Whew. She had it easy. One time, DreamWorks thugs broke into my home and smashed my Puss in Boots DVD. Said I'd get a fresh copy when I "bought it again."
I think that the reason why tarnishment is a valid thing is because most consumers say to themselves: "Oh, how could Company X let Company Y use their name so immorally?" without considering for a moment that this is either an unreasonable expectation on Company X, or an unreasonable expectation on everybody else.
It seems to me to be a consumer confusion problem, but one that's been promoted by these big companies.
What would TWC do with free fiber, government employees, buildings, and discounted services? Would they make service better and cheaper for their users?
I think not. I have a feeling that if TWC/AT&T got these perks, they might use them to develop faster services, but would charge the users a premium to get access to them; or do nothing with them, since TWC does cable, and AT&T does DSL, letting the users wait for Verizon to come in with fiber, so they can continue to have tiered services that technically (but don't actually) compete with one another.
I used to be a big fan of the NC, until I realized that I was only using it to prevent other people from making money from something I did. And then I realized that that made me just as bad as all the other culture cops out there, and since I didn't care if people copied my stuff, why should I care if they profit off of it? Ultimately, what I wanted was the credit for the parent work, and as long as there's a CC-BY, I'm still good.
I still do SA, though, as a matter of principal.
That being said, I think that NC and ND are good things to have to promote openness in otherwise gated content. I think if CC did away with these clauses, they would get fewer new adopters. The better solution is to keep these clauses around to encourage growth, but to educate people (as I was educated) that while it might be comforting to have the NC/ND clauses, they should only be used as a gateway to better access to content.
Also, if the CC got rid of NC, Cory Doctorow's new books wouldn't be released under CC-4.0 licenses due to an agreement he has with his publisher.
Maybe Google is just trying to bring awareness to the ridiculousity of patent laws and how they only manage to harm the general public and stifle innovation, and is doing this by targeting the squeakiest wheel on the block, Apple users.
I just hope that someone will appreciate the irony.
(untitled comment)
"If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we placed our feet in our mouths."
Why any Patent Lawyer Would Say the Patent System's Not Broken
They're still making money off of it...
Re: Real Math Time...
Oops, wasn't signed in...
(untitled comment)
This is great! It means that those pesky scientists can't sell products that may lead consumers into thinking they're getting Hobbit-brand hominids.
Otherwise, we might get a dreadfully boring anthropological documentary called "The Hobbit" or something. Snore... even if it IS in 3D...
Bullet = dodged.
(untitled comment)
Whew. She had it easy. One time, DreamWorks thugs broke into my home and smashed my Puss in Boots DVD. Said I'd get a fresh copy when I "bought it again."
Tarnish
I think that the reason why tarnishment is a valid thing is because most consumers say to themselves: "Oh, how could Company X let Company Y use their name so immorally?" without considering for a moment that this is either an unreasonable expectation on Company X, or an unreasonable expectation on everybody else.
It seems to me to be a consumer confusion problem, but one that's been promoted by these big companies.
no subject
At least they didn't claim that a closed book counted as a form of DRM...
Competitive Disadvantage?
What would TWC do with free fiber, government employees, buildings, and discounted services? Would they make service better and cheaper for their users?
I think not. I have a feeling that if TWC/AT&T got these perks, they might use them to develop faster services, but would charge the users a premium to get access to them; or do nothing with them, since TWC does cable, and AT&T does DSL, letting the users wait for Verizon to come in with fiber, so they can continue to have tiered services that technically (but don't actually) compete with one another.
(untitled comment)
You know, if we still had a copyright term that lasted no more than 28 years (and change), this wouldn't even be an issue.
It makes me wonder if IP laws are just a government stimulus for the legal industry...
Re: Re:
Yeah. I guess I'm still new at this Troll business. I was trying to stick with the nautical motif of pirates.
(untitled comment)
there goes pirate mike's sidekick, cabin boy tim, completely missing the point of politics.
it's not about informed votards. it's about making money.
duh.
where have you been for the past 200+ years?
/pseudotroll
(untitled comment)
Why didn't Stewart just go with one of the other cable providers in his area? I'm sure TWC has plenty competition in that region.
...
Oh, yeah. Nm.
(untitled comment)
The unauthorized changes to the play obviously caused harm to Levin.
He's dead.
(untitled comment)
Does this mean that all of my books must be destroyed when I die?
Hello, viking funeral...
Silver Bullet for Protecting Intellectual Property:
Stop believing that it exists.
Re:
principle, too.
(untitled comment)
I used to be a big fan of the NC, until I realized that I was only using it to prevent other people from making money from something I did. And then I realized that that made me just as bad as all the other culture cops out there, and since I didn't care if people copied my stuff, why should I care if they profit off of it? Ultimately, what I wanted was the credit for the parent work, and as long as there's a CC-BY, I'm still good.
I still do SA, though, as a matter of principal.
That being said, I think that NC and ND are good things to have to promote openness in otherwise gated content. I think if CC did away with these clauses, they would get fewer new adopters. The better solution is to keep these clauses around to encourage growth, but to educate people (as I was educated) that while it might be comforting to have the NC/ND clauses, they should only be used as a gateway to better access to content.
Also, if the CC got rid of NC, Cory Doctorow's new books wouldn't be released under CC-4.0 licenses due to an agreement he has with his publisher.
Re: Re:
The federal government?
(untitled comment)
Maybe Google is just trying to bring awareness to the ridiculousity of patent laws and how they only manage to harm the general public and stifle innovation, and is doing this by targeting the squeakiest wheel on the block, Apple users.
I just hope that someone will appreciate the irony.
Re: Copyright
I know! It seems to me that "character copyrights" seem more like a fictional character's "publicity rights" than they do actual copyright issues?