if it's actually "substandard" then it means it's not a copy of the original because there is no original to copy. meaning they were selling the latest seasons of the shows which aren't on sale yet.
Well, no, it just means it was substandard. The DVD itself can be poorly written, and might not play properly. Box sets might be missing items.
There was no indication in the article that they were selling the very latest episodes.
if you want the latest season of game of thrones, you are going to have to wait until 2014.
the industry needs to learn that when there is a demand, someone will fill it. if you aren't filling that demand, someone else will.
Do you mean, when there is a demand for cheaper product? There was no indication that these DVDs weren't available anywhere else. But most likely they were cheaper than the product that is available in the store.
You cannot say what a world without copyright and such would be like; you can only spew forth random speculations.
You are right, we can only speculate what a world without copyright would be like. But I think it would be a fairly boring place. I enjoy watch movies that were made on a $100 million dollar budget. They tend to be better than movies made on a $10,000 budget. I find it hard to believe that anyone would spend $100 million dollars making a movie in a world without copyrights. I find it hard to believe people would spend significant time and effort generating content in a world without copyright.
It seems like some people believe nothing will drastically change if we had no copyright, except that they can then freely download the music they want, and the movies they want. And that is just not going to happen.
The fact is, people are greedy. They want something, someone else generated, and they want it for free.
how does that scam cost the economy as a whole anything though?
How does selling counterfeit goods hurt the economy? I'm sure there are lots of reasons, and probably tons of research and studies done over the years. But a few things that spring to mind. Typically counterfeit items are of low quality. The customer is purchasing something of a lower quality than they probably expect, and probably with no recourse. Sometimes the customer might expect that, but not always. Sometimes the product isn't made following the standards the real item is made, exposing the customer to health and safety issues. The original creator loses out on potential sales, possibly making it more difficult to improve on the product.
And you said it yourself, they were probably dodging the VAT, so the government loses some money as well.
Either you are pro-freedom or you are not; if you support copyright, you support censorship and the loss of control over private property.
Is it ok to sell counterfeit clothes and purses and watches? Ignoring the "IP" issue, selling a counterfeit item as an original is fraud. These guys weren't selling these items as "copies."
As far as your loss of control over your private property, you know if you go down to the store and purchase a DVD, you are free to sell it to someone else.
But you want to claim the bits now belong to you, and you have the right to copy them and sell them to someone else (and stopping you is somehow censorship). Well the person who created the item, had an agreement with society. He would create the item, if you let him own the copyright for a few years. If you don't honor that agreement, people might stop creating things. If you don't support copyright, then you don't support content creators. You know, the people creating the content that you WANT.
You get a link in your email from a classmate and hit Youtube to see a video some other kid you don't know using this game to "shoot" you and a bunch of your friends in the hallways.
If it was me being shot... I would think, "WAY cool, what app is this and where can I get it?"
Why. why do you automatically think that maybe this represents intention? Have you ever seen people throw darts at pictures of their bosses? Is your first thought "I better find out if this represents novelty of intention?"
Look at what? When I was a kid we used to run around and shoot each other with rubber band guns and dart guns. Shoot I used to run a game of "assassin" in high school. Should we be investigated? No, we were just kids. Based on the story in the article, this kid did NOTHING to warrant a second thought (other than perhaps "hey, is there a problem and do you need help."
TFA: "arrested for terrorizing and interference of the operation of a school."
He didn't terrorize anyone. And I'm not sure how he interfered with the operation of the school. The article doesn't indicate this, but my guess is, he didn't actually interfere with the operation of the school.
Uhm ok... No ACTUAL weapons were used in the making of this story. So what does the fact it is easier for kids to illegally obtain them have to do with anything? Because the kid MIGHT get a weapon? That isn't a good enough reason to arrest him. So really the "right to bear arms" "crap" has nothing to do with this story.
FTS: "the monster trucks of the DVR world"
But the title is "Monster Truck of Tivos"
Why? Why do we have to use Tivo as a synonym for DVR, can't we just say DVR?
There are better ways to study traffic patters, than to look for only SOME of the vehicles. Like you know maybe studying ALL the vehicles, like pretty much any other metropolis does.
The purpose of TSA is safety: "Protect the Nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce."
So it is to stop someone from blowing the plane up, as well as stop them from hijacking a plane and flying it into a building. Keep in mind that TSA's mission is NOT specific to air flight!
If a plane blew up, the airline would get sued for about a figure that an actuary could neatly estimate.
Anyone can estimate it, it is very very very close to 0.
But the TSA grabs everyone at the start of the terminal. The terminals are used by multiple airlines. How do you see that getting broken up by airline?
The same way everything else in the airport is broken up by airline, as I'm sure it was done before 9/11. Or better yet, don't do any security at all!
There are airports in Europe that have security at the gate, and these are awful. Not only does it not help to get there early, as the gate doesn't open up until a certain time, there is generally no facilities after the checkpoint. No food, no water, no toilets (not always, some have toilets and vending machines)
How are the incentives in the wrong place? The airlines need security theater; people are already fearful of flying, and fear of being killed by terrorists while flying only makes that worse.
This is the problem really. Flying is one of the safest ways to travel. After 9/11 more people drove to their destination and traffic deaths went up.
That is the wrong kind of profiling, and doesn't work. Profiling is supposed to based on how the person is acting. The problem is, well its acting, and people can control how they act.
Profiling is a horrible crime. Profiling based on something stupid like race doesn't work anymore than the current situation works. Profiling based on anything else can be tricked. But what exactly are we worried about? What is it we are afraid of?
She said "The thing is, we lost and if you don't comply it's treason." In other words, it is treasonous not to cooperate. Sounds like the headline is spot on.
What spin? TFA claims Yahoo CEO said "Releasing classified information is treason." She also said "The thing is, we lost and if you don't comply it's treason." These are both direct quotes from Ms. Mayer. So, how is this a spin on the article? The article is just reporting on what she said.
Slashdot Mirror
if it's actually "substandard" then it means it's not a copy of the original because there is no original to copy. meaning they were selling the latest seasons of the shows which aren't on sale yet.
Well, no, it just means it was substandard. The DVD itself can be poorly written, and might not play properly. Box sets might be missing items.
There was no indication in the article that they were selling the very latest episodes.
if you want the latest season of game of thrones, you are going to have to wait until 2014.
the industry needs to learn that when there is a demand, someone will fill it. if you aren't filling that demand, someone else will.
Do you mean, when there is a demand for cheaper product? There was no indication that these DVDs weren't available anywhere else. But most likely they were cheaper than the product that is available in the store.
You cannot say what a world without copyright and such would be like; you can only spew forth random speculations.
You are right, we can only speculate what a world without copyright would be like. But I think it would be a fairly boring place. I enjoy watch movies that were made on a $100 million dollar budget. They tend to be better than movies made on a $10,000 budget. I find it hard to believe that anyone would spend $100 million dollars making a movie in a world without copyrights. I find it hard to believe people would spend significant time and effort generating content in a world without copyright.
It seems like some people believe nothing will drastically change if we had no copyright, except that they can then freely download the music they want, and the movies they want. And that is just not going to happen.
The fact is, people are greedy. They want something, someone else generated, and they want it for free.
how does that scam cost the economy as a whole anything though?
How does selling counterfeit goods hurt the economy? I'm sure there are lots of reasons, and probably tons of research and studies done over the years. But a few things that spring to mind. Typically counterfeit items are of low quality. The customer is purchasing something of a lower quality than they probably expect, and probably with no recourse. Sometimes the customer might expect that, but not always. Sometimes the product isn't made following the standards the real item is made, exposing the customer to health and safety issues. The original creator loses out on potential sales, possibly making it more difficult to improve on the product.
And you said it yourself, they were probably dodging the VAT, so the government loses some money as well.
Either you are pro-freedom or you are not; if you support copyright, you support censorship and the loss of control over private property.
Is it ok to sell counterfeit clothes and purses and watches? Ignoring the "IP" issue, selling a counterfeit item as an original is fraud. These guys weren't selling these items as "copies."
As far as your loss of control over your private property, you know if you go down to the store and purchase a DVD, you are free to sell it to someone else.
But you want to claim the bits now belong to you, and you have the right to copy them and sell them to someone else (and stopping you is somehow censorship). Well the person who created the item, had an agreement with society. He would create the item, if you let him own the copyright for a few years. If you don't honor that agreement, people might stop creating things. If you don't support copyright, then you don't support content creators. You know, the people creating the content that you WANT.
You get a link in your email from a classmate and hit Youtube to see a video some other kid you don't know using this game to "shoot" you and a bunch of your friends in the hallways.
If it was me being shot... I would think, "WAY cool, what app is this and where can I get it?"
We used to bring dart guns to school. I made a special double barreled one, still got it around here someplace.
We don't know at what time that game becomes reality.
Actually WE do (we being everyone but the idiotic administrator.) The answer is NEVER.
squish squish
Why. why do you automatically think that maybe this represents intention? Have you ever seen people throw darts at pictures of their bosses? Is your first thought "I better find out if this represents novelty of intention?"
Look at what? When I was a kid we used to run around and shoot each other with rubber band guns and dart guns. Shoot I used to run a game of "assassin" in high school. Should we be investigated? No, we were just kids. Based on the story in the article, this kid did NOTHING to warrant a second thought (other than perhaps "hey, is there a problem and do you need help."
TFA: "arrested for terrorizing and interference of the operation of a school."
He didn't terrorize anyone. And I'm not sure how he interfered with the operation of the school. The article doesn't indicate this, but my guess is, he didn't actually interfere with the operation of the school.
Uhm ok... No ACTUAL weapons were used in the making of this story. So what does the fact it is easier for kids to illegally obtain them have to do with anything? Because the kid MIGHT get a weapon? That isn't a good enough reason to arrest him. So really the "right to bear arms" "crap" has nothing to do with this story.
There seems to be a market for quality recordings http://www.npr.org/blogs/therecord/2013/09/11/219727031/what-does-a-song-that-costs-5-sound-like
FTS: "the monster trucks of the DVR world"
But the title is "Monster Truck of Tivos"
Why? Why do we have to use Tivo as a synonym for DVR, can't we just say DVR?
There are better ways to study traffic patters, than to look for only SOME of the vehicles. Like you know maybe studying ALL the vehicles, like pretty much any other metropolis does.
So the legislature admits they passed a law with no idea what its impact would be.
That is only because they didn't listen to their constituents. Everyone ELSE knew what the impact would be, except for the people passing the law.
The purpose of TSA is safety: "Protect the Nation's transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce."
So it is to stop someone from blowing the plane up, as well as stop them from hijacking a plane and flying it into a building. Keep in mind that TSA's mission is NOT specific to air flight!
If a plane blew up, the airline would get sued for about a figure that an actuary could neatly estimate.
Anyone can estimate it, it is very very very close to 0.
But the TSA grabs everyone at the start of the terminal. The terminals are used by multiple airlines. How do you see that getting broken up by airline?
The same way everything else in the airport is broken up by airline, as I'm sure it was done before 9/11. Or better yet, don't do any security at all!
There are airports in Europe that have security at the gate, and these are awful. Not only does it not help to get there early, as the gate doesn't open up until a certain time, there is generally no facilities after the checkpoint. No food, no water, no toilets (not always, some have toilets and vending machines)
How are the incentives in the wrong place? The airlines need security theater; people are already fearful of flying, and fear of being killed by terrorists while flying only makes that worse.
This is the problem really. Flying is one of the safest ways to travel. After 9/11 more people drove to their destination and traffic deaths went up.
Suspects are typically described by appearance,
When you have a suspect, or a witness... But when you don't have a suspect, who do you look for?
That is the wrong kind of profiling, and doesn't work. Profiling is supposed to based on how the person is acting. The problem is, well its acting, and people can control how they act.
Profiling is a horrible crime. Profiling based on something stupid like race doesn't work anymore than the current situation works. Profiling based on anything else can be tricked. But what exactly are we worried about? What is it we are afraid of?
She said "The thing is, we lost and if you don't comply it's treason." In other words, it is treasonous not to cooperate. Sounds like the headline is spot on.
What spin? TFA claims Yahoo CEO said "Releasing classified information is treason." She also said "The thing is, we lost and if you don't comply it's treason." These are both direct quotes from Ms. Mayer. So, how is this a spin on the article? The article is just reporting on what she said.
Why would you think that? King and Clancy don't "produce" their books.