Lack of attention is a symptom. Students have been ignored teachers since the beginning of time. They don't even need paper and pencil to zone out.
I never had a good teacher that I ignored. Meaning a teacher that was able to engage and connect with the class almost always has the classes attention.
The teacher is/should be better equipped to handle mis-uses of technology in the classroom than legislation.
I have a hard time making it through any of Wireds articles on any media but especially music. They never EVER challenge anything anyone says. The articles almost sound more like advertisement.
As for Silverman, he seems to admit that mistakes were made but but as usual it was the 'other guy' that made them and now he knows what to do. But he doesn't. It will be more of the same.
I especially liked the part about how the Recording Industry wants to share in the merchandise and the touring though. Basically, they want to get a hold of any place that artists are making money now. And that will be because the artists are working their butt off connecting with fans to buy that merch and tickets.
The latest Wired article - http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/07/tell-all-author-discusses-music-industry-in-crisis-part-1-of-2/2/ - has a nice line at the very end: "I really think that and not 360 deals is the business that the record companies should be in: finding out what people want to own that’s worth owning."
Too bad they still think that's the packing the music comes on.
Suing customers, even prospective customers is not a good business method. Perhaps the owner might have been better off contacting her and asking if he could personally do an estimate and give it to her at cost. That experience might have turned her into an evangelist for the company instead of an albatross.
What really blows my mind is that they actually tested something without just assuming it was bad.
I love it when Mike rips into people. I would LOVE to see a live debate between Mike and anyone of the guys he shreds.
Actually this sounds like you're doing exactly what Mike said people had trouble with. Access and content are separate.
There is almost an infinite amount of content and very limited access. The mistake would be to think that content is only professional movies or news. But the quality and level of all media that can be served through an internet connection is infinite. There is no way that you can possibly consume all the content that exists.
The access is what you pay for because there is scarcity. Content isn't really what you pay for because it's abundant. After all, access to nothing is still access, content without access doesn't exist.
Hilarious! That's exactly what I was thinking. Sue the wildlife for inducing infringement as their dead oil soaked bodies float ashore and then sue the Gulf States for secondary liability since their residents live there.
Seriously? Does anyone think a $4 rental is worth it? And $15 purchase for a digital copy? What happens when you don't like their service and want to leave? Are you tied to their DRM? These people are on crack
Must have been a Freudian slip. Supposed to be 'laws', not 'lies'. Oops!
If only this worked out in the US with lobbying groups.
"The **AAs want tougher, stronger, more stringent copyright lies. Maybe we should see what the other side wants?"
In general, I would say Wired's writing sucks on things outside of new gadgets or memes. If you've read anything from them about copyright, newspapers, etc. you would know what I mean. After reading http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/05/a-legit-pirate-bay/, I'm considering removing Wired from my RSS. There just isn't enough value anymore.
I think a great deal of this presupposes the quality of the movie. If the movie sucks, it will never do well...unless it's a whole new level of suck that happens to be cool. If it really is a good movie then the buzz should be quite good and sales of dvds and box office should support each other.
As Mike has suggested, if a movie is really good, being able to buy the dvd on the way out would be like an impulse buy.
One of my favorite movies is Wedding Crashers. I saw it three times in the theater and I couldn't wait for it to be released. I got curious looked around and found a crappy version online to tide me over until it was released on dvd. Then bought the dvd and watched it several more times. And, watch it whenever it's on tv.
I think, box office sales of dvds would be great...if the movie is good too.
Tough choice. Make customers go to Blockbuster, which I would refuse to do, or download a copy off the intertubes. Which would be much like streaming it the same day it comes out except, oh wait, anyone can get a copy and watch it right now. And has been able to since it came out if not before.
What's that saying? You don't compete with free by sucking?
Now I'm conflicted. Because of these parodies I really wanted to see this movie. Especially since the producer has until recently been a good sport about it and letting it go. But now that they are being a raging bag of 'D' about it. I don't want to support them. It's not like I don't have a million other options for movies to watch.
The shortsightedness of this is that substandard apps will take care of themselves. If an app is buggy, or has whatever problem, people will move on to a better app. If a cross compiler produces buggy apps, people will use better compilers. They will compete and continue to improve.
If I can write code once for many platforms I'd prefer to go that route. Programmers and developers, good ones at least are lazy and don't like to keep building the wheel. That's why these tools are so popular and exist for so many platforms. Any good programmer could use a text editor to create apps from scratch, but why would they want to?