Oh, please. If you wish to twist my words that far, I can't help you. I said no such thing.
So you can play that game but I can't? Gotcha.
The artist most certainly has the right to attempt this business model.
Oh, absolutely they do. I agree. However, in an era where information is infinitely duplicable at no cost, it would be an exceptionally foolish business model. To make laws restricting people's right to share what they have just so certain artists can attempt an unworkable business model is unconscionable.
Society doesn't automatically get to do whatever the hell it wants. It has to respect individual rights, too. It would benefit society, for example, if we took our most brilliant scientists and forced them to work for free, but we don't do that, because it would be a violation of their rights.
I heartily agree, but no one is arguing for forcing anyone to work for free.
Let's face it: copyright is simply outdated and unworkable (and, to many extents, quite immoral) in this day and age.
There you go again, claiming people have some sort of right to make money for doing no work, and claiming that people have a right to steal from society by preventing others from sharing what they have.
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: claiming that making a copy of information is equivalent to the originator doing real, actual work!
Getting your car fixed for free means the mechanic is doing work for nothing. Copying a piece of art entails no work by the artist. To equate the two is completely absurd. Or do you think your mechanic should still get paid if you decide to fix your own car instead of bringing it to him? Or should your friends have to pay your mechanic if they see you driving the car he fixed?
No civilized society, he adds, can endure 'purely voluntary payment for art, knowledge, and culture.'
That's absolutely correct. A civilized society cannot endure any form of payment for art, knowledge, and culture. These things, by their very nature, are -- and should be -- free.
So the trouble is not with the law, for it is spiritual and good. The trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin. I don't really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don't do it. Instead, I do what I hate. But if I know that what I am doing is wrong, this shows that I agree that the law is good. So I am not the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it.
And I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my human nature. I want to do what is right, but I can't. I want to do what is good, but I don't. I don't want to do what is wrong, but I do it anyway. But if I do what I don't want to do, I am not really the one doing wrong; it is sin living in me that does it.
I have discovered this principle of life -- that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God's law with all my heart. But there is another power within me that is at war with my mind. This power makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin and death? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God's law, but because of my human nature I am a slave to sin.
It's also the guy who commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son, just to see if he'd actually do it. Then it turns out it was just one hell of a practical joke.
The God of Abraham didn't tell Abraham to sacrifice his son just to see if he's actually do it, as if it were some big joke. The event was [at a higher conceptual level] an alliteration to the atoning death of the one he would send in the future (i.e. the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth).
Wouldn't it be cheaper to modify the drone's camera software to simply send back images of 60s Batman-esque impact placards whenever a piece of ordnance strikes its target? The remote pilot would see the missile get fired away, then, just as it strikes its target, a comical "POW!" or "ZOT!" or "BLAMMO!" image appears overtop the carnage.
I just quit WoW like a month or so back. This almost makes me wish I had friends. Now I play the game of life! It sucks. Leveling is a huge grind, I'm sure there's a lot of people twinking out there, and don't get me started on the lewt and gear... One friggen blue short sleeved button up shirt I can buy at any store in the world, and it dropped off some dude I managed to down in a bar fight. He conned orange, so it was risky, and all I got was a damned blue shirt.
Least the mounts aren't so bad.
The worst part is that you never can tell if that sexy night elf is really a woman or not until it's too late.
They couldn't keep 5 guys breaking into the DNC office a secret (Watergate), but somehow they can orchestrate an elaborate conspiracy involving thousands of people over the course of 6 decades and not a single shred of credible evidence has been leaked.
It's interesting how this bit of false logic keeps popping up whenever topics like aliens or 9/11 or global conspiracies or whatever come up. "The government failed to keep one thing a secret, therefore it must be unable to keep anything a secret." Come on. That's shite logic even for Slashdot!
And thousands of people are involved? How would you know that? (unless you're in on it!)
And every single piece of evidence to date is not "credible"? Why? Because you don't believe it? Plus, let's just dismiss some evidence out of hand for no reason -- it just doesn't "count". Yeah, that's solid reasoning.
This kind of argument is like a triple waltz between "If the gov't was trying to keep a secret, surely someone would leak the info" and "Someone says he is leaking secret gov't info, but he's not credible" and "This info is not credible because I think it's unlikely the gov't would try to do this in secret". The fact is that the government *is* capable of keeping secrets from its citizens. Just try to find out what all the money for black ops is spent on. (Heck, try finding out what all the tax money for *regular* government work is spent on.)
(No, I don't think the gov't is hiding evidence of aliens, but it's not because I don't think they can)
If the user has any control of a character on the screen, he's performing a creative expression. Contrast this with, say, recording an in-game video sequence -- that's not at all creative on the user's behalf.
We keep on buying the BS because we have no choice. This is because businesses in almost every industry can subvert the free market with their magic wand known as Intellectual Property.
Artists should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them
And carpenters should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them.
And plumbers should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them.
And electricians should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them.
etc.
Do you see how absurd it is to say that someone should perpetually deserve payment for work they did once in the past? Artists should get paid for the work they do not for the work they did one or ten or a hundred years ago, just like everyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
So you can play that game but I can't? Gotcha.
Oh, absolutely they do. I agree. However, in an era where information is infinitely duplicable at no cost, it would be an exceptionally foolish business model. To make laws restricting people's right to share what they have just so certain artists can attempt an unworkable business model is unconscionable.
I heartily agree, but no one is arguing for forcing anyone to work for free.
Let's face it: copyright is simply outdated and unworkable (and, to many extents, quite immoral) in this day and age.
There you go again, claiming people have some sort of right to make money for doing no work, and claiming that people have a right to steal from society by preventing others from sharing what they have.
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: claiming that making a copy of information is equivalent to the originator doing real, actual work!
Getting your car fixed for free means the mechanic is doing work for nothing. Copying a piece of art entails no work by the artist. To equate the two is completely absurd. Or do you think your mechanic should still get paid if you decide to fix your own car instead of bringing it to him? Or should your friends have to pay your mechanic if they see you driving the car he fixed?
That's absolutely correct. A civilized society cannot endure any form of payment for art, knowledge, and culture. These things, by their very nature, are -- and should be -- free.
That rings a bell...
Yes, yes, now, for goodness sake, Bomb, disarm!
The God of Abraham didn't tell Abraham to sacrifice his son just to see if he's actually do it, as if it were some big joke. The event was [at a higher conceptual level] an alliteration to the atoning death of the one he would send in the future (i.e. the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth).
(PS: here's some info on the genocide issue you raised
You missed:
(2) Profit!
Wouldn't it be cheaper to modify the drone's camera software to simply send back images of 60s Batman-esque impact placards whenever a piece of ordnance strikes its target? The remote pilot would see the missile get fired away, then, just as it strikes its target, a comical "POW!" or "ZOT!" or "BLAMMO!" image appears overtop the carnage.
I daresay this would help our servicemen cope. ;-)
The worst part is that you never can tell if that sexy night elf is really a woman or not until it's too late.
Too horribly, horribly late
/cry
No, just once. Remember, he was appointed president by the courts the first time.
What does trust in God have to do with the United States?
Oh no! You guys started an infinite Karma loop!
They moved like real bikes in the original movie as well. It was only on the game grid that the lightcycles appeared to turn at right angles.
The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
It's interesting how this bit of false logic keeps popping up whenever topics like aliens or 9/11 or global conspiracies or whatever come up. "The government failed to keep one thing a secret, therefore it must be unable to keep anything a secret." Come on. That's shite logic even for Slashdot!
And thousands of people are involved? How would you know that? (unless you're in on it!)
And every single piece of evidence to date is not "credible"? Why? Because you don't believe it? Plus, let's just dismiss some evidence out of hand for no reason -- it just doesn't "count". Yeah, that's solid reasoning.
This kind of argument is like a triple waltz between "If the gov't was trying to keep a secret, surely someone would leak the info" and "Someone says he is leaking secret gov't info, but he's not credible" and "This info is not credible because I think it's unlikely the gov't would try to do this in secret". The fact is that the government *is* capable of keeping secrets from its citizens. Just try to find out what all the money for black ops is spent on. (Heck, try finding out what all the tax money for *regular* government work is spent on.)
(No, I don't think the gov't is hiding evidence of aliens, but it's not because I don't think they can)
Only if you are talking about an android or a teenage asian spelunker.
If the user has any control of a character on the screen, he's performing a creative expression. Contrast this with, say, recording an in-game video sequence -- that's not at all creative on the user's behalf.
We keep on buying the BS because we have no choice. This is because businesses in almost every industry can subvert the free market with their magic wand known as Intellectual Property.
And carpenters should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them.
And plumbers should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them.
And electricians should continue to receive compensation for their creations for as long as people are enjoying them.
etc.
Do you see how absurd it is to say that someone should perpetually deserve payment for work they did once in the past? Artists should get paid for the work they do not for the work they did one or ten or a hundred years ago, just like everyone else.
They shouldn't. No one should be paid for doing nothing. They should save their money for retirement like the rest of us.
Copyright needs to be reduced or abolished, not extended!
There you go trying to inject common sense into the Litigation Industry. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
Functionally "forever".
Um, no. This kind of inane comment does nothing to help the problem of copyright law.
It's wrong because some people you don't know said it's wrong and you don't have any real say in the matter.