PaulT's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
It’s been a good week for articles that interest me personally, a good thing as I’ve been asked to write this post about my favorites! First mention has to go to Jonathan McIntosh’s great recap of the problems he’s had to go through at the hands of Lionsgate. In short, despite his Twilight remix video having been mentioned by the US Copyright Office itself as an example of fair use, he still struggled to convince YouTube to keep it up since Lionsgate didn’t want to keep it up without obscuring it with ads (despite the current version being ad free and not monetized by McIntosh in any way himself). It’s a nice illustration of how even those who try to keep within the law fall foul of corporate greed if they decide they don’t like something. If something already illustrated as fair use can be treated like this, imagine the problems faced by anyone in a grey area!
On a similar note, rapper Kid Cudi yet again noted how disappointed he was in his label’s commitment to his new single, just one year after having similar problems with his last album. While some were noting that he was silly to have signed for a label in the first place, this was another illustration as to how even successful artists can be let down by the legacy industry and how many artists simply don’t need them.
Something slightly more disturbing to me personally is the story about a gambling software programmer being shut down and raided. The story appears to go that despite offering services that are perfectly legal everywhere that he licensed the software, he fell afoul of the US’s inexplicable anti-gambling obsession anyway because he’s based in the US and people in NY may have somehow touched his software. As someone who working in Gibraltar, a place whose industry is largely built by offshore gaming companies (some of whom were similarly attacked when US authorities suddenly decided that their companies were offering illegal products), this is a worrying trend. It also sadly means that my dreams of being invited to help set up a Las Vegas branch of one of those companies might still be a long way away!
On a lighter note, UK police were arguing about who first thought up their Twitter offers of free iPads to lure the stupidest criminals alive into their arms. Neither of them apparently remembering the episode of The Simpsons where Homer was successfully lured by the promise of a free boat.
Meanwhile, back in the entertainment industry, Sony offered the most naked example yet of profiteering and the back of what should be public domain material when they released a new Bob Dylan compilation entitled the “Copyright Collection Volume 1.” Regionally restricted, of course, and containing rare material that will inevitably be pirated as it’s not available anywhere else. It’s particularly odious because the mere 100 copies they released were openly intended to stop classic material from going back to the public under the original deal made when they were recorded. At least they’ve dropped the pretense of helping the fans, I suppose.
The movie industry also made some wrongheaded moves in an attempt to promote their silly Ultraviolet service (yet another in a long line of DRM that offer customers less than a pirated version under the pretense that it somehow benefits the consumer). The pretense is that by offering free movies with purchases of TVs and Blu ray players, they can convince people to use and love it. Having unfortunately tried it myself (unsuccessfully) on a movie I received for Christmas, I suspect it will just let people know not to bother.
Finally, on a lighter note, it’s nice to see some figures for Kickstarter’s year and their great success in funding a wide range of projects. Over 2 million people funded projects this year (myself included), so here’s hoping that many more independent artists get funded in 2013!
You'd be better off learning things rather than copying everything you find in a random Google search. Even your link names tell you that you're full of it (e.g. second one "too much gaming" - OK, how does that affect people who don't play too much? You said "everyone" but most of the links are about kids ...) Also, IIRC, some of the older studies like the 2000 one you linked have been largely disproven. For example, lack of evidence that increased aggressing within a game translates outside the game, not to mention the inherent problem with using adult games to try and determine childhood issues and then use that to restrict adults.
That is a weird take on the subject. Two of the things you listed were that you require direct contact with your kids even while in class and even if they disrupt the wishes of other parents, without involving the school themselves. Which just seems creepy. The other is advocating that children who aren't legally allowed to but cigarettes be allowed to smoke them on premises no matter the objections of other children, parents, or potentially law enforcement. As for "rights", other people have them too. Parents do indeed have rights - that includes the parents who don't want your spawn lighting up illegally obtained things in front of their kids, for example.
Because they got as far as "LLMs might be able to replace interns" but not as far as "actually, we need people to fact check LLMs" before they were. called on it.
Good news - since there's only one person saying something as stupid as this, by your own definition we can ignore you.
So, you oppose the religious leaders, scout masters and Republicans who regularly get caught with CSAM? You oppose the weird Honey Boo Boo show or whatever that thing was called, where kids are paraded around in beauty pageants? Oh, no apparently you just oppose books that admit that gay people exist and that teenagers go through puberty. You're free to stop your kids from reading those if you wish (though don't be surprised if they do it anyway), but your attempts to stop others from doing so will fail.
You have to use the alternative dictionary used by bigots. In that dictionary, "freedom" means "I can do or say whatever I want without consequences, and neither myself nor my family will be exposed to things we don't approve of". Unfortunately, that's not compatible with the real world, so you end up with idiots trying to ban books that mention reality. Or, even not reality, since these people will happily fight each other over the correct version of the bible if no other book is present. The only silver lining here is that for the kids who do want to be educated, they're created a must read list of books to find, in an age where it's essentially impossible to block them.
"it’s mostly just a front for criminals" As someone who works for a perfectly legal EU company that's approaching €1.5 billion in revenue, I'd love to see the study that shows this. Or, are you just one of those people who only read headlines when they were asked to drop accounts for bad actors, so now you assume that anyone needing DDOS protection, caching and CDNs must be illegal?
I'd love specifics here. A quick check from my side indicates that they made a lot more revenue YoY in recent financials but they haven't gone into the black yet on operating income based on that. What specifically do you think is preventing the extra revenue from creating a profit, since you're so knowledgeable about their finances?What's truly sad is that even after his performance at the debate where he repeated fictional internet memes and admitted that after 9 years he still doesn't have a healthcare plan, it's still a relatively close race according to polls, and some people think that letting a bankrupt rapist felon who killed hundreds of thousands of people through incompetence last time would be the best choice for president.
Oh, is this the tactic now? MAGAts recognise they're outclassed so they just pretend that everyone who filled the numerous stadiums on the tour and created new box office records with the concert film are not actually eligible to vote? If I were you I'd be more worried about the 24 year olds - a demographic that's usually more apathetic and less likely to vote, but is being motivated by a combination of celebrity endorsement and promises of attempted disenfranchisement to turn up in greater numbers.
These people aren't interested in such things. They go in, strip everything to the bone, and get out while the stock is still good. They operate on what's good for their bottom line this quarter, not what the company will be like 5 years after they take their golden parachute.
Hey, I missed the point where stupid copyright enforcement is OK if it's only on kids' content. Could you explain that for me?
This is WB, not MS. I don't know if they had any creative control, but it's likely they just took money from WB and let them run with it. Time will tell if they recover like Sony did with Sonic, or if it's just a payday with the wrong people involved creatively like Borderlands.
Absolutely it does, although it's only complete morons who retroactively change the content. Generally speaking, licences for things like music are negotiated for specific formats or regions. So, there's been plenty of examples of TV shows and movies where they only negotiated for the original broadcast, for a theatrical run and/or VHS and got stuck when trying to release on DVD, Blu Ray or streaming because the original licence didn't cover it.
What it should mean is that the licence was applied at the point of manufacture, so it's not liable for expired content like a digital copy where the licence is applied at the point of sale. But, there are insane people in charge of these things...