So if there's no relationship that means IP laws have no effect (i.e. it's harmless). Which is certainly surprising to me! I would have thought them negatively correlated.
This appears to be basically the same as West's monopoly on legal books (i.e. court rulings, basically). Although the judges' rulings, as government documents, are public domain, West's publishing of them in paginated volumes is copyrighted. And cases are often referenced by West page numbers.
Nonetheless I continue to be astonished that he wants to make it harder to find bad guys! It's almost like he supports terrorism (which I don't believe he does)!
"AT&T gave me $50K to help the homeless though they wanted me to endorse the merger. I'm an honest guy so I won't lie or pretend that I have a position on telecom policy but if it causes more donations, please do support it."
I am delighted by his attitude (but don't support the merger).
This is how Ronald Reagan got his start: he would read the ticker tape reporting of faraway baseball games and then describe the game over the radio to listeners. The ticker tape just had raw data (hits, outs etc) so he would make up the background detail.
(Not to mention that many people follow cases like this as they follow sport)
But what if, instead of focusing on the paywall, the NYT had focused its efforts on adding more direct value to the site itself
Interestingly, the Times has the chance to experiment with this, as it also owns the Boston Globe, which has a respectable following of its own. It could leave the paywall up on the NYT site but experiment on the Globe's site, and see which does better.
We should refer to these companies as "Music Enforcement" or "Movie Enforcement" companies. Both highlights the ridiculousness of it as well as indicating clearly that they are shakedown crews of little value to anyone but themselves. But While calling them "Music Shakedown" could sound biased; Music Enforcement is simply normative!
What would happen if you printed a book with URLs of sites that streamed video? Would such a book be protected by the 1st amendment? It seems to me that there is plenty of case law that would claim it would be.
This would make an interesting test case -- if it succeeds, it becomes a clarifying precedent, as the DOJ would need to prove that a web site is somehow different from a book.
I am not David Slater nor do I represent (or even know) a David Slater. These images are being used without my permission, therefore can I ask you remove these images from your site immediately.
(hmm, do I need permission from Caters News to use their sentence?)
Cops come under a lot of legit criticism on this site, so I'm glad be able to praise the chief of police for downplaying, rather than hyping this rubbish. How great to have a rational response for a change.
Of course it's a shame that the other rational response is beefing up police patrols anyway, because of the cost of the negative press.
I don't see how this can work. A device such as a Roku system only HAS one account in it. If you buy one, and more than one person in your house looks at it, you are violating this law.
In fact, more than one person watching cable TV violates this law.
Would we let McDonalds come in to speak directly to our children about how they consume food?
Actually, we already do. What we need is for indie musicians to come, play some music, and give a counter presentation. Of course, they're already busy!
Let's not lose sight of the fact that the whole idea of an "e-book" is an elaborate infrastructure for DRM. Otherwise an e-book would just be a large html file or series of same, as some free books are.
And once we require DRM, all these commonplace features have to be reinvented to fit into the restriction infrastructure.
Every NDA I can remember signing has a clause that info isn't considered confidential if it's been publicly released through no fault of the recipient (i.e. if released by the owner or some third party). In other words, no need to worry about slamming the barn door.
But in a slight defense of the government side: this is leak data of unclear/unknown provenance, so could be disinformation. Without knowing its validity, it could hardly be presented as defense evidence (though the government's position gives this info a lot of credibility -- a kind of a "Streisand's corollary.")
But, it really highlights the key point, that the TSA is always looking to stop the last attack, not the next attack. It's as if they don't realize that terrorists can adapt.
Actually, there's little value in figuring out which of a million strange things some crazy might come up with would be worth defending against. On the other hand, failing to defend against a repeat of the last attack would be terrible: the head of the TSA could lose his job!
If you spend money trying to defend against an attack that never comes you are wasting the taxpayers' money. If you fail to defend against a known attack you are negligent. But if you trowel in mortar to block repeat attacks, you're at least doing "as much as any reasonable person could."
The entire model is broken -- it's not worth spending time trying to tinker with it.
As you say, FTC makes sense: this could be considered false advertising as groupon wasn't actually offering the product (e.g. tour).
This is different from State Farm putting an ad on "Allstate" in that when you type "Allstate" an ad saying "Check out State Farm" could show up. Not misleading.
Hmm, if you write without cash renumeration you are being exploited. Thus if a Newspaper Guild member (who covers international news) sees the house next door burning down, he or she shouldn't write a blog entry, much less an article about it, unless payment will result. That would be devaluing the service.
I subscribe to the sunday hardcopy paper specifically for this reason. "Guilt" doesn't enter into it: it's really no different from any other form of shareware (and thus doesn't require the "scareware" / "letter from an orphan girl" treatment the times gave it).
I do typically flip through the hardcopy paper, though by then I've already read most of it online. But there is the dead trees serendipity value, though it doesn't justify the paper version on its own.
By the way it is ironic that the best deal on online subscription is to subscribe to the hardcopy. But it makes sense: the CPM is so much higher for a hardcopy subscriber. Clearly this is an attempt to pull the same thing off online. Good luck.
And why did they make all the options so complicated? They should differentiate _less_ at this stage, not _more_
I don't think banana republic is really the right term (who would be the colonizer?). This is more like the kind of behavior that people in Egypt or Tunisia have been complaining about by the ousted regimes there...
So it's not a problem, then?
So if there's no relationship that means IP laws have no effect (i.e. it's harmless). Which is certainly surprising to me! I would have thought them negatively correlated.
The bad guys will probably win
This appears to be basically the same as West's monopoly on legal books (i.e. court rulings, basically). Although the judges' rulings, as government documents, are public domain, West's publishing of them in paginated volumes is copyrighted. And cases are often referenced by West page numbers.
West sued someone who tried to use parallel structure, and won. Here's a good write up: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.05/the.law_pr.html
Actually, kinda cool
I think of Liberman as a retrograde anti-technologist, but he is advocating the Semantic Web, a technotopial idea!
Not that he would be persuaded by the obvious reasons it unfortunately can't work
Nonetheless I continue to be astonished that he wants to make it harder to find bad guys! It's almost like he supports terrorism (which I don't believe he does)!
That's brilliant
Mike asked,
It seems pretty clear to me:I am delighted by his attitude (but don't support the merger).Like old sports reporting
This is how Ronald Reagan got his start: he would read the ticker tape reporting of faraway baseball games and then describe the game over the radio to listeners. The ticker tape just had raw data (hits, outs etc) so he would make up the background detail.
(Not to mention that many people follow cases like this as they follow sport)
The NYT has the perfect opportunity to experiment
Name should include "Enforcement"
We should refer to these companies as "Music Enforcement" or "Movie Enforcement" companies. Both highlights the ridiculousness of it as well as indicating clearly that they are shakedown crews of little value to anyone but themselves. But While calling them "Music Shakedown" could sound biased; Music Enforcement is simply normative!
Possible first amendment challenge
What would happen if you printed a book with URLs of sites that streamed video? Would such a book be protected by the 1st amendment? It seems to me that there is plenty of case law that would claim it would be.
This would make an interesting test case -- if it succeeds, it becomes a clarifying precedent, as the DOJ would need to prove that a web site is somehow different from a book.
Cease and Desist Immediately!
I am not David Slater nor do I represent (or even know) a David Slater. These images are being used without my permission, therefore can I ask you remove these images from your site immediately.
(hmm, do I need permission from Caters News to use their sentence?)
Good job chief of police
Cops come under a lot of legit criticism on this site, so I'm glad be able to praise the chief of police for downplaying, rather than hyping this rubbish. How great to have a rational response for a change.
Of course it's a shame that the other rational response is beefing up police patrols anyway, because of the cost of the negative press.
Interesting hardware implication
I don't see how this can work. A device such as a Roku system only HAS one account in it. If you buy one, and more than one person in your house looks at it, you are violating this law.
In fact, more than one person watching cable TV violates this law.
Definition of a rogue web site?
I presume it's a maverick website with a book deal.....
Par for the course -- so fight fire with fire
Customised content
like, say, a web page?
Let's not lose sight of the fact that the whole idea of an "e-book" is an elaborate infrastructure for DRM. Otherwise an e-book would just be a large html file or series of same, as some free books are.
And once we require DRM, all these commonplace features have to be reinvented to fit into the restriction infrastructure.
Even corporations get this
Every NDA I can remember signing has a clause that info isn't considered confidential if it's been publicly released through no fault of the recipient (i.e. if released by the owner or some third party). In other words, no need to worry about slamming the barn door.
But in a slight defense of the government side: this is leak data of unclear/unknown provenance, so could be disinformation. Without knowing its validity, it could hardly be presented as defense evidence (though the government's position gives this info a lot of credibility -- a kind of a "Streisand's corollary.")
Actually, TSA is working as designed
If you spend money trying to defend against an attack that never comes you are wasting the taxpayers' money. If you fail to defend against a known attack you are negligent. But if you trowel in mortar to block repeat attacks, you're at least doing "as much as any reasonable person could."
The entire model is broken -- it's not worth spending time trying to tinker with it.
FTC makes more sense
As you say, FTC makes sense: this could be considered false advertising as groupon wasn't actually offering the product (e.g. tour).
This is different from State Farm putting an ad on "Allstate" in that when you type "Allstate" an ad saying "Check out State Farm" could show up. Not misleading.
Logical implication
Hmm, if you write without cash renumeration you are being exploited. Thus if a Newspaper Guild member (who covers international news) sees the house next door burning down, he or she shouldn't write a blog entry, much less an article about it, unless payment will result. That would be devaluing the service.
Actually, me
I subscribe to the sunday hardcopy paper specifically for this reason. "Guilt" doesn't enter into it: it's really no different from any other form of shareware (and thus doesn't require the "scareware" / "letter from an orphan girl" treatment the times gave it).
I do typically flip through the hardcopy paper, though by then I've already read most of it online. But there is the dead trees serendipity value, though it doesn't justify the paper version on its own.
By the way it is ironic that the best deal on online subscription is to subscribe to the hardcopy. But it makes sense: the CPM is so much higher for a hardcopy subscriber. Clearly this is an attempt to pull the same thing off online. Good luck.
And why did they make all the options so complicated? They should differentiate _less_ at this stage, not _more_
Re: Disgusting
I don't think banana republic is really the right term (who would be the colonizer?). This is more like the kind of behavior that people in Egypt or Tunisia have been complaining about by the ousted regimes there...