And yet if the system forced this to happen, more companies would be doing this creating demand and competition in the market dropping the price.
(Well until the larger player makes the right campaign contributions and we get laws blocking those who do it faster & cheaper by leveraging technology).
I am not saying it is easy, but many films have scripts they could use as a base to start with. There is mechanical turk and other services that one could use to lower the price. The problem is that the big players keep the price inflated for doing the work (it makes a great write off I am sure) and require some sort of secret handshake to be in the fraternity of those allowed to do it.
I am willing to bet, like in many things, there is a community of people who care about even the most niche of movies and would offer to help create the subtitles to help spread the word. Heck many of the fan based "services" often create better subtitles than the professionals do. There are always many paths to the goal, one just needs to take the first step and try.
We'll just block everything, and then they will give in and do what we want.
I'm often happy to see the companies do things that make sense to show the powers that be the error of their way (ie: newspapers complain about snippets, snippets stopped, newspapers whining louder about loss of traffic). Perhaps rather than give in, they should make them learn how to do it correctly and let them pay the price for their overblocking.
So perhaps it would be best to use Team Pretenda as something, other than an example of why we have lawyer jokes.
If they are using it, it is broken. No amount of hoping that somehow they will be reigned in will lead to anything, we need to find the will to actually deal with the very real problems with the law and repair them. They are extracting misery & cash (and even killing businesses in the process) all while lining their pockets by abusing a system that everyone is terrified to fix because of the bad soundbites.
The ADA is important, and fixing it should be a top priority. We knew there was a problem when, in the most entertaining example, the copies of the movie "Up" were being made available to the public for rental lacking subtitles as the main character has hearing aids. The mindset was that disabled people needed to buy "full" copies of the movie to be included. The terrible fear of the movie industry that people would just make copies of the movies they if put out full featured discs for rental trumped the right of citizens to have reasonable access to the material. We've seen them holding the blind "hostage" by demanding laws block features the blind would benefit from, because ZOMG someone else might figure out a way to abuse it and cost us money. The disabled are just a bargaining chip, not a demographic they care to serve.
We need serious reform of these things, despite them not offering great soundbites for politicians... we have fucking National Days for Vanilla and Chocolate Cupcakes but somehow fixing a law to require that subtitles be made available on all versions offered in the marketplace isn't even that important. Says something about the priorities of our leaders and about us not giving a shit about anything other than ourselves.
She really is a horrible person, IMHO. I have been trying to find a way to get her and that idiot tongues of glass guy to go after each other in a no holds barred deathmatch of nastygrams, just to have them focus on each other instead of people.
It was shocking when the courts took her at her word and completely ignored the law and evidence. All it took was the I'm just a poor terrified woman card to be played and reason flew out the window. I wonder how the courts would feel if they had to face the same people she terrifies with her threat letters send, most often, in a time of grief threatening them with $150K damages.
You tell me copyright is not broken, I point at this woman and the other trolls out there and ask how blind you are. There is more money to be made shaking people down for cash than producing new work. How does this benefit society again? This used to be a small cottage industry, sending letters demanding cash... now it powers entire business models that extract cash in a multitude of ways.
Live your dash baby, because that is all you are. A single blip who never did anything of note. Still managed to waste a courts time to remind you that people can think you are horrible but it isn't breaking the law. People weren't fond of you before, all you managed to do was make even more people dislike you. Good job.
This is an elected offical who publicly stated that the **AA hadn't done anything.
(IIRC) They paid him They wrote the letter He then pulled out lawyer/client privilege to HIDE the truth Funny he works for the state, he took on another client?
He managed to make a bigger mockery of his office than it was before, and now with bonus evidence available about the quid pro quo I am at a loss as to why no charges have been filed or the process started to put him on leave while an investigation proceeds. Anything the AG's office has touched is now fair game for being considered tainted, because he sold his influence. Perhaps if we actually enforced the same harsh penalties on them as everyone else has to face perhaps they might not do stupid things.
I guess the biggest problem is they killed their competition early on. They have been operating from this magical place where they have the power to kill any competition they might face, and never have to worry about providing what the customer actually wants.
There is no option other that the ones we tell you, you may have. We will spend millions offering you less, while trying to punish those who refuse to accept the overpriced limited options we provide. While others just put up an antenna and get those missing channels, we will pretend that you must pay us for 400 channels of crap to get the 2 shows you want to see... if you stay home at the right times or pay a bit more for them on demand.
As it is very clear that the AG has repeatedly lied, shouldn't that be grounds for removal from office? As it is very clear that he sold the use of his office to those willing to pay him the right amounts result in investigations into all of his actions and in the **AA's who bought this access?
If they had any legal basis, why would they secretly buy these silly attacks? They are obviously trying to end-run around the law and in the process have shown how far they are willing to go and how easily one can buy influence. There are penalties for these actual violations of the law, and it is well past time that they be enforced.
Gee why does this level of disconnect from reality not shock me. See Also: "Independent" Review of CCI
This maybe just maybe helps highlight the amazing disconnect between those on top and those who provide them that living.
Workers are seen as threats no matter what, oh something horrible happened to them... QUICK LOCK THE FILES!! Once upon a time a business would find out about troubles befalling their workers and extend some reasonable aid, because a happy worker is more productive and committed to the company.
Now everything is viewed from the viewpoint of those "on top" where if you see a weakness, you pounce and destroy. And living with this constant fear of takeovers, SEC investigations, etc where everyone is after them they become paranoid. They spend MILLIONS of dollars, that they got by cutting into the compensation for the workers, propping up the sales pitch of if you do not do this your workers will destroy you... ignoring that these sorts of actions will do very little to catch people committed to your downfall, and increases the sheer number of people who will grow to despise you and will help the one who decides you need to go down.
See also: Every stupid plan the **AA's have ever put forth. Punish those who pay them, chasing imaginary dollars.
Police Union supports members who lie to a court. This sounds like a group organized and working to subvert the legal process and hide the truth that their membership beat the hell out of an innocent person for not "knowing" his place. Why do we allow these groups to exist, if they were Italian in suits with funny accents we'd have the FBI sitting outside gathering evidence to stop the criminal organization.
A badge does not mean you can't be corrupt, and should never shield actions/statements from unbiased review.
And yet, these nice officers more than likely are still on the force because we have given them far more protections than any protection they offered the young man they beat. Still feel safe?
something something same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
They have no new plans. They have no new ideas. This time it will work and change everything.
Perhaps treating several million consumers like shit for decades, causes them to look into alternatives.
The solution is to get a clue that the business you are in is selling product to consumers, and everytime you put up another roadblock chasing imaginary dollars pissing off consumers who want to pay you... they find another way.
If you sell the content at the price the market wants without trying to pretend you still own it, the consumers will take the really easy path you made. Focus on getting them back by offering better for less, not worse for more.
Huh, isn't her job to do that whole truth, justice, American way thing? If she feels unable to handle the stress of being in this position, perhaps she would be better suited to find other employment.
This behavior is unacceptable, and if she wants to remove any public oversight over what she is doing (and reporters covering news is public oversight) perhaps her office should be investigated.
In fact this should be the response to any appointed/elected offical who responds in this manner. They are accountable to the public they represent, and if they are unwilling to be accountable... where there is smoke there is fire.
I'm loathe to suggest more laws, because they will always add more loopholes, but it is time this stop being acceptable and those unfit to hold positions be removed.
IP is so valuable that those who hold it often can not be bothered to verify they have it, but will still make threats... just in case.
So, someone(s) have the rights to a game that is currently earning them 0. Someone is willing to give that someone(s) MONEY for the ability to create a working game that there seems to be interest in. Da'faq is wrong here?
This entire episode highlights that "private" records of IP related transactions are unacceptable. If you aren't willing to file a document showing ownership with the central registry, you shouldn't have any rights to it. This is "just" one game, but how many other things are out there that no one can be bothered to unbox the records to look for? How many other people met the same idiotic we dunno if its ours, but we are prepared to crush you legally if we happen to find out we own it at a later date (and you make enough money we fell should be ours).
"Forcing" poor rightsholders to actually file documentation so that these records are searchable doesn't seem like much of a burden for having a monopoly. One could even throw in the ever popular, if you don't let us know you are alive every few years you surrender your rights to it. You aren't using the rights, refuse to see if you actually have them, refuse money by licensing them out... Other than keeping IP locked up for the sake of claiming to own a buncha IP, what the hell is the point? A system that rewards them for locking things away. How does this benefit society again?