Libraries do this to an extent. When books start to physically fail (i.e. pages missing, covers torn, etc), librarians will order a new book to replace the damaged one. This is what HarperCollins appears to be doing. I can respect that. But why 26? Seems like an arbitrary number to me.
This is very similar to what happened near Austin, Texas last month. http://www.statesman.com/news/local/in-lakeway-a-crusade-against-speed-traps-1146294.html?cxtype=rss_ece_frontpage
Mike, I typically agree with your posts. You're usually spot on. But in this case I don't know if we have all of the facts. I would suspect that when people rent a DVD it's because they want to watch a movie and not the entire theatrical experience.
That being said, I think it's pretty crummy to show the bonus feature menu items and then block them from playing.
They'll soon realize that digital distribution is here to stay.
I saw an article about some military guys that were allowed to carry their weapons on to the plane. But not their ammo. (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/11/18/another-tsa-outrage/) How did the law enforcement personal get to carry his ammo if the people who defend our country cannot?
I'm at a loss.
It's about time someone started to notice. I almost tend to think of this as bullying. The bigger guy tries to take down the smaller one because the smaller guy is becoming more successful. Whatever happened to competition?
Mike... Sometimes I think you have the best job in the world highlighting the huge problems we have with trademark/copyright/patent laws. Then I think... Although very interesting, I'd probably be pissed all day long reading and writing about this stuff.
This issue reminds me of the Amazon.com 'One click' patent. At what point does something become obvious and not patentable? It seems like there are more and more patents given out for stuff that is obvious and could have been figured out by anyone.
Netflix, Amazon, Zappos (I'm sure there are more), put the customer before profits knowing that if they have a happy customer they will buy more and spend more. Sure, I've had issues with Netflix and Amazon, but when I spoke to them they issues were resolved. As a consumer, that's all I'm looking for. I am not the enemy.
Now looking at blockbusters legacy model. If you didn't rewind it... Bam! Fee. Turned it in late... Bam! Another fee. Their business model wasn't one of promoting customer satisfaction. It was built on fear. Knowing that a certain percentage of customers were going to accumulate some sort of fee.
Way to go Netflix. I'm glad your beating the big guys. I guess they're not so big now are they. Isn't blockbuster filing for bankruptcy?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by J.D..
Too a degree I can respect what they're doing
Libraries do this to an extent. When books start to physically fail (i.e. pages missing, covers torn, etc), librarians will order a new book to replace the damaged one. This is what HarperCollins appears to be doing. I can respect that. But why 26? Seems like an arbitrary number to me.
Mike... I sure you purchased the techdirt.es domain in case yours gets shut down!
I'm glad to see a judge that finally recognizes the ridiculous nature of these lawsuits and is questioning the tactics that are being used.
This is very similar to what happened near Austin, Texas last month. http://www.statesman.com/news/local/in-lakeway-a-crusade-against-speed-traps-1146294.html?cxtype=rss_ece_frontpage
This got me thinking. At which point then is something considered prior art? Is it when the application was initially filed or when it was approved?
Well played, Mike.... Well played!
Mike, I typically agree with your posts. You're usually spot on. But in this case I don't know if we have all of the facts. I would suspect that when people rent a DVD it's because they want to watch a movie and not the entire theatrical experience.
That being said, I think it's pretty crummy to show the bonus feature menu items and then block them from playing.
They'll soon realize that digital distribution is here to stay.
What the...
I saw an article about some military guys that were allowed to carry their weapons on to the plane. But not their ammo. (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/11/18/another-tsa-outrage/) How did the law enforcement personal get to carry his ammo if the people who defend our country cannot? I'm at a loss.
It's about time someone started to notice. I almost tend to think of this as bullying. The bigger guy tries to take down the smaller one because the smaller guy is becoming more successful. Whatever happened to competition?
Mike... Sometimes I think you have the best job in the world highlighting the huge problems we have with trademark/copyright/patent laws. Then I think... Although very interesting, I'd probably be pissed all day long reading and writing about this stuff.
This issue reminds me of the Amazon.com 'One click' patent. At what point does something become obvious and not patentable? It seems like there are more and more patents given out for stuff that is obvious and could have been figured out by anyone.
Netflix, Amazon, Zappos
Netflix, Amazon, Zappos (I'm sure there are more), put the customer before profits knowing that if they have a happy customer they will buy more and spend more. Sure, I've had issues with Netflix and Amazon, but when I spoke to them they issues were resolved. As a consumer, that's all I'm looking for. I am not the enemy. Now looking at blockbusters legacy model. If you didn't rewind it... Bam! Fee. Turned it in late... Bam! Another fee. Their business model wasn't one of promoting customer satisfaction. It was built on fear. Knowing that a certain percentage of customers were going to accumulate some sort of fee. Way to go Netflix. I'm glad your beating the big guys. I guess they're not so big now are they. Isn't blockbuster filing for bankruptcy?