Clearly, our world is IP-crazy. Who's to blame? I think we can lay the blame on bad business models that attack free thought and on government-granted monopolies.
I've always been concerned/confused by the White House's use of the Creative Commons Attribution license. Obviously, if the images are generated by a US Government employee, the work is 100% PUBLIC DOMAIN. If the images are created by some 3rd party, then maybe the licensing makes sense.
Copyright does deny free expression. Those who argue the other way are simply protecting some sort of business model that relies on this goofy system we have.
The situation with American broadband is a complete debacle. We have almost no competition for the cable companies, and when competitors do show up they end up disappearing before an impact is made. I've personally used Charter and Comcast in metro Atlanta... both provide lightning fast internet access, but unless you "bundle" you get to pay a super premium, and of course, Comcast limits with a monthly cap.
Maybe there's something we are missing in terms of the imagery... maybe there's some content that's used as comparison that's 20th/21st century. If not, this is a completely goofy mess.
Yes, it's nice to see a company handling content this way. I am not sure why any company wouldn't want to put their films on Youtube... they have a revenue share option, they would get lots of exposure, free bandwidth, etc.
I think Publicity Rights maybe the most disgusting of all IP, especially for use with deceased people. It's a cottage industry for some, like the family of James Dean. Here's a link from THE BOOK KNOWLEDGE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
The law makes NO SENSE for dead people and only LIMITED SENSE for the living.
EA finally states something that's not stupid about the future of SOME games. Freemium is a model, not the only model, just one model. There's nothing wrong with larger companies like EA trying new ways to generate revenue, so I hope they pursue this type of system. Who knows, maybe the next "BIG" franchise for EA is a Freemium-based game. It could happen.
I agree with Mike... do the market a favor and CREATE a product, compete. Be a capitalist not a complainer.
While you are pondering such a difficult proposition, watch this video of Stephan Kinsella explain why patents (and copyright) get in the way of innovation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoSWC_6mDCk
I would like to discuss this law with Ms Pallante. It seems like she makes it no secret that she is all for more copyright, and culture comes second... no matter what.
I wonder what she thinks of celebrated photog Carol Highsmith? She is donating her images to the Library of Congress, and to the public domain. I guess Highsmith must be misguided.
It's nice that the RIAA can depend on ISPs to police their pipes for material they deem inappropriate. Wouldn't want the RIAA to lose any sales over digital files being copied back and forth between people using their computer to exchange info. That would be terrible. Yay, ISPs!
I think this gentleman dislikes anything that has to do with the growing realm of Free Culture. My guess is that he prefers traditional media efforts... in other words, big media. If you are unknown, you are a non-factor... if you believe in alternatives to copyright, you are problem child. Nina Paley is obviously talented, and has proven it many times.
I really think this guy is just not happy with those who dare make their works freely available.
The idea that the US would end up having to pay for something it paid for already shows you how stupid our government can be. This is simply amazing. This work, the entire thing, should be in the public domain.
Thank you
As usual, Mike has us covered. Yet another awesome, informative post dealing with a topic that is extremely important.
Any, and I do mean any, talk of copyright term reduction gets my attention.
No End...
Clearly, our world is IP-crazy. Who's to blame? I think we can lay the blame on bad business models that attack free thought and on government-granted monopolies.
CREATIVE COMMONS
I've always been concerned/confused by the White House's use of the Creative Commons Attribution license. Obviously, if the images are generated by a US Government employee, the work is 100% PUBLIC DOMAIN. If the images are created by some 3rd party, then maybe the licensing makes sense.
Maybe we need clarification?
Re: Re: Small question
Also, don't forget this book, The Knockoff Economy: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0195399781
Informative podcast too: http://surprisinglyfree.com/2012/07/17/christopher-sprigman/
Free Expression
Copyright does deny free expression. Those who argue the other way are simply protecting some sort of business model that relies on this goofy system we have.
Disaster
The situation with American broadband is a complete debacle. We have almost no competition for the cable companies, and when competitors do show up they end up disappearing before an impact is made. I've personally used Charter and Comcast in metro Atlanta... both provide lightning fast internet access, but unless you "bundle" you get to pay a super premium, and of course, Comcast limits with a monthly cap.
Awful
Maybe there's something we are missing in terms of the imagery... maybe there's some content that's used as comparison that's 20th/21st century. If not, this is a completely goofy mess.
Nice
Yes, it's nice to see a company handling content this way. I am not sure why any company wouldn't want to put their films on Youtube... they have a revenue share option, they would get lots of exposure, free bandwidth, etc.
Sickening
I think Publicity Rights maybe the most disgusting of all IP, especially for use with deceased people. It's a cottage industry for some, like the family of James Dean. Here's a link from THE BOOK KNOWLEDGE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
The law makes NO SENSE for dead people and only LIMITED SENSE for the living.
Yes, the world is changing...
EA finally states something that's not stupid about the future of SOME games. Freemium is a model, not the only model, just one model. There's nothing wrong with larger companies like EA trying new ways to generate revenue, so I hope they pursue this type of system. Who knows, maybe the next "BIG" franchise for EA is a Freemium-based game. It could happen.
Re: Re:
Now it's stifling on steroids.
Not a surprise
I agree with Mike... do the market a favor and CREATE a product, compete. Be a capitalist not a complainer.
While you are pondering such a difficult proposition, watch this video of Stephan Kinsella explain why patents (and copyright) get in the way of innovation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoSWC_6mDCk
Pallante on SOPA
This tells you a lot!
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/Pallante%2011162011.pdf
Unbelievable
I would like to discuss this law with Ms Pallante. It seems like she makes it no secret that she is all for more copyright, and culture comes second... no matter what.
I wonder what she thinks of celebrated photog Carol Highsmith? She is donating her images to the Library of Congress, and to the public domain. I guess Highsmith must be misguided.
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/highsm/
http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2012/12-125.html
ISP Stormtroopers
It's nice that the RIAA can depend on ISPs to police their pipes for material they deem inappropriate. Wouldn't want the RIAA to lose any sales over digital files being copied back and forth between people using their computer to exchange info. That would be terrible. Yay, ISPs!
Free Culture Hatred
I think this gentleman dislikes anything that has to do with the growing realm of Free Culture. My guess is that he prefers traditional media efforts... in other words, big media. If you are unknown, you are a non-factor... if you believe in alternatives to copyright, you are problem child. Nina Paley is obviously talented, and has proven it many times.
I really think this guy is just not happy with those who dare make their works freely available.
Goofball
Wouldn't want this guy giving my company advice.
Ugly
How unlikable does this goofball come across? What a poor showing.
Idiotic
The idea that the US would end up having to pay for something it paid for already shows you how stupid our government can be. This is simply amazing. This work, the entire thing, should be in the public domain.
No Surprise
It seems like when ANY government is considering changes to IP, they like to avoid getting the public involved.