NetCoalition/CCIA Reinforces Recent Comments To IP Czar Over Bogus Industry Studies On Copyright

from the keep-up-the-good-work dept

Earlier this year, the US's IP Czar (technically, IP "Enforcement Coordinator"), Victoria Espinel, asked for public comment on how her enforcement plan should work. While I had some trouble with the basis for many of the questions (which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing), I still submitted my own comments. Soon afterwards, I pointed to an absolute must read filing by NetCoalition/CCIA, which was 23 pages of brilliance, picking apart the claims of various pro-stronger-copyright groups one-by-one. Since then, a few key reports have been released, and, in response, Jonathan Band, who wrote much of the original report, alerts our attention to the fact that NetCoalition/CCIA have filed supplemental comments with Espinel (pdf) based on those reports:
The filing talks about those three reports -- all of which we've discussed here previously -- to reiterate some of the key points made in the original filing. The first, of course, is the GAO report that debunked the claims from industry studies about all of the "losses" caused by infringement. Amusingly, that GAO report was required by the same law that created the IP Czar position in the first place, the ProIP Act. The filing notes, by the way, that the GAO's mandate for the report didn't even say it had to investigate copyright infringement -- just counterfeiting. However, the GAO appears to have been so troubled by the bogus reports out there that it decided to publicly call those studies into question. As this new filing points out, many of the comments filed by groups in support of strong copyright enforcement, relied on those reports that the GAO has since debunked. This should call into question the legitimacy of those filings entirely.

Second, this supplemental filing highlights that ridiculous Chamber of Commerce report that we highlighted recently as well. It was the one that couldn't pass the laugh test, because it lumped in pretty much every company in what it decided were "IP-intensive industries" and compared them to companies in what it considered to be "non-IP-intensive industries" and then assumed, with no proof whatsoever, that all of the benefits to those IP-intensive industries came from intellectual property laws. The report was so ridiculous that no one who actually read the details could take it seriously. But, that's the problem. Very few people actually do read the details. The whole point of the report is to just take the distorted headline and reuse it. Thankfully, Band and others in this filing are trying to make it clear to the White House that the Chamber of Commerce's report is not an accurate description of what's going on.

Finally, it highlights CCIA's own report -- using the very same methodology as those who claim the "copyright industries" contribute $1.52 trillion to the economy -- to show that exceptions to copyright (such as fair use) contribute much, much more to the economy. Who knows if Espinel, or others at the White House are paying attention to the details in these filings, but these two filings from NetCoalition/CCIA are incredibly detailed and well supported with evidence. Hopefully someone in the White House is paying attention.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 5:13am

    which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    MIKE wrote :(which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Me:

    I know you are busy Mike , so let me correct this sentance for you :

    It should read:
    "....which all seemed to COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND that greater enforcement of copyright & patent law,, was, without ANY possible question, a good thing,,, and most certainly needed , to protect Artist Copyrights & Patent holder's rights in the current digital age, and the future nano-age."

    If you need any more help ,,Mike ,, you know where to find me.

    Have a Great day, ( But no illegal downloading , OR any circumventing anything. SO Play nice, or we will take away your toys.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 5:21am

    Yeah because my tax dollars can't be better spent on public safety or welfare. Nope, needs to be spent on something completely trivial like busting basement-dwellers for downloading Transformers.

    We can do without decent roads for a while. Our 1s and 0s are being held hostage!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Yogi, May 26th, 2010 @ 5:22am

    Forget it

    The president has already been bought and paid for. We are way beyond the point of having any discussion based on reason in this issue.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 5:30am

    "Who knows if Espinel, or others at the White House are paying attention to the details in these filings"

    I know. And the answer is no.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 5:49am

    Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    You're being sarcastic here of course....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 6:00am

    Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Wow, were you actually able to write that without feeling like a jerk? No evidence to the contrary, just condescending language.

    Have you actually read any of the studies that debunk your statement or do you prefer to keep your hands over your ears while shouting "lalalalalala?"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    tom, May 26th, 2010 @ 6:08am

    And the PPL..

    Have just sent me an email saying they have written to Ms Espinel, on my behalf (one of the 47,000 members, though i haven't bothered registering my music with them for 10 years now) even though i now 'practise my art as a hobby in the middle of the night'.See the link to the letter here: http://www.ppluk.com/en/Newsletters/Folder-Membership-Newsletter---May-2010/Stories/US-Copyri ght-Alliance-Update/. I find the whole educating-children-to-defend-their-business quite unpleasant.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 6:10am

    Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    yes ,, read ,, all the posts on my profile here for the last 3 weeks ,, it all there ,, i have nothing more to ad
    to the subject
    in nature of fact and/or opinion

    that I have not posted
    here
    already.
    READ,

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 6:11am

    busting basement-dwellers for downloading Transformers.

    and their organized crime bosses

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 6:12am

    Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    no I am biting serious actually.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 6:13am

    Sometimes you have to write like a jerk just so Mike can have something to live for, and that these people live up to being a jerk in real life.

    It seems to be the purpose of this blog run by an Ivy League graduate.

    Hey, I just found a great story for you:
    "Graduating From An Ivy League College: Smart. Starting A Blog After Graduating From An Ivy League College: Not So Smart"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 6:36am

    Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Who an earth would want to bother reading comments that are difficult to read because, besides making little sense, they lack any form of proper capitalisation, pounctuation, spelling or sentence structure.

    Psaw!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    NAMELESS ONE, May 26th, 2010 @ 6:43am

    the "copyright industries" contribute $1.52 trillion to the economy

    and the usa is still in debt how far?
    SO not only can we add extortion lawsuits
    BUT tax evasion to the list
    perhaps that term MAFIAA isn't so far off.
    33% taxes on that over 5 years = 2.5 trillion bucks
    take the recent bush obama madness and.....yea
    now you know why the USA economy is tanking.

    AND great news more and more of Canada is waking up to doing business with the Chinese. WE will be rid of the racist harper soon enough and then we will move forward.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 6:47am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Anonymous Coward

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 6:52am

    Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    If you want to be serious I would take the trouble to be better informed if I were you.

    Then you would be able to deploy facts and logical arguments rather than just assertyions and insults.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:04am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Copyright and Patent Law , is embedded into to U.S. Constitution.

    Jefferson knew it was needed to built a vibrant economy, that would be strongg enough to last 250 years,, now mater how many Bush's try to run it into the ground.

    Jefferson was cool..

    Though I do disagree with him on on point.

    I hold Copyright and Patent Law , is just an extension of Natural Law.

    T.J. disagrees , with me on that point , from what Mike tells me.
    ---

    I am dyslexic , sorry about the keyboard anarchy.

    This is not formal , pay-for-word writing,, ,,,,,,

    ,,,,,,,,,,, yet .

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    kirillian (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:07am

    Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Wait, you've been here for 3 weeks?!? Has anyone made sure to give you our customary Troll Welcome yet?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:24am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    I hold Copyright and Patent Law , is just an extension of Natural Law.

    Well you can have that as an opinion (just like my opinion that copyright laws should be abolished) - however in the founding judgement of copyright - predating your constitution - the House of Lords Judgement in the case of Donaldson against Beckett, that point was debated throroughly and resolved. The Natural Law of Ownership was held to exist only up to the point of first publication. After that point it is a matter for the give and take of statute law.

    Lpord Camden's comment on the case is quite eloquent - in an 18th century type of way.

    "The arguments attempted to be maintained on the side of the respondents, were founded on patents, privileges, Star Chamber decrees, and the bye (sic) laws of the Stationers' Company; all of them the effects of the grossest tyranny and usurpation; the very last places in which I should have dreamt of finding the least trace of the common law of this kingdom; and yet, by a variety of subtle reasoning and metaphysical refinements, have they endeavored to squeeze out the spirit of the common law from premises in which it could not possibly have existence."

    The Wikipedia article is quite good - although I can point you at peer reviewed academic work with the same content if you like:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donaldson_v_Beckett

    (btw your copyright law was copied from the British one originally and British cases were initially used as precedents)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:28am

    Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    I'm pretty sure you lost any ability to criticize downloaders the moment you became a copyright infringer yourself.

    If there was greater enforcement of copyright law, you would be in a lawsuit right now. Remember?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:30am

    Re: busting basement-dwellers for downloading Transformers.

    You honestly believe that most people who download music have "organized crime bosses"? Wow.

    That doesn't even apply to most counterfeiters, much less people who share music without profiting.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Son of Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 7:31am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Well, you are reading

    Tooo Funny

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 7:55am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Jefferson knew it was needed to built a vibrant vocabulary, (and grammar) that would be strong enough to last 250 years no mater how many Bush's try to run it into the ground.

    Fixed it for you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    chris (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:00am

    Re: busting basement-dwellers for downloading Transformers.

    and their organized crime bosses

    no, piracy supports terrorism.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    icon
    WammerJammer (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:04am

    Charge me

    As a disabled person on a very small income I don't understand how they lose money on me downloading something. I am so poor I don't go to movies, I don't rent DVD's, I don't have Cable and I can't afford to buy CD's. If I didn't download it I wouldn't have a clue as to what was going on. I can't buy it anyway so where's the loss? I am old and disabled but many young people I know have the same problem as me. Everyone wants to be entertained and it used to be affordable.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:28am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    I think he is yanking your chain just for grins and giggles.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 8:30am

    in the end, it all comes back to a simple question: how many people have an illegal copy of something, and how much is it worth retail? if you didnt want it, why did you download it? if it was desirable enough for you to download, then it must have been desirable enough to buy, at least at some price.

    everything else is smoke and dust in your eyes as the pro-piracy people attempt to prove that 1+1 = 0.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:31am

    copyright laws should be abolished)

    Show me one member of Congress ,, or any sitting federal judge who agrees with:

    "copyright laws should be abolished".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:34am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Which Troll welcome ?

    Hello, is that your mom under that bridge?

    Does anyone mind if I feed this guy?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:35am

    our customary Troll Welcome yet?

    I have been reading here for years.
    check my blog , as listed in my profile.

    Post ,,I rarely do , unless Mike ticks me off ( copy rights) ,, or Mike hits a point I really agree with him on . ( usually on electronic voting. )

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:37am

    Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Karl ,, don;t make me come up there ! (c.f. : D. Letterman, after bad joke response)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:39am

    Re:

    "how many people have an illegal copy of something, and how much is it worth retail?"

    what is it worth retail? not that much, which is one of the reasons why people infringe. The other are lack of other options, overpriced, etc

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:43am

    If there was greater enforcement of copyright law, you would be in a lawsuit right now. Remember?

    Please , Paul , sue me , for posting my cover of Revolution #1 , on my MySpace page.

    ( Paul , also please bring Ringo , when we meet , for coffee ,, I am having trouble with my vocal to "Don't Pass Me By", and mayber Ringo could vocal coach me on his brilliant octave change in the chorus.

    Love u Richie , you are the greatest Drummer ever , as I know Paul has told you during the Let It Be sessions)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 8:45am

    Re: Re:

    "what is it worth retail? not that much, which is one of the reasons why people infringe." - you always have the option not to take something for free. using price as an excuse to infringe is a very slick way of justifying the crime, no? if you dont value it enough to pay for it, dont take it and enjoy it anyway. trust me, when you stop enjoying it for free, you will discover that some of it is actually worth the retail price to you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:47am

    You honestly believe that most people who download music have "organized crime bosses"?

    "You honestly believe that most people who download music have "organized crime bosses"?"


    Yes . Conspiracy does not have to be conscience by all parties,, -- according to the John Birch Society -- ( I had a lecture in college from a rep , of theirs ,, the proff , thought it was a good thing to hear.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:49am

    no, piracy supports terrorism.

    "no, piracy supports terrorism."

    In some country-s : YES !!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:51am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    cute ,, i like it . REALLY !

    BTW : Are you also an Anarchist like Mike?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:02am

    Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    What's with all the spelling and punctuation trouble? Makes it hard to take you seriously.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:03am

    It's amazing how our government is so quick to act in the corporate interest but when it comes to actually acting in the public interest (ie: correcting copyright and IP law) they won't even lift a finger.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:13am

    "Who knows if Espinel, or others at the White House are paying attention to the details in these filings"

    Sorry, they only pay attention to their campaign contributors. Nice try though.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:22am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "using price as an excuse to infringe is a very slick way of justifying the crime, no?"

    It's not a crime, it's a tort, and the justification is that you have no (natural) right to prevent others from copying you and that our legal system is broken beyond all respectability.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:26am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    i would say that is another slick way to justify the crime. congrats.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 9:30am

    Re: If there was greater enforcement of copyright law, you would be in a lawsuit right now. Remember?

    Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:43am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Nor does one have a natural right to commit a tort.

    Ours is a society based upon the rule of law. If there is a law with which you disagree, then use the rule of law to advocate change.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Uhm.... Isn't that what this blog is about. We are using the rule of law (free speech) to advocate change.

    and yes, people have a natural right to commit a legal tort to the extent that the law infringes on our natural rights. Now, I'm not advocating that we break the law, I think we should try and change the law instead, which is the whole point of this discussion.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "i would say that is another slick way to justify the crime. congrats."

    Who cares what you would say, it's not like you ever say anything substantial or substantially supported with logic or evidence anyways.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46.  
    identicon
    Undisclosed Wimp, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:10am

    Re:

    I think the question is: "who doesn't?".

    The way the laws are getting it is almost impossible to do anything without infringing on some law or patent. And if that wasn't enough, they are preparing to borrow a few ideas from the inquisition, where you don't need proof to convict/punish someone, just an accusation...



    Oh, and by the way, 1+1 equals 0 without bending any rules. Just impose one condition, and you're good (math homework: figure out what :p).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:14am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You misapprehend my comment because most certainly free speech is generally within the boundaries of law, and this or any other public forum to express one's views is appropriate.

    However, free speech is not an absolute. Use this forum to commit defamation or other actions long recognized as exceptions to the First Amendment and you can well expect that "I have a natural right to commit a tort" will fall on deaf ears.

    The same can be said for many other tortious activities.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:21am

    Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    You're not listening.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:23am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    Anarchy means without government. So can you prove that Mike is an arachrist?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 10:25am

    Re: no, piracy supports terrorism.

    Bullshit.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 10:43am

    Re: You honestly believe that most people who download music have "organized crime bosses"?

    So, who is your crime boss, then? I ask, because I'm not a pirate like you. Is there some sort of secret handshake or something?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  52.  
    icon
    chris (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 11:14am

    Re: Re: no, piracy supports terrorism.

    no u.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  53.  
    icon
    Nastybutler77 (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 11:34am

    Re: Re: Re:

    So you chose to ignore the fact that those who "illegally" download content spend more on entertainment than those who don't. How convenient.

    I may, or may not, download music, television shows, and movies via BitTorrent for free, but I also go to the movie theater fairly often, and pay to see the bands that I've "ripped off" when they play in my city. Which I might not have the discretionary income for if I had to pay for all the content I may or may not have downloaded for free. But you never take that into account, do you?

    I, and a lot of other people, set aside "$X" for entertainment. If I don't have to spend it on content that can be reproduced and distributed for free, then I'm free to spend that money on other things that aren't freely availiable. But I don't suppose that makes any sense to you, does it?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  54.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:10pm

    Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    Show me one member of Congress ,, or any sitting federal judge who agrees with:

    Show me one that understands the implications of economics as applied to modern technology....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  55.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:13pm

    Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    Show me one member of Congress ,, or any sitting federal judge who agrees with:

    "copyright laws should be abolished".

    Only point that matters in the real world !
    =========================================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  56.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:22pm

    Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    http://commerce.senate.gov/public/

    Your move ,, who do you like ? who don't you like?

    I am talking about mainstream public policy reality.

    Not juvenile "copyright laws should be abolished" proposeals

    Might as well divide by zero on your abacus .

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  57.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 12:23pm

    Re: Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    "Only point that matters in the real world !"

    So if the members of congress thought murder was OK then that's the only point that matters?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  58.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:27pm

    MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    Just suspect .

    I wrote


    ME : "CopyRIGHT Laws - like any laws - are what define a civilized society. ( Do you accept that point? If not you are a lost cause. )"

    MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100514/0126329423#c3565

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  59.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:31pm

    I am dyslexic

    I will repeat when needed , for nubbies ,, or geek , eho cannot figure it out .

    Mike,, Please put grammar and spell check into the post reply window.

    I is not worth if got me to open MS Word ,, or another Google doc -- to answer every nut here who want to ban copyright .

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  60.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:37pm

    Re: Charge me

    Websites , that provide downloads or lyrics LEGALLY ,, should pay royalties to artists with the advertising income , like radio does.

    Some do already.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  61.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:42pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    REAL WORLD comments please ,, i will debate people from this solar system only.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  62.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 12:49pm

    Re: Re: You honestly believe that most people who download music have "organized crime bosses"?

    "who is your crime boss, "

    Lou Reed
    http://www.loureed.com/

    Love ya , Lou,, ,, I will be in mid-town NYC later ,, i hope we cross paths at the guitar store again. Always a pleasure.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  63.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 12:55pm

    Re: MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    See, this is why so many people disagree with you. You take one or two words, implicitly assume a grand majority of things, then refuse to give an credence to others that demonstrate flaws in your assertions.

    For example, above. It is an enormous assumption--completely unsubstantiated by the evidence you've provided that Mike is an anarchist. He addresses what makes a civilized society, not whether or not laws are necessary. The two are independent of one another. It is possible for society and culture to drive civilization without formal laws and that does not make them civilized. Most would argue, for example, that politeness is a mark of civilized society, but codified into law.

    I'm beginning to wonder if the fact that english is not your first language is a massive barrier to your understanding and comprehension.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  64.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 12:57pm

    Re: Re: MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    Yargh. Apparently english is not my first language either.

    * formal laws, which do not make them civilized.
    * not codified into law.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  65.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 1:00pm

    capitalisation, pounctuation, spelling or sentence structure.

    again dyslexia. keep picking on my disability folks.

    shows your ilk,

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  66.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 1:00pm

    Re: Re: Charge me

    As long as those artists start paying for the advertising and distribution costs of those works on radio and those websites, I'm all for it!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  67.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 1:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    You do understand that, to the average english-reading person, your posts make almost no sense and ignore reason and basic facts?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  68.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 1:14pm

    apples and oranges

    "New King of Technology: Apple Overtakes Microsoft"

    By MIGUEL HELFT and ASHLEE VANCE
    Published: May 26, 2010

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/technology/27apple.html?hp

    ==========
    WOW !!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  69.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 1:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    It is a real world comment - it's called a thought experiment. Einstein used them all the time. Too bad if you lack the imagination to follow this type of argument.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  70.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 1:59pm

    Re: Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    First of all your congress and judges don't directly concern me.

    Secondly I don't see what the opinions of judges and congressmen have to do with my right to hold an opinion - or yours for that matter.
    You hold an opinion (that copyright is somehow a "natural right") that goes against the authoritative interpretation of the law at the time copyright was established. I hold an opinion that copyright should be abolished. We are each entitled to these opinions that is all.

    Thirdly you call my opinion juvenile. I don't see how that advances the argument - it is merely abuse which generally indicates a lack of real arguments in tose who employ it.

    There was a time when slavery was mainstream public policy reality. That didn't make it right.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  71.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 1:59pm

    Re: Re: MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    "It is an enormous assumption--completely unsubstantiated by the evidence you've provided that Mike is an anarchist."

    He knows that, he's just being dishonest. Most IP maximists are dishonest you know.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  72.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 2:10pm

    Re: Re: Re: You honestly believe that most people who download music have "organized crime bosses"?

    Lou Reed, eh?
    ...he also referred to downloading his more obscure songs, and, after noticing a lot of open cell phones, mused that maybe we have entered into a new era of cell-phone radio and added, "It's fine by me."

    http://www.spin.com/articles/lou-reed-advanced

    So, I guess maybe he is your "crime boss," and should be thrown in jail or sued into oblivion. Good to know.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  73.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 2:12pm

    Re: Re: Re: Charge me

    radio pays for the content that they make their money from, websites should be no different. music (or talk show hosts) is their raw materials, without which nobody would be listening to empty air.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  74.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 2:14pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "So you chose to ignore the fact that those who "illegally" download content spend more on entertainment than those who don't. How convenient. " - no, i choose to ignore what i consider a red herring. their spending doesnt change the basic fact that they are obtaining music / movies / whatever without compensation, and profiting from them.

    as always, there is no indication that (a) the money wouldnt be spent anyway, and (b) that these same people would not in fact spend more to obtain what they wanted, if they were not getting it for free. if you can point me to an empirical study that can cover these very basic concepts, you might score a point. otherwise, your entire concept is meaningless and built on junk science. a red herring in the copyright debate.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  75.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 2:23pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    If you want to be serious I would take the trouble to be better informed if I were you.

    Then you would be able to deploy facts and logical arguments rather than just assertyions and insults.


    That's just not how he rolls.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  76.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 2:25pm

    Re: I am dyslexic

    I don't know about grammar, but Firefox can check your spelling. It would help anyway.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  77.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 2:30pm

    Re: Re: Charge me

    Websites , that provide downloads

    Generally speaking, websites don't provide infringing content themselves. Usually, they either provide "online storage lockers" for users, or they provide a mechanism for users to swap each others' files. In either case, it's their users who make the content available.

    For example: by hosting your illegal version of Revolution 1, MySpace is hosting infringing content. But they're not the ones who should be paying royalties - you are.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  78.  
    icon
    Nastybutler77 (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 2:47pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "if you can point me to an empirical study that can cover these very basic concepts, you might score a point. otherwise, your entire concept is meaningless and built on junk science."

    And if you can point me to an empirical study that shows that infringement equals lost sales you might have a point. But there's not any, so your point of view is absurd and build on bad business models proped up by government monopolies granted due to influence peddling.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  79.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 4:21pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    If by red herring, you mean anything that might compromise your position or make it look stupid, then yes.

    It's always easy to win with conditions of "heads I win, tails you lose".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  80.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 5:51pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Charge me

    Huh? Streaming websites have been forced to pay royalties, radio does not. Good luck telling all those artists that radio will stop playing their music or start deciding what music to buy based on its costs... I'm sure they'll be thrilled to hear about their reduced exposure.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  81.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 5:58pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Again you misunderstand or change the locus of the argument. He's not saying breaking the law is ok, only that you are incorrectly munging together natural and positive law.

    And believe it or not we agree that if it was worth infringing or downloading, it is worth buying. Where we disagree is in how much the people will pay. Whether you like it or not, the price is far lower than you would like. If you don't like it, tough. People will pay money if they believe the price justifies the value--if they don't they meet their need in other ways. Sometimes doing without, sometimes accepting alternatives, sometimes infringing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  82.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:47pm

    Einstein used......

    I know what ,, Einstein used,, i have 30 college credit hours in astronomy and physics -- is was an unoffical minor,, got a lifetime hobby.

    Einstein used though experiments , not to explain fantasy , but to inquire into the nature of things. It worked perfectly.

    Political Theory (Pol-sci major is me ) is more academic and hyperbolic,, with many silly what ifs.

    Abolishing Copyright and Patent Laws , embedded into the Us> constitution , is silly , unreasonable , unrealistic , futile , and a waste of time to discus here,

    Lets talk real , actual Public Policy with real world consequences ,

    , and maybe some congressional staffer will read it ,
    , and tell his/her Congress-person boss,

    and then we can do away with the evil income tax -

    - which is not in the Constitution !!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  83.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:55pm

    There was a time when slavery was mainstream public policy reality. That didn't make it right.

    "There was a time when slavery was mainstream public policy reality. That didn't make it right."

    Go to my profile read my posts ,, i have raised that numerous times . Human Rights is Natural Law,

    History and Law caught up with it in the USA in 1863.

    Elsewhere in today world , it is still very much an issue everyday.

    I hold copy Rights stem from Natural Law as well , Mike says Thomas Jefferson disagrees. , I am still not sure on that.

    ,, but we all agree that COPYRIGHT and PATENT LAW is in the ORIGINAL U.S. Constitution --- not the bill of Rights- as it is a fact.

    Copy-Right & Patent Law came before free speech and press.

    THINK ABOUT IT !

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  84.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 7:57pm

    Re: Re: Re: MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    Mike , Your Ball. Your pitch . the bases are loaded.

    Whatta say ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  85.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:03pm

    Re: Re: I am dyslexic / Firefox can check your spelling. It would help anyway.

    "Firefox can check your spelling. It would help anyway."

    it does ,, but with from /form ,, it /is .,, on /in ,, and ,, etc ,, its hard for me ,, so be,, fare -- er,,, fair.

    Grammar . I AM an Anarchist !! And i will fight to the death there !! Use to drive the proffs nuts., (but does the period go inside or side the parentheses.). ???

    When i was a kid , it did , and now it don;t , except on a Tuesday in May in a Leap year

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  86.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:05pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    "You do understand that, to the average english-reading person, your posts make almost no sense and ignore reason and basic facts?"

    Yes.

    That's why I worked in politics.

    I though that was clear

    =================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  87.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:11pm

    Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Wrong.
    It is ALL about Paul and John , and Ringo , and George ,

    , and Clapton and Dylan , and Jackson ( Browne & 5 ) .

    And every other Artist of there rich or poor ,, famous or unknown to most ------ and their families , who eat food , form the Artists income

    Artists whose work you want soooooo bad , but you still ,, you want for nothing ,, and are willing to break the law to get it !!!

    CLEAR undisputed LAW,, that says payment or royalties are due .

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  88.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:15pm

    cell-phone radio and added, "It's fine by me.

    Because if your cell plays "sweet Jane " on a ring tone -- legally downloaded ,, Lou gets a nickel.

    Pretty obvious, point actually.

    THINK ,, guysmm think , before you post !

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  89.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:17pm

    Re: cell-phone radio and added, "It's fine by me.

    "THINK ,, guys (mm) think , before you post !"

    I have no idea what those mm's are doing there ,,must have hit :M: not spacebar. ( I need to change to my reading glasses)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  90.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:20pm

    Anonymous Cowards

    Anonymous Cowards ,, all of you !

    Shame!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  91.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:21pm

    Re: Anonymous Cowards

    but A good exchange , still .

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  92.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:35pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    "what is it worth retail?

    not that much, which is one of the reasons why people infringe."

    - you always have the option not to take something for free.

    using price as an excuse to infringe is a very slick way of justifying the crime,

    no?

    if you dont value it enough to pay for it,

    dont take it and enjoy it anyway.

    trust me, when you stop enjoying it for free,

    you will discover

    that some of it

    is actually worth
    the retail
    price
    to
    you."


    ME : Worth repeating ,

    Why be an " Anonymous Coward",,

    unless you are a techdirt staffer ,,

    then i could see why .

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  93.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 8:41pm

    "If by red herring"

    To quote::::::::::

    Senator Foghorn Leghorn:

    "I say SIR !!

    If the chair does so recognize.!

    I would like to propose a rule.

    No metaphors ,

    Unless you know their root meaning."

    ((( ( You chicken plucking varmint you! $%%$## !! )))))

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  94.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:17pm

    Re: Re:

    "Oh, and by the way, 1+1 equals 0 without bending any rules. Just impose one condition, and you're good (math homework: figure out what :p)." binary single digit. but that would still be bending the rules by ignoring the resulting 1 to the left.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  95.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 26th, 2010 @ 9:33pm

    So glad I don't pay for media LoL

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  96.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 9:52pm

    Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    CLEAR undisputed LAW,, that says payment or royalties are due .

    Yes. By you, to the copyright holders, because you "stole" their song.

    In case you want to stop being a "thief:" A quick browse through the Harry Fox Agency's Songfile shows that the publishers (copyright owners) of "Revolution 1" are EMI (for Lennon) and Sony (for McCartney). These corporations are the only ones who can give you permission to cover the song, and the only ones who are allowed to collect royalties from you. Neither Lennon's estate, nor McCartney, are allowed to do so, nor can they stop EMI/Sony if these companies decide to sue you.

    So: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  97.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 10:01pm

    Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    ...As an aside: If you pay the statutory licensing fees (Harry Fox usually handles this on behalf of the majors), then you can cover the song, whether or not Paul approves.

    He can say, "Sod off, you wanker, I don't want you playing my song." You would show your royalty receipt, and say "Tough titties, Limey." And Paul would have to run home with his tail between his legs, because he has no right to do anything else.

    Ain't copyright a bitch?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  98.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 10:11pm

    Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    "Yes. By you, to the copyright holders, because you "stole" their song."

    Karl , get off of this ,, i said , already ,, its a musician culture thing ,, Please Paul sure me !! H e won't. I will try a George song next , but Olivia Harrison won't sue me either then,

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  99.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 10:13pm

    Ain't copyright a bitch?

    on this point ,,Karl,, you are the female dog.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  100.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 10:25pm

    Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    "He can say, "Sod off, you wanker, I don't want you playing my song." You would show your royalty receipt, and say "Tough titties, Limey."

    I have said many times here :
    If Paul ( or whoever owns the song now ) ,, asks me to take down the my cover of revolution # 1 ,
    @ http://www.myspace.com/radamhalperin,

    I will.

    They have not.

    SO , Please Karl , turn me in to them , if you feel so strong.

    If not . give it up man ,, get a life.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  101.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 26th, 2010 @ 11:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Karl , get off of this ,, i said , already ,, its a musician culture thing

    You keep saying "it's a musician culture thing," as if this allows you to break the law. Sure, musicians do cover songs; but whenever they release recordings of them (even for free), they always have to pay royalties to the copyright holders (the publishers).

    I will "get off of this" at the exact moment that you stop calling file sharing "stealing." The only thing downloaders are stealing is exactly the same thing YOU are stealing.

    I am not actually against your cover song, just as I am not actually against file sharing. The fact that your cover is unlawful is a reason to abolish copyright. What I am against is hypocrisy and willful ignorance.

    Please Paul sure [sic] me !!

    I guess I'm never going to get through to you, but one more time: Paul cannot sue you. He can bring a suit on behalf of Sony, but not on his own behalf. Paul has no rights to his music whatsoever - other than the right to get paid, by Sony.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  102.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 1:39am

    You keep saying "it's a musician culture thing," as if this allows you to break the law.

    "You keep saying "it's a musician culture thing," as if this allows you to break the law."

    yes is does ,, on a mirco level .
    The Beatles started as a cover band.

    Also ,, I will check ,, but MYSpace , might, could , maybe be ,,paying BMI/ M.J.s kid,, a micro-fee, anytime someone plays the song in question at MySpace.

    If you try to play all 7 of my songs @ my space in a row,, MySpace throws in an adv,, after song "5"

    SO MYSpace , might, could , maybe be ,, already be paying BMI/ M.J.s kid,, a micro-fee, anytime someone plays my cover song in question at MySpace. Like if i play it in a bar?

    Ever think of that Karl? Your a bright boy , with a keyboard , and clearly too much spare time ----look it up and find out .

    Comon

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  103.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 1:51am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    "I will "get off of this" at the exact moment that you stop calling file sharing "stealing." The only thing downloaders are stealing is exactly the same thing YOU are stealing."


    again dingle-brain,, if BMI or My Space says take it down ,, i will .

    I am not getting anything for nothing .

    Files-harers ARE stealing,, getting a product for nothing that they would pay for.

    It apples and kiwis,, no comparison.

    And ,, i may be 100% legal at MySpace , if MySpace is paying royalties of their Adv $$ ,, as I certainly and getting any sheckels from that.

    You know Karl , the more you sqirm ,, the diiger hole you dig for yourself.

    You are not writing in good faith anymore as a truthseeker,, but someone , who is trying to find any micro reason to attack me.

    the point of out diicussion is :
    PIRACY is illegal-- mirco or marco. IT is , will be, should always be ,, and always will be,, unless Mike M., leads an armed revolt to overthrow the USA gov't , just based on that issue of Copyright,, which he too , is nuts on.
    ----------------------

    Man these late nit /early morning posts are wierd. It is like the old days in radio , when the D.J. knew only 3 folks are listening ,, so he does wierd stuff ,, like actually play the White Album backwards,,,,,,,,, Paul is Dead ,, Karl -- at least for this thread.

    Love you Paulie,, just using you as a metaphoric example -- please sue me,, and bring your uke. Kiss Ringo for me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  104.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 2:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Ps, Oliva , now owns ALL of Geroge's songs. ( George , never sold his songs)

    My next project , is actually "While my Guitar Gently Weeps".

    So let us go ahead in time , to drill home my point.

    I record WMGGW ,, post it on My SPACE.

    Mrs. George Harrison, Olivia -- who is a truly GREAT HUMAN being all around --- Well Mrs. Harrison ,,please sue me !!

    Trust me , she won't.

    it is a musician culture thing.


    But is you download w/o paying a penny the recently released re-mastered WMGGW of the White Album,,, no one will sue you ,, but the orginized crime site where you got it ,, will get noticed by the Law enforcement folks.

    CLEAR Karl.
    Karl Clear,
    Clear Karl Clear.

    See spot run

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  105.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 3:48am

    Bacon

    "If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts;

    but if he will be content to begin with doubts

    he shall end in certainties."

    - Sir Francis Bacon
    http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/28981.html

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  106.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 4:58am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    I know what ,, Einstein used,, i have 30 college credit hours in astronomy and physics --

    Well I have a PhD and several published research papers in that area ...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  107.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 5:01am

    Re: There was a time when slavery was mainstream public policy reality. That didn't make it right.

    Copy-Right & Patent Law came before free speech and press.

    So did slavery.

    Copyright and patent law are the continuation of medieval systems of Royal patronage and ripe for abolition.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  108.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 5:13am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    Copyright and Patent Laws , embedded into the Us> constitution

    Actually the constitution gives congress the right to institute such laws - not the obligation to do so.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  109.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 6:05am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Okay, I'll explain this to you one last time, then I'm done with you. You're right, I have better things to do with my life.
    Files-harers ARE stealing,, getting a product for nothing that they would pay for.

    They are not "getting a product for nothing," they are making a copy without authorization. Just as you are making a copy without authorization, when you record a cover version.

    The only law that file sharers are breaking, is the same law that you are breaking. It's not "apples and kiwis," it's red delicious and granny smith. Until you understand that, you will never know what they hell you are talking about.

    Would they pay for it? I dunno: did you pay for making your copy?
    i may be 100% legal at MySpace , if MySpace is paying royalties of their Adv $$

    I doubt it, since they don't need to. From MySpace's Terms and Conditions:
    You may not upload, embed, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any material that infringes any copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret or other proprietary rights of any person or entity.

    So, since you're violating copyright, you're also violating their terms of use. If I really wanted to be a dick, I'd just write them, point them to your song, and tell them that you don't have the rights to it.

    But I don't want to be a dick. I just want to show you why your beliefs are damaging to music, and damaging to society at large.

    I guess I'll never do that. So, good luck to you in the future.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  110.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 7:22am

    They are not "getting a product for nothing," they are making a copy without authorization. Just as you are making a copy without authorization, when you record a cover version.

    file sharers are taking something for free.

    True?

    Even you admit that.

    ---------

    I am w/ my cover version of the Beatles Revolution #1 ,---- which is a result of THOUSANDS of hours of practise ,, and intense home & studio work,, for years in the making,,----- for me the song is the pinnacle*** of my guitar skills.

    (30 years of hard work ,, for almost no real $$$$,)

    -----------------------------

    That opinion is endorsed by my musical mentors. who tell the track IS the ***pinnacle of my guitar skills.

    --------------
    -------


    I am creating my ART to GIVE-- for Free..

    File sharers take,

    See the difference ?
    =================
    ===========
    ======
    ====
    =

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  111.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 7:36am

    Free

    file sharers are taking something for free

    1. Last time I looked that was not a crime in itself. For axample you can quite legally take for free anything that is in the public domain (eg Shakespeare, Beethoven or anything created by the US Government - including the extremely useful "Handbook of Mathematical Functions" by Abramovitz and Stegun. You also get a lot of physical goods for free - including the air that you breathe and berries gathered from public places.

    2. You are also getting something for free when you cover someone else's composition. It is not legal to perform such a song in public or to publish a recording of it as you are doing on myspace. If you were singing that song in a bar then you (or the bar owner) would need to pay a license fee.

    3 File sharers don't actually get stuff for free. They have to pay for connection, bandwidth, disk drives. memory, power etc etc

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  112.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 7:58am

    on the internet no knows you a dog , as the famous cartoon says.

    on the internet no knows you a dog ,

    ( as the famous cartoon says.)
    ----------------------

    You click on my profile here , from there , you can know pretty much all about ,

    trust me nothing exciting.
    ---------------------


    Your profile here is empty.

    What EXACTLY was you PhD. thesis topic ?

    Layman terms are not needed, I read a lot of journals on Cosmology .


    -----------------

    you raise some other good points on copyright ,

    , but I hold till you reply here first.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  113.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:00am

    "on the internet no one knows your a dog" ,--- as the famous cartoon says.

    corrected

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  114.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:08am

    file sharers

    let me define :

    I am talking about NON-public-domain-files,

    w/o formal permission,

    That is stealing

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  115.  
    identicon
    Undisclosed Wimp, May 27th, 2010 @ 8:14am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Try doing this with a one bit cpu. 1 + 1 overflows (i.e., the number of bits in the result exceeds the maximum number of bits your cpu can handle), so the carry bit gets tossed away (same happens with a shiny 64-bit cpu. If the sum's result exceeds the 64 bits, the carry bit gets tossed way.).

    Or if you don't enjoy hardware restrictions, try doing 1+1 in the Z_2 ring (instead of Z). + and * operations are made modulo 2, so 1+1 (mod 2) = 0.

    You don't need to bend rules.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  116.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:32am

    "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    yes it is.
    I cannot be stopped.
    Any Artist can cover any song , w/ o permission.

    It is my craft , I know it well.

    If royalties are due , and there is money , it is paid.

    No $$ . No payment possible .

    the system works . All are happy,

    Paul gets a kick , that I love him and the gang enough

    to spent 40 hours in the studio-at-home ,,

    with little sleep,
    , recording and mixing

    9 tracks of guitar.

    I get the kick of accomplishment.

    I share it for free in MP3 -- low bit sound - --- @ my space.

    For the better sounding .WAV track (----- the real version and the difference is easily heard---- ), you buy the CD from me ,

    that is registered for copyrights and royalties ,

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  117.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:40am

    Copyright and patent law are the continuation of medieval systems of Royal patronage

    "Copyright and patent law are the continuation of medieval systems of Royal patronage"


    Real World .

    Now Copyright is Law.

    You view will never each a practical realization

    till G-D ends time.

    it ain't worth debating.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  118.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:41am

    Re: Copyright and patent law are the continuation of medieval systems of Royal patronage

    BTW ,, i am ans. your BAD points.

    I still hold on the good ones Dr.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  119.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:49am

    Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    No $$ . No payment possible

    Not strictly true - if you perform in private - true - in public then it all depends ....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  120.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:57am

    not the obligation to do so.

    wrong.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  121.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:58am

    First of all your congress and judges don't directly concern me.

    the problem

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  122.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 9:01am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: MIKE : "Then consider me a lost cause. ***I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws.****"

    silence speaks louder than words

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  123.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 9:18am

    For example: by hosting your illegal version of Revolution 1, MySpace is hosting infringing content. But they're not the ones who should be paying royalties - you are.

    "But they're not the ones who should be paying royalties - you are."

    wrong.

    My space is a broadcaster w/ads,, just like radio.

    To radio I sent them my work -- by mail or person on CD.

    If they play it -- one day -- they are responsible for the $$ end,, not me. The radio pays royalties.

    My Space is no different. I simply uploaded , instead of mailing in. I get zero $$ from page traffic.

    My Space gets ad $$ from page traffic.

    Very quantifiable #s. If royalties are legally due, some lawyer is there doing it.

    ----

    this really torpedoes your claim : " But they're not the ones who should be paying royalties - you are."

    Think man . You are smarter than you are writing here.
    Think.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  124.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 9:32am

    Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    how can payment be possible if there is no $$?
    divide by zero?
    ----------------------------

    And again , what is your PhD. in EXACTLY?

    And What was your thesis title EXACTLY.

    Where is it posted online? if it exists.

    Can I read it for free. Or is it now a book ,I must buy-- if it even exists.

    Your Ans?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  125.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 10:10am

    Re: For example: by hosting your illegal version of Revolution 1, MySpace is hosting infringing content. But they're not the ones who should be paying royalties - you are.

    Think man . You are smarter than you are writing here.
    Think.


    Just a quick tip - don't talk to people in real life the way you write here. Sooner or later you are going to get punched in the face if you do. I'm not even kidding.

    And if you think that ad hominem arguments are effective - well, they're not.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  126.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 10:23am

    Think man . You are smarter than you are writing here. Think.

    Uh , as opposed to all the dirty names I get back at me ,, and folks picking on my dyslexic typing.

    Diplomacy is an art.

    By telling him to think , I am saying he can do better,

    I am MUCH older than karl for sure.

    age earns respect, even when not granted.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  127.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 10:34am

    ad hominem arguments

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

    i have "ad hominem -ed " more than anyone here

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  128.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 10:37am

    By telling him to think , I am saying he can do better,Re: Think man . You are smarter than you are writing here. Think.

    By telling him to think , I am saying he can do better,

    and I want him to .

    I seek truth.

    the path is never easy.

    And the truth is often scary.

    that is life.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  129.  
    identicon
    Coyright Cop, May 27th, 2010 @ 11:09am

    Re: Charge me

    I police the internet for several small romance authors and no, you don't get any sympathy from me. These writers barely eek out a living because of all the stealing going on. No one is entitled to have someone work for nothing for any reason. I suppose you expect to go into a store and take what you want because you can't afford to buy it, while someone else's sweat produced it. You get disability money while these people work for a living.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  130.  
    identicon
    RobertsGloria, May 27th, 2010 @ 11:19am

    Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    Stupid comment. Why don't you just say, "I should work for nothing" and then try doing it. Same difference as "copyright laws should be abolished". There would be no music, no books, no movies because these people would have to get other jobs to support themselves and their families. Oh wait, we'd be a third world country because there would be no jobs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  131.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 11:39am

    Re: Think man . You are smarter than you are writing here. Think.

    By telling him to think, you are also telling him that he has been posting without thinking up to this point. It's really quite insulting.

    And no, age doesn't earn respect. Many things earn respect, such as presenting well reasoned and well written arguments, but being old is not one of those things.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  132.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 11:42am

    Re: Re: copyright laws should be abolished)

    You and Copyright Cop should spend a little time poking around here before commenting, because these lame, made-up, frequently-debunked arguments really don't carry any weight around here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  133.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 1:04pm

    Re: Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    how can payment be possible if there is no $$?
    divide by zero?

    I suggest you go to ASCAP or one of the other performing rights societies for an explanation of that one. However my reading of the situation is that.

    1 The performing rights societies say you need a license to have performances of cover versions on any website - see here

    http://www.ascap.com/weblicense/reports/

    2 Myspace TOS makes it clear that you need to be able to grant them a license for public performance for any material you make available - see here

    http://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=misc.terms

    That seems to be the legal situation. I must hasten to add that I do not approve of it - I'm just telling you the reality.

    As for your point about $$ - they don't care about that - remember these organisations have tried to charge Girl guides for singing round the campfire and shop assistants for singing whilst stacking shelves.
    And again , what is your PhD. in EXACTLY?

    And What was your thesis title EXACTLY.

    Where is it posted online? if it exists.

    Theses in those days were not in electronic form so the only copies are with me and in the University of London Library. However you can see one of the papers that contributed to the thesis here

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/h7755185t35273m1/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  134.  
    identicon
    Easily Amused, May 27th, 2010 @ 1:24pm

    Re: which all seemed to assume that greater enforcement was, without question, a good thing),

    I always chuckle when I see posts from douchebags "correcting" someone with numerous spelling errors, punctuation fails, and made up words.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  135.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 2:14pm

    Re: not the obligation to do so.

    No - right. Look up the full text.
    Here
    http://www.copyrighthistory.org/cgi-bin/kleioc/0010/exec/showTranscription/%22us_1789_im_001 _0002.jpg%22

    On your interpretation the congress would also be required to borrow money!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  136.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 3:30pm

    Re: Re: Think man . You are smarter than you are writing here. Think.

    "By telling him to think, you are also telling him that he has been posting without thinking up to this point."

    Very True. He completely is lacking "Common Sense"** in is harping on my posting at MYSpace.

    But any Proff , teacher , Parent , or girlfriend , or drinking buddy,, probably tells him the same thing daily -- think man ,, you common sense.

    I am try to help him grow , into a more worthy "opponent" in his debate with me,, because right now , he is more annoying than challenging. That trait can torpedo any persons career.

    ( **I am sure Thomas Paine will also come up eventually in oe copyright/patent talks. He did not believe in Natural Law as an atheist"")
    ===================
    "It's really quite insulting. "
    Tough. It is not violent . Political discourse is veiled insult . You are always saying you opponent is wrong and full of it.
    ================

    "And no, age doesn't earn respect."

    The problem here .

    Age does earn respect. In any civilized Society .

    When I was young , I was stupid too.

    ========

    And where is s the gut who claimed the PhD in Einstein stuff??

    Must be busy
    ====
    ====
    ====

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  137.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 3:36pm

    I always chuckle when I see posts from douchebags "correcting" someone with numerous spelling errors, punctuation fails, and made up words.

    Again I am dyslexic.

    I never make up words.

    READ more. Write less.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  138.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 3:42pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    And again , what is your PhD. in EXACTLY?

    And What was your thesis title EXACTLY.

    I said exactly ? Any PhD. can rattle of his thesis title in his sleep.
    =====================

    You and Karl , are lacking "common sense",, a recognized tool for law and judges since time began.
    =============

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  139.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 3:48pm

    Re: Re: not the obligation to do so.

    get a PgD , in "Constitutional Law" ,, and get back to me.

    You base you comment on your first read ---ever probably -- of the constitution, and lack historical context ,, and 250 years of history.

    ------


    This thread is dead. Nothing new of substance for HOURS now.

    Bye

    See you in the next world --er thread

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  140.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 4:04pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    ME: And again , what is your PhD. in EXACTLY?

    And What was your thesis title EXACTLY.

    Where is it posted online? if it exists.


    YOU: Theses in those days were not in electronic form so the only copies are with me and in the University of London Library. However you can see one of the papers that contributed to the thesis here

    ME:
    I repeat: on the internet no one knows you are a dog.

    Where is your name on the paper ? I do not know your name.

    Richard ,, go home.
    ===============

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  141.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 5:22pm

    because these lame, made-up, frequently-debunked arguments really don't carry any weight around here.

    With the anti-copyRight gang all they have to offer is "these lame, made-up, frequently-debunked arguments really don't carry any weight" anywhere intelligent people speak and form public policy !!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  142.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 5:35pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Charge me// " radio pays for the content that they make their money from, websites should be no different. music (or talk show hosts) is their raw materials, without which nobody would be listening to empty air."

    Well Put .. You win .

    You hit the core of this thread in just a few words. A+

    Good Job you Anonymous Coward you !!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  143.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 6:45pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Well, I guess I'm even more of a loser than I thought. For some reason, I just can't let this go... Maybe because I think there's hope for you, if you can just think outside your box for a second.

    But is you download w/o paying a penny the recently released re-mastered WMGGW of the White Album,,, no one will sue you ,, but the orginized crime site where you got it ,, will get noticed by the Law enforcement folks.

    The downloaders are exactly the ones that got sued by the RIAA. The downloaders are exactly the ten thousand people who are going to be sued by the producers of the Hurt Locker.

    "Law enforcement folks" are not involved in copyright infringment, unless it is criminal, and file sharing is not criminal. You get sued (by civilians), not arrested. And I still have never seen even one "orginized crime site." As I said, most either do not host files at all, or only host users' files (without knowing what is in them). If any make money, it is through legit channels, and they'll take down infringing content if you let them know it's there.

    file sharers are taking something for free. True?

    False. File sharers are not taking anything; they're copying it. To take something, you have to deprive someone else of that thing. Copyright infringement is not legally theft, for this very reason.

    Another poster on here quoted Stephen King. When asked how he felt about Hollywood ruining his books, he said, "My books are not ruined. They're right there on the shelf, the same as they always were." File sharing is the same way: the music is still there, same as it always was.

    (30 years of hard work ,, for almost no real $$$$,)

    This pays Sony and EMI how, again? Unless you're saying that "I worked for it, so I have a right to it," which is called a "sweat of the brow" argument. That argument has been repeatedly rejected by the Supreme Court. If you're not saying either of those things, then I don't know why you would even bring it up.

    I am creating my ART to GIVE-- for Free.. File sharers take, See the difference ?

    Legally, it's not "your" art, so you believe that distributing unlawful material is better than simply getting it? I'm glad you feel that way. Unfortunately, the law does not - it views distribution as much worse than posession. (Also, this would seem to counter your "downloader/website" dichotomy.)

    But you're absolutely wrong when you say "file sharers take." It's called file sharing for a reason. File sharing means music blogs, that write a review of the music (or how it affects them), with a link to download it. It means chat rooms on peer-to-peer applications, where users recommend music to other users, and offer up each others' music collections. It means fan sites that link to everything they can find, authorized or not. It means musicians who bought an indie CD of the band they played with, and want their friends to hear it. It means a culture of art and music. (That's probably why people who share files buy far more content, legitimately, than people who don't.)

    This is what you believe should be shut down, sued into oblivion, or locked away. This is what Hollywood and the major labels want to destroy, merely because they don't know how to make money off of it.

    Do you now see why, as a musician, I'm so pissed off about this?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  144.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 8:46pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Thanks for sticking with it, Karl; I gave up. I don't have any hope for Technopolitical, but maybe others are watching and can compare your arguments to his and make up their minds accordingly. Of course, I'm using the term "arguments" very loosely here for his benefit.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  145.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 9:02pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    To be honest, the fact that I'm sticking with it probably reveals more about my life than anything else. Still, thank you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  146.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 10:53pm

    To Technopolitical

    Just so you know, I (and many other people) view the comments section threaded, so if you're going to reply to me in a different thread, I'll probably miss it.

    So that won't happen again, I'm starting a new thread with this post, so we can continue our conversation. But to keep it short(er), I won't respond to posts that I've already replied to. You'll have to hunt those down, sorry. It would probably help the conversation if you would reply to this post only, when you're talking to me.

    I am MUCH older than karl for sure.

    Not that it's at all relevant, but I'm betting that you're wrong. I've been playing music since the late '80s, and spent the last twenty years hanging out with musicians (most underground, some on labels). So please, drop the paternal act, sonny.

    He completely is lacking "Common Sense"** in is harping on my posting at MYSpace.

    My "common sense" tells me that it is bad to criticize people for breaking the exact same law that you are breaking, and yours does not. But since there's no objective measurement of common sense, we'll have to stick with the law.

    My space is a broadcaster w/ads,, just like radio. [...] they are responsible for the $$ end,, not me.

    To coin your phrase: "wrong."

    They are not a "broadcaster," they are a social networking site with user-supplied content.

    When you signed up with them, you agreed to their Terms of Use, which state that you control the rights on all material uploaded, and you gave them a royalty-free licence to deliver that material.

    Radio (internet or not) only pays royalties to copyright holders and publishers. Since users are (supposed to be) the exclusive rights holders, and agreed to forgo royalties, MySpace doesn't owe anyone any money.

    By uploading content to which you don't have the rights, you violated their Terms of Use (a legal contract BTW), which lets MySpace of the hook. If anyone owes money, it is you.

    "You keep saying "it's a musician culture thing," as if this allows you to break the law."

    yes is does ,, on a mirco level .
    The Beatles started as a cover band.

    And the Beatles paid royalties whenever they released a cover version. If they covered a song live, the venue paid royalties (as all venues are required to do). Being a Beatle doesn't give you the right to break the law, "micro level" or not.

    Any Artist can cover any song , w/ o permission.

    In private, sure. In public or on a recording, no. If you don't believe me, see the Harry Fox Agency for recordings (including internet releases), and ASCAP's FAQ for live performances.

    If royalties are due , and there is money , it is paid. No $$ . No payment possible .

    Again: wrong. You must obtain a license for that song, even if it is used for non-commercial purposes (you don't charge money for it). See the Harry Fox link above. If you do release it without a license, copyright law allows the rights holders to sue you either for their "lost profits" (which you can't contest), or statutory damages, whichever is greater. Plus legal fees, injunctions, and the destruction of all existing copies of that song. If the infringement is "willful," the court can award additional damages up to $150,000.

    If it were true that "No $$ . No payment possible," then the RIAA could not have sued any file sharers, since they did not charge (or gain) any money either.

    you buy the CD from me , that is registered for copyrights and royalties

    If that Beatles song is on your CD, then you are a commercial copyright infringer - which is much worse, legally speaking, than being a file sharer. Also, you cannot register a cover song under your own copyright, since you have no rights to the song in the first place.

    By the way: if you want to know the ugly details of how the music industry works, here are a couple articles for you: The Problem With Music by Steve Albini, and Courtney Love does the math by (you guessed it) Courtney Love.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  147.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 27th, 2010 @ 11:58pm

    Re: To Technopolitical

    ME:
    The earth is round.

    Karl:

    TP ,, How can you be so insane and closed minded?

    1] the earth is a sphere , not round dummy.

    2} the earth is not a perfect sphere either, even if that is what you meant by writing "round"..
    2a} Every school kid knows the earth is "pear-shaped", with the southern hemisphere being bulkier ,
    2b}, and also the polar circumference , being less than the equatorial circumference ,, by several dozen miles,, if I remember correct ,, but

    3} that is really beside the point ,, the exact numbers,, as you are clearly a disingenuous fool's fool for trying to say the "world is round",, it shows you are just covering up your basic lack of knowlege in the earth sciences -

    4] - which has everything to do with copyright laws at My Space ,, because being you hold copyright law is from natural law, and Natural Law is the grist of earth science -(- well philosophically at least if not actually physically.)

    5] So your statement "the world is round" , has been dis-proofed by me -- Karl -- super genius!!!!!

    ==============

    bye karl

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  148.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 6:47am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    I said exactly ? Any PhD. can rattle of his thesis title in his sleep.

    Not true actually - the final title of a thesis is often invented at the last minute and then promptly forgotten. This is especially true in theoretical physics where students often do a number of smaller - but related projects and then have to work out a title that pulls it all together. Mine was 30 years ago - but I can't even remember the titles of the theses of my successful PhD students from the last few years.




    Where is your name on the paper ?


    You know my first name - so I thought you would be able to deduce which of the authors is me from the initials - it's not that hard.

    If you are in any doubt - then here is another one I wrote (slightly later - after the PhD).

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TVN-470WKTG-1G1&_user=24 71587&_coverDate=08%2F20%2F1981&_rdoc=9&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info%28 %23toc%235539%231981%23998959997%23349652%23FLP%23display%23Volume%29&_cdi=5539&_sort=d& _docanchor=&view=c&_ct=19&_acct=C000057461&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid= 2471587&md5=d7f16e6bc10a8f7b47e441c21cc2d56f

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  149.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 7:25am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    A couple of quotes on common sense

    "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." Einstein

    "The freethinking of one age is the common sense of the next."
    Matthew Arnold

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  150.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 7:41am

    but I can't even remember the titles of the theses of my successful PhD students from the last few years.

    "but I can't even remember the titles of the theses of my successful PhD students from the last few years."


    Where do you teach EXACTLY?

    CAN I view YOUR FACILITY WEBpage ?

    Anif you do not remember the exact title of your thesis,

    certainly , you can tell me the General Topic ,, in PHD. science terms. You have yet to do that either .

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    On the Internet no one knows your a dog !!!

    On techdirt , no one knows if you are sane; unless you state : "All copyright & Patent Law should be abolished.",, in which case we know you are are insane.

    ----------------------------------------

    Thank you everybody !
    You have been a wonderful audience !!
    G-D Bless.
    =================================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  151.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 9:33am

    Re: Re: To Technopolitical

    because being you hold copyright law is from natural law

    I don't hold this, because it's not true. Copyright is not a "natural law," nor an inalienable right. Ideas and expressions (songs, movies, art in general) are not property, nor are they "owned" by the people who make them.

    If you don't believe me, ask Thomas Jefferson, the person who actually wrote the part of the Constitution that allows copyright law:
    He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody.

    -from Thomas Jefferson to Isaac McPherson (which is worth reading in its entirety), emphasis mine.

    ME:
    The earth is round.

    More like...

    YOU:
    The earth is flat.

    ME:
    You're wrong, and here are a dozen reasons WHY you're wrong, which I will now go into in excruciating detail.

    If you're leaving this thread, fine. But here is what you should take away from it:

    - You are a copyright infringer, so you cannot harp on other copyright infringers (file sharers) without being a hypocrite.

    - Whatever you thought about copyright law is wrong.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  152.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 12:51pm

    Re: Re: Re: To Technopolitical

    "-from Thomas Jefferson to Isaac McPherson (which is worth reading in its entirety), emphasis mine."

    Mike and I had this discussion last week. More reading , less writing Karl ::::
    http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100514%2F0126329423&threaded=true&sp=1#c3525

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  153.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 12:54pm

    Re: Re: To Technopolitical

    karl , this comment was satire on you.

    Response to satire , shows you are drinking too much coffee or taking meth.

    Have a nice weekend Karl. chill out . try to live w/o a computer for 2 days.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  154.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 2:57pm

    Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    This is the ARTIST CONTROL point.

    An ARTIST (or copyright holder of the Art)
    can CHOOSE , when , or when NOT to,, enforce their control rights.

    Paulie ( or whoever in control of the Beatles song PUBLISHING rights there days) ,,

    CHOOSES to ignore my posting of my all guitar cover version of Revolution #1 @ MySpace.

    That is the ARTISTS right of control. Paul won't sue me.

    IT is a Musician Culture Thing.

    Even if it is technically illegal my post, the Copyright holder can choose not to ENFORCE,-- or to enforce --- on a case-by-case basis

    But please PAUL,,, sue me ,, as i want to meet you , to get your autograph , and play some uke w/ you, (Please bring Ringo too.)

    That is why I posted the song @ MySpace,

    =====================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  155.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 3:34pm

    Re: but I can't even remember the titles of the theses of my successful PhD students from the last few years.

    Where do you teach EXACTLY?

    CAN I view YOUR FACILITY WEBpage ?

    You have enough information to find all of the above already using Google (hint - look for more recent papers by me - the top hit will usually be relevant)



    certainly , you can tell me the General Topic ,, in PHD. science terms.

    I have given you two papers for which you can read at least the abstract. If you were proficient with the information finding capabilities of things like Google Scholar, citeseer
    you could find several other papers that related to my thesis.

    If you want a list of keywords related to my thesis it would be:

    Quantum field theory, 1/N expansion CP^N-1 models, False Vacuum decay, Instantons
    (This list gives rather more information than the title!)
    On the Internet no one knows your a dog !!!

    Actually -on the internet anyone can find out if they know how to Google...

    On techdirt , no one knows if you are sane; unless you state : "All copyright & Patent Law should be abolished.",, in which case we know you are are insane.


    You never gave any reason for this other than an appeal to the wisdom of US politicians and judges- the same group of people who once nearly passed a law to mandate incorrect mathematical calculations.

    (Incidentally I never actually mentioned patents.)

    Also you never asked why I held the opinion that seems to scare you so much - however - I can tell you that one of my major reasons for wishing to abolish it is precisely the type of response I have received from you - which I feel is not in the best interests of those who make it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  156.  
    icon
    Dave Records (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 3:42pm

    Journalist License?

    Michigan Lawmaker wants to license journalist to ensure their moral character, and that will help how? Maybe we should license our lawmakers! http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/28/michigan-considers-law-license-journalists/

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  157.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 3:59pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Leave Paul alone. He has nothing to do with this.

    Paulie ( or whoever in control of the Beatles song PUBLISHING rights there days) ,,

    CHOOSES to ignore my posting of my all guitar cover version of Revolution #1 @ MySpace.


    I doubt that very much - its probably the result of the huge problem copyright holders have in policing the internet ( which their representatives frequently complain about here).

    I would be very surprised if the rightsholders for the song in question are even aware of your infringement.

    However as you said "greater enforcement of copyright & patent law,, was, without ANY possible question, a good thing,,," at the very start of this discussion I suggest you enforce the law against yourself (by taking down your infringing content) -surely that would be unquestionably a "good thing". Surely you don't want to force Paul (or whoever) to waste their time searching through myspace for it, do you?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  158.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 4:41pm

    Re: Re: but I can't even remember the titles of the theses of my successful PhD students from the last few years.

    YOU :"Quantum field theory, 1/N expansion CP^N-1 models, False Vacuum decay, Instantons **" (**your misspell"

    That is not a thesis title. Sorry Richard , i know how academics talk.

    If you ask any PhD to name his/here thesis title , s/he can rattle it off no B.S. or beating around the bush in a flash.

    Also you claim you have students. Where is your faculty page?
    I only know your name is Richard -- it it is that.

    If you wish not to put the information here @ techdirt ,, go to my profile here ,, click around from the info I provide ,, and you can find my email address , in a few clicks.

    Email me , your Faculty web page ,, your thesis title , and "3 reference's and their emails".

    You do that , then you have answered my question.

    You claimed a PhD, in some vauge area of physics.

    PROOF it. (pun intended)
    =================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  159.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 4:47pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: "It is not legal to perform such a song in public"

    ME: "how can payment be possible if there is no $$?
    divide by zero?"


    YOU: I suggest you go to ASCAP or one of the other performing rights societies for an explanation of that one.


    ME: Mike can tell you how funny it is you suggest that.
    I have post more form ASCAP here @ techdirt that Mike has these last few weeks.

    Richard -- if have a real Ph.D in physics,, i will illegally down load all your copyrighted papers and redistribute then for free .

    But you are not so , i won't

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  160.  
    icon
    Technopolitical (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 4:51pm

    Michigan Lawmaker wants to license journalist to ensure their moral character, and that will help how?

    how about for techdirt posters? Now that i would support!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  161.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), May 28th, 2010 @ 5:36pm

    Re: Re: Re: To Technopolitical

    Mike and I had this discussion last week.

    Since you were replying to him and not me, I must have missed it. Also, the fact that the thread was one word wide probably didn't help.

    That discussion did yield some guffaw-inducing quotes. Such as:
    Thomas Jefferson is lamenting that you cannot copyright IDEAS.

    He's advocating that ideas cannot be property. He was discussing what the basis for American copyright law should be, since he was creating it.
    Artist have IDEAS / inspiration : again the IDEA , cannot be copyrighted. But , Artist make ART . A painting , a song , a play , a poem, a book .

    So, you're saying that Jefferson is not talking about books, songs, etc. when he is talking about ideas. If that were true, copyright law would not include the word "author." It's also pretty obvious that he's talking about these things if you actually read the full text. He's saying that physical things can be property; but that products of the mind cannot. According to Jefferson, "intellectual property" does not exist.

    But let's assume you're right. Copyrights (and patents) are the basis of all legal rights to the products of your mind. If what you say is true, it would mean that books, songs, etc. would not be covered by copyright. So, they should be afforded no legal protection at all.
    karl , this comment was satire on you.

    Oh, that's what it was? Forgive me, I thought it was just you attacking me to hide the fact that you're wrong. Thanks for letting me know, Mr. Swift.
    Have a nice weekend Karl. chill out .

    I will, and I am. I actually enjoy these little arguments. There's nothing like coming home after a hard day's work, and lifting up your spirits by proving you're better than someone else. And if I can't do that - well, then I've learned something I didn't know. It really warms the cockles.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  162.  
    identicon
    Abdul Raheem, Jun 20th, 2010 @ 10:12pm

    A4 Paper 80 GSM, 75 GSM, 70 GSM

    We have A4 Paper 80 GSM, 75 GSM, 70 GSM we also have A3 Paper. We are located in Malaysia and we lead to any port worldwide. Kindly view our FOB price per ream below and contact us for informations.

    Specifications:
    Sheet Size:210mm x 297mm, International Size A4
    Quality: Imported 100% Virgin Wood Pulp
    Whiteness = 102-104%,Natural White
    Capability: High Speed Copying100ppm, Laser
    Capable,Inkjet Capable, Fax Capable.

    Brands:

    Double A copier paper --- $ 0.85USD
    Paperone copier paper ---$ 0.85USD
    Ik plus paper( yellow) --------$ 0.80USD
    Paperline Copier Paper 80g --$ 0.80USD
    Xerox copier paper 80g-------$ 0.85USD

    Port of loading: Dickson sea port/ Klang Port
    Mode of payment:T/T
    Delivery Time: Asia 14 working days,Africa 21 working days,Europe 21 working days
    and America 24 working days.
    And in one 20FCL they will be packed.

    500 Sheets per Ream
    5 Reams per Box
    1560 Boxes per container(With Pallet)
    1600 Boxes Per container( Without Pallet)
    7800 Reams Total in one 20FCL( With Pallet)
    8000 Reams Total in one 20FCL( Without Pallet)

    Minimum Order Quantity: 1 container.

    Regards

    Abdul Raheem.
    Online Sales Rep.

    K.K.P AND OFFICE SUPPLIES SDN BHD.
    Tel:+60133072140
    fax.+60170080010
    Email Address: officesupplies2011@gmail.com
    Email Address2: expressofficesupplies@gmail.com
    Skype Address: customerscare01
    Company Address: No. 8256, 1st Floor, Jln Pending, 93450 Kuching,
    Sarawak MALAYSIA

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This