It is amazing that Andy Ihnatko could so totally miss the entire point.
Here is a sales opportunity. It represents thousands of such sales opportunities, and the "content owners" did everything they possibly could do to ENSURE the consumers could not buy it legally in any way.
And then the content owners whine that they are losing money...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I have given MS enough money
Yeah, because it "looks to you AS IF they are" illegal ... that's it. End of discussion. You're done.
Pardon me if I don't condemn people because it "looks to you as if they are illegal". Things are almost always more complicated then you might think.
I don't condone bad behavior but I don't condemn until REAL lawyers and REAL experts have investigated, analyzed and reported on these things. But you go ahead and pontificate and condemn because things "look to you as if", that's fine with me.
I don't think you read the article. While it would be a great idea if Moto/Google simply donated those patents license free, there are read problems with that or even lowering the price. Read the article.
Walt, keep believing ONLY the MS side of the story and be sure to parrot it exactly. Never look at the full picture. Then you will be protected from all the Evil Freetards who want to destroy the Internet.
Re: Re: The problem is with the means, not the ends
You say: "thats right, so dont ever try to enfore ANY crime EVER because it might at some point actually hurt someone who is innocent."You probably mean "don't enforce any law" but even if you'd stated it correctly it's pure strawman. NO ONE you are "arguing" with took that position.Try to argue against the actual position that they've stated: That ACTA doesn't address child porn AT ALL. Go ahead, try to use logic not logical fallacies.
Sure roads might have a legitimate use but no matter how hard you try, liability is attached. People were driving over the speed limit. People were using roads to drive to and from crime scenes. Sorry, it's just too bad. That's why we closed all the roads.
And you come to that conclusion how? They have no bearing as long as you completely ignore the fact that SOPA/Protect IP will make this sort of abuse much, much easier and much more common. Well, you are ignoring that, so your comment kind of makes sense.
Well, yes, you are confused. Content creators have NO inherent RIGHTS to ANY monopoly protection. Period. That isn't a RIGHT like Freedom of Speech. There is no "you shall have a monopoly" clause in the Constitution.
Why should "we the people" give them any monopoly at all? Many creative industries do quite well without such monopolies.
You are assuming that monopoly is their RIGHT and it isn't. It is a PRIVILEGE, given by US to them to encourage their creativity. That is the exchange. THEY get a limited monopoly and WE benefit from their creativity.
There is nothing in the vastly extended monopoly that encourages the ORIGINAL creator -- we're long past that cause and effect. Today the BENEFIT accrues to some big corporation and the original creator gets nothing.
The agreed-upon exchange has been destroyed. WE get NO benefit so why should we keep extending the privilege?
Re: No matter how prolix you get, Mike, problem is still PIRACY.
No, but the existence of the Internet does mean that the industry must change if it is to survive.
Their refusal to recognize this fact is their problem, not the problem innocent users who are being treated like criminals.
The problem is not "piracy", the problem is new technology. Barring outlawing all new technology from here on out, there is only one solution for the movie industry: Find out how to live with the world as it is not how they wish it to be. Old industries have always had to do that.
If some in the industry can't figure it out and go under, don't worry, there are many others who can and will figure it out. Laws designed to protect the old dinosaurs only delay the inevitable. Soon, the movie industry will be composed entirely of those who happily coexist with the Internet and the new technologies.
The difference here is that PIPA and SOPA make the abuse of the law legal. Under these laws you couldn't stop the abuse because they actually protect and even encourage the abuse.
Laws are supposed to protect the innocent -- these laws encourage the abuse of the innocent and protect the abuser. There are absolutely no penalties for misusing these laws. All the penalties are on the accused, even if they are completely innocent.
What's REALLY strange is that companies who are supposed to be providing services (i.e. phone and internet connections) think they have the right to dictate what you may and may not do with your PRIVATE property, your phone -- and that there is a sense that rooting your phone is, somehow, wrong.