I bought both my children and grandchildren dictionaries. The reason for this is that when I was a child, I learned quite a bit from words I found on the way to words I was actually trying to find. If you can customize everything you can see you won't find things you don't know. The sad thing is you won't even know you missed them.
So I just have to accept that the medication the doctor proscribes for my condition will not cause me side effects. How about whether or not a resturant has passed a health inspection? It is commercially sensitive. Or is it only large companies with lots of lawyers who do not have to share their information?
Except for the problem that you will always be able to pirate music and the experience in France shows stronger enforcement does not lead to higher purchasing levels. So it is possible only if you decide to disregard the current evidence.
Updated 06/08/2012: It turns out that the developers in question were actually censured for keyword spam -- they overloaded their app descriptions and meta data with keywords. This happened to coincide with the roll-out of the new guidelines. You can read more about Google's Play policies here.
May be we have been looking at everything from the wrong angle. All these years we have thought the anti piracy laws were to stop counterfeiting for the benefit of Hollywood. Maybe the government has been using this as an excuse to bend the rules of law to their advantage.
I bought the first book(hard copy) of a series for my grandaughter. She loved it. I tried to buy the second book from B&N. It was out of stock, but they would order it. I could have it in 3 weeks. Amazon could get it to me in 3 to 5 days and it was cheaper. Where would you have purchased it?
Assuming a law is needed, any law will initially cause an increase in crime because it is making a behavior criminal which was previously not criminal. Once that barrier is passed it would be enforcement of the law that mattered.
You are not going to find a way forward if you say the way forward is more value for "me". The internet does produce more value. It is spread around to a greater number of people so it looks smaller but in aggregate it is greater than what we had.
Re: TechDirt totally out of touch about how much patents pay for innovation
And in the 1980's the system was changed to allow procedures and business idea's to be patented pretty much doing away with the necessity to come up with a working model. That and the fact that most of the people vetting patents are no longer highly informed in the field means we have a broken system. Go back to patenting physical objects that you create only and the system would be acceptable again.
If you actually create something, no it does not. Since generally most copyrighted works are building off what others in society have created the attempt to lock up all materials used for your creation is like builders trying to patent wood used in buildings.
Re: Oh I get it, all you have to do is ask people to "do better"
Bob,Please do better.
That aside lets look at your argument.
Food companies: You are allowed to make copies it is called gardening and except in the case of Monsanto they only charge you for the bandwith(seeds). Under the current situation on the internet you could not grow the food because they did oranges first.
Maxim and Playboy. Women are asking you to do better. If you manage to you won't need the magazines.
Cancer: I was unaware that people dying showed approval of the job disease was doing. Perhaps you have misinterpreted this and it is a disapproval of life?
You can write Bobbi Smith and ask him to do better. Unfortunatly, you can't force him to. Yes people produce things and want to get paid. They cannot force people to pay what they want or say what it is worth to the consumer.
If you cannot set the price you are stuck accepting what the person says your product is worth to him or her. Which may be nothing, the cost of disk space and download time or cash. Its different then what was, but hey that's life. Feel free to ask life to do better.