous -- not in principle, in my case, but in terms of the punishments for violating them, and in the duration of the copyrights. I would like it very much if the laws changed to make them more reasonable. But I'm convinced that piracy on my part would contribute to making things worse for me, worse for you, worse for everyone.
"I've got mine, screw you Jack" applies much more to the people who pirate goods, that justify the media companies in getting laws and treaties passed that firther restrict *my* ability to enjoy media. The selfish asses who pirate everything under the sun because it's free to them are the ones who have the selfish attitude you wrongly assign to me.
Saying that "it's no longer news when a media rights holder pursues action against infringers" is dangerous- do you want such actions to become the accepted norm?
It doesn't bother me one way or the other. I don't knowingly violate copyright. If copyright law gets changed, then my actions may change. Until then, I buy the media I choose to consume, and if I don't think the price is right -- I do without.
The key reason the pursuit of action against violators is not newsworthy is that we know it happens frequently. This is nothing new. What would be more newsworthy are articles about how enforcement is changing, or articles about how the law itself is changing. Yet another copyright holder suing due to infringement just isn't news anymore.
One other note:
I disagree. I had never heard of Uwe Boll until he started his lawsuit campaign.
You must be new here:) . Luckily for us, since Germany (and other countries) closed the tax loophole investors in his films were taking advantage of, he hasn't been getting a lot of work. The tax loophole is what made his bombs profitable despite their dismal ratings.
While you may or may not be correct in your earlier post, the parent to this post uses the wrong section of Procedure 20. What you should have quoted is:
(2) Defendants.
Persons -- as well as a vessel, cargo, or other property subject to admiralty process in rem -- may be joined in one action as defendants if:
(A) any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and
(B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action.
Seems quite likely that part B may come into play for these type of motions.
Of course, IANAL, etc, but if you're going to ask someone to refute your point given a quoted piece of text -- may be a good idea to cite the relevant material:)
Unless all of these people were a part of some vast conspiracy to download the same movie from the same source en mass, they can't be joined together in a single lawsuit. Explain how my post is wrong, based on the entry in the court docket and Procedure 20.
What does people joining together as plaintiffs (Procedure 20) have to do with joining defendants together in court motions?
Your supporting quote is not relevant, whether or not your point is correct.
The law is pretty clear on whether copyright violation is legal or not.
Using the "I'm not likely to be one of the people they choose to pursue action against" strategy seems, as time goes on, to be a less-than-optimal one.
But since we're commenting on flamebait mods... the whole article is flamebait for slashdot. The only reason this is newsworthy is because it includes Uwe Boll, make of some of the most nerd-despised movies on the planet. It's no longer news when a media rights holder pursues action against infringers -- the only reason this article made the main page is so we can flame (1) entities that pursue enforcement of their IP rights and (2) that director of tripe, Uwe Boll.
Seriously, it's hard to complain about flamebait posts when that's the very nature of the article.
That's a bad idea. You want students at one university to learn the same thing as students at another university. And just because the material covered is the same, you'd like to make sure that they learned it pretty much the same way.
I disagree, in general. I think diversity of thought process and education is undervalued. Citizens/employees are not commodity goods*
*OK, maybe uneducated workers can be considered somewhat like a commodity. But educated workers are a different story.
Well, that's the nice thing about a laser. You can set the nest on fire from quite a distance as long as you have line-of-sight or some very good mirrors. So no stings.
That's why American TV now has warning labels: WARNING: may induce loss of apatite, vomiting, apathy,
I had no idea TV could cause loss of phosphate minerals. This is serious!
What other minerals is TV leaching from our bodies? I shudder to think that watching the World Cup may be depleting my body of hardystonite or some other mineral!
I mistook when I said you'd be hard-pressed... but most critical scholars would agree.
For the Gospel of Matthew, it's generally accepted (though still debated) that Matthew didn't even write the Gospel.
For the Gospel of Mark, it's generally accepted that Mark actually wrote it. But what we know as the Gospel of Mark is likely more than what he originally wrote, especially considering that there are at least four extant versions of the end of the Gospel.
I'm no biblical expert... I took an 'adult enrichment' class in the history of the bible about ten years ago, and have read some about it. I recall less than what is in Wikipedia, which is where I confirmed the above. Hope you can find the kind of sources you're looking for.
Yes. They also pay taxes when they don't send their kids to school at all (i.e. homeschool). Or for Amtrak even if you've never set foot on a train. That's the unfairness of a monopoly in a nutshell. It's the government equivalent of having to send $1000 to Microsoft every year, even if you never use MS operating systems.
Waah waah waah. Do us a favor and move to Rwanda where you won't have to worry about that.
Even if you homeschool your kids, you still benefit from the public school system. Amtrak? Puh-lease. Subsidization of road travel makes subsidization of Amtrak look like a speck of dust in the cosmos.
So if the parent decides this MacBook idea is stupid, he can just quit that school and go somewhere else. There's no negative consequences of that decision.
There are NO decisions that do not have negative consequences. If you choose to ignore them, it's further sign that you cannot see the forest for the trees.
I think you might want to do some quick googling for your information. There is plenty of evidence that this is the case.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a biblical scholar who would say that the books of the bible were written by contemporaries of Jesus, let alone friends of his.
There are literally hundreds of theses written by DD candidates on this subject.
When parents lead their children to believing something, we have the delusional masses on both the left and right who vote without question for the Republicans or Democrats without thinking about what they stand for just because their parents voted that way and when you have that, democracy doesn't work.
I think you overlook the fact that it's possible for parents to discuss the works with their kids, without forcing their viewpoints on the kids. How the kids interpret and form viewpoints on issues is a function of the material they digest and the culture they are surrounded with. It would be irresponsible for parents to not guide their children to some extent, at the very least to encourage consideration of varying viewpoints.
I'd also like to point out that when parents lead their children's beliefs, there are beneficial aspects as well. We have accumulated a culture that can have negative, as well as positive, impacts on the views of developing minds, and IMO it is part of a parent's responsibility to counter the common culture where necessary.
If anybody should have been impeached, it should have been him - Andrew Jackson (D).
Ah, keep banging that partisan drum.
Too bad anyone who understands US political history understands that the Democratic Party of Jackson's time is irrelevant to the Democratic party of today -- and if anything, is equivalent to the Republican Party of today.
Maybe it's cultural, but several games in S Korea would beg to differ, that is, if games were people (or dogs) capable of begging.
Even in the US, micropayment games are having some success... it's only a matter of time before we see more games with a macro number of micropayments being required for competing at the highest level.
Don't frame your initial post as a question (a leading one at that) and then reply to the one response that takes the bait. It's intellectually dishonest.
No need to get worked up. It was just a particularly good troll, I think.
Which is fitting, given that we're discussing a species that has been trolled (and longlined) near to extinction.
What, one of those mornings where you wake up, roll out of bed, step on a rusty nail that protrudes from the floorboards, limp to the bathroom, have the cold water stop during your shower so you get scalded, the toilet gets clogged and overflows, the coffeemaker shorts out and starts a small fire in your kitchen, your dog eats something bad and barfs all over your feet, and then you get your penis caught in your zipper?
Wait, that is not really analogous to this update... that kind of morning is more analogous to installing windows in the first place.
Is that a challenge? We've got a number of very creative people on slashdot who would be happy to take you up on that.
Just some ideas on how things could get better:
The observation craft crashes in said desert, with the only survivors being the three very attractive but brainy female NASA scientists who unfortunately were slightly injured and had to tear the midriffs from their shirts in order to apply tourniquets to the pilot of the plane, who, despite their best efforts, expired on the desert flats -- but not before handing our intrepid heroines a jailbroken iPad with a map of a secret city in the desert.
The secret city, of course, is populated by mutants who are engaged in a war of factions between the aborigines and the whites. The whites have a technological advantage, but are really mean. The aborigines, however, reveal secrets to our heroines via a half-naked drug-addled walkabout whereupon it is discovered that the residue from the asteroid contains the last component to the ritual that awakens Croczilla from his dusty resting place and floods the desert, who upon awakening will be hungry for the other other white meat.
That's all I've got so far, I'm not sure how they'll keep Croczilla from destroying the opera house in Sydney. However, I'm quite sure it involves ridiculous sci-fi weapons and more toplessness of our heroines, and perhaps some beer.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that'd depend on whether I owned 100% of the company, whether it was publically traded, how much stake I had if it was publically traded, etc.
Look at the share prices of some companies that lose hundreds of millions...
Those products have a limited market.
Just as easy to pirate
Just as easy to pirate. Game guides or tabulatures can be scanned.
Here's the thing about media products: no matter what, it's cheaper to buy pirated goods. When you start talking about niche-market products, then we're talking about products that make little difference to the bottom line for the megacorps which source most of our media.
I understand that content sellers can try to differentiate their product from that offered by pirates. But I fail to see how the things they use to differentiate their product won't eventually be pirated just as easily. Sure, Blu-Ray (at 8 GB) seems like too big a file to pirate... but in ten years will we feel the same way? What about people who use sneakernet for piracy (like on college campuses)? 8 GB is a small fraction of a sub-$100 USB drive. Sure, sneakernet can't be captured by data aggregating totals from torrent trackers... but you can bet that the media industries include some kind of estimation in their rationale.
Media is going full-digital. Media sellers are shifting (dragged kicking and screaming, really) to digital distribution. With digital distribution, how exactly can they differentiate their product from that offered by piracy?
You think that's my attitude? You're far from accurate.
Since you seem to be a little dense, let me explain my position in full:
In a market-based system, actors in the system make choices that depend on information.
If I were to pirate an album, or a movie, the information I'm giving to the rights holder of that IP is that I want their product, but I'm not going to pay for it because I can get it for free. Their options are then to compete on price (by giving it away for free or nearly free, a losing proposition for them) or to lean on government to enforce and/or change the law re: copyright infringement.
Pirating goods actually makes copyright law *worse*. It is the justification media companies use to get legislatures to pass laws that make punishments for copyright violation harsher. It is a justification media companies use to overprice their goods for people who purchase the goods legally. It is the justification used to lean on governments to sign ridiculous over-the-top IP treaties.
My attitude has nothing to do with "I've got mine, screw you Jack". I honestly cannot comprehend how you would read that attitude from my post.
I think our copyright laws are ridiculous -- not in principle, in my case, but in terms of the punishments for violating them, and in the duration of the copyrights. I would like it very much if the laws changed to make them more reasonable. But I'm convinced that piracy on my part would contribute to making things worse for me, worse for you, worse for everyone.
"I've got mine, screw you Jack" applies much more to the people who pirate goods, that justify the media companies in getting laws and treaties passed that firther restrict *my* ability to enjoy media. The selfish asses who pirate everything under the sun because it's free to them are the ones who have the selfish attitude you wrongly assign to me.
It doesn't bother me one way or the other. I don't knowingly violate copyright. If copyright law gets changed, then my actions may change. Until then, I buy the media I choose to consume, and if I don't think the price is right -- I do without.
The key reason the pursuit of action against violators is not newsworthy is that we know it happens frequently. This is nothing new. What would be more newsworthy are articles about how enforcement is changing, or articles about how the law itself is changing. Yet another copyright holder suing due to infringement just isn't news anymore.
One other note:
You must be new here :) . Luckily for us, since Germany (and other countries) closed the tax loophole investors in his films were taking advantage of, he hasn't been getting a lot of work. The tax loophole is what made his bombs profitable despite their dismal ratings.
Rule 30? I'd be more concerned with Rule 34.
Have you seen some of these judges? I definitely don't want to see them sans robes.
While you may or may not be correct in your earlier post, the parent to this post uses the wrong section of Procedure 20. What you should have quoted is:
Seems quite likely that part B may come into play for these type of motions.
:)
Of course, IANAL, etc, but if you're going to ask someone to refute your point given a quoted piece of text -- may be a good idea to cite the relevant material
What does people joining together as plaintiffs (Procedure 20) have to do with joining defendants together in court motions?
Your supporting quote is not relevant, whether or not your point is correct.
On the other hand, it's a valid point.
The law is pretty clear on whether copyright violation is legal or not.
Using the "I'm not likely to be one of the people they choose to pursue action against" strategy seems, as time goes on, to be a less-than-optimal one.
But since we're commenting on flamebait mods... the whole article is flamebait for slashdot. The only reason this is newsworthy is because it includes Uwe Boll, make of some of the most nerd-despised movies on the planet. It's no longer news when a media rights holder pursues action against infringers -- the only reason this article made the main page is so we can flame (1) entities that pursue enforcement of their IP rights and (2) that director of tripe, Uwe Boll.
Seriously, it's hard to complain about flamebait posts when that's the very nature of the article.
No, "Ring Wraiths" are fiancees starving themselves to fit into their wedding dresses.
Catholic Priests are more like Olog-hai -- it's true -- the Pope incubates them in pits of the catacombs beneath the Vatican.
See sig below.
I disagree, in general. I think diversity of thought process and education is undervalued. Citizens/employees are not commodity goods*
*OK, maybe uneducated workers can be considered somewhat like a commodity. But educated workers are a different story.
Well, that's the nice thing about a laser. You can set the nest on fire from quite a distance as long as you have line-of-sight or some very good mirrors. So no stings.
I had no idea TV could cause loss of phosphate minerals. This is serious!
What other minerals is TV leaching from our bodies? I shudder to think that watching the World Cup may be depleting my body of hardystonite or some other mineral!
Jackson's Democrats adhered to anti-federalist Jeffersonian politics. Who is the (theoretically) anti-federalist party now?
I mistook when I said you'd be hard-pressed... but most critical scholars would agree.
For the Gospel of Matthew, it's generally accepted (though still debated) that Matthew didn't even write the Gospel.
For the Gospel of Mark, it's generally accepted that Mark actually wrote it. But what we know as the Gospel of Mark is likely more than what he originally wrote, especially considering that there are at least four extant versions of the end of the Gospel.
I'm no biblical expert... I took an 'adult enrichment' class in the history of the bible about ten years ago, and have read some about it. I recall less than what is in Wikipedia, which is where I confirmed the above. Hope you can find the kind of sources you're looking for.
I always daydreamed in class that hollow-point bullets would work better on good teachers.
:(
But I wouldn't do it over Christmas break, far more convenient to do it when school is in session, when all the teachers are in one location.
Wait... was that my out-loud voice? Now I'm going to get arrested for making terrorist threats
Waah waah waah. Do us a favor and move to Rwanda where you won't have to worry about that.
Even if you homeschool your kids, you still benefit from the public school system. Amtrak? Puh-lease. Subsidization of road travel makes subsidization of Amtrak look like a speck of dust in the cosmos.
There are NO decisions that do not have negative consequences. If you choose to ignore them, it's further sign that you cannot see the forest for the trees.
I think you might want to do some quick googling for your information. There is plenty of evidence that this is the case.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a biblical scholar who would say that the books of the bible were written by contemporaries of Jesus, let alone friends of his.
There are literally hundreds of theses written by DD candidates on this subject.
Pop quiz:
/.
What tech/nerd site has an editor who is a Republican party official and is will soon be attending a Republican leadership conference?
Need a hint?
It's not reddit, digg, fark, or any other site that cannot be abbreviated as
I think you overlook the fact that it's possible for parents to discuss the works with their kids, without forcing their viewpoints on the kids. How the kids interpret and form viewpoints on issues is a function of the material they digest and the culture they are surrounded with. It would be irresponsible for parents to not guide their children to some extent, at the very least to encourage consideration of varying viewpoints.
I'd also like to point out that when parents lead their children's beliefs, there are beneficial aspects as well. We have accumulated a culture that can have negative, as well as positive, impacts on the views of developing minds, and IMO it is part of a parent's responsibility to counter the common culture where necessary.
Ah, keep banging that partisan drum.
Too bad anyone who understands US political history understands that the Democratic Party of Jackson's time is irrelevant to the Democratic party of today -- and if anything, is equivalent to the Republican Party of today.
Yes, of course. Rule34 applies to everything (and if not, Rule35 comes into play).
In this case -- you've seen goatse, right?
Maybe it's cultural, but several games in S Korea would beg to differ, that is, if games were people (or dogs) capable of begging.
Even in the US, micropayment games are having some success... it's only a matter of time before we see more games with a macro number of micropayments being required for competing at the highest level.
No need to get worked up. It was just a particularly good troll, I think.
Which is fitting, given that we're discussing a species that has been trolled (and longlined) near to extinction.
What, one of those mornings where you wake up, roll out of bed, step on a rusty nail that protrudes from the floorboards, limp to the bathroom, have the cold water stop during your shower so you get scalded, the toilet gets clogged and overflows, the coffeemaker shorts out and starts a small fire in your kitchen, your dog eats something bad and barfs all over your feet, and then you get your penis caught in your zipper?
Wait, that is not really analogous to this update... that kind of morning is more analogous to installing windows in the first place.
Is that a challenge? We've got a number of very creative people on slashdot who would be happy to take you up on that.
Just some ideas on how things could get better:
The observation craft crashes in said desert, with the only survivors being the three very attractive but brainy female NASA scientists who unfortunately were slightly injured and had to tear the midriffs from their shirts in order to apply tourniquets to the pilot of the plane, who, despite their best efforts, expired on the desert flats -- but not before handing our intrepid heroines a jailbroken iPad with a map of a secret city in the desert.
The secret city, of course, is populated by mutants who are engaged in a war of factions between the aborigines and the whites. The whites have a technological advantage, but are really mean. The aborigines, however, reveal secrets to our heroines via a half-naked drug-addled walkabout whereupon it is discovered that the residue from the asteroid contains the last component to the ritual that awakens Croczilla from his dusty resting place and floods the desert, who upon awakening will be hungry for the other other white meat.
That's all I've got so far, I'm not sure how they'll keep Croczilla from destroying the opera house in Sydney. However, I'm quite sure it involves ridiculous sci-fi weapons and more toplessness of our heroines, and perhaps some beer.