Well, we did vote for someone else. The DMCA passed on Clinton's watch, but no politician has yet to speak out against it. It will take time and sacrifice, but eventually the DMCA will be revealed to everyone for what it is, an unjust law.
A marvelous quote from the CEO of the Fox Group:
"Where piracy tends to thrive is where the consumer perceives that goods and services are not convenient and price is out of whack," --Peter Chernin, chairman and CEO of the Fox Group.
Excellent point! It would be quite a wonderful accomplishment if the litigation surrounding this Sony issue ends up setting a precedent that directly counters the DMCA. Afterall, we all know that case law and precedent are valued more highly than even constituional law...
If they are going to use demand for a product to determine pricing, they should also be required to factor in supply. The supply is infinite, so then the price should be practically nothing!
That is true, but some violations of laws can cause the corporate veil to be pierced. It isn't unheard of for individuals who show gross negligence or premeditated intent to commit crimes behind the protection of a corporation to have that protection stripped away.
Just try cheating on your taxes by using an "S" corp and see how far that corporate protection gets you.
The root-kit that Sony deliberatley distributed is probably a criminal offense and we should question our elected officials if they choose not to pursue it.
Whenever I receive a call that is somehow exempt from the DNL, I explain my terms. My "fee" is $500/hr and I'd be happy to help after proof of a minimum deposit of 1 hours payment is received. Where do they get off gathering information and spending my time for free, huh? I'm with Golias, if everyone could punch a telemarketer in the face this would be a much better world.
Again this is off topic, and not to sound insensitive, but I'm astounded at the amount of money that was being spent/wasted on those projects! It's obvious that the money spent on those projects was ill-managed. It saddens me to think that we were spending billions of dollars fruitlessly on those programs and now we are going to spend billions to reconstruct a town below sea level...Maybe the problem isn't how much were spending, but HOW we are spending it. Oh, and I got a tax cut, but I didn't know that I was in the top 1% Yippee! Lucky me! Here I thought I was lower middle class and all...
Exactly! What happens all too often for these loaded bills, is that if a politician votes against it because of all the loaded garbage, it comes back to haunt him/her at re-election. "Senator Jim-Bob is an evil man because he voted against a bill for giving money to blind orphans! He hates blind orphans!" Those same campaign posters will not make mention of the fact that tacked onto the bill for blind orphans was a ridiculous piece of drivel like...oh...I don't know...a broadcast flag system. And since politicians are really only worried about re-election...
Whether M$ chooses HD-DVD or Blu-ray, who cares? Why don't we ask why they need to "choose" anything? We haven't reached the end of DVDs by any means. There are very few people indeed who would be able to notice the increases in resolution and quality that Blu-ray or HD-DVD could offer. As a data storage medium, they are intrinsically important, but there are few who need to store more than 8.5 gig of data on a single disc. However, as a media storage medium, they are a poor attempt of the movie industry to recover after their pathetic CSS encryption on DVD's was cracked. Why else would they be in such a hurry to get a product and new standard out in the market? They naively believe that, this time, they'll make a format that is uncrackable!...and we the consumer gets to pay for it as they phase out DVDs in favor of this new unneeded format.
If a multi-million (billion?) dollar corporation goes out of their way to sue a minor, it is effectively delivering the message 'Don't fuck with us or your ass is ours'.
More like, "We enjoy fucking people, be they children or not." The RIAA will lose this war precisely because they will never win the "hearts and minds" of the worlds youth.
Am I the only one that finds it somewhat disheartening that after all these years, nay decades, Voyager 1 is just now at the edge of our Solar system!? How are we ever going to get off this rock!?
When you're a big boy you can afford the $5 movie rental at blockbuster.
Then you know what you do with the rental? Rip it.
Very good point! I'm even cheaper though, I get my rentals from the local library!
Bingo! What authority does the US (or US corporations) have over how law is interpreted or executed in a foreign nation? None whatsoever! In fact, a copyright or patent filed in the US only has effect in the US!
Any country that has a shred of independence or self respect would condemn the mere idea of this plan.
Normally, in order to dictate policy and law in a country, it requires "boots on the ground." Apparently, these days it only requires "briefcases and fat wallets on the ground."
This is called an implied contract. Similar to when you go to a restaurant and order food. It is implied that you will pay when you are done eating.
Oh, except the terms of this "Implied contract" change constantly and are more complex than John Q. Public can comprehend. Oh, and they also work retroactively, strange, isn't it?
1984 Copyright Act declaring that we have a right to make a copy for personal use, while:
The DMCA declares it illegal to bypass copy protection schemes.
So which is it? Can I make the copy I'm entitled too or not?
Lastly, considering the wealth and power of the RIAA/MPAA and the producers behind them, piracy would seem to be a victimless crime. If nothing else, it seems to be making them stronger... And why do they care so much about big bad evil Linux and Mac users being able to use their product? Since when do companies strive to reduce their market share not increase it?
Although large cineplexes, home theaters, and poor quality movies are as much to blame as anything else for the disappearance of the old second-run or third-run theaters and the reduction in customer base for theaters in general, piracy has little blame for this.
This is really a question of perceived value. Bread, gasoline, homes, etc. are necessities, whereas a movie is a luxury. This changes the point of pricing to be more influenced by perceived value (demand) rather than cost of production and supply. Especially since today, supply for IP is essentially infinite.
It is my belief that movies and music are hugely overvalued, just like the "artists and actors" compensations for said "work."
Perhaps the real reason that the MPAA is so upset about piracy is that it shows peoples' changing perception of the perceived value of a movie. The gripe I really have with the MPAA/RIAA is that rather than focus on the macro-economic issues affecting their industry, they continue to focus on the relatively minor impact of piracy. They attempt to legitimize this by making ridiculous claims of billions of dollars lost to piracy.
I could make a similar argument that I shouldn't have to pay a large portion of my real-estate taxes, because I don't use the school district services in any way, but then all the kids couldn't go to school because we couldn't afford it. It's true.
However, the point of little to no government involvement in this issue has one remarkable difference to the issue of government involvement with roads, transportation, health care and education, in that it is NOT a necessity of the populace. This concerns a product being sold to customers, not a necessary infrastructure. As some have said, the only reason that the government is involved at all is because the RIAA/MPAA and other organizations world-wide have tremendous lobbying power, not because our elected officials have any care as to what is the best for their people. I'd be willing to bet that anyone with any power in the FCC gets free cable and anyone with any power over legislation concerning copyright and the DMCA gets a lot of free movies and other kick-backs.
What we are asking for is Self-Reliance. The ability to have the market determine what we want, not the government. As long as the government continues to stick it's nose in this business at the behest of the media conglomerates, there will be conflict. That is unless you're a democrat who thinks that we should just pay lots of taxes and have the government decide whats best for us. (I just had to stick that in for the republican remark!)
maybe some of which will wonder why they can no longer aspire to be the next Peter Jackson since no one will risk hundreds of millions of dollars to make something that only the "chumps" will pay to see.
God I hope this happens! Is it a fool's dream to think that someday the people will wake up and realize that there's no reason to idolize actors and singers and pay copious amounts of money for their products? It is a little too close to socialism for some I'm sure, but can you honestly say that people like Brittany Spears or Ashley Simpson deserve what they have and worked hard for it? Would you want your child to become a Paris Hilton or even a Peter Jackson? I'd rather have my child become a George Washington or god forbid an Einstein or Tesla!!
This is a good point. I think I could buy the RIAA's argument, if they could actually prove some sort of financial loss by presenting some incontrovertable evidence. It's one thing to claim a loss, and another to actually prove it.
So far, the RIAA has only made outrageous claims that their industry is suffering because of P2P sharing of copyrighted works. Yet, they continue to bring suits on only handfuls of people. I mean honestly, are the 3000 people you've sued so far been the cause of your financial slump? Would they have bought that many CDs? Shouldn't there be an equivalent increase in sales due to removing these "pirates" from the seas of P2P?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, we did vote for someone else. The DMCA passed on Clinton's watch, but no politician has yet to speak out against it. It will take time and sacrifice, but eventually the DMCA will be revealed to everyone for what it is, an unjust law.
A marvelous quote from the CEO of the Fox Group: "Where piracy tends to thrive is where the consumer perceives that goods and services are not convenient and price is out of whack," --Peter Chernin, chairman and CEO of the Fox Group.
Excellent point! It would be quite a wonderful accomplishment if the litigation surrounding this Sony issue ends up setting a precedent that directly counters the DMCA. Afterall, we all know that case law and precedent are valued more highly than even constituional law...
Is this what is referred to as an "invalid markup?"
If they are going to use demand for a product to determine pricing, they should also be required to factor in supply. The supply is infinite, so then the price should be practically nothing!
That is true, but some violations of laws can cause the corporate veil to be pierced. It isn't unheard of for individuals who show gross negligence or premeditated intent to commit crimes behind the protection of a corporation to have that protection stripped away. Just try cheating on your taxes by using an "S" corp and see how far that corporate protection gets you. The root-kit that Sony deliberatley distributed is probably a criminal offense and we should question our elected officials if they choose not to pursue it.
File Sharing, the cause of and solution to, all of life's problems!
Whenever I receive a call that is somehow exempt from the DNL, I explain my terms. My "fee" is $500/hr and I'd be happy to help after proof of a minimum deposit of 1 hours payment is received. Where do they get off gathering information and spending my time for free, huh? I'm with Golias, if everyone could punch a telemarketer in the face this would be a much better world.
Again this is off topic, and not to sound insensitive, but I'm astounded at the amount of money that was being spent/wasted on those projects! It's obvious that the money spent on those projects was ill-managed. It saddens me to think that we were spending billions of dollars fruitlessly on those programs and now we are going to spend billions to reconstruct a town below sea level...Maybe the problem isn't how much were spending, but HOW we are spending it. Oh, and I got a tax cut, but I didn't know that I was in the top 1% Yippee! Lucky me! Here I thought I was lower middle class and all...
Exactly! What happens all too often for these loaded bills, is that if a politician votes against it because of all the loaded garbage, it comes back to haunt him/her at re-election. "Senator Jim-Bob is an evil man because he voted against a bill for giving money to blind orphans! He hates blind orphans!" Those same campaign posters will not make mention of the fact that tacked onto the bill for blind orphans was a ridiculous piece of drivel like...oh...I don't know...a broadcast flag system. And since politicians are really only worried about re-election...
Whether M$ chooses HD-DVD or Blu-ray, who cares? Why don't we ask why they need to "choose" anything? We haven't reached the end of DVDs by any means. There are very few people indeed who would be able to notice the increases in resolution and quality that Blu-ray or HD-DVD could offer. As a data storage medium, they are intrinsically important, but there are few who need to store more than 8.5 gig of data on a single disc. However, as a media storage medium, they are a poor attempt of the movie industry to recover after their pathetic CSS encryption on DVD's was cracked. Why else would they be in such a hurry to get a product and new standard out in the market? They naively believe that, this time, they'll make a format that is uncrackable!...and we the consumer gets to pay for it as they phase out DVDs in favor of this new unneeded format.
If a multi-million (billion?) dollar corporation goes out of their way to sue a minor, it is effectively delivering the message 'Don't fuck with us or your ass is ours'. More like, "We enjoy fucking people, be they children or not." The RIAA will lose this war precisely because they will never win the "hearts and minds" of the worlds youth.
Now if only we can get the judges to terminate with extreme prejudice these RIAA bullies...
Am I the only one that finds it somewhat disheartening that after all these years, nay decades, Voyager 1 is just now at the edge of our Solar system!? How are we ever going to get off this rock!?
When you're a big boy you can afford the $5 movie rental at blockbuster. Then you know what you do with the rental? Rip it. Very good point! I'm even cheaper though, I get my rentals from the local library!
Bingo! What authority does the US (or US corporations) have over how law is interpreted or executed in a foreign nation? None whatsoever! In fact, a copyright or patent filed in the US only has effect in the US! Any country that has a shred of independence or self respect would condemn the mere idea of this plan. Normally, in order to dictate policy and law in a country, it requires "boots on the ground." Apparently, these days it only requires "briefcases and fat wallets on the ground."
The RIAA/MPAA spokespeople for the US government responded, "We just need some breathing space."
This is called an implied contract. Similar to when you go to a restaurant and order food. It is implied that you will pay when you are done eating. Oh, except the terms of this "Implied contract" change constantly and are more complex than John Q. Public can comprehend. Oh, and they also work retroactively, strange, isn't it?
Once again we find the paradoxical system of the:
1984 Copyright Act declaring that we have a right to make a copy for personal use, while:
The DMCA declares it illegal to bypass copy protection schemes.
So which is it? Can I make the copy I'm entitled too or not?
Lastly, considering the wealth and power of the RIAA/MPAA and the producers behind them, piracy would seem to be a victimless crime. If nothing else, it seems to be making them stronger... And why do they care so much about big bad evil Linux and Mac users being able to use their product? Since when do companies strive to reduce their market share not increase it?
Although large cineplexes, home theaters, and poor quality movies are as much to blame as anything else for the disappearance of the old second-run or third-run theaters and the reduction in customer base for theaters in general, piracy has little blame for this.
This is really a question of perceived value. Bread, gasoline, homes, etc. are necessities, whereas a movie is a luxury. This changes the point of pricing to be more influenced by perceived value (demand) rather than cost of production and supply. Especially since today, supply for IP is essentially infinite.
It is my belief that movies and music are hugely overvalued, just like the "artists and actors" compensations for said "work."
Perhaps the real reason that the MPAA is so upset about piracy is that it shows peoples' changing perception of the perceived value of a movie. The gripe I really have with the MPAA/RIAA is that rather than focus on the macro-economic issues affecting their industry, they continue to focus on the relatively minor impact of piracy. They attempt to legitimize this by making ridiculous claims of billions of dollars lost to piracy.
I could make a similar argument that I shouldn't have to pay a large portion of my real-estate taxes, because I don't use the school district services in any way, but then all the kids couldn't go to school because we couldn't afford it. It's true.
However, the point of little to no government involvement in this issue has one remarkable difference to the issue of government involvement with roads, transportation, health care and education, in that it is NOT a necessity of the populace. This concerns a product being sold to customers, not a necessary infrastructure. As some have said, the only reason that the government is involved at all is because the RIAA/MPAA and other organizations world-wide have tremendous lobbying power, not because our elected officials have any care as to what is the best for their people. I'd be willing to bet that anyone with any power in the FCC gets free cable and anyone with any power over legislation concerning copyright and the DMCA gets a lot of free movies and other kick-backs.
What we are asking for is Self-Reliance. The ability to have the market determine what we want, not the government. As long as the government continues to stick it's nose in this business at the behest of the media conglomerates, there will be conflict. That is unless you're a democrat who thinks that we should just pay lots of taxes and have the government decide whats best for us. (I just had to stick that in for the republican remark!)
maybe some of which will wonder why they can no longer aspire to be the next Peter Jackson since no one will risk hundreds of millions of dollars to make something that only the "chumps" will pay to see. God I hope this happens! Is it a fool's dream to think that someday the people will wake up and realize that there's no reason to idolize actors and singers and pay copious amounts of money for their products? It is a little too close to socialism for some I'm sure, but can you honestly say that people like Brittany Spears or Ashley Simpson deserve what they have and worked hard for it? Would you want your child to become a Paris Hilton or even a Peter Jackson? I'd rather have my child become a George Washington or god forbid an Einstein or Tesla!!
This is a good point. I think I could buy the RIAA's argument, if they could actually prove some sort of financial loss by presenting some incontrovertable evidence. It's one thing to claim a loss, and another to actually prove it.
So far, the RIAA has only made outrageous claims that their industry is suffering because of P2P sharing of copyrighted works. Yet, they continue to bring suits on only handfuls of people. I mean honestly, are the 3000 people you've sued so far been the cause of your financial slump? Would they have bought that many CDs? Shouldn't there be an equivalent increase in sales due to removing these "pirates" from the seas of P2P?