Tencent should have hired the guy or at least bought his new software from him. Then its a win/win. Instead, they stomp all over him and still do not change their own software. Sure, it was copyright infringement. But the choice was to either make the Tencent product better - use the new version legally by buying out the programmer - or do nothing to their software and throw lawsuits at him. Tencent just chose the loose/loose situation. They don't have any better software and possibly alienating those that use the illegal version.
As many have posted, most accidents are caused by poor drivers. Dave Despain on SpeedTV made a great comment a year or so ago (and I'm paraphrasing) ... 'people make up for their poor driving skills by driving large SUV's because it makes them feel safer'. When in fact they become more of a danger because of the inherent instability SUV's have when making drastic manuevers.
I'll be surprised if Sweden does not turn around and sue RIAA for having their representatives give them bad information for what servers need to be taken.
I agree with the other posters, the music model that the RIAA wants so desperately to hold onto, is antiquated. A bunch of greedy, rich old guys who only want more money. Why else would the pressure iTunes to raise the price on some of their albums? Because they want to make even more money.
I always love the RIAA argument that sharing music is hurting the bands themselves. The bands only make about 3 cents per CD in royalties. And that money is sucked up by fees for making that recording (studio time, engineering time....) I think was Janice Ian (70's singer/songwriter) who said that she never got a royalty check from her Label, only that the royalty was used to pay off what she already owed the record label to make her albums. She only made money by touring.
I totally agree with you, but here in the US we believe that throwing more money at something is a better way to fix a problem. (and if the money goes to a company that you've invested heavily in, so much the better).
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Brian.
Should have hired the Guy
Tencent should have hired the guy or at least bought his new software from him. Then its a win/win. Instead, they stomp all over him and still do not change their own software. Sure, it was copyright infringement. But the choice was to either make the Tencent product better - use the new version legally by buying out the programmer - or do nothing to their software and throw lawsuits at him. Tencent just chose the loose/loose situation. They don't have any better software and possibly alienating those that use the illegal version.
Poor Drivers
As many have posted, most accidents are caused by poor drivers. Dave Despain on SpeedTV made a great comment a year or so ago (and I'm paraphrasing) ... 'people make up for their poor driving skills by driving large SUV's because it makes them feel safer'. When in fact they become more of a danger because of the inherent instability SUV's have when making drastic manuevers.
Sweden vs. RIAA
I'll be surprised if Sweden does not turn around and sue RIAA for having their representatives give them bad information for what servers need to be taken.
I agree with the other posters, the music model that the RIAA wants so desperately to hold onto, is antiquated. A bunch of greedy, rich old guys who only want more money. Why else would the pressure iTunes to raise the price on some of their albums? Because they want to make even more money.
I always love the RIAA argument that sharing music is hurting the bands themselves. The bands only make about 3 cents per CD in royalties. And that money is sucked up by fees for making that recording (studio time, engineering time....) I think was Janice Ian (70's singer/songwriter) who said that she never got a royalty check from her Label, only that the royalty was used to pay off what she already owed the record label to make her albums. She only made money by touring.
Re: Old ways can be the best.
I totally agree with you, but here in the US we believe that throwing more money at something is a better way to fix a problem. (and if the money goes to a company that you've invested heavily in, so much the better).