Even better, just incorporate and take out a business loan in the name of the band company. That way, you pay back the minimum for such an investment and then, assuming the band is profitable, the rest is yours. You could crank out one-hit wonders with this structure and even at a minimum return if you can chart a single top 10 hit, you'd easily repay the loan and make 100% profit from then on out on royalties.
What's wrong with delaying public display of videos until they are reviewed for legality? I don't see why all videos have to get posted, then only later when enough people are outraged does google have to take it down. It seems they bear some responsibility for making visible the illegal activities without checking first to see if there were any illegal activities in the video. Google could have forwarded the video to the proper authorities without ever making it public, which would have cut off the perpetrators from their sick search for infamy.
getting rid of copyright doesn't have much effect on the value of the original... except in the case of digital works. There is only one real Statue of David by Michelangelo, but there are millions of "Enter Sandman" copies by "Metallica", even though there's only one gold master, they are all nearly identical in content to that gold master, to the extent that you can enjoy any copy of the performance as if the band were right there in front of you. The difference? They still aren't right there in front of you, and not capitalizing on that fact is their own fault. Movies can be put on real time, but generally that's called theater, and it has major drawbacks compared to an actual movie. If movie theaters are so concerned about copyright, then stop selling any DVD's and charge more for tickets to see the movie.
The problem is, content and advertising are actually different. I pay for content from my cable provider, and I expect advertisements to come in a block separate from the content, yielding some reduction in the amount of content but nonetheless leaving me with "uninterrupted" blocks of content. To put product placements within the content is to essentially to increase advertisement time, and thus give me less content for my money.
Boring lectures will always cause kids to tune out. I drew pictures so much in my lectures that I switched to majoring in art, because I figured as long as I'm going to be drawing the whole time, I may as well get credit for it!
Furthermore, can you perform brain surgery because you read about it in a physical Encyclopedia at the library? I wouldn't even trust a brain surgery student to my brain. I would want the most experienced expert at it. Would you want Lance Armstrong as a bike teacher? I dunno, is he any good at teaching it, or can he only ride extremely well by nature? None of these things is connected to the other as the premise implies.
The solution to all of this is simple: stop creating digital music, since no one can figure out how to "protect" a cd in any tangible way. Why would you give someone a DVD of a movie if all you wanted was to sell them a ticket to see the movie? It's the same principle.
I would pay 35 bucks if they immediately ejected anyone who's phone goes off or who talks or interrupts the movie in any way.
The part everyone is ignoring here is how this was cheating. A regular study group is not cheating wholesale because while you could just copy down the answers, in a sense you are exposed to the process of learning with the other students in a real-time environment.
Posting that content online creates direct access for everyone to just the answers. That's the same thing as taking the answers from a study session and posting them outside the classroom before the assignment is due -- which would clearly be cheating. I hope it finally makes sense to everyone why this was a punishable offense.
People mostly lose things because other people move them, not because they can't remember where they put their items in the first place. Seeing the last place I put the keys doesn't help me if they're not there anymore. A much better technology to find my keys would be an rfid tag on my keys, and readers in each room so that at least the house could tell me what room they're in.
Many people that post blog comments are aware that an impressive-enough comment may yield some amount of lasting fame, and a regular record of great comments will definitely cement a place in history, possibly to include entries in the dictionary of slang for a commonly-used phrase. In that vein, I must add that in Soviet Russia, blog comments laser-point YOU!
That sounds like hiring Al Capone to guard a bank vault... major conflict of interest. If you want to hire someone with a background in actually committing real crime, then you are going to pay the price of extremely high risk. However, hiring someone with a slightly less than pristine past in terms of maybe a system hack here and there, who knows how to do it but doesn't want to go to jail, that might be a way better bet. Common sense should prevail, i.e. who's going to guard you against the convicted hacker, regardless of how secure your systems turn out to be? 99% of hacking is physical access, so be careful when 'inviting the wolf into the henhouse'.
Bridge for sale
Hey, there's this guy selling a bridge downtown for 2 trillion dollars. I know, 2 trillion is a lot of money, but "I'm pretty sure it's OK".