I don't really think its a fair analogy here as we are not discussing material objects that physically degrade over time such as a house or car.
I've heard this argument several times...games DO degrade, albeit in a different way. They degrade in the sense that they become obsolete. Houses don't become obsolete. Really, cars don't either.
For example, a 1959 Cadillac Eldorado convertible sold new for $7,401, which would be about $57,000 in today's money. Yet these cars routinely trade hands today for upwards of $200,000, and can be driven pretty as you please on the road today. Games, by contrast, are frequently unplayable two years after release. They lose any online support, updates, and don't even get me started on those stupid one-time codes.
Apparently that's their excuse for the higher licensing rates.
It's the same as the TV networks and Aereo, and Megaupload for that matter. It fundamentally comes from the entitlement complex of the entertainment industry hating for anyone to make money they don't get a slice of, whether they deserve it or not.
Except they can't in this case, since Warner Bros. doesn't actually know your identity.
These notices are submitted to via DMCA to the ISP, who then forward it to the customer associated with the IP address. Short of attempting to subpoena the ISP for the identity of the subscriber, they actually have no way of knowing the identity of the alleged infringer unless they attempt to make the payment.
In other words, ignoring it in this case would be the only sensible thing to do.
Then don't publish it. You seem to want it both ways: You want to claim "ownership" of a creative work, yet you also expect it to be propagated and become a part of national (if not global) culture. Trouble is, no one owns culture. It's yours, or it's the world's. Pick one.
no different than the theory here that there is no law broken for sending a 0 or a 1 to someone in pirating a file.
I've been reading TechDirt for about four years now, and I'm at a complete loss as to when this alleged theory was put forth. I certainly don't recall any articles that state as much.
"It teaches practically everyone in the world—sources, liaison services—that America can’t keep secrets."
Nor should it, beyond basic military intelligence and short-term activities. We frequently beat our chests in this country and bill ourselves as the "most free nation on Earth," but if we want to live up to that, we need the most transparent government, and the most well-informed public. Such programs as the one Snowden exposed do not aid in that goal, and should be exposed accordingly.
Like it or not (and clearly you don't), the money being made available is the product of IP, if the IP is violated then that money is less available.
Says who? Stupid threats like this one from the IP commission basically prevent governments from experimenting with IP-free economies, so you have little evidence to suggest they don't work. On the other hand, I could point to a few thousand years of human history prior to the Statute of Anne to suggest that they do.
I've noticed lately that "IP theft" is the **AAs favorite phrase now. All of their mouthpieces have begun using it every single time copyright issues come up.
Re: Re: Re: Used Games
I don't really think its a fair analogy here as we are not discussing material objects that physically degrade over time such as a house or car.
I've heard this argument several times...games DO degrade, albeit in a different way. They degrade in the sense that they become obsolete. Houses don't become obsolete. Really, cars don't either.
For example, a 1959 Cadillac Eldorado convertible sold new for $7,401, which would be about $57,000 in today's money. Yet these cars routinely trade hands today for upwards of $200,000, and can be driven pretty as you please on the road today. Games, by contrast, are frequently unplayable two years after release. They lose any online support, updates, and don't even get me started on those stupid one-time codes.
Re:
Someone's going on Keter duty....
Re: Re: Re:
As opposed to the cadre of copyright maximalist sites that don't allow comments at all.
Re: Re: Re: Crying because of effeciencies
You may want to go back and re-read. There has been plenty of discussion here that piracy is inevitable because of technology
Correct, but that's not what you said and not what I objected to. The line I responded to was:
no different than the theory here that there is no law broken for sending a 0 or a 1 to someone in pirating a file.
Id est, the party line to toe here is that piracy is not illegal. I've still never read that one here, and neither have you.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Internet stations have THE WHOLE WORLD for market.
Apparently that's their excuse for the higher licensing rates.
It's the same as the TV networks and Aereo, and Megaupload for that matter. It fundamentally comes from the entitlement complex of the entertainment industry hating for anyone to make money they don't get a slice of, whether they deserve it or not.
Re:
Except they can't in this case, since Warner Bros. doesn't actually know your identity.
These notices are submitted to via DMCA to the ISP, who then forward it to the customer associated with the IP address. Short of attempting to subpoena the ISP for the identity of the subscriber, they actually have no way of knowing the identity of the alleged infringer unless they attempt to make the payment.
In other words, ignoring it in this case would be the only sensible thing to do.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: OH, BY THE WAY: Rapidshare is in trouble!
I doubt it, considering they're probably being paid for it.
Re: Re: Re: Mike and Torrentfreak trolling for fanboy outrage.
I made it, therefore I own it, you do NOT.
Then don't publish it. You seem to want it both ways: You want to claim "ownership" of a creative work, yet you also expect it to be propagated and become a part of national (if not global) culture. Trouble is, no one owns culture. It's yours, or it's the world's. Pick one.
Re: Crying because of effeciencies
no different than the theory here that there is no law broken for sending a 0 or a 1 to someone in pirating a file.
I've been reading TechDirt for about four years now, and I'm at a complete loss as to when this alleged theory was put forth. I certainly don't recall any articles that state as much.
Re: Oh, wait..."Mississippi"?
Here's a truth bomb, launching straight from my home outside of Meridian, Mississippi: You're a fucking idiot.
(untitled comment)
"It teaches practically everyone in the world—sources, liaison services—that America can’t keep secrets."
Nor should it, beyond basic military intelligence and short-term activities. We frequently beat our chests in this country and bill ourselves as the "most free nation on Earth," but if we want to live up to that, we need the most transparent government, and the most well-informed public. Such programs as the one Snowden exposed do not aid in that goal, and should be exposed accordingly.
Re: Dotcom is guilty and should be locked up after due process.
Remember, the US only got John Dillinger, definitely behind multiple murders, on tax evasion.
The hell they did. They got Dillinger with three rounds of .38 behind the Biograph Theater.
Re: Re:
"HERPA DERPA TECHDIRT DOESN'T MATTER!! That's why me and about five other regulars spend all of our time spreading pro-industry propaganda there!"
Re:
Like it or not (and clearly you don't), the money being made available is the product of IP, if the IP is violated then that money is less available.
Says who? Stupid threats like this one from the IP commission basically prevent governments from experimenting with IP-free economies, so you have little evidence to suggest they don't work. On the other hand, I could point to a few thousand years of human history prior to the Statute of Anne to suggest that they do.
Re:
Right. No streaming or download service would exist without Hollywood movies and major label music.
They're not as irreplaceable as they'd like to think. The continual growth of independent music is proof of that.
(untitled comment)
I've noticed lately that "IP theft" is the **AAs favorite phrase now. All of their mouthpieces have begun using it every single time copyright issues come up.
(untitled comment)
I responded to this Nutella story yesterday with a short, but concise video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJjjx0lijF0
Re:
Seriously. Do you jizz in your pants when the guys at Taco Bell get your order right?
(untitled comment)
How unbelievably horrible do you have to be to make Gordan Ramsay seem reasonable?
Re: The problem is property.
If I could make "insightful" 10 times, I would.