Does any facet of the simulation address the economic feasibility of the various models? I don't argue that a completely free and open exchange of ideas would result in the greatest amount of innovation in the shortest amount of time, but that's assuming that all parties involved can remain in business.
But if Company B can simply copy the products of Company A, and charge a lower price since they don't have to recoup R&D costs, I don't see how all the various parties can stay in business long enough to see the benefits of increased innovation.
Would this law also require that the code in the car's ECU (Engine Control Unit) be unencrypted?
If so, this law would be a boon for the aftermarket performance companies. Right now, much of the information in the ECU like fuel maps, ignition curves, and the algorithms to modify the fuel & ignition settings based on engine sensor data is encrypted, so it's difficult to modify the ECU to optimize it for modifications like larger turbochargers or bigger fuel injectors until the ECU has been "cracked".
Trademark cases can get a little weird sometimes when it comes to determining whether or not two companies are in related industries. I remember years ago when a snow-ski manufacturer was refused the right to name one of their models "Quattro" because Audi complained. The court ruled that both the automobile and the snow ski could be considered "sport vehicles" and determined that confusion could arise. The ruling was even stranger for the fact that "quattro" is simply the Italian number for "four", so I'm surprised Audi was able to lay claim to it in the first place.
“Today a man shot six people on the crosstown bus, got a transfer, and shot six people on the downtown bus. In order to prevent this from happening in the future, authorities are discontinuing the transfer system.”
I *don't* think it's fair, but that wasn't the question being asked.
Personally, I'd like to see all works enter the public domain upon the creators' death. That poses a problem when the "creator" is a corporation like Disney, though. In a case like that, you'd have to do something different, such as having the work enter the public domain "X" years after its creation. I think a good value of "X" is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-50 years, personally.
Really... What company ships software with their burner that allows you to copy CSS-encrypted commercial DVDs? Be specific.
You're comparing apples to oranges anyway - the two specific machines that Alan linked to are *standalone* duplicators. They're not used with a separate computer and don't have any additional software included - just the firmware inside the duplicator unit itself. And that firmware doesn't include the code to bypass the protection on commercial DVDs. THAT'S the reason the companies that sell those duplicators aren't being sued by the MPAA like Real Networks is. (And that's the question Alan was asking when he brought up those duplicators)
No, it's not. It's a simple fact that the "behind the scenes" workers (burger flippers, lawn mowers, machinery operators) tend to come from a much larger pool of available labor and don't have as much power to negotiate. If the bosses don't want to pay them royalties, they'll easily find someone else that doesn't demand them.
Yes. Audio engineers have reputations just as much as musicians do.
Seriously, how often do you hear of an album being abandoned because the audio engineer backed out?? They're important, but they're replaceable.
And how many musicians are sitting on such "vast personal fortunes"?
It's more common with the musicians than it is with the support staff, I can tell you that. Getting small royalty checks over the next 50 years for work you do today works a lot better if you already have your immediate financial needs taken care of.
Isn't that exactly what record labels expect the musicians they sign up to do?
And I never claimed it was a good deal for the newly-signed musicians. They'd probably rather be paid up front as well. But getting them to agree to royalties plays on their hopes of "striking it rich" with a big album, and it also allows the studios to screw the artists by hiding all the profits and/or eating away at them with "expenses" so they end up paying the artists very little. Royalties are much more favorable for the Madonnas and Stephen Kings of the world - they know that no matter what dreck they may put out, it'll still sell a ton of copies, so there's less risk involved in basing their pay on a percentage of sales.
Audio engineers play a crucial part in putting together a CD. As do the skilled folks who operate the CD-mastering plant. How come they don't get royalties for their work?
And what about the manufacture of hamburgers? That takes a lot of skills and high-tech equipment, not to mention the design of the stoves, electrical safety certification, health inspection etc. How come the folks who work on those things don't get royalties for every burger flipped?
I suspect the answer to your question lies in the fact that the individual stove designers, electrical inspectors, health inspectors, audio engineers etcetera generally don't possess a level of skill that is so unique or extraordinary in their field that they have the influence to demand compensation in the form of royalties. The production of a successful album requires an audio engineer, but is there any *specific* engineer whose skill is so great that obtaining his services will "make or break" the project? Most likely not. So the studio is free to find another engineer that isn't going to demand royalty payments.
As for the stove designer, if he has truly come up with a design so unique and so valuable that the burger company absolutely must have it, he may well be able to negotiate to license the design to the burger company in exchange for royalty payments, rather than selling his services outright for a flat fee.
Lastly, the people that do electrical inspections and run the disc-manufacturing facilities might prefer to be paid up front, rather than hoping for trickling payments over the next few decades. It's not as if they're sitting on vast personal fortunes and can afford to take a chance on the future success of a particular project. After all, if some stranger came up to you and asked for your services in exchange for a percentage of possible future earnings, would you jump at the chance? Or would you rather just take a check and go the hell home?
And here's a quote from Primera's FAQ/Knowledge Base:
Can I copy commercial DVD movies?
No. Our duplicators are intended only for duplication of original content audio, video and other digital information. All applicable copyright laws must be observed. Most DVD movies are copy-protected with encryption and this prevents a "global image," necessary for duplication, from being created.
So, the Primera duplicators can't copy protected discs, which means that the MPAA can't come after them using the same approach as they're taking with Real Networks in this lawsuit. I'm still looking for a definitive answer regarding the Tascam duplicator Alan linked to.
I can't prove a negative. Go to the Tascam site - none of their consumer (or "pro-sumer", or whatever you want to call it) models list the ability to copy CSS-protected media.
That's pretty good evidence that either they can't copy protected media, or that Tascam doesn't advertise the capability because they know doing so would be inviting lawsuits similar to the one Real Networks is currently facing. Either scenario would prove my point equally well.
Fine, so I called them "commercial" instead of "pro-sumer" - sue me. You're still missing the entire point of my reply to Alan. He asked why Real Networks was being sued, while the manufacturers of those two particular duplicators aren't. Here's my exact reply:
"The difference is that unlike the duplicators you linked to, the RealDVD software makes copies of encrypted/copy-protected discs. That's the whole thrust of this lawsuit - the plaintiff is claiming that Real's software is violating the DMCA because it bypasses the copy-protection scheme on the discs in order to copy them.
If RealDVD only made copies of unprotected discs (like the Tascam/Primera duplicators in your post), then this lawsuit wouldn't be happening, or at the very least, the plaintiff would have to find a different strategy to attack Real."
Unless you can show me some evidence that those two duplicators can in fact copy protected media, then I don't see anything wrong with my reply. Likewise, prove me wrong in my assertion that this case wouldn't be happening if RealDVD didn't bypass the DVD protection. That's the claim that the plaintiff's **entire case** hinges on - that Real Networks is violating the DMCA by bypassing the disc protection.
Yep - and that's my biggest problem with the studios - they want the best of both worlds. They want your purchase to be merely a license, so that you're subject to all of the restrictions when it comes to re-distribution and copyright infringement, but they also want to treat the sale as if you're purchasing the actual physical media, so that they don't have to replace damage media and so that you can't format-shift the performance onto other media.
If we were truly just purchasing a license, I wouldn't be looking at four copies of the Beatles' "White Album" on my shelf, all on different media and purchased at full retail price. Instead, I would have been able to just purchase the license once, and then pay a nominal materials fee to get it on whatever media I wished.
If the busker hasn't obtained a public performance license, than probably so.
But there's very little oversight when it comes to street performers, because the system in place for collecting royalties for public performances is set up for collecting payment from the venue where the performance is held, not from the individual artists giving the performance. In the case of buskers, the "venue" isn't well-defined, and there are just so many of them that enforcement would be problematic, to say the least.
"FYI in my experience as a studio pro, most burners of Tascam quality indeed do copy discs regardless of protection schemes."
Do you have any specific models you can name? Because if the Tascam consumer/prosumer duplicators *will* copy protected DVDs, they're being awful quiet about it on their website.
Interesting, but it doesn't refute my claim that there are no consumer-oriented duplicators that will duplicate CSS-protected discs, and *that's* why the manufacturers aren't being sued along with Real Networks for DMCA violations. That's all Alan was asking.
I really don't know what you're babbling about, but if you look up "unskilled laborer", I'm willing to bet you don't fit the accepted definition.
And since you asked, in the past week I secured 200k in funding for a relatively tiny project I'm working on as a result of an in-person meeting with DARPA representatives, including the former Chief Scientist of the US Secret Service. This will allow me to easily finish up the experimental portion of my thesis, so I'm all set to graduate with my master's degree in applied physics in June. Then I go back to Virginia to continue my career as a Naval officer.
Umm - "hourly" and "unskilled" are not synonymous. And even though works created by unskilled workers can sometimes still have value years later, you're ignoring my second criteria - that the work continues to directly produce a profit for the person that commissioned the work in the first place.
Do you really not see a difference between someone that nails a house frame together and an author that writes a book which is continually re-sold again and again at a profit for the publisher? How would you suggest that authors be paid? Hourly? An annual salary that entitles the publisher to everything that the author writes during the year? I think that an author's pay should be related to the amount of money his work is going to directly earn for the publisher. And the model that makes the most sense for that is a royalty arrangement.
Of course there are no lawsuits regarding the commercial duplication machines - they're the machines used **at the request of the publishers** to produce discs for sale.
Sony Pictures isn't going to ask a duplicating service to make them ten million copies of "Angels & Demons" and then turn around and sue the service for duplicating copy-protected discs - that's asinine.
As for my personal opinion on end-user copying of protected content, I think that consumers should be allowed to make backup copies of protected discs and/or transfer the content to other formats for viewing on laptops, personal video players, etcetera. In fact, I was disappointed to hear that the RealDVD software wouldn't let you burn a disc from the saved copy. To me, that's like having backup software without any "restore" functionality.
Re-read my original post. AC asked why he wasn't still getting paid for burgers he flipped 20 years ago. I just pointed out that he was paid hourly, so why would he expect lifetime payments? I never said that a royalty-based alternative for burger flippers exists.
Seriously, how would royalties even be applicable/appropriate in such a case? Are people still eating the burgers he prepared 20 years ago?
And don't get your panties in a twist about the whole "skilled/unskilled" thing. "Unskilled labor" is not a derogatory term - it's just a description of a certain type of work. And I still claim that unskilled labor doesn't lend itself to a royalty-based payment system, because the results of their labor are usually fleeting. A flipped burger is eaten and is then gone. A freshly-mown lawn grows ragged again over time. The work that's performed doesn't have any lasting value for anyone or provide profits for anyone over an extended period of time, so royalties don't make much sense, do they?
I never said anything about non-commercial copying being OK or not. I only mentioned commercials in my response to AC in post #45 where he said "Tascam and Primera have devices on the market that circumvent said copy protection."
I'm claiming that either he's wrong, or that such devices are meant for strictly commercial use. Obviously such commercial duplication devices exist, because that's how all of the DVDs that end up on store shelves are produced in the first place.
All this goes back to my response to Alan's post where he asked why Tascam and Primera haven't been sued like Real is being sued for RealDVD. I claim that any consumer-oriented duplication machines like the examples he gave are incapable of copying CSS-protected discs, and that's why Tascam and Primera aren't being sued.
RSS
Twitter
Financial feasibility? (as Scott Gardner)
Does any facet of the simulation address the economic feasibility of the various models? I don't argue that a completely free and open exchange of ideas would result in the greatest amount of innovation in the shortest amount of time, but that's assuming that all parties involved can remain in business.
But if Company B can simply copy the products of Company A, and charge a lower price since they don't have to recoup R&D costs, I don't see how all the various parties can stay in business long enough to see the benefits of increased innovation.
Another possible implication? (as Scott Gardner)
Would this law also require that the code in the car's ECU (Engine Control Unit) be unencrypted?
If so, this law would be a boon for the aftermarket performance companies. Right now, much of the information in the ECU like fuel maps, ignition curves, and the algorithms to modify the fuel & ignition settings based on engine sensor data is encrypted, so it's difficult to modify the ECU to optimize it for modifications like larger turbochargers or bigger fuel injectors until the ECU has been "cracked".
Different Industries (as Scott Gardner)
Trademark cases can get a little weird sometimes when it comes to determining whether or not two companies are in related industries. I remember years ago when a snow-ski manufacturer was refused the right to name one of their models "Quattro" because Audi complained. The court ruled that both the automobile and the snow ski could be considered "sport vehicles" and determined that confusion could arise. The ruling was even stranger for the fact that "quattro" is simply the Italian number for "four", so I'm surprised Audi was able to lay claim to it in the first place.
(as Scott Gardner)
Sounds like an old George Carlin routine:
“Today a man shot six people on the crosstown bus, got a transfer, and shot six people on the downtown bus. In order to prevent this from happening in the future, authorities are discontinuing the transfer system.”
Re: Re: Re: (as Scott Gardner)
I *don't* think it's fair, but that wasn't the question being asked.
Personally, I'd like to see all works enter the public domain upon the creators' death. That poses a problem when the "creator" is a corporation like Disney, though. In a case like that, you'd have to do something different, such as having the work enter the public domain "X" years after its creation. I think a good value of "X" is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-50 years, personally.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ Scott How discs are made (as Scott Gardner)
Really... What company ships software with their burner that allows you to copy CSS-encrypted commercial DVDs? Be specific.
You're comparing apples to oranges anyway - the two specific machines that Alan linked to are *standalone* duplicators. They're not used with a separate computer and don't have any additional software included - just the firmware inside the duplicator unit itself. And that firmware doesn't include the code to bypass the protection on commercial DVDs. THAT'S the reason the companies that sell those duplicators aren't being sued by the MPAA like Real Networks is. (And that's the question Alan was asking when he brought up those duplicators)
Re: Re: Putting Together a CD (as Scott Gardner)
No, it's not. It's a simple fact that the "behind the scenes" workers (burger flippers, lawn mowers, machinery operators) tend to come from a much larger pool of available labor and don't have as much power to negotiate. If the bosses don't want to pay them royalties, they'll easily find someone else that doesn't demand them.
Seriously, how often do you hear of an album being abandoned because the audio engineer backed out?? They're important, but they're replaceable.
It's more common with the musicians than it is with the support staff, I can tell you that. Getting small royalty checks over the next 50 years for work you do today works a lot better if you already have your immediate financial needs taken care of.
And I never claimed it was a good deal for the newly-signed musicians. They'd probably rather be paid up front as well. But getting them to agree to royalties plays on their hopes of "striking it rich" with a big album, and it also allows the studios to screw the artists by hiding all the profits and/or eating away at them with "expenses" so they end up paying the artists very little. Royalties are much more favorable for the Madonnas and Stephen Kings of the world - they know that no matter what dreck they may put out, it'll still sell a ton of copies, so there's less risk involved in basing their pay on a percentage of sales.
Re: Re: Putting Together a CD (as Scott Gardner)
I suspect the answer to your question lies in the fact that the individual stove designers, electrical inspectors, health inspectors, audio engineers etcetera generally don't possess a level of skill that is so unique or extraordinary in their field that they have the influence to demand compensation in the form of royalties. The production of a successful album requires an audio engineer, but is there any *specific* engineer whose skill is so great that obtaining his services will "make or break" the project? Most likely not. So the studio is free to find another engineer that isn't going to demand royalty payments.
As for the stove designer, if he has truly come up with a design so unique and so valuable that the burger company absolutely must have it, he may well be able to negotiate to license the design to the burger company in exchange for royalty payments, rather than selling his services outright for a flat fee.
Lastly, the people that do electrical inspections and run the disc-manufacturing facilities might prefer to be paid up front, rather than hoping for trickling payments over the next few decades. It's not as if they're sitting on vast personal fortunes and can afford to take a chance on the future success of a particular project. After all, if some stranger came up to you and asked for your services in exchange for a percentage of possible future earnings, would you jump at the chance? Or would you rather just take a check and go the hell home?
Re: Re: Re: Re: @ Scott How discs are made (as Scott Gardner)
And here's a quote from Primera's FAQ/Knowledge Base:
Can I copy commercial DVD movies?
No. Our duplicators are intended only for duplication of original content audio, video and other digital information. All applicable copyright laws must be observed. Most DVD movies are copy-protected with encryption and this prevents a "global image," necessary for duplication, from being created.
So, the Primera duplicators can't copy protected discs, which means that the MPAA can't come after them using the same approach as they're taking with Real Networks in this lawsuit. I'm still looking for a definitive answer regarding the Tascam duplicator Alan linked to.
Re: Re: Re: @ Scott How discs are made (as Scott Gardner)
I can't prove a negative. Go to the Tascam site - none of their consumer (or "pro-sumer", or whatever you want to call it) models list the ability to copy CSS-protected media.
That's pretty good evidence that either they can't copy protected media, or that Tascam doesn't advertise the capability because they know doing so would be inviting lawsuits similar to the one Real Networks is currently facing. Either scenario would prove my point equally well.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To Scott (as Scott Gardner)
Fine, so I called them "commercial" instead of "pro-sumer" - sue me. You're still missing the entire point of my reply to Alan. He asked why Real Networks was being sued, while the manufacturers of those two particular duplicators aren't. Here's my exact reply:
"The difference is that unlike the duplicators you linked to, the RealDVD software makes copies of encrypted/copy-protected discs. That's the whole thrust of this lawsuit - the plaintiff is claiming that Real's software is violating the DMCA because it bypasses the copy-protection scheme on the discs in order to copy them.
If RealDVD only made copies of unprotected discs (like the Tascam/Primera duplicators in your post), then this lawsuit wouldn't be happening, or at the very least, the plaintiff would have to find a different strategy to attack Real."
Unless you can show me some evidence that those two duplicators can in fact copy protected media, then I don't see anything wrong with my reply. Likewise, prove me wrong in my assertion that this case wouldn't be happening if RealDVD didn't bypass the DVD protection. That's the claim that the plaintiff's **entire case** hinges on - that Real Networks is violating the DMCA by bypassing the disc protection.
Re: Re: (as Scott Gardner)
Yep - and that's my biggest problem with the studios - they want the best of both worlds. They want your purchase to be merely a license, so that you're subject to all of the restrictions when it comes to re-distribution and copyright infringement, but they also want to treat the sale as if you're purchasing the actual physical media, so that they don't have to replace damage media and so that you can't format-shift the performance onto other media.
If we were truly just purchasing a license, I wouldn't be looking at four copies of the Beatles' "White Album" on my shelf, all on different media and purchased at full retail price. Instead, I would have been able to just purchase the license once, and then pay a nominal materials fee to get it on whatever media I wished.
Re: (as Scott Gardner)
If the busker hasn't obtained a public performance license, than probably so.
But there's very little oversight when it comes to street performers, because the system in place for collecting royalties for public performances is set up for collecting payment from the venue where the performance is held, not from the individual artists giving the performance. In the case of buskers, the "venue" isn't well-defined, and there are just so many of them that enforcement would be problematic, to say the least.
Re: @ Scott How discs are made (as Scott Gardner)
"FYI in my experience as a studio pro, most burners of Tascam quality indeed do copy discs regardless of protection schemes."
Do you have any specific models you can name? Because if the Tascam consumer/prosumer duplicators *will* copy protected DVDs, they're being awful quiet about it on their website.
Re: Re: Re: To Scott (as Scott Gardner)
Interesting, but it doesn't refute my claim that there are no consumer-oriented duplicators that will duplicate CSS-protected discs, and *that's* why the manufacturers aren't being sued along with Real Networks for DMCA violations. That's all Alan was asking.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: (as Scott Gardner)
I really don't know what you're babbling about, but if you look up "unskilled laborer", I'm willing to bet you don't fit the accepted definition.
And since you asked, in the past week I secured 200k in funding for a relatively tiny project I'm working on as a result of an in-person meeting with DARPA representatives, including the former Chief Scientist of the US Secret Service. This will allow me to easily finish up the experimental portion of my thesis, so I'm all set to graduate with my master's degree in applied physics in June. Then I go back to Virginia to continue my career as a Naval officer.
No, I don't need a hug - thanks, though.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To Scott (as Scott Gardner)
Umm - "hourly" and "unskilled" are not synonymous. And even though works created by unskilled workers can sometimes still have value years later, you're ignoring my second criteria - that the work continues to directly produce a profit for the person that commissioned the work in the first place.
Do you really not see a difference between someone that nails a house frame together and an author that writes a book which is continually re-sold again and again at a profit for the publisher? How would you suggest that authors be paid? Hourly? An annual salary that entitles the publisher to everything that the author writes during the year? I think that an author's pay should be related to the amount of money his work is going to directly earn for the publisher. And the model that makes the most sense for that is a royalty arrangement.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To Scott (as Scott Gardner)
Of course there are no lawsuits regarding the commercial duplication machines - they're the machines used **at the request of the publishers** to produce discs for sale.
Sony Pictures isn't going to ask a duplicating service to make them ten million copies of "Angels & Demons" and then turn around and sue the service for duplicating copy-protected discs - that's asinine.
As for my personal opinion on end-user copying of protected content, I think that consumers should be allowed to make backup copies of protected discs and/or transfer the content to other formats for viewing on laptops, personal video players, etcetera. In fact, I was disappointed to hear that the RealDVD software wouldn't let you burn a disc from the saved copy. To me, that's like having backup software without any "restore" functionality.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: (as Scott Gardner)
Re-read my original post. AC asked why he wasn't still getting paid for burgers he flipped 20 years ago. I just pointed out that he was paid hourly, so why would he expect lifetime payments? I never said that a royalty-based alternative for burger flippers exists.
Seriously, how would royalties even be applicable/appropriate in such a case? Are people still eating the burgers he prepared 20 years ago?
And don't get your panties in a twist about the whole "skilled/unskilled" thing. "Unskilled labor" is not a derogatory term - it's just a description of a certain type of work. And I still claim that unskilled labor doesn't lend itself to a royalty-based payment system, because the results of their labor are usually fleeting. A flipped burger is eaten and is then gone. A freshly-mown lawn grows ragged again over time. The work that's performed doesn't have any lasting value for anyone or provide profits for anyone over an extended period of time, so royalties don't make much sense, do they?
Re: Re: Re: To Scott (as Scott Gardner)
I never said anything about non-commercial copying being OK or not. I only mentioned commercials in my response to AC in post #45 where he said "Tascam and Primera have devices on the market that circumvent said copy protection."
I'm claiming that either he's wrong, or that such devices are meant for strictly commercial use. Obviously such commercial duplication devices exist, because that's how all of the DVDs that end up on store shelves are produced in the first place.
All this goes back to my response to Alan's post where he asked why Tascam and Primera haven't been sued like Real is being sued for RealDVD. I claim that any consumer-oriented duplication machines like the examples he gave are incapable of copying CSS-protected discs, and that's why Tascam and Primera aren't being sued.