I don't, and don't think it necessary. You let your country make its laws, let my country make its own. Disney should have no say over Mickey Mouse in Paraguay.
Actually, IMO Disney shouldn't even be allowed to hold copyright. I don't think corporations should be afforded any rights whatsoever.
When I was in Thailand in the Air Force, you could ride about anywhere for a dollar. A Bhat bus was called that because it cost a bhat to ride. One bhat was equal to five American pennies. You could take a taxi from the extreme south where I was to Burma for three dollars. The big red bus took you to Bankok (middle of the country) for five cents.
I took three girlfriends (who cost five bucks apiece per night) to a nice restaraunt and got change back from a 20 baht note (one dollar), and that included Pepsis for the girls and a beer for me.
Some friends and I rented a trawler, inclucing hiring its pilot, for ten bucks for a whole day and night.
My tealock (kind of a rented wife) cost thirty dollars a month, and came with a bungalow. That's what you're competing with.
If copyright terms were a reasonable 20 years then most US movies there are would be public domain, as the US founding fathers envisioned.
If the movie studios weren't retarded that would help Wikipedia, too. No stills of a movie covered in Wikipedia? Hmmm, the people who made that flick must be ashamed of their work. No reason fro me to spend money to rent it if it's so bad its makers are ashamed of it!.
Actually, if you repealed all copyright law written in or after the 20th century it would make a lot more sense. The problem isn't the law trailing technology, but being hijacked by financial interests.
If the copyright law was as it was in 1901, all of Jimi Hendrix' works would be in the public domain. Windows 3.1 would be in the public domain. Steamboat Willie would be in the public domain. In fact, all the movies Disnay made prior to 1987 would be in the public domain! There would be no DMCA (now THERE'S a bad law).
The only way the law hasn't matched technology is where it can't go at all; the international internet (I'm being purposly redundantly redundant here).
You have an example of where the law doesn't match technology? I personally see no difference between sampling on a computer and recording on a tape, or swapping P2P vs trading tapes. The only difference is the scale.
I'm not sure why you've got the feeling that copyright is considered to be the evil around here either, as none of the comments so far have said anything of the sort, or even remotely like it. The closest was the fellow who said he doesn't mind anyone plagairizing his work. Even he didn't say copyright was evil.
What's been said is that copyright is in bad need of reform. Not that it's evil, but that the laws as written are bad.
Many copyright HOLDERS are indeed evil; Sony comes to mind.
-mcgrew
(linked text is titled "SONY MUST DIE!!! Die, you worthless scumbag bastards die!")
In the US, copyright is NOT a property right. I own my car; it is my property. I can pass it to my descendants for a thousand years. My two registered ISBNs will expire. They are NOT my property, and the work will enter the public domain after an extremely retardedly long length of time. From Atricle I section 8 of the US Constitution:
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
The concept of "intellectual property" is unamerican. -mcgrew
We live not in a democratic republic, but a plutocracy. Money talks and your bullshit vote walks.
Here's how our government works: the great American corporation Sony gives ten million $ to the Democrat candidate, and another ten mil to the Republican. No matter who loses, Sony wins. When Sony's interests go against yours, you lose.
We're not going to get copyright reform. Here's another two reforms we need before copyright reform is possible but won't get either:
You should not be eligible to contribute to a candidate you're not eligible to vote for. I should not be able to contribute to John McCain unless he runs for President, or moves to Illinois and aomeone from Arizona shouldn't be able to contribute to Obama unless Obama m,oves to Arizona or runs for President.
You should not be allowed to "contribute" to more than one candidate in any given race. "Contributing" to more than one candidate in a race is simply a badly hidden bribe.
1. Fair Use Reform. The author offered no concrete suggestions, just "expand fair use". I offer a suggestion: any non-commercial use should be considered fair use. And if you sue me for copyright infringement and the courts deem my use to be fair use, I should be able to collect a kingly sum from you.
2.Limits on Secondary Liability BZZZT! No, these tech ddin't become popular because they "challenged the status quo." They became popular because (surprise) they were USEFUL. And again, IMO TFA is wrong. There shouldn't be "limits" to secondary liability, there should be no such thing as "secondary liability.
3. Protections Against Copyright Abuse. Am I the only one that gets annoyed when someone presents some obscure reference that I'm supposed to know about to the point that they need no link? Look, you want me to know about the "The Let's Go Crazy Baby" case then dammit, link to a Wikipedia article about it. Hmmm... "No page with that title exists". That said, I agree with the author about his point even though it was extremely retarded to expect me to know about "lets go crazy baby". If it isn't in Wikipedia it must be pretty damned obscure.
4. Fair and Accessible Licensing As an end-user, I should have no license, nor any need for one. Licenses are for those who wish to use a copyrighted work for financial gain. End-user licenses should be illegal, PERIOD, not merely the unenforceable clickthrough licenses.
As to music, a small sample should be considered "fair use", not unlike a quote from a book. File sharing, being noncommercial, should be fair use.
5. Orphan Works Reform Agreed, to get copyright you should have to register your copyright. And you should havce to clearly state the year your copyrighted work was registered so one can know when it gets to the public domain.
6. Notice of Technological and Contractual Restrictions on Digital Media. Agreed.
But the guy completely missed the most needed reform of all: Sanity to copyright lengths. IINM at the beginning of the 20th century it was twenty years. That sounds about right; you're not going to pursuade Jimi Hendrix to do any more recording!
The recording artist should hold copyright to the recording rather than the record label, as it is now.
I'm pretty sure all she was after was money. But there is an even more insidious way these girls get your money.
POLICE WARNING:
Police are warning all men who frequent clubs, parties and local pubs to be alert and stay cautious when offered a drink from any woman. Many females use a date rape drug on the market called..."Beer". The drug is found in liquid form and available anywhere. It comes in bottles, cans, from taps and in large "kegs".
"Beer" is used by female sexual predators at parties and bars to persuade their male victims to go home and have sex with them. A woman needs only to get a guy to consume a few units of "Beer" and then simply ask him home for no strings attached sex. Men are rendered helpless against this approach.
After several "Beers", men will often succumb to the desires to perform sexual acts on horrific looking women whom they would never normally be attracted.
After drinking "Beer", men often awaken with only hazy memories of exactly what happened to them the night before, often with just a vague feeling that "something bad" occurred.
At other times these unfortunate men are swindled out of their life's savings, in a familiar scam known as a "relationship". In extreme cases, the female may even be shrewd enough to entrap the unsuspecting male into a longer term form of servitude and punishment referred to as "marriage". Men are much more susceptible to this scam after "Beer" is administered and sex is offered by the predatory females. Please! Forward this warning to every male you know.
If you fall victim to this "beer" and the women administering it..... There are male support groups where you can discuss the details of your shocking encounter with similarly affected like-minded guys. For the support group nearest you, just look up "Golf Courses" in the phone book.
There are two ways to compete. One is to offer the same product for less. The other is to offer a better product for more. Since you can't lower your price, improve your product.
I'm not worried about MY job. I can retire in a couple of years. I'm worried about they guy who's going to put a gun in my face to take my money because he can't find a job and there are no social programs here.
For every genius, there's someone whose only skill is asking if you want fries with that, and the cost of goods is rising so fast compared to his labor that the minimum wage worker (which is who we're talking about here) is working two jobs and still can't pay the rent.
In 1968 you could go to McDonald's and get a hamburger, fries, and small coke for less than fifty cents. A Volkswagon beetle was $900. A Corvette was $3,000. The minimum wage was $1.60.
Today the McLunch is four bucks (although the drinks are now large, medium, and humungous), the Volkswagon is $20,000 and the 'Vette is about $80,000. The Federal minimum wage is $5.85. And some people, like wait staff, don't even make that.
Wealth doesn't trickle down, it flows up. Every bottom tier worker produces wealth, whether he's a fry cook at McDonalds, a phone jockey in India, or a programmer silicon valley. The wealthy don't produce wealth at all; they merely aggregate it. The working person produces the wealth. When there is such a thing as the "working poor" your society is in serious trouble.
Besides, there is probably not a big distance from 'funny' to 'insightful'.
There are at least two kinds of funny; stupid funny and insightful funny. Sometimes both at the same time.
Our *three* kinds of funny are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our kinds of funny.... Amongst our funninesst...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
-mcgrew
(apologies to Monty Python and everyone else on the planet)
"Microsoft has suggested that Google is not experienced enough or capable of fully developing a workable platform. Microsoft's vice president, Steve Ballmer inferred that Google's interest in the field will also wane due to it being 'deeply unsexy', and that development is not likely for such a platform because "You have [...] a lot of zeroes in your sales figures before a developer gets out of bed." In the same series of statements, Linux is likened to a cancer: "About every three months this year there has been a Linux initiative of some sort launched. It's a bit like cancer. It keeps coming round and then we die.""
Yeah I was joking... and here it is today and the joke has become real. Or surreal.
Balls of crystal, I tell ya! Where's that Randi guy?
-1, troll? Who gave major league baseball owners slashdot mod points? The parent is correct, albeit sarcastically (and I'd have been sarcastic too). It's not a problem to the MLB, they already GOT your money, sucker!
Or thought much about it, or knows what a third world country is like. How can I compete with someone who only pays $30 a month for rent, can take his family to a nice restaraunt for a dollar, or ride anywhere in the country for a nickle? Not even by doing away with such luxuries like electricity and running water could I compete with that!
That was what Thailand was like in 1974 (USAF at the end of the Vietnam war). You can't compete with "dirt cheap".
Slashdot Mirror
I think if a work is protected by technical means, it should not be eligible for copyright at all.
I don't, and don't think it necessary. You let your country make its laws, let my country make its own. Disney should have no say over Mickey Mouse in Paraguay.
Actually, IMO Disney shouldn't even be allowed to hold copyright. I don't think corporations should be afforded any rights whatsoever.
When I was in Thailand in the Air Force, you could ride about anywhere for a dollar. A Bhat bus was called that because it cost a bhat to ride. One bhat was equal to five American pennies. You could take a taxi from the extreme south where I was to Burma for three dollars. The big red bus took you to Bankok (middle of the country) for five cents.
I took three girlfriends (who cost five bucks apiece per night) to a nice restaraunt and got change back from a 20 baht note (one dollar), and that included Pepsis for the girls and a beer for me.
Some friends and I rented a trawler, inclucing hiring its pilot, for ten bucks for a whole day and night.
My tealock (kind of a rented wife) cost thirty dollars a month, and came with a bungalow. That's what you're competing with.
If copyright terms were a reasonable 20 years then most US movies there are would be public domain, as the US founding fathers envisioned.
If the movie studios weren't retarded that would help Wikipedia, too. No stills of a movie covered in Wikipedia? Hmmm, the people who made that flick must be ashamed of their work. No reason fro me to spend money to rent it if it's so bad its makers are ashamed of it!.
Actually, if you repealed all copyright law written in or after the 20th century it would make a lot more sense. The problem isn't the law trailing technology, but being hijacked by financial interests.
;)
If the copyright law was as it was in 1901, all of Jimi Hendrix' works would be in the public domain. Windows 3.1 would be in the public domain. Steamboat Willie would be in the public domain. In fact, all the movies Disnay made prior to 1987 would be in the public domain! There would be no DMCA (now THERE'S a bad law).
The only way the law hasn't matched technology is where it can't go at all; the international internet (I'm being purposly redundantly redundant here).
You have an example of where the law doesn't match technology? I personally see no difference between sampling on a computer and recording on a tape, or swapping P2P vs trading tapes. The only difference is the scale.
-mcgrew
(PS- take your meds
Your post is offtopic. The discussion is about copyright, not patents.
I'm not sure why you've got the feeling that copyright is considered to be the evil around here either, as none of the comments so far have said anything of the sort, or even remotely like it. The closest was the fellow who said he doesn't mind anyone plagairizing his work. Even he didn't say copyright was evil.
What's been said is that copyright is in bad need of reform. Not that it's evil, but that the laws as written are bad.
Many copyright HOLDERS are indeed evil; Sony comes to mind.
-mcgrew
(linked text is titled "SONY MUST DIE!!! Die, you worthless scumbag bastards die!")
Or, perhaps we should limit corporate ownership of copyright?
I would rather we not allow corporations to hold copyright.
-mcgrew
Here's how our government works: the great American corporation Sony gives ten million $ to the Democrat candidate, and another ten mil to the Republican. No matter who loses, Sony wins. When Sony's interests go against yours, you lose.
We're not going to get copyright reform. Here's another two reforms we need before copyright reform is possible but won't get either:
- You should not be eligible to contribute to a candidate you're not eligible to vote for. I should not be able to contribute to John McCain unless he runs for President, or moves to Illinois and aomeone from Arizona shouldn't be able to contribute to Obama unless Obama m,oves to Arizona or runs for President.
- You should not be allowed to "contribute" to more than one candidate in any given race. "Contributing" to more than one candidate in a race is simply a badly hidden bribe.
-mcgrew1. Fair Use Reform.
The author offered no concrete suggestions, just "expand fair use". I offer a suggestion: any non-commercial use should be considered fair use. And if you sue me for copyright infringement and the courts deem my use to be fair use, I should be able to collect a kingly sum from you.
2.Limits on Secondary Liability
BZZZT! No, these tech ddin't become popular because they "challenged the status quo." They became popular because (surprise) they were USEFUL. And again, IMO TFA is wrong. There shouldn't be "limits" to secondary liability, there should be no such thing as "secondary liability.
3. Protections Against Copyright Abuse.
Am I the only one that gets annoyed when someone presents some obscure reference that I'm supposed to know about to the point that they need no link? Look, you want me to know about the "The Let's Go Crazy Baby" case then dammit, link to a Wikipedia article about it. Hmmm... "No page with that title exists". That said, I agree with the author about his point even though it was extremely retarded to expect me to know about "lets go crazy baby". If it isn't in Wikipedia it must be pretty damned obscure.
4. Fair and Accessible Licensing
As an end-user, I should have no license, nor any need for one. Licenses are for those who wish to use a copyrighted work for financial gain. End-user licenses should be illegal, PERIOD, not merely the unenforceable clickthrough licenses.
As to music, a small sample should be considered "fair use", not unlike a quote from a book. File sharing, being noncommercial, should be fair use.
5. Orphan Works Reform
Agreed, to get copyright you should have to register your copyright. And you should havce to clearly state the year your copyrighted work was registered so one can know when it gets to the public domain.
6. Notice of Technological and Contractual Restrictions on Digital Media.
Agreed.
But the guy completely missed the most needed reform of all: Sanity to copyright lengths. IINM at the beginning of the 20th century it was twenty years. That sounds about right; you're not going to pursuade Jimi Hendrix to do any more recording!
The recording artist should hold copyright to the recording rather than the record label, as it is now.
-mcgrew (I hold two ISBN numbers)
-mcgrew
Beads? You don't need the beads. Just see Ginger. Ginger and the Mickey part 1 gives a first person account of a non-sexual use for these drugs, and the sequel, Am I too picky? chronicles the karma payback.
Of course, since those diaries were written in 2003 Ginger's probably either dead or in prison by now.
-mcgrew
Apparently everyone on Slashdot is an idiot.
Well, I know I am.
There are two ways to compete. One is to offer the same product for less. The other is to offer a better product for more. Since you can't lower your price, improve your product.
I'm not worried about MY job. I can retire in a couple of years. I'm worried about they guy who's going to put a gun in my face to take my money because he can't find a job and there are no social programs here.
For every genius, there's someone whose only skill is asking if you want fries with that, and the cost of goods is rising so fast compared to his labor that the minimum wage worker (which is who we're talking about here) is working two jobs and still can't pay the rent.
In 1968 you could go to McDonald's and get a hamburger, fries, and small coke for less than fifty cents. A Volkswagon beetle was $900. A Corvette was $3,000. The minimum wage was $1.60.
Today the McLunch is four bucks (although the drinks are now large, medium, and humungous), the Volkswagon is $20,000 and the 'Vette is about $80,000. The Federal minimum wage is $5.85. And some people, like wait staff, don't even make that.
Wealth doesn't trickle down, it flows up. Every bottom tier worker produces wealth, whether he's a fry cook at McDonalds, a phone jockey in India, or a programmer silicon valley. The wealthy don't produce wealth at all; they merely aggregate it. The working person produces the wealth. When there is such a thing as the "working poor" your society is in serious trouble.
-mcgrew
Besides, there is probably not a big distance from 'funny' to 'insightful'.
There are at least two kinds of funny; stupid funny and insightful funny. Sometimes both at the same time.
Our *three* kinds of funny are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our kinds of funny.... Amongst our funninesst...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
-mcgrew
(apologies to Monty Python and everyone else on the planet)
In Soviet USSA, MLB cancels you!
"I was at a boxing match last night, and a hockey game broke out." -Rodney Dangerfield
Poor silicon valley, destined to be a ghost town with no industry, no jobs, and nobody there but drug dealers and crackheads.
That is Detroit, right?
-mcgrew
Yeah I was joking... and here it is today and the joke has become real. Or surreal.
Balls of crystal, I tell ya! Where's that Randi guy?
-mcgrew
Excuse me while I enjoy my MLB feed on Morpheus. Oh wait, I forgot - I stopped watching baseball the year they cancelled the world series.
My point, thoough, is that the only ones with functioning videos got them illegally.
-mcgrew
-1, troll? Who gave major league baseball owners slashdot mod points? The parent is correct, albeit sarcastically (and I'd have been sarcastic too). It's not a problem to the MLB, they already GOT your money, sucker!
Now mod me troll too.
-mcgrew
Or thought much about it, or knows what a third world country is like. How can I compete with someone who only pays $30 a month for rent, can take his family to a nice restaraunt for a dollar, or ride anywhere in the country for a nickle? Not even by doing away with such luxuries like electricity and running water could I compete with that!
That was what Thailand was like in 1974 (USAF at the end of the Vietnam war). You can't compete with "dirt cheap".
-mcgrew
No, a ton of feathers is fatter than a ton of bricks, like my earlier example of the fat guy and the skinny guy who weigh the same.
Yes, but imagine a beowolf cluster of... OW! OW! STOP HITTING ME!
I stand pedantically corrected. Muscle mass is DENSER than fat mass.