"I'm simply asking for an opinion."
I don't really understand why you are asking for it here.
If it really means that much to you, wouldn't approach him privately?
But that was in reference to a general copyright question, not author's rights. I can see the relation between them, but they sound like two different questions on two different subjects.
Spotify and Itunes are the two biggest revenue streams to the record labels.
Makes me wonder what goes on with all that money.
"He's claiming to not be on the fence about whether authors should have some sort of exclusive rights to their writings"
Huh? Where?
I'm not being facetious, I may have just missed it.
The question seems a little loaded (funnily enough, it's a great lawyer question, IMO), and I'm not really following the claims of dishonesty.
Technically he did answer your general question about copyright, which I've seen you ask multiple times in the past few weeks.
The specific one you just asked about author's rights, however, I have not seen as a topic until today.
"So trying to say piracy is ok because there have been some record labels that have pulled some shady shit just doesn't fly."
There may be some here who advocate piracy (I don't) but there's a lot of people here who aren't big fans of it, and do realize it has a part in the monetary woes of musicians.
I also agree that piracy is not justified by the hypocrisy of some of the record labels. However, their hypocrisy makes it more difficult for some people to take them seriously.
In my opinion, change for the better needs to come from the record labels. So many musicians are irate with spotify's payouts when the company is giving a large chunk of it's revenue to the record labels, and trying to stay afloat with whatever's left over. The artists should be lobbying for change in the royalty rates and the accounting practices, instead of attacking the services that help people find their music.
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3r5sue/
Uwe Boll (director of horrendous films such as Bloodrayne and In the Name of the King) did the same thing, but instead invited his critics to into a boxing match.
Wow, this Gina lady's a character.
She apparently hunted down someone who called the cops on her after she made "passively suicidal" statements on her blog.
Masnick, you forced my hand on this one!
http://i.imgur.com/lsdUxnM.png
"It only tracks those who upload the most-popular copyrighted content, like blockbuster movies and best-selling albums,"
I thought this was interesting. I've seen a few indie artist voice their support of this system, yet it won't prevent people from downloading their music.
Oh, Hollywood will you ever stop being so seedy?
They'll probably try to use a download chart to say you were torrenting unauthorized copies...and then completely ignore the fact it was actually Netflix traffic.
You're just jealous he gets a gold toilet.
Like Mike says, very rarely does a spam comment get through their own inner filters.
The fact remains, the report tool is a form of expression in it's own right. You may see it as pointless, but it still allows others to express their discontent when someone makes insults or attacks.
"Whether one wants to call it censorship, moderation, or just cleaning up the forum, it still blocks an opinion."
I wouldn't say it block an opinion, but rather places a stigma on the commenter and usually for good reason. The majority of the comments I've seen get reported to the extent of being blocked are typically meant to goad people (mostly Mike) into a pissing contest with personal insults, which is not commentary or conducive to a public discussion.
Frankly, if the commenter wishes to be heard and taken seriously, it's his/her responsibility to express themselves cordially.
The other thing is, the report tool is driven by the community. In a way it's the community expressing it's disagreement with the commenter, so who is to say the community is wrong?
Wasn't there mention on TD about Germans using Youtube to sample songs and GEMA's vengeance-related lawsuit boner preventing them from doing it??
Eh, true, however if you're developing Open Source software you're already planning on giving it away.
I was referring to artists (not that programmers aren't artists in their own way) distributing music.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"but I don't recall seeing a single, unified article outlining how copyright should be"
If you browse the comments, there are occasional suggestions for improvement. I have read a few articles here of examples of ways to overcome piracy as well. I guess that's why subjectivity is such a good thing.
"It's far easier to attack a system than to build one. I see lots of the former but almost none of the latter. "
So if you see something wrong with a system and point it out, it's considered attacking?
" Most here aren't dependent on the markets suffering the corrosive effects of piracy to earn their living. In fact, they're economic beneficiaries of piracy."
Mmm, how do you know that?