AC51 is exactly correct. The real purpose is to encourage passengers to pay attention to what's going on during takeoff and landing. People fiddling with their toys and not listening to instructions are the ones that get tossed around the cabin and injured if an incident occurs.
There is a process by which the Federal Government may be sued. It requires application to a Federal Court and the approval of the Judge therein. It even happens on rare occasion. Hopefully someone from Dajaz1 will make such application and it will be approved. If not, this country is in really deep trouble.
How is the Government, as embodied in this administration, any different than the real Mafia? They seem to have no regard for the rule of Law. They have no regard for citizen's rights. They have no regard for the Constitution. In short, they are worse than the crime families, which, at least, have a code of ethics that they follow. This bunch justifies any crime, any action, any disregard for the Constitutional guarantees that they perform against our citizens, with the mock excuse of protecting us. Things have gotten way out of control. If they are going to act this way, then they should organize along the Mafia guidelines and adopt the Cosa Nostra code. We're already paying them tribute (taxes), and they're already acting like them, so let's make it formal. It couldn't be any worse.
I've been sitting here, thinking about the business world as it currently exists, and wondering how we should fix it. This mess reminds me of the conditions that existed on my Kindergarten playground, 64 years ago. The same sort of friends, quiet studious types, bullies, gangs protecting property (toys) they perceive as theirs, faculty, etc. I can see little difference except now they're playing for real stakes and money. Maybe we should just spank them, or give them "time out" in the corner.
"Why are people so obsessed with the whole 'prison rape' meme?"
Simply because it's reality in prison. Rape is a power thing. It's one way, other than beating someone up, to establish the pecking order in a very harsh environment.
Most prisons are nothing like the "country clubs" Hollywood shows you. All are violent and populated mostly by people who comitted violent crimes to get there, don't want to be there and hate everyone around them because they are. The weak DON'T survive. Prisons are also the main recruiting grounds for most of the criminal white supremacist groups and the worst adult gangs. Prisons are not nice, I don't care what the liberals and do-gooders tell you.
"A War on Piracy would be easily ten times as destructive as a War on Drugs, and just as successful. Trying to enforce these laws is like having the authors standing on the shore, spitting into the ocean, and then demanding that the ocean track every molecule of their spit, forever, and change itself so that their water molecules don't mix with the ocean.
In a sea of bits, no bits are special, and trying to make them that way will be immensely destructive to the fabric of the Internet."
Excellent simile, and exactly on point. The other thing to remember is that ANY use of ANY content on our bit factories, creates a copy in memory and on the hard disk of portions or the entirety of that content. Such copies, while legitimately obtained, are preserved on the disk and are ultimately retrievable by the tech savvy. Videos, web pages, pdf files, viewed on the internet end up in the browser's cache, as files that can be copied elsewhere, very easily.
I don't see a way to browse the web without the local copies, unless we went back to the mainframe/terminal concept where no local processing occurred. Kinda like enforced Remote Desktop. That ain't likely to happen.
The same applies to music, by the way. Usually the entire song ends up stored locally during play. That cache is also available for copying.
Regarding videos, the time bar across the bottom of the player has two functions. First it tells you how far into the video you have progressed. Second, there is another color bar behind the time bar that tells you how much of the file has been downloaded. Once that gets all the way to the end the download is complete and the file is stored in the cache. You could conceivably disconnect to internet at that point and still watch the entire video, repeatedly.
The only way to prevent this copy from being made is to send the file in small chunks as the viewing progresses and erase them from the cache as they are used. Youtube and most streaming services do this for larger files, but small videos and songs, files with lengths under 5 or 6 minutes of playtime are almost always stored complete in the cache.
Hollyweird must HATE that. All those nasty COPIES floating around. We're ALL pirates, all 100 million of us!
Most of the (at least) hardware world DOES include fixed and R&D costs in the unit price, at least initially. Intel is famous for this. Their first run of almost any chip is very expensive. My first 8085 chip cost over $100. Later, when the production bugs are worked out, and quantities go up, the price drops considerably, like $5 in the 8085 case. Hollywood, on the other hand, has never used this model. Films (and music) are "invested in" by the studios (the "budget") then they hope the market will reimburse them, which it usually does - sometimes in spectacular fashion. Occasionally they lose, but not often.
The electronic industry, and most others, get their reimbursement up front in the initial sales. The idea for Hollywood would be a high price for the first few showings with a gradual decline as the product ages.
The real difference is that the costs to Hollywood are one-time, during production. Once a film is complete, and the distribution masters are done and sold to the distributor, the studio's costs drop to zero and the distributor pays the distribution and promotion costs. The studios just collect a percentage, which justifies their model. The studios have no ongoing material and parts costs like almost any manufacturer does. They take one hard hit then the rest is gravy. No wonder they don't want to let go.
It's kinda like the VC business - one large initial investment, then collect a percentage forever (assuming the investment was wise, of course).
AC24: You're entirely correct. I failed to mention that the "sweet spot" is a moving target and is dependent on many factors, including time, the perceptions of the buyer, the actions of the seller, and even public opinion and reviews.
The process of producing an eBook, IMHO, is a followup to the print layout process. The publisher has to lay out and typeset the original manuscript to get a printable product. Nowadays, instead of a box full of foolscap or a hand-written original, the publisher likely gets a file, partially or entirely formatted to his requirements. He usually has little to do, other than producing printer plates (which is done by computer now anyway). The task of converting that original file into eBook format is likewise probably entirely automatic. Even if the publisher has to scan an original volume to make the file, this, too, is automatic. I don't see much additional cost, over setting up a print book. Once that's done, the eBook file is mostly finished. Distribution is essentially free. They just have to store that one file somewhere and give controlled access to millions of copies of it.
In a free market, the value of a particular good (and therefore it's ultimate street price) is determined by the purchaser, not the seller. If the seller's price is too high, few will sell. Likewise, if the price is too low, the buyer will see it as "cheap" and few will sell. There's a market-determined "sweet spot" that results in maximum sales. Finding that point, of course, is the trick. Ultimately, the buyer doesn't give a hoot WHAT your costs are. He wouldn't care if you lost money on each sale, only that he bought it at a price he likes, and that you stick around long enough to support him if he needs it. Such is business.
And no, it's not up to the courts or Congress to prop up antiquated business models (see Buggy-Whip Mfrs V Auto Industry).
For once, I agree with "That Anonymous Coward". Both Google and Microsoft have the hardware, software, and expertise in place to accomplish what the Copyright Office wants to do. They only need permission, and a hard contract to prevent data hoarding, to do it. I, for one, would love to see this happen. Way too much has been locked up.
Of course the medical imaging industry, and most other technical companies, are not innovating. They don't want to get sued. The trolls are just waiting for them. If you want real numbers and reasons, try to talk to the chief engineers of those companies, and ask why they have stopped (or slowed down) R&D efforts. They (being engineers) will likely answer you truthfully.
If our esteemed commenters would be so kind as to read the article before commenting, and most especially read the AIC policy under "Image Licensing" most of the questions would be answered. They allow photos of established AIC exhibits, under available light, but not new or short period exhibits. Anything else must be requested with up to two weeks for approval (if you get it).
There's only one way to stop all of this BS in Congress: Shut down ALL technology in DC and congressional offices. Only when the congresscritters can demonstrate competency in their use will they be allowed to reinstate it. The folks providing the technical services should be easily capable of shutting them down.