PaulT's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the las-vegas-dreams-dashed dept
It's been a good week for articles that interest me personally, a good thing as I've been asked to write this post about my favorites! First mention has to go to Jonathan McIntosh's great recap of the problems he's had to go through at the hands of Lionsgate. In short, despite his Twilight remix video having been mentioned by the US Copyright Office itself as an example of fair use, he still struggled to convince YouTube to keep it up since Lionsgate didn't want to keep it up without obscuring it with ads (despite the current version being ad free and not monetized by McIntosh in any way himself). It's a nice illustration of how even those who try to keep within the law fall foul of corporate greed if they decide they don't like something. If something already illustrated as fair use can be treated like this, imagine the problems faced by anyone in a grey area!
On a similar note, rapper Kid Cudi yet again noted how disappointed he was in his label's commitment to his new single, just one year after having similar problems with his last album. While some were noting that he was silly to have signed for a label in the first place, this was another illustration as to how even successful artists can be let down by the legacy industry and how many artists simply don't need them.
Something slightly more disturbing to me personally is the story about a gambling software programmer being shut down and raided. The story appears to go that despite offering services that are perfectly legal everywhere that he licensed the software, he fell afoul of the US's inexplicable anti-gambling obsession anyway because he's based in the US and people in NY may have somehow touched his software. As someone who working in Gibraltar, a place whose industry is largely built by offshore gaming companies (some of whom were similarly attacked when US authorities suddenly decided that their companies were offering illegal products), this is a worrying trend. It also sadly means that my dreams of being invited to help set up a Las Vegas branch of one of those companies might still be a long way away!
On a lighter note, UK police were arguing about who first thought up their Twitter offers of free iPads to lure the stupidest criminals alive into their arms. Neither of them apparently remembering the episode of The Simpsons where Homer was successfully lured by the promise of a free boat.
Meanwhile, back in the entertainment industry, Sony offered the most naked example yet of profiteering and the back of what should be public domain material when they released a new Bob Dylan compilation entitled the "Copyright Collection Volume 1." Regionally restricted, of course, and containing rare material that will inevitably be pirated as it's not available anywhere else. It's particularly odious because the mere 100 copies they released were openly intended to stop classic material from going back to the public under the original deal made when they were recorded. At least they've dropped the pretense of helping the fans, I suppose.
The movie industry also made some wrongheaded moves in an attempt to promote their silly Ultraviolet service (yet another in a long line of DRM that offer customers less than a pirated version under the pretense that it somehow benefits the consumer). The pretense is that by offering free movies with purchases of TVs and Blu ray players, they can convince people to use and love it. Having unfortunately tried it myself (unsuccessfully) on a movie I received for Christmas, I suspect it will just let people know not to bother.
Finally, on a lighter note, it's nice to see some figures for Kickstarter's year and their great success in funding a wide range of projects. Over 2 million people funded projects this year (myself included), so here's hoping that many more independent artists get funded in 2013!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"You're conflating disagreement with a zealous hatred resulting in physical violence."
Try reading my words, and stop making things up. Unchecked bigotry and hatred often leads to violence, and you don't have to look very far to see stories where gay kids (or kids merely suspected of being gay) are bullied, often to the point of suicide of physical violence.
I'm not saying that you said it's OK to bully. I'm saying that bigots like you sometime turn to bullying and violence as a result of their bigotry, especially in a school where such behaviour is not discouraged. That you haven't personally done this doesn't excuse the next gay kid driven to suicide because of others who share the same prejudice, or the kids wasting half their lives trying to appear straight because of how their peers would react.
"What they're doing not only goes over the heads of the taxpayers"
No its doesn't. It goes against the opinions of people like you, but the taxpayers who take the alternative viewpoint are having their taxes used in the way they wish. Many taxpayers fully support the education you find so offensive, and I'm yet to hear an objection not based in simple bigotry.
It's obviously pointless talking to you, since you apparently don't understand the role schools have in wider society, and seem to think that educating against bullying and discrimination is some form of agenda. But, like most bigots, I doubt that you can come up with a reason for your prejudice other than "I don't like those people" or "because my book of fiction says so", and that sort of person can rarely come up with something not equally applicable to heterosexuals. If you can, feel free to share and debate, but you've already shown that "I don't like what they get up to in bed" is about the extent of your reasoning.
As for constitutional rights, gay people have those as well. If you don't like your children being taught tolerance and how to see gay people as fellow human beings, you're free to homeschool, or send your children to a private or religious institution where they can be taught all sorts of bullshit ranging from creationism to how there's no problem with hating people if you don't like something about them. If you send them to a public school, then the taxes of gays and other minorities are also paying those taxes, as well as people who support their cause for equality.
Gay people exist, they always have and always will. Stripping away their rights because you don't like that is not acceptable, and teaching kids that they - like women, blacks, jews, Irish and whatever other group has faced similar discrimination - deserve equal treatment is hardly wrong. When people say you're on the losing side of history, this is what they mean. Get used to it.
Re: Re: Dotcom stole millions.
It's even sillier than that if you think about it. Dotcom didn't personally infringe on anyone's copyright, he merely created a platform that others used to infringe (and many others used for perfectly legal activity).
So, even if you bought into the bullshit that infringement = theft, Dotcom didn't steal anything. At most, he merely profited from the actions of others, over which he had no direct control.
As with his idiotic attacks on Kickstarter for daring to make a profit from the service they provide (while not having a clue what that service actually is), ootb fails to even understand what he's attacking. He has no facts, just an obsessive need to attack this site.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: censorship
No, it's funny to look at tools like you try to move the goalposts, while doing a great job of dismantling your own arguments.
Here, for example. The hiding of comments here has two components that don't apply to the attempt to block the sites in question. One is that there's no attempt at censorship, just a warning that a certain proportion of the community here agrees that the comment in question is "abusive, spam, trollish or otherwise inappropriate", as the report button is marked.
The other is that there's a clear message with a one-click was to show the comment again. That's not applicable to using a proxy or VPN, since the average user won't know how to do that - blocking any legitimate speech on those sites from a majority, unlike the hiding of comments here, which block nothing.
But, hey, thanks for admitting that any attempt to censor content in this ways is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard to anyone who knows what they're doing. Won't you join us in going for workable and effective solutions, rather than the constant useless (and hugely damaging to legitimate activity) methods promoted by the idiots in charge and their corporate masters?
Re: Too bad for Him
Yeah, trapped in New Zealand. What a hell hole /s
"Clearly, he wants to do everything under his power to try to avoid having to face the courts in the US"
He's trying to avoid a kangaroo court in a country that's already shown a willingness to break laws and procedures in order to get him, ignored any right to due process before shutting down his business and refuse to allow his defense access to the evidence they'd need to clear him? Of course he is, why would he think he'd get a fair trial?
Re: Re: A matter of proportionate ease.
No, he whines about due process all the time when people hide his insane drivel through use of the report button. Like many authoritarians, he'll happily strip the rights of others, then cry bloody murder when he feels his own rights are infringed.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"something you may or may not be failure with"
Nice Freudian slip. We all know he's a failure ;)
Re: Re: Re:
No, you losers should stop cherry picking what you want to address at any given moment. So what if SOPA allowed for that? There's nothing in the current law that disallows them, and SOPA was so full of other dangerous and unworkable crap that nobody in their right mind would support it just because it happens to have a clause somewhere they agree with.
I know its hard for someone with as limited intellect as yourself to address an entire issue or consider all the implication of what's happening, but do try to keep up.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If by hateful you mean "have no patience with the hatred, prejudice and bigotry of others" then yes. I fail to see why that's a problem.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, we'll see, but I don't see what the problem is as long as it's out in the open. Half the criticisms seem to be outright misdirection or misunderstanding of what's going on. Zack Braff's project, for example, stated upfront that on top of his own money, the project would also be funded by foreign sales among other things - indicating a standard release. Anyone who didn't catch that just didn't read it properly.
But, so what? The fact that Hollywood may be involved somewhere and that a traditional release method is used doesn't stop totally independent releases. Public involvement in the development process might actually lead to better product (people paying for what they want to see made rather than what some marketing drone assumes). Independent productions can still thrive, and Kickstarter's not the only game in town if people don't like that.
I can understand some of the criticisms, but to my mind it's a lot of worrying over nothing, while the wider changes to the industry that crowdfunding encourages can only be a good thing in the long term.
Re:
11 comments on this thread, most of them the usual lies and impotent attacks from the local trolls and people telling them how they're wrong. Don't you guys get tired of this?
Re: German entertainment
You don't see how things could be better without a mandatory collection agency that takes money for performances of music they don't own and gives it to big stars instead of the people who made the music in question? You don't see how raising the costs for venues by a factor of 10 could make things worse than if they didn't collect at all?
There's something to be said for willful blindness...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Strange, being English I've always thought of faggots meaning meatballs, especially Mr Brain's Faggots, still found in UK supermarkets. Funny thing language, isn't it :)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Like mall bigots, you're an idiot, and proving it at every turn. Nobody is denying you any rights. You just don't get to hide when your vile hatred of gay people is responded to. You have the same rights as any person - and homosexuals should have all those rights as well. Tough shit if you don't like it, but that's what's fair - equal rights for everyone, even those you hate.
That you try to twist this into you having some rights removed only shows how stupid you really are.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yesah, I mean why stop there. Let's just let all the racists and misogynists have their way too! I mean, why teach kids how to integrate into modern society when they can just hate all the gays, women and racial minorities they can, right? I'm sure harbouring those vile prejudices will never result in harmful action.
You a moron, one of the most despicable people I've ever had the misfortune of encountering.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
He means that they have the audacity not only to acknowledge that gays exist but that they are equals as human beings. They also have the sheer gall to do this in front of large groups of people, some of which statistically will be homosexuals.
He just hates that his rabid hatred of gay people is not allowed to fester and turn into bullying, violence and psychological trauma on the children he hates (yes, michael, some of those children are gay).
Re: Re: Re:
"some people have assumed"
Then some people are morons. Unless it's stated specifically in the project that the resulting product will be released free of charge, there's no reason to assume this - if you understand how Kickstarter actually works. If people have assumed otherwise, they're wrong.
I've just donated $60 to a movie production. It's a production that not only would not get funded traditionally, but is partially inspired by the poor treatment its creators have received at the hands of the studios. It's not being 100% funded by the Kickstarter funds, as is made abundantly clear, but the money is necessary for production to begin. If successful, I get a free copy of the movie among other extras. There's no reason to assume that anyone who didn't donate will get a free copy. It will be sold through normal channels, and as far as I'm concerned its creators deserve every penny they make as a result.
This discussion really would be helped by people looking at the reality of how Kickstarter works, not attacking fictional assumptions.
Re: May "puts to rest the ridiculous claims", but what about the FIVE PERCENT?
ootb again being OFFENDED by the fact that a service provider gets paid for the service they provide! Learn what Kickstarter actually does, you blithering moron. Hey, set up your own company if the money's that easy!
I bet you're just angry because you can't accuse them of piracy like the other companies you lie about, but your obsessive insane hatred of Mike won't let you admit that a company he likes down good work.
(untitled comment)
"Now, the surcharge would no longer be a percentage of the fees, but would instead be calculated at 0.13€ for every mp3 file on the DJ's computer. Every song over five minutes costs an extra 20% per minute."
If you need any evidence that this whole thing is not only ridiculous, but clearly gamed to benefit only the commercial chart music end of the market, here it is.
Crappy commercial DJs only interested in playing the latest major label pop songs most likely come out paying very little. Non-commercial DJs will tend to not only have a lot more songs (in part because they're reacting to the mood of the dancefloor, not just going "yeah, let's play that new Rihanna song again!"), but most genres popular in Germany such as trance and techno will often have songs of 10-15 minute in length. Are you a newcomer making a name for himself in those genres? The club will lose money by giving you the opening slot, and you'll probably spend your booking fee just to be allowed to carry your music into the venue (for which the artists making those tunes will probably not see a penny).
So, play major label approved pop songs? You won't pay much. Play underground music that will never be found on any approved commercial outlet? Pay through the arse, and the money still goes to the crappy pop artists instead of the people making the music being played. How convenient.
There's an interesting article about it here for a bit more information about the current state: http://www.residentadvisor.net/feature.aspx?1757
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Education includes knowledge of the world surrounding you, and that world contains an significant number of gay people, all of whom deserve equal treatment to the rest of us.
I apologise if you don't like this fact, but it's true, and if parents with your mindset aren't going to teach anything but hatred and prejudice, then the schools will have to.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Parents should teach their children that homosexuality is wrong and immoral."
No, they should teach that hatred of other human beings is wrong and immoral. Hopefully that will help reduce the impact of people that scum like you would spawn, as well as stop the bullying of kids who have been mistakenly identified as gay (straight kids get bullied too because morons like you don't know how to pick the right target).