I have a better idea. Just point out that under the guise of cybersecurity, the ATF get access to all Facebook comments about guns. That should set off the 2nd Ammendment crowd and this thing will get dropped in a heart beat...
Ooops - looks like I left something out which caused you to make false assumptions. Let me rephrase something and see if it helps you at all:
Any creative product created by any "author" in my lifetime will never be available to me outside of copyright for use as a base or starting point to build something new.
Of course, you would have us believe that the original creator still deserves a major cut of any profits from the new work. You believe that the 2nd generation work couldn't possibly exist without the first. The point you're ignoring is that the 2nd creator puts just as much if not more effort into the 2nd generation work. If you disagree, then stop being a hypocrite and demand that the Ray Charles estate donate their proceeds to all the people Ray copied to become a star.
I love how you leave off the part of the Copyright Clause that says the way to promote the progress is to grant exclusive rights to authors. No doubt you'd erase that from the Constitution if you could. Best just to pretend it's not there, right?
I love how you leave off the part of the Copyright Clause that says "for a limited time". No doubt you'd erase that from the Constitution if you could. Best just to pretend it's not there, right?
Of course, I'm sure you'll reply that current copyright is limited. I disagree. While in the scope or frame of all of human history, life+70 is limited, but in terms of a single human lifespan, it's not. Any creative product created by any "author" in my lifetime will never be available to me outside of copyright. As far as my perspective is concerned, that's an infinite restriction, not "limited".
So some intrepid Farker took the time to compare PETA to other humane/animal rescue outfits in VA and came up with this interesting post:
From the link, PETA Virginia's stats: 1,877 animals taken in, 1,675 euthanized, about 90%
Looking at the same source, for all humane societies (including PETA): 10,143 animals taken in, 2,519 euthanized, about 25%
That means that for non-PETA humane societies in Virginia, you're looking at 8,266 animals taken in and 844 animals euthanized, about 10%.
Why does PETA have a 90% euthanasia rate while the rest of the humane societies in Virginia combine for a 10% rate?
In Connecticut after 2011 the power companies started to care a little bit. With two major power outages just a couple months apart, the legislature stuck their nose into things and passed a law about penalties if more than 10% of their customers are out for more than 72 hours. For the last 2 years, they've actually been trimming and clearing lines. That's pretty much what prompted me to think of the idea.
Granted, a similar idea would be for follow up after a major storm. Since they're travelling the streets, have them report downed trees, wires, etc. Tie it in with a GPS location and perhaps a picture upload (via cell) and utility response time could increase dramatically.
If only the postal service with it's fleet of trucks that visit nearly every physical address in the entire country multiple times per week could be used in other ways. I mean, it's really too bad we don't have GPS units they could attach to them so that mapping companies could get really accurate GPS locations for addresses. Or if only someone could invent a camera system that you mount to the roof of a vehicle to take pictures of the road to get a street level view for mapping directions. And what local municipality could possibly want a service to report road and highway issues like serious potholes in the northeast or roads washed out in the southwest. And, of course, there's no way a power company would want to license a fleet like that to help get a complete survey of their power lines looking for dead/weak trees and obstructions. I doubt even a communications company like AT&T or Comcast would want that either.
This will certainly be fun when someone's random celebrity shot from the streets of LA gets used as an ad and a publicity rights lawsuit filed. That's sort of the point raised by non-user Wil Wheaton in his blog. He doesn't use the service, but does he now have to worry about how people around him use it? Of course, he also admits he's not likely "big" enough for it to be a concern for him, but that he knows people for whom it will be.
Should be fun to watch corporate IP grab run headlong into entertainment IP grab... lol
You think it was bad in the media? You should see what it's like "on the ground". I live within 15 miles of the school and had to disconnect for a good portion of the weekend. The rampant speculation, fear mongering and general bad information was hard to deal with. So many people spouting so much crap.
I'm just glad my kids were able to handle a rational discussion of what happened and aren't falling into the general atmosphere of panic that seems to be surrounding the area. Heck, just this morning schools in another town were put on lockdown because of a "stranger walking with a rifle". Turned out to be an umbrella. Imagine that - a guy carrying an umbrella on a rainy day...
It's obvious most of the people posting that drivel were NOT looking to protect creative work, but instead trying to prevent the use of their personal info for marketing purposes. They used copyright because they are starting to realize just how massive and scary weapon it has become. In their panic over the fear that Facebook might do something "evil", they jumped on a bandwagon. Too bad it was full of crap... lol
Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.
This is a point that we keep making and they keep ignoring. Most movie studios won't stop to consider it either. If you put some real numbers behind it, it's even more obvious though:
- Price for 1 adult ticket at local movie house = $13
- Snacks because I'm not a sneak and buy there = $7.50
- Gas to and fro = $1 (I live close by)
So, for ~2 hours of entertainment + ~10 hours of conversations with friends, I have to spend $21.50. Of course, I could spend just $19.99 in the Blizzard store and get the WoW Battle Chest and a full month of game time which would yield dozens of hours of entertainment along with dozens of hours of conversation with friends. Hmm... which is the better deal? Even better, if I wasn't all that interested in the movie, I can wait until it comes out on TV and watch it for free.
So why again does a $100 million movie budget count?
The deeper point here that gets lost in the lack of merit in this suit is that if the copyright maximalists succeed, this will become a very common occurrence. For every suit the entertainment conglomerates file, they'll be defending a dozen as more and more people subscribe to their version of "copyright". Makes you wonder if they'll go screaming to Congress to get the changes backed out at that point. I doubt it, but you never know.
Good luck getting ANY publicly traded company to look beyond next quarters financial statements. With a fear of "shareholder lawsuits", HFT systems and a shareholder preference for short term profits over long term investment, it's doubtful any company would be willing to risk a long-term approach to growth.