It's time for a real knock-down drag-out fight with the copyright pros, and it's not going to happen until the average person feels the pain. Let them enact any crazy thing they want, then watch people find a million ways around it.
The problem with your point of view is that presupposes that the inventor of a technology can anticipate the uses to which it will be put, and take action to prevent the "bad" ones. In fact, it is rare that an inventor is able to guess the future path of his/her work. The guys who developed a resilient network for military communications, for example, had no way of knowing it would become a global network where just anyone could post comments. It's not their fault they never put in a "troll filter". ;)
Actually, you're clearly a radical subversive with an anti-American agenda. As will be verified by the "psychiatrists" over there with the government IDs.
There's no excuse for LucasFilm. However, it's worth pointing out one big advantage to Verizon for their license: they can legitimately play up the "Star Wars" connection in their advertising. That might be worth a fair chunk of change all by itself.
Problem with that is, they could be incompetent at one part of their business and make up for it in another. Just as a hypothetical they might, oh, I don't know, buy out every competitor they have. But in this case I suspect it's not Wells Fargo that's frakked up, it's the legal system. Unless you're a lawyer, in which case this is just great.
So authors are going to "renegotiate" every time a new product comes out? And meanwhile Amazon should just stop everything? If an ebook sale is treated differently from a physical sale, it sounds like the authors you mention already agreed to some bad contracts.
The industry has used the "we can't go after each downloader, so we'll get this guy" argument repeatedly. They seem to be saying that because it's infeasible to comply with the law, they should be able to rewrite it. Imagine if we could all do that.
GeneralEmergency said "...exactly how is packet inspection based traffic shaping legally distinguishable from eavesdropping?
How would one know that one's mail is not being read or the file in a file transfer is not being copied and archived?"
Beats the heck out of me. Also, what prevents everyone from going to encrypted data streams?
The First Amendment is the only "bit" that mentions free speech. It's all that's needed. It's widely considered the bedrock on which all other freedoms depend. A government which controls speech can violate any other rights it wants to -- no one will ever know.
I think foreigners underestimate how seriously we take this Amendment. Any attempt to limit the speech of US citizens will be cheerfully ignored by most of them.
I've got to say I wasn't disappointed. I thought it went pretty well. Do remember Colbert's not a real journalist, for which the profession is profoundly grateful I'm sure.
Why Would Penguin Force Colbert To Take Down Lessig's Remix?
Probably as part of another plot to "bring the City of Gotham to its knees". I admit I don't see the connection, but I'm not a deformed criminal mastermind with Joker envy. Thank God.
Any chance the prosecutors are launching all these cases to demonstrate how dumb the law is, and get it killed quickly? Or is that giving them too much credit?
All this hysteria about child porn deliberately misses the most important point. Child porn is a proxy for our fear of child molestation. However, by far most molestation of children is done by family members. Until we admit and act on that politically uncomfortable fact, we're addressing the tip of a huge iceberg.
The following was original written as a response to a Australian/British Tabloid on the US election. It will not be posted there due to their posting rules.
So, instead you decided to post your spelling error infested ramblings to a completely unrelated web site? OK!
Let it pass.
It's time for a real knock-down drag-out fight with the copyright pros, and it's not going to happen until the average person feels the pain. Let them enact any crazy thing they want, then watch people find a million ways around it.
Re: Scientific ethics
The problem with your point of view is that presupposes that the inventor of a technology can anticipate the uses to which it will be put, and take action to prevent the "bad" ones. In fact, it is rare that an inventor is able to guess the future path of his/her work. The guys who developed a resilient network for military communications, for example, had no way of knowing it would become a global network where just anyone could post comments. It's not their fault they never put in a "troll filter". ;)
Re: doctor-patient confidentiality
Not a problem. Any psychiatrist who claims to be able to tell who's a leaker from an interview has no ethics to violate.
Re: BETTER IDEA
Damn, beat me to it.
Actually, you're clearly a radical subversive with an anti-American agenda. As will be verified by the "psychiatrists" over there with the government IDs.
Verizon had another motive
There's no excuse for LucasFilm. However, it's worth pointing out one big advantage to Verizon for their license: they can legitimately play up the "Star Wars" connection in their advertising. That might be worth a fair chunk of change all by itself.
Terrible for YOU, maybe
Me, I'm putting up a web site that says terrible things about me, then starting a chain letter with a link to it.
Payday, baby!
Re: Re: Right Wing To The eXtreme
Problem with that is, they could be incompetent at one part of their business and make up for it in another. Just as a hypothetical they might, oh, I don't know, buy out every competitor they have. But in this case I suspect it's not Wells Fargo that's frakked up, it's the legal system. Unless you're a lawyer, in which case this is just great.
Hard to see how that makes sense.
Well, of course it doesn't. This is Scalia. Duh.
Do Lawyers Know Better, Period?
Based on the accumulated evidence: no.
Re: Author Renegotiation
So authors are going to "renegotiate" every time a new product comes out? And meanwhile Amazon should just stop everything? If an ebook sale is treated differently from a physical sale, it sounds like the authors you mention already agreed to some bad contracts.
Seen this argument before
The industry has used the "we can't go after each downloader, so we'll get this guy" argument repeatedly. They seem to be saying that because it's infeasible to comply with the law, they should be able to rewrite it. Imagine if we could all do that.
Re: Excuse me...but...
GeneralEmergency said "...exactly how is packet inspection based traffic shaping legally distinguishable from eavesdropping?
How would one know that one's mail is not being read or the file in a file transfer is not being copied and archived?"
Beats the heck out of me. Also, what prevents everyone from going to encrypted data streams?
This is why I donate to the EFF
Why do people assume that the old rights don't apply to new technology? Is it just a case of "let's see how much we can get away with"?
Shocking News
South Carolina has a state legislator who's a blithering idiot. Film at 11.
(Really, why are you surprised?)
Re: Re: copy sent.
The First Amendment is the only "bit" that mentions free speech. It's all that's needed. It's widely considered the bedrock on which all other freedoms depend. A government which controls speech can violate any other rights it wants to -- no one will ever know.
I think foreigners underestimate how seriously we take this Amendment. Any attempt to limit the speech of US citizens will be cheerfully ignored by most of them.
Watched the video
I've got to say I wasn't disappointed. I thought it went pretty well. Do remember Colbert's not a real journalist, for which the profession is profoundly grateful I'm sure.
Obvious
Why Would Penguin Force Colbert To Take Down Lessig's Remix?
Probably as part of another plot to "bring the City of Gotham to its knees". I admit I don't see the connection, but I'm not a deformed criminal mastermind with Joker envy. Thank God.
Hidden Agenda?
Any chance the prosecutors are launching all these cases to demonstrate how dumb the law is, and get it killed quickly? Or is that giving them too much credit?
The Real Problem
All this hysteria about child porn deliberately misses the most important point. Child porn is a proxy for our fear of child molestation. However, by far most molestation of children is done by family members. Until we admit and act on that politically uncomfortable fact, we're addressing the tip of a huge iceberg.
Re: Re:
The following was original written as a response to a Australian/British Tabloid on the US election. It will not be posted there due to their posting rules.
So, instead you decided to post your spelling error infested ramblings to a completely unrelated web site? OK!
Rats, you beat me to it.