This is exactly what is happening to the UFC. There was an initial rush, but 2011 PPV sales were down 60% from 2010. The reason is there are few ways to see MMA besides PPVs. This lack of exposure is going to kill MMA. Sure, UFC signed with Fox, but I think it is too little, too late.
The reason the patent system is so messed up is it is already socialism. You still want the monopoly, but instead of a corporate monopoly you have a government-run monopoly. You trust the government not to mess it up?
How about we get rid of the damn monopolies and just let the corporations duke it out. No patents -- prices will be low -- everyone wins.
> You realize that without the original patent ideas, the
> product might not even exist?
I work at an engineering firm in the oil/gas industry. Here's how patents work. I come up with an idea. I develop it evenings and weekends because I think it will help my customers. I tell my boss who figures everyone is going to steal it and we have to patent it. I try and explain that when someone buys a product, they are also buying the people behind it and our name, so we should not be concerned. In any case, if our competitors make it, then it actually legitimizes the product, which helps customers spec them. Oil companies are not going to spec your proprietary product if there is a chance that if you run out or jack the price, their project will get delayed. So now I have to spend months working with lawyers to patents something, when I could have been testing it and releasing it to the market.
Patents might good in areas with government intervension, because budgets are never an issue (like military or aerospace). In the "real" world, patents are a huge hinderance to both inventor _and_ customer.
Most freetards were once paying customers who were fed up with:
- Buying a CD after hearing the single on the radio and the rest of the album is sh!t.
- Buying a PC game and finding it doesn't work on your computer but there is no way to get a refund.
- Buying a movie on DVD only to have the "special edition" come out 6 months later with extras.
- Having to put up with ridiculous DRM that makes many games unplayable in certain situations, and the publisher doesn't care.
You think freetards just sprung into existence in a vacuum? It is years of abuse that created this backlash. Pull your head out of your ass.
> about anyone ever buying an ebook again
Except, of course, the libraries. You know that libraries have to buy the books they lend out, right? And people still have the desire to own books, because then they can read them or refer to them after the lending period. E-books don't change any of that.
> I am not sure that libraries will survive this change
What are you talking about? The change to e-books? Publishers better find a solution, because "refusing to allow lending of ebooks" is not a solution. First-sale says I can do whatever I want with my purchace. If publishers try and do an end-run around that by claiming sh!t like, "You've actually purchased a licence to a book" (whatever the hell that means) they will find the public will not tolerate it. They have to find a way to lend e-books like dead-tree books, or there will be a mass exodus to infringement. The public recognizes bullsh!t.
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. If it really is that hard to tell if something is infringing, I'm going to suggest, it isn't. If you are straining to hear a snippet of a pop song in a home video uploaded to YouTube, it is probably fair use.
In addition, if it would take a "highly trained musician" to tell if stuff on YouTube is infringing, how can YouTube be expected to tell?
The oil industry might car a little bit if there are electric cars, but the coal and natural gas industry sure don't, as the major uses of those are electricity generation. Why would the automotive industry care about electric cars? If people want them, they'll get built.
Redundency. That is how you store digital files. Books are an anomoly. All other media has suffered the same problem. Film degrades. Photos degrade. Records wear out. The digital age is the one hope to collectively capture our culture. Before, it is in the hands of a few, like gorehound up there, who aren't about to scan and share their collection they spent time and money on.
I agree. It is tough to determine you are wasting your time before you actually waste your time.
The thing is, it is always harder (impossible?) to prove a negative than a positive. If they caught her doing something illegal, the surveillance would be over. But to definitively rule out she isn't doing illegal things ... that would take forever. The best you can do is watch long enough to reasonably conclude she isn't likely to do illegal things.
> then lowering prices ... is almost certainly a losing proposition
These don't add up. You almost got it, when you talked about price discrimination. The problem is copyright infringement very seldom represents a lost sale, at the current going price of the media. So if DVDs are $20, then the guy who downloads the movie is unlikely to have bought it for $20. However, he would probably buy it for some price, say $2. So if distributors simultaneously had a download available for $2, they would not only have some people buy DVDs, but the guy who would never buy a DVD at $20 may buy a digital file for $2.
This is so wrong. Big Business will police itself, as long as you don't bail it out. Your recession is proof that having the government control the interest rate, encourage home ownership, and in general meddle with the economy only messes it up. Leave business to businesses. They know what they are doing.
Name me one successful corporation that isn't run by billionares. That's how the free market works, you idiot. You prefer to shop with companies run by broke losers?
I connect my computer to my TV, but the biggest problem is now I need my keyboard on my lap to act as a remote. Anyone have a better solution? Can I buy a remote for my computer?
> Actually, it's usually the OS that makes the computer obsolete.
Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. My engineering firm still runs Windows XP, but we have the most powerful desktop computers available and upgrade every 18 months. It is not the software, it is the hardware.
Re:
> Fans are less engaged
This is exactly what is happening to the UFC. There was an initial rush, but 2011 PPV sales were down 60% from 2010. The reason is there are few ways to see MMA besides PPVs. This lack of exposure is going to kill MMA. Sure, UFC signed with Fox, but I think it is too little, too late.
Exposure is always a bigger problem than piracy.
Re: Re: Aren't patent's also a responsibility?
> entrust to profit-hungry corporate sharks
The reason the patent system is so messed up is it is already socialism. You still want the monopoly, but instead of a corporate monopoly you have a government-run monopoly. You trust the government not to mess it up?
How about we get rid of the damn monopolies and just let the corporations duke it out. No patents -- prices will be low -- everyone wins.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
> You realize that without the original patent ideas, the
> product might not even exist?
I work at an engineering firm in the oil/gas industry. Here's how patents work. I come up with an idea. I develop it evenings and weekends because I think it will help my customers. I tell my boss who figures everyone is going to steal it and we have to patent it. I try and explain that when someone buys a product, they are also buying the people behind it and our name, so we should not be concerned. In any case, if our competitors make it, then it actually legitimizes the product, which helps customers spec them. Oil companies are not going to spec your proprietary product if there is a chance that if you run out or jack the price, their project will get delayed. So now I have to spend months working with lawyers to patents something, when I could have been testing it and releasing it to the market.
Patents might good in areas with government intervension, because budgets are never an issue (like military or aerospace). In the "real" world, patents are a huge hinderance to both inventor _and_ customer.
Re:
> and here TPB didn't start hosting
They don't "host" anything, dumbass. They don't even "link" to anything. The site is a list of hashes of torrent files.
Re: Re: Just say no to paying
Most freetards were once paying customers who were fed up with:
- Buying a CD after hearing the single on the radio and the rest of the album is sh!t.
- Buying a PC game and finding it doesn't work on your computer but there is no way to get a refund.
- Buying a movie on DVD only to have the "special edition" come out 6 months later with extras.
- Having to put up with ridiculous DRM that makes many games unplayable in certain situations, and the publisher doesn't care.
You think freetards just sprung into existence in a vacuum? It is years of abuse that created this backlash. Pull your head out of your ass.
Re: Re:
> serious violation of the law no different than stealing
> the movie from a store.
The closest analogy to infringing is fare-evasion. Look at the penalties for fare-evasion to see how far out of line the law for infringing are.
Re:
I don't think you understand how libraries work.
> about anyone ever buying an ebook again
Except, of course, the libraries. You know that libraries have to buy the books they lend out, right? And people still have the desire to own books, because then they can read them or refer to them after the lending period. E-books don't change any of that.
> I am not sure that libraries will survive this change
What are you talking about? The change to e-books? Publishers better find a solution, because "refusing to allow lending of ebooks" is not a solution. First-sale says I can do whatever I want with my purchace. If publishers try and do an end-run around that by claiming sh!t like, "You've actually purchased a licence to a book" (whatever the hell that means) they will find the public will not tolerate it. They have to find a way to lend e-books like dead-tree books, or there will be a mass exodus to infringement. The public recognizes bullsh!t.
Re:
> infringing links
Are you serious? Not this sh!t again. Sure, let's just nuke Google because a Family Guy snippet was posted to YouTube. Wow.
Re: Re: Re:
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. If it really is that hard to tell if something is infringing, I'm going to suggest, it isn't. If you are straining to hear a snippet of a pop song in a home video uploaded to YouTube, it is probably fair use.
In addition, if it would take a "highly trained musician" to tell if stuff on YouTube is infringing, how can YouTube be expected to tell?
Re: Re:
The oil industry might car a little bit if there are electric cars, but the coal and natural gas industry sure don't, as the major uses of those are electricity generation. Why would the automotive industry care about electric cars? If people want them, they'll get built.
You see too many conspiracies.
Re:
Redundency. That is how you store digital files. Books are an anomoly. All other media has suffered the same problem. Film degrades. Photos degrade. Records wear out. The digital age is the one hope to collectively capture our culture. Before, it is in the hands of a few, like gorehound up there, who aren't about to scan and share their collection they spent time and money on.
Re:
I hope you've scanned them all. One fire, and all that history is gone.
Re: Dan Bull Sh*t
> I honestly do not understand how these illegal
> filesharing operations are allowed to exist in ANY country.
The Pirate Bay does not share any files. It is a site of hash codes.
If all citizens decided that they didn't support copyright anymore, it would cease to be wrong. Citizen who fileshare are voting.
Re: Trash or not
I agree. It is tough to determine you are wasting your time before you actually waste your time.
The thing is, it is always harder (impossible?) to prove a negative than a positive. If they caught her doing something illegal, the surveillance would be over. But to definitively rule out she isn't doing illegal things ... that would take forever. The best you can do is watch long enough to reasonably conclude she isn't likely to do illegal things.
Re:
> piracy very seldom represents a lost sale
> then lowering prices ... is almost certainly a losing proposition
These don't add up. You almost got it, when you talked about price discrimination. The problem is copyright infringement very seldom represents a lost sale, at the current going price of the media. So if DVDs are $20, then the guy who downloads the movie is unlikely to have bought it for $20. However, he would probably buy it for some price, say $2. So if distributors simultaneously had a download available for $2, they would not only have some people buy DVDs, but the guy who would never buy a DVD at $20 may buy a digital file for $2.
Re: Piracy
We are talking about copyright infringement. Piracy and stealing are two different things, and neither are infringement.
We already have word for things. Stop making up your own.
Re: Re: Sarbanes-Oxley should be the first to go
This is so wrong. Big Business will police itself, as long as you don't bail it out. Your recession is proof that having the government control the interest rate, encourage home ownership, and in general meddle with the economy only messes it up. Leave business to businesses. They know what they are doing.
Re:
> run by all the billionaires
Name me one successful corporation that isn't run by billionares. That's how the free market works, you idiot. You prefer to shop with companies run by broke losers?
Re:
I connect my computer to my TV, but the biggest problem is now I need my keyboard on my lap to act as a remote. Anyone have a better solution? Can I buy a remote for my computer?
Re: Re:
> Actually, it's usually the OS that makes the computer obsolete.
Sorry, but this is 100% wrong. My engineering firm still runs Windows XP, but we have the most powerful desktop computers available and upgrade every 18 months. It is not the software, it is the hardware.