Geez, don't get your panties in a twist. People frequent attack the substance of an article and attribute it to Mike and get flamed over it.
I guess what you are saying is just the opposite- that attribution of anything in an article to Mike is proper as "...they were done with his knowledge, consent, and/or will. It's ridiculous to assume otherwise."
Glad to see we agree.
You miss the point. If a post is done on the main page by another author on Techdirt, attribute it to said author. However, assume it's done with Mike's blessing. That's what I was talking about, not attributing posts by other authors to Mike himself, but since this is his site, it's extremely fair to assign responsibility over Glen Moody's, Nina Paley's, etc.'s posts to him.
Perhaps you need to check the byline. Mike didn't write the story. I don't recall if he commented, but doubt it.
I know Mike didn't write the story. That's why I said 'I thought this site and Mike "Torrent/Pirate Mike" Masnick were shilling for Google™!' When I said "this site", I meant all of the people on Techdirt other than Mike Masnick, Chris Sprigman included.
And even though Mike didn't write those two articles, it's extremely safe to assume that since those posts were on Techdirt*, i.e. his website, they were done with his knowledge, consent, and/or will. It's ridiculous to assume otherwise.
*This does not apply to comments or Step 2, only the main posts.
I think I'll highlight these paragraphs [Note: bold mine]:
For example, Glyn Moody's post on Google's offer to pay French publishers 50 million Euros in order to settle the dispute over Google's display of news snippets in its search results. This is bad news on a couple of fronts. First, it suggests that the French newspapers have a legitimate copyright claim, which they don't. Second, although Google can afford to pay for the privilege of doing what they are entitled to do for free, many of Google's potential competitors will not be so fortunate. So Google throws the French newspapers some of its spare change, and in the process raises barriers to competition. Yuck.
This hasn't been a good week for Google's promise not to do evil – and for some reason France is the epicenter of the bad behavior. Big Search has agreed to pay French ISP Orange for preferential handling of its traffic. Which is precisely inimical to the net neutrality principles that Google has been fighting for in the U.S. That said, Google's move is consistent with a French proverb that applies to a lot of its conduct lately -- Autre temps, autres moeurs.
If the trolls were right, I thought this site and Mike "Torrent/Pirate Mike" Masnick were shilling for Google™! And then here comes a post wrapping up several posts showing disgust with Google™'s actions? Do the trolls not realize that their claim that anyone fighting for digital freedom is in the pocket of Google is easily debunked?
Seriously, we need better trolls, because their criticism of Google™ may be evidence enough that they can't use the simple search function in the upper-right corner to find evidence to the contrary.
Actually, from my personal experience, I don't think I would have become a songwriter or a musician if it weren't for the internet.
My last album The Aftermath, (which you can buy here) made me $180 if you remove the money I paid bandcamp. For an unknown who rarely plays concerts and makes music as a hobby, I'm doing pretty well! As I said before, this would have not happened to me without the internet.
BTW, I'm one of those musicians who actually WANTS his stuff to be torrented; that way, I know that people are interested in me! After all, as Tim O'Reilly has astutely pointed out: For people like me, the problem isn't piracy but obscurity!
Re: Re: Johnny C. Responds in the best way possible…
your kidding right? there are literally hundreds of "in the style of glee" covers on itunes and now coulton's is just another one, so what?
Except that Coulton made no changes whatsoever to his "cover of a cover of a cover" as compared to his original cover. In other words, IT'S THE EXACT SAME SONG AS THE ONE ON THE FIRST THING-A-WEEK DISC!!! But people are buying it up anyway (some of which already have the Coulton's original arrangement from the Thing-A-Week series, myself included) in a show of solidarity.
Is techdirt suggesting stronger protections in copyright for artists than currently exist?
So JoCo re-released his original cover of "Baby Got Back" as "Baby Got Back (In The Style Of Glee)", does his best impression of Glee's trademarked "Wink-and-L-Sign", and donates all the proceeds to the VH1 Save The Music foundation and Dan Savage's It Gets Better project.
Folks, this is not just winning the court of public opinion; this is analogous to winning a unanimous Supreme Court verdict. Also, Karma seemed to have entered the fray, seeing as I'm writing this, This charity single of "Baby Got Back (In The Style Of Glee)" is at position #164 on the US overall music chart…………and Glee's ripoff version is nowhere to be found! Oh frabjous day! Callooh, Callay!
I downloaded "Leaving On A Jet Plane" from iTunes, and though I can hear a tiny bit of similarities to JoCo's "Baby Got Back" cover, it's clear that JoCo had written his own melody to his version of "Baby Got Back". Fox/Glee didn't even bother to do that.
There is one important distinction between Apple's locked ecosystem and Amazon's locked ecosystem: Apple won't delete a file you downloaded from their iTunes store off your hard drive. Even if they don't carry the product anymore, it's still on your hard drive. I know this because DRM'd works they don't carry anymore are still accessible on my iTunes and iPod Touch. For the record, I never used Apple's iCloud service. While there is a lot (shitloads, even) that Apple does wrong, this is one of those areas that they got right.
Also, EPUB files work on the Nook, Kino, Sony E-Reader, etc.