Innovation, Optimism And Opportunity: All Coming Together To Make Real Change
from the keep-it-going dept
Over the past few years, we’ve had a bit of a “New Year’s” tradition around here for my last “regular” post of the year. It started in 2008, in response to an email asking how I didn’t go crazy with anger over all of the bad stuff we wrote about all the time. In response, I explained why I was actually quite upbeat over all of the amazing and wonderful things going on, if a bit frustrated by the attempts to hold them back. The following year, I talked about the nature of creativity and innovation and all of the examples of people starting to recognize the possibilities that were being enabled, rather than just fighting against them. In 2010, I pointed out that despite the roadblocks, innovation was an unstoppable force, and last year I talked about the fact that people were finally speaking out and making a difference.
This year, I’m going to follow along with that thread, in looking at some of the amazing things that were accomplished in the past year — things that seemed impossible just a short while ago. I’m using the slot we normally use for the “favorite posts of the week,” because in some ways this will be my “favorite posts of the year” post. First up, obviously, was the amazing blackout day last January 18th, in which the internet rose up and said NO! to some awful legislation proposed by Congress: SOPA and PIPA — leading to millions of people deciding to take action and protest the bill.
To this day, very few people realize how amazing that situation was, and how unlikely a scenario it was just a few months before. This was bipartisan-supported legislation that was seen as a “no-brainer” by most in Congress. Previous attempts at similar types of legislation tended to pass easily with little or no debate. Yes, some of us would make some noise, and maybe the absolute worst bits of a law would get excised (after being put in the bill for that purpose), but a bill like SOPA/PIPA was a foregone conclusion: it was going to be law. Until it wasn’t. That is amazing. Last year at this time I was excited about the fact that people had finally come together to speak out, but the bill was still alive and we hadn’t fully achieved anything yet. And a few weeks later… we did. It was an amazing moment of real representative democracy in action.
And it didn’t stop there. Almost immediately following the SOPA victory, a large group of people suddenly discovered ACTA. ACTA was an ever more foregone conclusion than SOPA. It was basically done — and all but “signed” in Europe (the US had already signed it). It was a mere formality. And, yet… the success against SOPA energized the opposition, leading to a months-long process that resulted in the EU Parliament loudly rejecting ACTA, and the EU Commission finally giving in just a few weeks ago. Without the success against SOPA, that doesn’t happen.
The wider internet spoke up on other occasions as well, including on cybersecurity and on internet freedom. Not all of these campaigns led to victories, but these activities are no longer being ignored by those in power. The wider internet is finding its voice, and that’s a good thing — and something worth being quite excited about.
Of course, it is still early, and there will be setbacks. Politicians and legacy industries have been at this for too long and are too good at “playing the game” to just give up. But, the playing field has shifted notably and the opportunity to speak out and have an impact has increased drastically. At the same time, the tools for such activism have grown and expanded. The ability to use innovative new platforms — and for those platforms to exist and be useful — continues to expand.
At the same time, more and more people are engaged and aware. More and more innovators are recognizing that there are new opportunities for disruption. More and more amazing things are within our grasp. Countries are suddenly taking things like copyright and patent reform seriously. There are growing discussions about the power of innovation to help an economy. People are recognizing that new platforms and services are enabling things that used to be impossible (rather than merely updating old things).
It’s an exciting time, full of opportunity. There are, as always, threats and those who wish to get in the way of that opportunity, but we’re on the cusp of a new era, in which more and more people are able to stand up and speak out and put a stop to those attempts to block innovation and opportunity. And that’s incredibly exciting.
I’ve now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years, and I wouldn’t keep doing it if it wasn’t an absolute joy and pleasure every single day — and much of that is because you come here to read, to comment, to share and to suggest other stories and ideas. It’s an amazing experience in and of itself, so thank you.
Filed Under: innovation, opportunity, optimism, year in review
Comments on “Innovation, Optimism And Opportunity: All Coming Together To Make Real Change”
‘Innovation, Optimism And Opportunity: All Coming Together To Make Real Change’
unless, of course, the entertainment industries can do their usual thing and put great big obstacles in the way!! whatever can be done by man, can be screwed up by those industries and make no mistake, doing so is their first priority!!
It’s an exciting time to be covering all of the opportunity out there, even if it also means covering those who stand in the way of such opportunity.
Which to you means every single person attempting to enforce their copyright rights against those who intentionally violate their rights. You attack any and all efforts to enforce any aspect of copyright law while at the same time pretending like you think that piracy is not OK. That’s bullshit. I think it’s great that you encourage people to investigate new opportunities. What I think sucks big time is your incredible hatred and disgust at everyone who doesn’t subscribe to your alternative views. Maybe for 2013 try being a little more understanding and open-minded. You might have good ideas, but you’re losing many by being so extremely opinionated and inflexible. Just my two cents.
Re: Re:
You’re the one who needs to be more open minded you boring inbred little cretin.
Re: Re: Re:
The flagged guy above you just posted to get HIS post flagged so you look like you’re insulting Mike.
It’s an old worn-out joke where you post nasty stuff to facebook in response to someones page covering a traged etc, then when someone calls you names, you delete the post and it looks like they’re laughing at the main post itself
Re: Re: Re: Re:
AJ wishes he was that smart, but no. That wasn’t his intention, believe me…
Re: Re:
Wow, happy New Year to you too, AJ. I guess the sanctimonious spigot never turns off, huh?
Re: intentional...
Copyright is not an aspect, it’s a broken piece of legislation that has to be withered away. You think Mike is bad? Check out any informed person, it will cause you really irrational thoughts about yourself and situation; in a good way :).
I’m sure you notice that “piracy” is more than something you “can’t” like? No one has been able to stop it, I wonder why? Ships to “just a set of tubes”(We actually blow up virtual stores to get our booty btw.), WHO KNEW?!?!? Good luck trying to control everything. In your memoirs be sure to denounce all of rational human existence as your soul is wracked with realization by how much time you wasted on your hopefully last stop on earth.
Re: Re: intentional...
You can’t control everything with legislation. Nor threaten your fans with punishment. I think one viable way is to offer consumers a third choice which is better than free. I’ve created a platform that does exactly that – reward people who pay for music/ebooks/apps/games/videos and share their links legally.
http://e27.sg/2012/12/28/tell-my-friends/
Re: Re:
AJ, there is a twofold problem with copyright, as use by the maximalists and their continuos efforts to extend its scope.
First :-
Its enforcement require levels of monitoring and control over communications that are draconian, and establish the tools that wouild greatly simplify takeovers by totalitarian regimes. All the measure put forward by the maxmalists to protect there copyrights are badly biased against normal society by enabling takedown of content with no easy remedy for affected parties. They are too easily abused as a means of censorship. Taken to the extreme they are pucshing for, any copying device, which is ant device with a computer in it, will need to get permission for any copy operation, just to make shure their rights are not infringed. This means they will control all computers and their software.
Second :-
Its enforcement is damaging to culture and society by attacking the very sharing that is fundamental to a healthy society and culture. All the proposed measures to detect infringement require the use of automatic tools, which leave no room for fair use. Blocking viseoa of babies dancing because of 30 seconds of badly recorded music is blocking communication between member of a family.
Various forms of fan finction, and remix to make some form of staement have always been part of culture, from written works through music and song, and now video as the technology has become affordable and avilable. This is basic to how people communicate, and how their learn tyhe various arts. This sort of work is communicated by the Internet, which makes it easier for the publishers to find, and also for people to gain a wider audience and gain critical review which allow them to develop as an arftist. If this is prevented, then culture will be stifled, as it stops the sharing that is the basis opf culture.
That is a world where there is no free speech, and culture is reduced to the lowest common denominator, like endless quizz show and reality shows, along with manufactured pop music. That is not a world that I desire. Think deeply about where copyright right is taking the world before supporting the maximalist position.
P.S. Happy new year to everybody.
Re: Re: Re:
First :-
Its enforcement require levels of monitoring and control over communications that are draconian, and establish the tools that wouild greatly simplify takeovers by totalitarian regimes. All the measure put forward by the maxmalists to protect there copyrights are badly biased against normal society by enabling takedown of content with no easy remedy for affected parties. They are too easily abused as a means of censorship. Taken to the extreme they are pucshing for, any copying device, which is ant device with a computer in it, will need to get permission for any copy operation, just to make shure their rights are not infringed. This means they will control all computers and their software.
Wow. This is pretty paranoid and silly. First of all, if you guys are going to use the internet to willingly violate other people’s rights, then you shouldn’t be too surprised when those victims fight back. But that fighting back isn’t censorship. Censorship is the suppression of speech because of the ideas or points of view being expressed. Copyright enforcement concerns proprietary rights, and it is fundamentally unconcerned with suppressing ideas or points of view. Calling is censorship is disingenuous. Nor do I think your concern that they’ll monitor everything makes any sense. We have fundamental rights to privacy and the free flow of ideas. The Constitution would outright forbid the exact sort of totalitarian state you’re so worried about. So it’s all tinfoil-hat-wearing FUD. Will ISPs and intermediaries rain on the piracy parade? You bet. I look forward to it because to me reigning in those who willingly violate other people’s rights is the right thing to do. The pirates are the tyrants. They’re the ones who put themselves above others and who are bringing this on themselves.
Second :-
Its enforcement is damaging to culture and society by attacking the very sharing that is fundamental to a healthy society and culture. All the proposed measures to detect infringement require the use of automatic tools, which leave no room for fair use. Blocking viseoa of babies dancing because of 30 seconds of badly recorded music is blocking communication between member of a family.
I think clearly the vast majority of the downloading of copyrighted materials is not fair use. Automated tools are needed because the pirates are so numerous that it couldn’t be done any other way. You guys can’t gang up to violate people’s rights and then claim that the only tool available to combat your wrongs, automation, somehow can’t magically tell when one pirate out of a million actually makes fair use of a work. It’s a silly argument that rests on the faulty premise that all enforcement must be perfect or we shouldn’t do it all. There’s going to be errors in enforcement with such a big problem. This error is the fault of the wrongdoers, i.e., the pirates, and not on the parties that are trying to enforce people’s rights. To blame the victims for the problem that the pirates created is clearly backwards.
Various forms of fan finction, and remix to make some form of staement have always been part of culture, from written works through music and song, and now video as the technology has become affordable and avilable. This is basic to how people communicate, and how their learn tyhe various arts. This sort of work is communicated by the Internet, which makes it easier for the publishers to find, and also for people to gain a wider audience and gain critical review which allow them to develop as an arftist. If this is prevented, then culture will be stifled, as it stops the sharing that is the basis opf culture.
Culture is great, and the internet is wonderful for bringing the world’s culture right to us. That’s certainly something that will always be a good policy argument. But it’s silly to pretend like the copyright system doesn’t greatly improve our culture. You guys love copyrighted works so much that you’re willing to violate people’s rights to get them. To then blame the system that brings you things you clearly value is silly. It’s great that the internet can disseminate culture worldwide with the click of the mouse, but we musn’t forget that those who create culture have rights too. Rights that everyone must respect even if we don’t agree with them.
That is a world where there is no free speech, and culture is reduced to the lowest common denominator, like endless quizz show and reality shows, along with manufactured pop music. That is not a world that I desire. Think deeply about where copyright right is taking the world before supporting the maximalist position.
There will always be free speech and culture is only growing and becoming more accessible to everyone. To pretend like everything is being thwarted left and right when we are in fact in the greatest point of human culture is just sour grapes. You guys are pretending like the world is ending because you’d rather violate someone’s rights than pay a couple bucks to watch a movie.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”,
…expressed by the English jurist William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, published in the 1760s.
John Adams also expanded upon the rationale behind Blackstone’s Formulation when he stated:
?It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished.
But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, “whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,” and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.
tl;dr: if you punish innocent AND guilty people, then there is no reason for anyone NOT to commit a crime with the chance of a reward…….
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Empty rhetoric. Nobody is having their rights violated. There is no right to post stuff on Facebook or YouTube. If your post gets flagged and you don’t like it, don’t use those services. But to pretend like innocents are being convicted of anything is stupid.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
“Empty rhetoric. Nobody is having their rights violated. There is no right to post stuff on Facebook or YouTube. If your post gets flagged and you don’t like it, don’t use those services. But to pretend like innocents are being convicted of anything is stupid.”
Technically true, but completely missing the point of everything Techdirt talks about.
Youtube and Facebook, for the moment, are the huge Internet services of the day. Youtube in particular is just too huge for anyone else, at least at the moment, to even think of rivalling. So, when someone is able to complain and I get my videos blocked merely because of that accusation alone, it is still something to be concerned over.
Besides, isn’t the Six Strikes plan supposed to be because no-one would get convicted? That the accusations wouldn’t hold up in court, so let’s just roll out this plan and disconnect them anyway, without letting those accused have their say (without having to pay a $35 fee first or being told they can only pick from a small list of allowed defenses).
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Well it should be a right to not be harrassed by the holder of monopolies.
Saddly for you the other options are all more free than Youtube or Facebook where you and your kind won’t be able to exert control as easily LoL
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
While I would agree that free speech does not force any forum to carry the speech, their should not be any third party control imposed over hose forums. The powers gained by the copyright lobby, the DMCA, and the powers they requested in SOPA/PIPA and ACTA are mechanisms whereby any material can be taken down by simple notice with no court oversite.
This enables censorship, especially as it places the burden of reversing any take-down on the affected party, who may not have the legal knowledge or money required to fight such actions. The copyright maximalists are forcing a regime where guilt is presumed, and innocence has to be proven by the party injured by their action.
Such systems enable the rich and powerful to dominate society in a fashion that can only be described as totalitarian, or fascist.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
That what poor AJ doesn’t understand or maybe he does but he doesn’t want to admit that because the whole reality would crush him.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
AJ = idiot.
” First of all, if you guys are going to use the internet to willingly violate other people’s rights, then you shouldn’t be too surprised when those victims fight back. But that fighting back isn’t censorship.”
You outright call us criminals, all without charges or evidence of any kind. Most of the time, when someone files to Google to take down links or Youtube videos, its to censor other parties. Hell, there’s been articles on Techdirt about copyright maximilists demanding that Google take down a DMCA takedown on Chilling Effects because the original takedown notice had a naughty link in it; or of Microsoft demanding that Google delist certain links in its own search engine, but those same links are acceptable on Bing for some reason. Many of my favourite internet celebrities have been victims of copy-fraud: LittleKuriboh (the man who started the Abridging Anime phenomenon) and SFDebris (Sci-fi show reviewer). Both have multiple times received copyright claims and been threatened with suspensions of their accounts, all on the basis of accusations with no way for them to respond until after the fact.
“Nor do I think your concern that they’ll monitor everything makes any sense. We have fundamental rights to privacy and the free flow of ideas. The Constitution would outright forbid the exact sort of totalitarian state you’re so worried about. So it’s all tinfoil-hat-wearing FUD. Will ISPs and intermediaries rain on the piracy parade? You bet. I look forward to it because to me reigning in those who willingly violate other people’s rights is the right thing to do. The pirates are the tyrants. They’re the ones who put themselves above others and who are bringing this on themselves.”
Everything there is so wrong as to stop me from even laughing it.
First off, what is the best, most efficient way to enforce copyright law? Why, with tools and techniques that help usher in a totalitarian regime. It’s happened in China: there, they brought in tools to combat copyright infringement, only for those same tools to be used to help squelch speech. Same in the UK: the Cleanfead system was originally for child pornography blocking, but its use was extended.
Second, what about the Constitution? How exactly has the Constitution helped with all the other government abuses? Since you clearly don’t read the non-copyright related articles here on Techdirt, what about FISA? Ya know, the law that was recently extended that allows the US government to harvest information on domestic citizens without a warrant, and all against the 4th Amendment? Yeah great job the Constitution is doing there, stopping that.
Also, how is a pirate a tyrant? A tyrant is a person enforcing his will upon the majority. Last I checked, pirates acting individually don’t do that. We share files…but don’t ride rough shod over other human rights (which copyright is NOT, so shut the fuck up about that).
“I think clearly the vast majority of the downloading of copyrighted materials is not fair use. Automated tools are needed because the pirates are so numerous that it couldn’t be done any other way. You guys can’t gang up to violate people’s rights and then claim that the only tool available to combat your wrongs, automation, somehow can’t magically tell when one pirate out of a million actually makes fair use of a work. It’s a silly argument that rests on the faulty premise that all enforcement must be perfect or we shouldn’t do it all. There’s going to be errors in enforcement with such a big problem. This error is the fault of the wrongdoers, i.e., the pirates, and not on the parties that are trying to enforce people’s rights. To blame the victims for the problem that the pirates created is clearly backwards.”
How many examples do you need Foolish_Joe, before you’ll see sense? How many examples of people being accused and punished, all because of automation? How many people whose online speech has to be censored or restricted in any way before you think about “Gee, computers don’t handle law, they’re binary, it takes a trial before we can call someone a criminal”. If you actually were a law student, you’d know that.
I’m actually scared to live in a world where errors that law enforcement has with identifying suspects are the responsibility of the accused. So when Viacom (owners of the Star Trek copyrights) accused SFDebris of violating their copyrights when he reviewed Star Trek videos, its his problem because they didn’t bother checking to see that the fact he reviews is allowed under Fair Use?
“Rights that everyone must respect even if we don’t agree with them.”
Respect is a two way street. I might respect copyright law, but then again, it doesn’t respect my right to share, to talk, to remix, etc.
I look forward to shredding everything you say in 2013, just like I have countless times in 2012. Not once, have you applied logic or reasoning to anything you say. You demand answers to loaded questions. You throw up nonsensical scenarios and not once thought through anything you say.
I leave you with a question, one I know you will not answer.
How would you enforce copyright law, if not with draconian methods or methods that smack of being close to draconian/totalitarian? What methods would you use to enforce copyright law and how would you ensure that those methods wouldn’t be used by those who wish to bring about a totalitarian regime?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Thanks, you have said what I would have said in response to A.J;s response top my post, and saved me some work. 🙂
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
I don’t read posts from the “Rikuo” puppet.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
I don’t read posts from this “average_joe” brainless puppet myself, so I guess it all balances out.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
For your information, Joe, nope, not a puppet. I live in Ireland, have had no personal contact with Mike Masnick other than a few emails when I wrote 2011’s Xmas article. I just happen to agree with most of what he says because he makes sense.
For one thing, look at what I and others here do. We look at what you write and de-construct it, and shred it, line by line.
You don’t. More often than not, you just throw out “puppet” or some other insult, because that’s all you’re capable of doing.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
To help clarify, while he says ‘puppet’, what he probably means is ‘people who disagree with me’. And going off of that definition, you, me, and a whole ton of other people, here and elsewhere would indeed fall under the classification of ‘puppet’.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Automated tools are needed because the pirates are so numerous that it couldn’t be done any other way.
“We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem,” he said. “If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate’s service is more valuable.”
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Stop blaming the victims. Blame yourselves for making the conscious decision to violate other people’s rights. It, of course, is easy for pirates to give away content that they don’t have to license or pay for. Rationalize your decision to violate other people’s rights all you want, but the fact will always remain that the ONLY party to blame for piracy are the pirates. You don’t like how someone sells their goods? Don’t buy them. It’s not a service problem. It’s a bullshit sense of entitlement and lack of morality problem.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Okay I’ll get to blaming myself for the failing business models that other people (such as yourself) insist work despite all the evidence suggesting otherwise.
AJ, if you aren’t a complete tool, you are at least a good troll.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Yeah, creating and selling content that other people value and pay money for is such a failed business model.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
“creating and selling content that other people value and pay money for is such a failed business model.”
No, it isn’t. But failing to change the way said content is distributed IS a failing business model. When you create regionalized and windowed releases THAT is a failed business model. When you create and force DRM on PAYING CUSTOMERS THAT is a failed business model. When you demand exorbitant license fees to anyone attempting to help you sell your product in a new way that the public wants (ala Netflix or Pandora) THAT is a failed business model. And all of those are examples of how YOU and YOUR KIND have failed business models which absolutely refuse to adapt or change with the times. At the end of the day, piracy is very much a service problem and one brought about by people like yourself and your outdated views and business practices.
“Do without” is a cop out. Because at the end of the day if people just did without YOU and people like you would go crying to whatever elected officials you currently do saying, “BUT PEOPLE AREN’T BUYING OUR PRODUCTS!!! DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!” We already have mandatory taxes put upon items that MAY be used for the possibly illegal purposes of acquiring media (hard drives and recordable CD/DVDs and whatnot). In that case, you’re charging people for a crime they’ve yet to commit (violating copyright). If they purely did without there’d be a “media consumption tax” imposed because they MIGHT look at a television or hear someone whistling a song. Sounds farfetched? Well, given the history and the current taxes on CD/DVDs it’s not as farfetched as some like you would make it out to be/hand wave away.
Re: Re: Re:6 Re:
You don’t like the way someone distributes their content, buy someone else’s content. Funny how you guys just have to have the copyrighted stuff. Thank goodness for copyright.
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
Read this article and then come back to me and say it’s wrong, try to convince me
http://torrentfreak.com/do-you-prefer-copyright-or-the-right-to-talk-in-private-110121/
that somehow, copyright can co-exist peacefully in an Internet-enabled world without harming civil liberties.
Re: Re: Re:8 Re:
Nice of Falkvinge to take time away from bilking people on the BitCoin scam to write this dreck. His example is e-mailing or video chat that includes a song or movie clip. He somehow thinks that should provide a universal shield against people freeloading (and monetizing) feature length motion pictures, entire albums and books. That merely a weak, recycled version of the argument posed by others. That a site with 99% infringing content (or child porn) should be immune from takedown because the 1% of non-infringing content it also contains.
Re: Re: Re:9 Re:
Well at least you read the article. That’s a step up for you. But you didn’t answer my question. How can copyright co-exist peacefully in an Internet-enabled world without harming civil liberties? In order to enforce it efficiently we’ve got the DMCA’s notice and takedown, and then (whenever it gets launched) Six Strikes. All of which operate with accusations alone, and a defense is only possible after the punishment.
Re: Re: Re:9 Re:
Bitcoin is a nice scam, bitcoins actually are getting more valuable than the dollar LoL
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
That is what I did, did the retards stop bugging me?
Nope, they still claim they are being robbed and I must be a criminal so I have to pay more for media, I have to allow ever more intrusive measures so some idiot can sell imaginary property and say to others they can use some idea.
Thanks but no thanks.
Die copyright die!
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
You don’t like the market condition go find another job.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
And region locking, release windows, not offering it at all in certain areas yet globally advertising it as if to rub it in the faces of people in those regions who cannot legally obtain it, accusing your customers of being “thieves” through multiple unskippable piracy warnings on purchased DVDs, multiple layers of DRM that are easily thwarted by pirates but succeed only in giving ample amounts of frustration to paying customers, etc, etc, etc…these are all effective methods of selling a product to consumers.
Are you getting the picture yet? Or are you just going to keep trumpeting “IT’S THE LAW!!1!”.
You have a government granted monopoly. You don’t deserve it. But, you’ve done a bang up job through government corruption to ensure that your “rights” are extended into perpetuity. You have antiquated business models that must adapt to the internet age. Your other choice is to die. Choose now.
You will not stop infringement. There is mountains of evidence throughout history that proves this. The internet will regain control of culture, with or without your consent and despite your constant corruption of government officials to do your bidding.
Re: Re: Re:6 Re:
You have a government granted monopoly.
You obviously don’t understand what a real monopoly looks like. There are tons of motion pictures, tons of songs and books all competing for your dollar. Then look at all of the other alternatives that fall under the heading of entertainment and you will have a clearer picture of how full of shit you are.
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
Fine if there is no granted monopoly than everybody can copy everything all they want, use it and sell it right?
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
Quote:
Source:Wikipedia: Monopoly
You see an earned monopoly is a good thing, when you beat the competition, when you work for that market share that is all good, it also creates a monopoly that is contestable and when its usefulness is no longer that monopoly also goes away, which is different from a forced monopoly that is instituted and doesn’t fallow any natural laws or limits, that is a bad monopoly to have that is why it was so short to begin with because it was a NECESSARY EVIL! at that time. That is no longer the case so I invite any person to just disregard copyrights since they have been abused and are toxic to the very fabric of society.
Re: Re: Re:8 Re:
Now look up the definition of commodity, dope.
Re: Re: Re:9 Re:
Quote:
Source:Wikipedia: Commodity
Whoops!
Dear Sir, you don’t seem to have a very strong grasp on economics, this is obviously not your area, stop before your foot reaches your lower exits.
Re: Re: Re:10 Re:
Whoops my ass. Typical Techdirtbag move. Here’s the rest of the quote from your own citation:
“The more specific meaning of the term commodity is applied to goods only. It is used to describe a class of goods for which there is demand, but which is supplied without qualitative differentiation across a market.[3] A commodity has full or partial fungibility; that is, the market treats its instances as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them. “From the taste of wheat it is not possible to tell who produced it, a Russian serf, a French peasant or an English capitalist.”[4] Petroleum and copper are other examples of such commodities,[5] their supply and demand being a part of one universal market. Items such as stereo systems, on the other hand, have many aspects of product differentiation, such as the brand, the user interface, the perceived quality, etc. And, the demand for one type of stereo may be much larger than demand on the other.
In contrast, one of the characteristics of a commodity good is that its price is determined as a function of its market as a whole. Well-established physical commodities have actively traded spot and derivative markets. Generally, these are basic resources and agricultural products such as iron ore, crude oil, coal, salt, sugar, coffee beans, soybeans, aluminum, copper, rice, wheat, gold, silver, palladium, and platinum. Soft commodities are goods that are grown, while hard commodities are the ones that are extracted through mining.
There is another important class of energy commodities which includes electricity, gas, coal and oil. Electricity has the particular characteristic that it is usually uneconomical to store; hence, electricity must be consumed as soon as it is produced.
Commodification (also called commoditization) occurs as a goods or services market loses differentiation across its supply base, often by the diffusion of the intellectual capital necessary to acquire or produce it efficiently. As such, goods that formerly carried premium margins for market participants have become commodities, such as generic pharmaceuticals and DRAM chips. Another example is the credit card product, where all suppliers offer almost identical interest rates, fees, rewards programs, and bait & hook incentive models for new customers. Since the core credit card product is essentially identical, the only remaining market differentiators are branding & customer service.
There is a spectrum of commodification, rather than a binary distinction of “commodity versus differentiable product”. Few products have complete undifferentiability and hence fungibility; even electricity can be differentiated in the market based on its method of generation (e.g., fossil fuel, wind, solar). Many products’ degree of commodification depends on the buyer’s mentality and means. For example, milk, eggs, and notebook paper are considered by many customers as completely undifferentiable and fungible; lowest price is the only deciding factor in the purchasing choice. Other customers take into consideration other factors besides price, such as environmental sustainability and animal welfare. To these customers, distinctions such as “organic versus not” or “cage free versus not” count toward differentiating brands of milk or eggs, and percentage of recycled content or forestry council certification count toward differentiating brands of notebook paper.”
Applying the term “monopoly” to a single title is absurd. That’s like complaining that Apple has a monopoly on iPhones, completely disregarding the fact that you could easily substitute a Samsung phone. Maybe next time think beyond the tired sloganeering.
Re: Re: Re:11 Re:
While copyright nominally only protects expression, it has been extended to cover ideas. Just try making a Stars Wars film, and the monopoly of George Lucas will become apparent. Star Trek to name another series is not directly competitive with Star Wars, and is another monopoly controlled area of ideas.
This is one of the harms of copyright, walling off ‘universes’, preventing people from building on the work of others.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
That’s where you’re wrong, the business model that’s failing isn’t the industry that’s selling a product to customers to do what they wish with it. It’s the industry that’s licensing the privilege of using a product that still technically belongs to them even if it’s being rented to an end-user. That business model is failing fairly quickly.
Not that I would expect you to understand. You would be more than happy with any kind of painful reaming that the industry gives you as long as they lean over while they are doing it and whisper in your ear that you are a ‘valued customer’.
Unfortunately, not all of us wish to put up with the reaming any longer and this seems to get you all flustered and frustrated. Maybe you could hire someone to fill the industry’s ‘place’ inside of you as it were?
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Actually no, copyright on the other hand to make it happen is.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
It’s not a service problem. It’s a bullshit sense of entitlement and lack of morality problem.
Gabe Newell vs. average_joe. That’s a tough one . . . I’m going to have to give this to the guy who has successfully competed against the pirates, better luck next time!
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Hey, if people don’t want to rely on copyright for their business model, then good for them. And if people want to rely on copyright, good for them too. Why don’t you support all the great artists, filmmakers, etc. who don’t rely on copyright? Funny how you guys flock to the copyrighted stuff because it’s the good stuff.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Hey, if people don’t want to rely on copyright for their business model, then good for them. And if people want to rely on copyright, good for them too. Why don’t you support all the great artists, filmmakers, etc. who don’t rely on copyright? Funny how you guys flock to the copyrighted stuff because it’s the good stuff.
Seriously, go watch “Sita Sings The Blues” or something ghastly like that.
Re: Re: Re:6 Re:
masnick relies of copyright for his business model, if copyright was reformed or removed that ‘the nick’ would have nothing to cry about, and no job.
and what does a movie have to do with if people want to operate within the law or outside of it.
You make no point, and present no argument, welcome to masnicks world…
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
I have some points for you.
Copyright doesn’t work.
Copyright enforcement is annoying to say the least.
Copyright holders are sad that everybody is seeing the illusion of intellectual property crumble under the weight of reality.
Please, please do something, be radical, go to extremes make life hell to all those pirates.
But you can’t can you?
Copyright laws go so far as the front door in any house, nobody is inviting it into their homes, it is not welcome.
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
Wow, darryl, I had no idea your spelling had devolved to this horrible a standard. Your name is spelt d-a-r-r-y-l, not ma-s-n-i-c-k!
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
How is copyright a business model?
Re: Re: Re:6 Re:
Because it’s modeled on a business that deals in perceptions?
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
If people want to rely on a granted monopoly to exclude others, while crying that they need everybody to help and try to force everybody to see it their way, no that is not ok and will never happen.
Why copytards don’t work for a change like everybody else or they don’t take care of their own business by themselves, why drag everybody into this crap?
Screw you and your kind.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Why should I stop blaming the copytards?
They sure dehumanize others and try to punish everyone who don’t drink the kool-aid, I don’t think they earned the right to be respected or to have a voice in the matter, people should create copyright free zones and start expanding those, we can’t push back in the political area yet, but in any other area I don’t see why people shouldn’t do it.
It is the duty of every person in this world to fight against monopolies.
Re: Re:
And here’s your change:
http://www.reasonforliberty.com/reason/patents-lateral-vs-vertical-innovation.html
The people who support crap like SOPA and push for ridiculous patent and copyright extensions prefer this guys first worst case scenario, where everybody has to ask permission to do virtually anything or be in violation of the law. You can keep it, I’ll pass.
Re: Re: Re:
You omitted to mention that permission will rarely be granted and cost a fortune when it is
Re: Re:
“It’s an exciting time to be covering all of the opportunity out there, even if it also means covering those who stand in the way of such opportunity.”
Which to you means every single person attempting to enforce their copyright rights against those who intentionally violate their rights. You attack any and all efforts to enforce any aspect of copyright law while at the same time pretending like you think that piracy is not OK. That’s bullshit. I think it’s great that you encourage people to investigate new opportunities. What I think sucks big time is your incredible hatred and disgust at everyone who doesn’t subscribe to your alternative views. Maybe for 2013 try being a little more understanding and open-minded. You might have good ideas, but you’re losing many by being so extremely opinionated and inflexible. Just my two cents.
Requoted as my $.02 as well, chubby. The zealotry you engage in only polarizes and will never lead to an actual resolution. You’re no different than Grover Norquist, Glenn Beck or Wayne Lapierre.
Re: Re: Re:
You can requote it all you want but you end up in the same place as aj. Wrong.
Nice try though.
You and aj and other various trolls will get nowhere until you accept the well documented facts, many of which are discussed on this site and others, that the current environment of IP legislation, judicial system abuse and draconian enforcement efforts is horribly broken and skewed against the public good.
Or, you can continue to live in the past and pretend that you still have control and deserve your government granted monopoly. You can continue to offer up one pathetic excuse after another for why any of us should ever give you even one…more…inch. But, you simply aren’t going to be taken seriously until you admit that the status quo is broken and in need of serious reform.
In the meantime, the internet will continue to route around you parasites. You can’t have complete control anymore.
Re: Re: Re:
Right now, the economic benefits of enforcement are zero. That’s right, folks! There is no legitimate reason for any enforcement of Perceptional Property “rights”.
I put the word rights above in quotation marks because PP is not actual property. If you pay for a CD, you don’t actually own that CD’s contents. You only own the physicality. To expand further, you buy a game or film or music digitally, you don’t own that either. You bought a license to that particular piece of PP. And yet, people will still claim that it’s a sale. Which is a lie. Because it’s really fucking difficult to get a refund on a digital PP “sale”.
When you can equalise those things, then you can come back and complain. Until then, sit down and be quiet.
Re: Re: Re:
Requoted as my $.02 as well, chubby. The zealotry you engage in only polarizes and will never lead to an actual resolution. You’re no different than Grover Norquist, Glenn Beck or Wayne Lapierre.
My experience with Mike is that he is not interested in actually discussing or resolving issues. He’d rather pump out multiple stories a day where he tells us all how smart he is while whining about how everyone else is incompetent. When he does actually bother to engage someone substantively, it’s only to insult them and to demand that his view is the only one with any merit. Need someone to stir up the masses in a frenzy? Mike’s your man. Need someone to have a productive discussion on the merits about an issue? Keep looking. Mike doesn’t do that.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah AJ, keep deluding yourself. If he wasn’t interested in discussions, there wouldn’t be a comments section now would there? What about the MPAA/RIAA websites? Where’s the discussion sections there? Oh wait I forgot, it’s a top down model there: they tell us what they think and then don’t want to listen to us.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“My experience with Mike is that he is not interested in actually discussing or resolving issues.”
Yes, well given your “experience with Mike” consist of you derailing threads with “WHY WON’T YOU DEBATE ME?!?! RAWR!!!” and throwing temper tantrums and insulting Mike it’s easy to see/understand why he isn’t interested in actually discussing anything. WITH YOU.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Yes, well given your “experience with Mike” consist of you derailing threads with “WHY WON’T YOU DEBATE ME?!?! RAWR!!!” and throwing temper tantrums and insulting Mike it’s easy to see/understand why he isn’t interested in actually discussing anything. WITH YOU.
You’re just an angry broken record. I will continue to point out the fact that Mike is too dishonest and cowardly to actually answer questions and give specifics. Mike hates being challenged, and he hates to be pinned down on anything. You know it’s true.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Projecting your own inadequacies into Mike’s person will not help you child.
Re: Re:
“Just my two cents.”
*throws them back.
Keep them. You obviously need them since you’ve not understood a thing TD presented all these years to understand you don’t need middlemen to be successful.
You just need fans, hard work, and two cents.
Re: Re: Re:
Ummm… Summer’s Eve… individual artists can hold copyright too, not just middlemen. Maybe it’s you who don’t understand.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Funny though how without the resources to make use of those copyrights most artists that hold their own copyrights are nobodies.
It is a scheme that only those who can afford get the benefits.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Almost all artists understand two things that the middlemen refuse to publicly acknowledge, that there work is derivative of other peoples work, and that that fans come from people who sample and enjoy their work. Both of these things are best served by weak copyright enforcement.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
…. that fans come from people who sample and enjoy their work
That is such bullshit. The overwhelming about of infringement comes from people who simply don’t want to pay. And who “samples” books, which are plagued by thieves?
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Thieves? Maybe it would be more conducive to call them baby-rapers? All these criminal scum raping artist’s babies!
They’re baby-rapers! These baby-rapers are committing horrible and unspeakable acts of copyright infringement!
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
oh em gee did you SEE that picture/video/story they used MY character without MY PERMISSION
THEY USED MY BABY WITHOUT -*MY*- PERMISSION
THAT IS RAPE
BABY RAPE
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Who samples books? Have you seen the sheer amount of people trying to sue for that? What about the guy who sued Ubisoft over Assassin’s Creed because he wrote a book about “genetic memory” in science fiction?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The middlemen copyright/patent things like:
Rounded corners (Apple)
A semipermeable membrane able to transfer oxygen in one direction whilst also transferring carbon dioxide in the other (Microsoft – who patented the ability to breath, just to see if the patent office would allow it (SPOILER – it did!).
Basically rich people patent/copyright something they have no right to, knowing the average person doesn’t have the funds to fight in court, so they crush new competition before it gets a foothold.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
AC, what you fail to realize is my comment is more about artists keeping their copyrights, not contractually giving them away. That’s one of the lessons TD tries to teach, and you’ve once again shown you don’t understand.
To be honest, I’m no fan of copyright. Aside from the well known problems, I see it used far too much as a crutch artists falsely believe in, which is then used to “distribute” their works.
Whether or not those distribution channels are controlled (middlemen) or open (internet/sharing), the fact they believe they should have dominance on what people could do is their own self-defeating enemy.
I fully understand people’s fear of someone else making money on the works they created, but it’s a fallacy I don’t understand. What, is there somehow a limited number of dollars that can be earned?
An artist needs to understand one important lesson, but very few do: they don’t create the works for themselves, they create it for us.
Whether we share it, sell it, or ignore it, is our choice. I don’t like someone telling me I’m somehow restricted on what I enjoy, whether it be through CC or copyright.
If an artist is truly that terrified of this loss, then perhaps they keep their works to themselves and never release it to the public.
I suppose this issue will never end, because it’ll *always* be about money, not the works.
Re: Re:
Perhaps the most beneficial thing this site could do for 2013 is remove the silly “report” button. If someone does not like what someone may say, there is nothing preventing them some simply ignoring the comment.
Re: Re: Re:
How about removing the report button for people who are signed in and have had their account more than say a month?
Can still flag up anonymous cowards/people generating throw-away accounts.
Re: Re:
Must be our resident tame troll, Out Of The Blue, trying to hide under a different name. Recognise that vitriol anywhere.
Happy New Year, Jerks!
Much love and the wish of much drunken but safe debauchery to all my fellow Techdirters out there. Love all of you guys!
Happy New Year to everyone except Average Joe, OOTB, bob and anonymous trolls 🙂
Re: Re:
I even wish the trolls a happy new year. Maybe it will melt the ice around their frozen, blackened hearts, and give them hope for the future.
Re: Re: Re:
I wish I could be so optimistic 🙁
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I wish I could say you just try it once, but this is not something you should give up, is an ongoing thing, it has to be renewed every year and if you can’t do it this year, maybe next year?
Work harder for a better world that means having to put up with the bad just as enjoying the good.
True story:
I was having some hallucinations when I was a young drug addict. Paranoid hallucinations, of someone trying to kill me, hearing voices and everything and I couldn’t sleep and I needed too, I was awake for 3 days already, and in that moment of intense stress I had a moment of revelation, I could not defend myself I could not keep up with all of it and so I let it go, I knew I was having a psychotic moment, at the very least I was hopping it was just my fueled drug imagination doing that to me, so I let it go, I accepted death as an acceptable end and stopped being afraid of dying and a sudden relief came about, and I got to sleep, I never touched drugs or alcohol since, found a job and a good lady, apologized to the people that I have hurt(family, ex-wife, sons, friends and people) some still hate me to this day but that is their choice not mine to make so I accept that just I have accepted death that day.
You should do every thing in your power to better your life, but if things get to stressful just let it go, when it doesn’t matter it is easier to find a solution.
Now I am old and dying and I wish everyone merry Christmas and a happy new year to all, friend or foe in the end we all want the same thing, to live in peace is just we differ in how to go about doing that.
I learned when and what to let go to be able to continue living, by accident perhaps or maybe not, and I wish you learn to let go of all that fear if it bring you too much stress so you can see how life really is beautiful and full of promises.
ps: I may regret disclosing this to my core someday, but not now, also I am hard to find, not impossible just hard.
And how about some optimism for all the cool new innovation out there? 3D printers! Self-driving cars! Commercial space flight! Robots on Mars! Personal heads up displays! And so on.
Re: Re:
Whoa! For a second I read, “flight! Robots on Mars!” as “fighting robots on Mars!” and thought, Damn! How did I miss that?
Too bad the best is just stopping attacks
Defeating SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA are marvellous and noteworthy. But this just leaves us where we were. What we did was work hard to stop things from getting much worse. Will 2013 possibly be a year where we actually improve things?
Re: Too bad the best is just stopping attacks
We can improve things. Change the business model. Reward and reinforce the right behaviour instead of punishing the wrong behaviour.
15 years and counting....
Big thanks to Mike Masnick, Timothy Geigner, Leigh Beadon, Michael Ho, Tim Cushing, Glyn Moody, and everyone else for making Techdirt such an engrossing, informative and active place to visit. Thanks for having the integrity to stand with us, the internet community (i.e. the people), and give us a platform to make our voices heard.
Happy new year to everyone.
What I’d like to see in 2013:
-I’d like to see Google, Amazon, Wikipedia, and other major web sites to shut down and stand up against the DMCA, forcing Congress to re-write the law so companies aren’t wasting billions of dollars on bogus takedown notices.
-I’d like to see the FBI, ICE, and DoJ’s top dogs get arrested for violations of the laws they’re trying to enforce. To read the injustices these law enforcements abuse is a felony.
-I’d like to see those responsible for the economic disaster of 2008 be criminally charged. I’d like the government to be responsible and address why “too big to fail” is a bigger problem than the economic mess they caused, because it will happen again.
-I’d like to see the movie, music, TV, and publishing industries to take 25 steps forward and get with the program by realizing two important facts: people buy what they like and we are the ones paying for the advertisements for the content. Stop treating people as criminals.
-I’d like to see this “app mentality” stop, or at least slow down. It’s disgusting people are exchanging their control for the sake of 99 cents. It’s already bad enough with DRM, but apps are the greatest DRM people just don’t see right in front of their own two eyes.
-I’d like to see Microsoft release a service pack for Windows 8 to get rid of [bleeping bleep bleep] Metro.
-I’d like to see Mike Masnick wear a pink tutu, because that would be funny.
-I’d like to see Senator Wyden continue to ruffle the feathers of Congress even more than he’s done since being in office. Not too often I take pride in our Congress, but he’s giving me some damn good hope someone is finally using their power for the people. Thank you, Ron.
-I’d like to see out_of_the_blue post something that doesn’t contain a word in all caps or doesn’t spew the rhetoric of someone who lacks a third grade education in forming a sentence. Wishful thinking, but that’s what this list is.
Well, that’s my short list. 2013 is looking to be a very rough year, but I’m still trying to stay optimistic.
It gets harder every year. 🙁
Re: Re:
Personally I’d hope we see Senator Wyden moving forward towards becoming a Presidential Candidate who might actually DO something useful for a change…..
Re: Re:
“-I’d like to see Mike Masnick wear a pink tutu, because that would be funny. “
Just go down to Castro St. any Saturday night.
Keep up the good fight Mike! Do not be dissuaded by small-minded negative nabobs… (and yes, I know who said that).
Keep up the Good Fight Mike ! I love Reading the News here and really appreciate the things you do.There must be Millions of people from all over the World who come here to read good Tech News.
Keep up the Fight against the MAFIAA & their Stooge Politicians.
I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
WOW, and how’s that worked out for you ??
Clearly you must do it because you LOVE it..
Because you are not doing it to affect any change, what do you consider you have achieved in those LONG 15 years of ‘this’ ???
in 15 years what copyright or patent reforms or changes have occurred because of you Masnick ?
Do you believe you’ve changed the publics attitude to illegal file sharing, or have you spent the past 15 making excuses for those who prefer to steal what they use ?
but we all know you have about 10 to 15 rabid fanbois who hang off your every word (as if you are a God), so I guess that is sort of an achievement ! (although not necessarily something to be proud of).
so 15 years to get 15 fans, way to connect with the people !
If I was as passionate as you are about these issues, and had only achieved what you appear to have in the past 15 years, I would be REALLY disappointed with myself, I would consider my efforts to be an almost total failure.
But I guess if you are happy selling crystal balls and T-Shirts, and you don’t care what your children think of their old man and what he spends his life ‘doing’, then it’s ok.
but as far as records of performance go, I would have to put this one in the ‘total failure’ class.
I guess you standards just are not quite as high as most, it’s great to set the bar really low, and achieve it.
Nice and safe, it’s just a shame you think it is worth it.
I guess if you kid yourself that you are a “player” you can life in your fantasy world and in your mind your the hero of the people. (all 10 of them)..
If anything, in the past 15 years, you have not only not achieved anything, but have gone backwards by a considerable distance.
yes, there is copyright and patent reform, but in the OPPOSITE direction than you propose, so if anything you are giving the industry more and more reasons why copyright and patent laws DO work and a strong argument for their continuing existence.
So the industry’s would be better off, WITHOUT you here at all, so you clearly do more damage than good to your ’cause’.
And yet you are proud of that, proud of your ‘achievements’ and think your doing great !!
15 years, zero ‘runs on the board’, 10 to 15 fans is what you can show for this effort, oh, nearly forgot probably 15 or so T-shirts too.
so your just a ‘retail’ shop selling nicknaks.
I guess it is good in a way that you have seen the limitations of your ability and have decided ‘this is your peak’, the very best you can do, and your happy with that, even proud !!!.
at least ‘boycott boy’ scored a Phd in that time.
Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
I have 2 words for ya:
Pirate Bay.
After 20 years, numerous intractable laws to stop piracy from a minority of the population that don’t even buy anything from media producers, what do the pirates got?
Free music and videos, put online by the very same people who complain they can’t compete with free 🙂
You need more 20 years to realize people won’t stop?
Go Custer go!
Re: Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
so masnick spending 15 of his best years or his life, is entirely responsive for the ‘massive’ success of PTB ??
is that it ?
do you have any more (and better) examples to justify Masnick’s existence ?
What actually is Masnick’s connection to TPB ?
oh that’s right… one word… NOTHING !!!
Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
Don’t forget the smashing success of *giggle* Step 2.
Re: Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
when your on floor 64 on Step 2 you have a LONGGGGG way to go !!
Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
Yes, because more diseases have been discovered and people keep dying from disease, therefore any development into medicine has been an absolute failure. We should therefore stop developing medicine.
You’re an idiot, darryl. How about you make it your New Year’s Resolution to wander into the Australian desert and feed yourself to the vultures?
Re: Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
That last suggestion is cruelty to vultures, what have they done to deserve a poisoned meal.
Re: Re: I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
are you planning on making a point anytime ??
I like your website.
But im wondering how long it would be around if someone from the mpaa/riaa actually wanted it gone.
They could finance a ddos attack, hire hackers, notify the fbi.
Re: Re:
This website was hacked already it came back 🙂
Mike should have put a banner with the Phoenix in it when it came back.
Re: Re:
Doubtful, for the simple reason that if it was that easy, they would have done so years ago.
Mind, I’m sure they would absolutely love to do so, but taking out a site with the means, motivation, and connections to fight back is something quite different from going after the smaller, more easily destroyed sites that make up their usual targets.
Re: Re: Re:
There is no need to DDOS this site.
I don’t know if Mike Masnick was ever taken seriously by more than a handful of people, but at this point he has been defined as a piracy apologist and Google mouthpiece, so his influence is nil.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
What he has been defined at, by people like you, does not make him that.
Piracy apologist? Pointing out how piracy enforcement has failed and pointing out how the rule of law should be followed even in pursuit of pirates DOES NOT make him a piracy apologist.
Google mouthpiece? Ah yes, you refer to that piece where Google listed anyone who had written about their court case with Oracle. What’s interesting is how much spin you and yours put into that. What the judge asked for and what Google delivered was basically, “Hey, all these people listed are people who have written about the case at all. Nothing more, nothing less. We’d rather present that than nothing at all.” And from that you kids spun it to “Google presented a list of shills!!!”
Sorry, but if Mike had no credibility/influence your type wouldn’t see fit to come here daily and derail conversations/articles.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
“Sorry, but if Mike had no credibility/influence your type wouldn’t see fit to come here daily and derail conversations/articles.”
actually we come here to see what ridiculous things he is talking about, and how far he is willing to go to bend the truth to suit his biases. The bigger problem is the likes of you who appear to read every word he writes as if it comes from God himself, (or Gods boss). Without question, you take what he says as absolute.
I don’t know if it because you are unable to think or just unwilling, either way, the display of adoration for Masnick is interesting to look at.
It does carry with it all the hallmarks of a cult, and Masnick does his best to encourage that.
Therefore it’s of little more use than an interesting study in human behaviour, and a source of amusement.
as has already been indicated, Masnick has basically ZERO influence in any industry and is little more than a knickknack hawker, selling crystal balls.
What is sad is that masnick things that spending 15 years flogging the same horse and not getting anywhere is something to trumpet and be proud of..
but I do understand that some people know when they have reached their peak, and Masnick is one of them.
Just seems like a big waste of 15 years, marginally better than flipping burgers I guess.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yawn,do you post this shit for attention. Why don’t you make like a dick and jack off to sone porn
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
and why did you post ??
let me guess, guard dog for masnick.
Re: Re:
they would have to care about Mansick’s site to do that, and masnick would have to show that he at least has some market impact.
neither is true..
they don’t care, (why) because he has zero impact.
Re: Re: Re:
you arent getting any points for these posts, are you?
I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
Come now, even vultures have standards.
Re:
Okay then:
Are you willing to give your first and last names, and youe place of study?
If not, then I kindly suggest you shut the fuck up.
I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
I would, but you seem to have an accuracy stat of 0.
Re:
Yeah, woof, woof.
Now bend over, bitch.
Re:
Well, maybe MS Points.
Re:
Derp!
Also I don’t like how average joe’s posts are buried even though his comments are legitimate arguments.
It makes for less back and forth arguing and more circle jerking which makes the site boring.
The fact that I have to click unbury on his posts seems like a petty attempt from Mike to spite people that disagree with him.
If you want debate and a stronger site stop being so petty because conflict drives discussion and further comments.
And calling someone that disagrees with you a troll is like running away and crying when they have a good counter argument.
Other than that, good site 😛
Re:
To help clarify, while he says ‘puppet’, what he probably means is ‘people who disagree with me’.
No, I mean Mike and his gang of puppets. I’m certain that several posters are Mike in disguise. I can’t prove it obviously as only Mike has access to the proof, but I think Mike is so desperate and dishonest that there is no depth that he wouldn’t go to. One thing he won’t ever do is just address arguments directly on the merits and be honest and explicit about what he actually believes. Nobody runs away faster and gets more angry when called out on their bullshit than Mike.
Re:
If you cannot make money without trampling on freedom of speech and peoples privacy rights, then maybe you should find another business model.
Re:
I’m certain . . . I can’t prove it obviously . . . that there is no depth that [Mike] wouldn’t go to.
Paranoid much?
Re:
Not paranoia. Just observation. I would be completely and utterly shocked to find out that Mike doesn’t in fact operate several puppets. I really think he’s that desperate.
Re:
So fucking what? Lost In Space didn’t prevent Star Trek which didn’t preclude Star Wars. Try being creative.
Re:
Speaking of desperation . . .
Re:
Can you explain exactly how you think it does this? Because there’s a growing number of people who see it doing just the opposite.
Re:
More to the point: The Hidden Fortress and The Lord of the Rings didn’t prevent Star Wars, but if Disney had owned them it would have been a close shave.
Re:
Wow, did you clip that joke out of a 1973 issue of Esquire magazine?
Re:
I don’t know if you are just trolling, being willfully dishonest, or are just stupid (although it could be a combination of one or more), but the term monopoly is being properly applied to a copyrighted work.
Let’s use your own example… Apple does have a monopoly on iphones, but you are correct in that you can get a similar experience in that you can make calls, send texts, download apps, etc on a Samsung phone or a myriad of others. The Samsung phone is an alternative to an iphone in that it provides you with a product that is functionally similar. If you want an iphone though you have to buy it from Apple, and if you buy a counterfeit then Apple has a right to stop the fake iphones production.
This is not the same situation when referring to a movie, or album, or other copyrighted work. If I want to watch Star Wars Episode 4 there is no legal alternative to obtaining the film other than going through a licensed distributor which is authorized by the copyright holder. Watching Star Trek part 4 could take up close to the same amount of time, and it is also a movie, but it is by no means a substitute for the Star Wars film. It’s a completely different experience and in no way is described by your phone analogy.
Re:
Got it in one, bravo. Hell, let’s complicate the situation even further.
About two or three weeks ago, the popular online games retailer Gog.com (gog stands for Good Old Games) allowed users of their site to download the classic game Duke Nukem 3D for free. I did and had a ton of fun, reliving my childhood tipping heavily pixelated strippers.
Here’s the thing though. If we lived in the world that AJ favours…I would have had to do a thorough background check on the website in order to see if they had a “licence” from the game developers. How would I know? What if they didn’t get a licence? What difference does it make to me if I get the game for free from Gog.com or piratebay.se? I still get the exact same digital data on my computer. There is no difference at all. If gog.com didn’t have a licence, am I now on the hook legally for downloading the game?
That’s just one game, on one website. Plenty of artists deliberately release their work on piratebay and other sites for free download. It’s not just small independents. Slowly but surely, the AAA scene is having “legit” releases on sites like these. We’ve got bands with labels having official channels on Youtube, where six years ago, such a thought was heresy that merited those same acts being burned at the stake. So how am I the end user supposed to know or even care, if a free release on piratebay is legit? What’s the difference if it is or isn’t?
As an aside, I was in a supermarket in Ireland today. On the shelf is a bunch of DVDs of the “Dark Knight Rises”. On the front cover there’s a strip advertising Ultraviolet. I had heard of it before, but couldn’t quite remember what it was. So I picked up the DVD case, flipped it around, and read the back. Said it was a streaming service, so I thought “Cool, it’s like Netflix then, but presumably only for this one movie (as stupid as that sounds)”. I then read the small print.
ULTRAVIOLET IS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND.
I remind you, this is the official DVD of one of the year’s most anticipated movie releases. On the front cover it is advertising a service that I CANNOT use. Oh, I suppose I could always use a VPN, but why the fuck should I have to resort to subterfuge and lying so I can stay in the legal clear, when the far, far, far easier option is to just torrent the damn movie in a couple of hours?
Re:
Ultraviolet will make you want to take the DVD case and repeatedly hit yourself in the head with it until one of you breaks. In the event that the DVD case breaks first, you will then find the closest substitute and continue bludgeoning your skull. It’s. That. Terrible! That being said, I feel your pain. It’s amazing that you could buy something in your country of residence that you can’t use in your country of residence.
Also, +1 Interwebz for playing Duke Nukem 3D. I can’t remember how much time I wasted playing pool on the billiards table in the pixelated strip club shooting the balls until I ran them out. “It’s time to kick ass and chew bubble gum… and I’m all outta gum.”
Re:
“Funny how you guys just have to have the copyrighted stuff.”
Has the wannabe IP lawyer forgotten that everything is automatically copyrighted once in a fixed medium?
Re:
“You’re just an angry broken record.”
Did the massive irony in that statement not slap you in the face as you typed it? Explain how complaining in every second comment that “Mike won’t debate me!” is not you being an angry broken record. It’s become a running joke, equal parts hilarious and infuriating.
Re:
“The fact that I have to click unbury on his posts seems like a petty attempt from Mike to spite people that disagree with him.”
If you’re going to criticise, please make an attempt to understand what the hell you’re talking about, so you don’t look like a fool. Like now.
“If you want debate and a stronger site stop being so petty because conflict drives discussion and further comments.”
Please show us just one example of a flagged comment comment with no replies. Show us where flagging a comment has killed a discussion. I see the opposite occur every day.
Re:
I’m certain that several posters are Mike in disguise.
You are 100% wrong. I have never posted on the site anonymously. I put my name on everything I write. It’s my site. I have no problem standing behind what I write.
You, on the other hand…
I can’t prove it
Because it’s never happened. Never.
I think Mike is so desperate and dishonest that there is no depth that he wouldn’t go to
AJ, in the past, many times I have asked you to stop arguing against the strawman you think I am and try actually arguing against what I’ve actually written. But you can’t do this, because you’ve built up this person in your head who simply doesn’t exist.
This is a perfect example of what I’m talking about.
It also explains why engaging with you is a completely pointless endeavor. You’re so paranoid and have built up this completely bogus image of what I must think that you keep arguing with that strawman. And now you’re imaginging that I fake stuff?
Let me be 100% clear: I stand behind what I write and I put my name on it. Every time.
Nobody runs away faster and gets more angry when called out on their bullshit than Mike.
AJ: It has been explained to you many times why I don’t engage with you. It is not about running away. Sometimes I’m just busy (unlike you, I work for a living, and that work keeps me pretty busy — spending time debunking your latest ridiculous theory built up in your mind takes time and serves little useful benefit, as we’ve discussed before).
So, once again: no, you’re wrong that I fake comments here. And, no, I have no problem with real debate. It’s just that you’ve shown to be incapable of holding up your end of the bargain in a real debate.
For those haven’t seen it:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120818/01171420087/funniestmost-insightful-comments-week-techdirt.shtml#c1210
Re:
It’s just that you’ve shown to be incapable of holding up your end of the bargain in a real debate.
You won’t discuss things in detail with me because you’re a coward and a fake. You care more about perception than truth.
Re:
Yeah, first of all, the ‘flagged and hidden’ comments aren’t in that state because Mike did anything, they get that way when enough people on the site decide that a post is pointless, insulting, or otherwise offensive enough in some way to warrant a reporting.
Also, if anything being reported seems to increase the number of people who read a comment, I can’t remember the last time a non-spam reported comment didn’t have a whole slew of replies to it.
I’m honestly not sure which I find funnier, the idea that AJ’s posts would qualify as ‘legitimate arguments’, or the idea that having a ‘good counter argument’ is enough for someone to be labeled a troll. I can only assume you haven’t actually read the posts by AJ or those that have earned the troll designation.
Going in order, the basics of AJ’s ‘arguments’ basically boil down to ‘everyone who disagrees with me is a criminal’, something he accuses people of with great regularity, and just in case it’s not clear, that is anything but a ‘good argument’.
Now, to be fair, on occasion he will act in a civil manner, and actually present evidence to back up his positions, but those times are very much the exception.
As for those that have earned the designation of trolls, they don’t reach that state due to people disagreeing with them, they get called that for being offensive, calling people names and/or swearing at them, calling people criminals with no proof, throwing tantrums like children when their arguments are refuted or called out as wrong, and various other seriously anti-social behaviors they exhibit.
The fact that they also may disagree with what people are posting is immaterial, it’s how they act or present themselves that earns them the label of ‘troll’.
Re:
You’re really on fire today with these massively ironic statements. Keep it up Joe, every one further confirms what we all know about you.
Re:
You won’t discuss things in detail with me because you’re a coward and a fake. You care more about perception than truth.
Or, you know, this:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120818/01171420087/funniestmost-insightful-comments-week-t echdirt.shtml#c1210
I’ll let anyone who reads the site decide for themselves which is the more likely of the two.
Also, re: my unwillingness to debate, you still ignore the fact that I regularly debate with people much more established and credible than you.
Happy New Year, Joe. I hope that, next year, you decide to stop fighting the Strawman Mike, and maybe you’ll eventually learn that I’m not the person you think I am. I’m optimistic that you’ll come around.
Re:
maybe you’ll eventually learn that I’m not the person you think I am.
You mean the person that sides with pirates? Something that is demonstrably true due to the thousands of posts you’ve written here over the years?
Happy New Year, Mike. I hope this is the year you get the mental health attention you so obviously need.
Re:
Huh, I wasn’t aware that you could figure out who someone was siding with simply by the number of posts they’ve made… how many does it take to side with those for chocolate ice creams, but against say, dropping anvils on nuns?
I’d hate to think my post count had already put me into the pro-nun-flattening crowd…
Re:
And you whine about this for 15 years? I suppose some creatures gotta feed on pond scum even if they don’t like it.
Re:
If it makes you feel any better, I wrote in his name for president.
Re:
This is pathetic
Re:
“You mean the person that sides with pirates?”
So you take a huge and complex issue and reduce it down to “sides with pirates”. With such simplistic and thickheaded attitudes among copyright supporters it’s no wonder copyright continues to become less and less respected in the minds of the general public.
“I hope this is the year you get the mental health attention you so obviously need.”
Wow, so anyone who doesn’t completely subscribe to your worldview simply has mental health issues? Maybe if we all just went and saw a shrink we’d start buying CD’s and DVD’s again right?
I've now been writing Techdirt for more than 15 years,
Yes, if reporters don’t have a direct relation to something they’re talking about they have no right to talk about it.
Once again, darryl, you make single-celled paramecium look like Nobel Prize winners by intelligence comparison. It’s hard to imagine that you’re not a vacuum given by how much you suck.
Re:
If this were true, then I would have no problem with the more extreme efforts of copyright enforcement.
But it’s just not true.