To 1, 2, and 3, you are correct. I am also not a fan of his proposal. I tend to believe economies will function better if the government is not needed.
To 4, there is no reason why Kickstarter couldn't work without copyright. There would probably be no tier of "a download of the album", but that's not a necessary tier. Most of the money will probably be made on the physical items or exclusive intangibles for sale anyway. And people still want their favorite artists to create things and earn a living.
They're saying zero marginal cost, not zero cost. It costs you nothing additional to download an additional movie, beyond the fixed costs you already had to pay for your internet connection.
One reason I gave my congressman that I opposed this bill is that it didn't contain safeguards to keep the information from being used to prosecute other types of crimes which were not in any way related to "cybersecurity". Based on the amendment, that was apparently intentional.
On the article you're linking through, the "For ten bucks a month" part has strikethrough. The update says:
"An earlier version of this article stated that a membership is $9.99 per month for six months. The cost is $9.99 total for six months. I apologize for the error."
Possibly the best thing about Kevin Smith is his ability to come up with his own, extremely funny and apt, comparisons. I don't think we'd ever have Mike, for example, saying that the real problem for major movie studios is that they have to compete with watching threesomes at home. It's true that he's not the only person who could pull off alternative funding, but he is a rather unique individual.
If copyright were limited to the life of the author, then the author would have declining incentives as he/she grew older. An 80-year-old would likely have no publisher willing to buy his book, since they would have far less time to exploit it (prior to public domain) than a 30-year-old author's book. This is avoided with fixed lengths. It also removes the incentive to kill authors so you can use their work.
You can call me names if you'd like, but I was legitimately answering TechnoMage's question. It is the only social argument I've heard against it which is not a moral/religious argument. It is not based on the rightness of multiple wives, but on the potential negative outcomes to the society.
A typical informed argument is that if you have lots of one-man-many-women polygamists in a society where men and women are roughly equal in number, there will be a huge population of men that are completely unable to find a wife due to their monopolization by powerful men. These unattached men are far less stable and more likely to become, for example, suicidal religious fanatics.
Re: Hurrah Hurrah Someone who appears to be on my side
It seems to me that the relevant history here is landline telephones. Government forcing competition seems to have been a good thing for those.
Typo
"giving away you're entire output" should be your
Re: What a nightmare!
To 1, 2, and 3, you are correct. I am also not a fan of his proposal. I tend to believe economies will function better if the government is not needed.
To 4, there is no reason why Kickstarter couldn't work without copyright. There would probably be no tier of "a download of the album", but that's not a necessary tier. Most of the money will probably be made on the physical items or exclusive intangibles for sale anyway. And people still want their favorite artists to create things and earn a living.
Re:
They're saying zero marginal cost, not zero cost. It costs you nothing additional to download an additional movie, beyond the fixed costs you already had to pay for your internet connection.
Re:
That would probably take a constitutional amendment at this point. Otherwise they'd just undo it the next election cycle.
Re: Re: A new way to shave
Agreed. It's amusing in an Old Spice-style way.
Typo
"But no one knows who's publishing rights" should be "whose publishing rights"
Plentiful gold
If gold were plentiful, we'd use it for all our electronics. Solder, wires, and especially exposed electronics like connectors would all be gold.
Re: Re:
One reason I gave my congressman that I opposed this bill is that it didn't contain safeguards to keep the information from being used to prosecute other types of crimes which were not in any way related to "cybersecurity". Based on the amendment, that was apparently intentional.
Re: typo
Nice job, I didn't spot that one! Is there a typo in every post to see whether we're paying attention?
Re: Re: Re:
Exactly.
Re: That's all you could find?
Maybe he was trying to keep people from getting sucked into that black hole of time.
The Grey Album
Cool, a reference to my only submission. Surprised it wasn't linked:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101119/00342311929/jay-z-explains-he-is-honored-to-have- his-work-remixed-others.shtml
Re:
How do you figure? Lobbying sucks, regardless of who's doing it. It's institutionalized bribery.
Update to linked article?
On the article you're linking through, the "For ten bucks a month" part has strikethrough. The update says:
"An earlier version of this article stated that a membership is $9.99 per month for six months. The cost is $9.99 total for six months. I apologize for the error."
Amazing illustrations
Possibly the best thing about Kevin Smith is his ability to come up with his own, extremely funny and apt, comparisons. I don't think we'd ever have Mike, for example, saying that the real problem for major movie studios is that they have to compete with watching threesomes at home. It's true that he's not the only person who could pull off alternative funding, but he is a rather unique individual.
Re: ZERO SYMPATHY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Re: Re: Re: This case should even be a case
If copyright were limited to the life of the author, then the author would have declining incentives as he/she grew older. An 80-year-old would likely have no publisher willing to buy his book, since they would have far less time to exploit it (prior to public domain) than a 30-year-old author's book. This is avoided with fixed lengths. It also removes the incentive to kill authors so you can use their work.
Re: Re: Re: Other than Jewish/Christian Religious Traditions...
You can call me names if you'd like, but I was legitimately answering TechnoMage's question. It is the only social argument I've heard against it which is not a moral/religious argument. It is not based on the rightness of multiple wives, but on the potential negative outcomes to the society.
Re: Other than Jewish/Christian Religious Traditions...
A typical informed argument is that if you have lots of one-man-many-women polygamists in a society where men and women are roughly equal in number, there will be a huge population of men that are completely unable to find a wife due to their monopolization by powerful men. These unattached men are far less stable and more likely to become, for example, suicidal religious fanatics.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200706/ten-politically-incorrect-truths-about-h uman-nature