Overcast 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1367)

• On the post: Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2012 @ 01:26pm

  Well the representative for my district just lost my vote.

• On the post: SEC Investigating Hollywood Studios For Alleged Bribes To China

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 26 Apr, 2012 @ 03:51pm

  So if a country is rampant with piracy and you build nice theaters and offer a novel experience people will pay for what they could have for free? So tell me again about how you can't compete with free and how no one will ever buy something when it is available free on-line especially when the culture has no moral qualms with piracy or infringement.
  
  Well, first off just to start my rant - since I've been listening to Pandora regularly, I have bought a bunch of CD's from Amazon and have 30 more on my wish list. I am buying like this because the price is good.
  
  I can pay 3-7 bucks for a CD. The digital downloads are pointless, they run TWICE as much as the physical disk.
  
  Only REASON at all I bought most of these CD's was because......
  
  
  .....
  
  I HEARD IT FOR FREE FIRST!
  Like 95% of the population - they hear music somewhere FOR FREE - then they might buy the CD.
  
  But the core problem is the whole 'idiot' concept to even say you can compete with free.
  
  It's NOT ABOUT COMPETETING with free.
  
  You use 'free' to augment your sales, BUT you must offer 'value' in order to sell the product.
  
  This - historcially has been proven time and damn time again, but people are too hung up on their own egos to figure this out in the media business.
  
  Radio: FREE from the consumer's point of view - generated more music sales than anything, easily, not to mention tons of ad revenue.
  
  Broadcast TV: FREE from the consumer's point of view - generated tons of ad revenue, and in turn, people bought products and VCR tapes/DVD's.
  
  Then add MTV, VH1 to the mix - when I used to watch those channels in the days they actually had music on them, I bought loads of Cassettes and records after hearing them for ********************FREE********************** on TV.
  
  Any damn series on TV that was broadcast for 'free' but still selll DVD collections - is proof positive of this.
  
  $15.00 for a CD worth of digital music IS NOT A DEAL. $15.00 for a CD with two good songs, IS NOT A DEAL.
  
  Music is worth paying for - but only so much per song. Some songs, I like enough to buy the whole CD for - just because I have my own moral reasons I won't torrent stuff I know is not public domain.
  
  Anyone who goes on about 'you can't compete with free' - should explain how Broadcast Radio and TV has generated MASSIVE sales for advertisers and media companies.
  
  How did it? How did they compete with 'free'?
  
  It wasn't because of 'scarcity' so much - the radio plays some songs into the ground, and usually they just so happen to be the same songs that are top 10, and go platinum/gold due to sales.
  
  Yeah, 'free' hurts the media industry, LOL!!!
  
  Free Broadcast Radio and Free Broadcast TV were the WORST things that even happened to media, right???? LOL!!!!

• On the post: Hurt Locker Producers Now Understand The Copyright Troll Shakedown Better: Sue 2,514 More Defendants

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 26 Apr, 2012 @ 12:13pm

  The butt hurt locker, lol.
  
  You know, I've seen this on my on-demand premium, and even though I could watch it for free - the nastiness of the whole situation on this... I just skipped it.
  
  Look at the time, energy, and money wasted on this.
  
  EVEN IF they win 99% of the lawsuits, I doubt they'd even collect enough to cover their travel expenses. I mean, seriously, if the people they are suing have the cash to pay for a judgement - it's very likely they would have had the cash to buy the movie.
  
  Just be more chapter 7 filings after the 'award'... lol

• On the post: Can CISPA Be Fixed?

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 26 Apr, 2012 @ 12:10pm

  I suspect the law is just as they want it - ambiguous to make some cash for trial lawyers, and overbearing to keep big political contributors in media happy.
  
  
  **
  "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." - Franklin D. Roosevelt

• On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 26 Apr, 2012 @ 11:58am

  As far as I understand the people who were arrested were the people who made the first tweet?
  
  Shouldn't matter who it was anyway. Then I guess they get even more time.

• On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 26 Apr, 2012 @ 11:50am

  However, at some point, you have to come to terms with reality, and recognize that even if you don't want the name out there, it's out there.
  
  If it's illegal to publish the name, yes by all means they should be held accountable for this.
  
  Whenever 'protected' information is released, that can endanger a person, that should be the case. I mean - how would any of us feel if that was our Mother/Wife/Daughter?
  
  While it may be legal to arrest folks on Twitter for mentioning this woman's name, it clearly goes beyond the purpose or intent of the law, and doesn't seem to do much good.
  
  I would also disagree 100% with that - the intent of this law is to protect a person who has already been victimized, be it published by the press or anyone else. Publishing her name removes a level of protection; and in some cases, that could be devastating to a person. Let's say the rapist themselves didn't know her name, nor does the brother of the rapist who's all mad that his brother went to jail.
  
  If her name gets out there, it give anyone like that a clear means to start up 'retaliation' against that person.
  
  I'm all for free speech, of course, but in the case where a law is defined to protect people in this case, there do need to be restrictions. It would seem real clear that this information should be protected.
  
  I mean - what if someone published any one of our social security numbers, addresses, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, phone numbers.... I doubt we'd be too happy. And then should it be said, that even though there is a law, since it was twitter, we should just ignore it?

• On the post: Oracle/Google Case Shows Just How Totally Pointless It Is To Have Patents On Software

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2012 @ 03:33pm

  Shhh, don't tell anyone.
  
  There's been some talk even where I work about open source software. It offers major advantages commercial packages don't.
  
  First off, you can analyze every speck of code. Big plus.
  
  The level of customization is only limited by the programmers you are willing to hire.
  
  It's uh.... mostly Free, although they are willing and would prefer to pay for 'supported' packages as well.
  
  Perhaps the only real downside to any open source is when they are more 'collaborative' technologies. Such as word DOCS, and also perhaps the 'big', in terms of widespread use, software packages that would be far too much to maintain, like PDF readers, Email clients, etc.
  
  But for the existing specialized process control uses, it shines. Then the 'middleware' starts to look good as well. Instead of paying huge piles of cash for something like Web applications, custom apps typically require a small team to code and manage - really good there too.
  
  Of course, some open source projects are becoming pretty predominant over others - like Open Office for instance, as similar apps become more commonplace the whole 'collaborative' use becomes easier too.
  
  Either way, people will be happy to pay a lesser upfront cost and little bits here and there for updates or support.
  
  But that's a good synopsis of the whole situation - if ALL code was 100% patented, technology would be no where near where it is today. Every company would be re-writing mouse and I/O routines for all software - like in the VAX/Mainframe days, and overall software companies would net a lot less, just because computers wouldn't be as useful.

• On the post: ACTA 'May Interfere With Fundamental Freedoms' — EU Data Protection Supervisor

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2012 @ 07:40am

  Really, wow.. what a revelation..
  
  Does it always take politicians two years or more to figure out obvious things like this?

• On the post: To Read All Of The Privacy Policies You Encounter, You'd Need To Take A Month Off From Work Each Year

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2012 @ 07:42am

  The 'cancel' button is useful many times with these. Then you can keep your money too.
  
  I'm finding there are better ways to waste time than sit in front of a TV screen trying to figure out legalities of using new technology to watch/listen to Media.
  
  And there are better ways to waste money than give it to these greedy media companies.
  
  Get out. Buy a new bike, ride it, etc.
  
  At least you really own it then.

• On the post: London 2012 Olympics Win Gold Medal For Cluelessness By Banning Video And Photo Uploads To Social Media During Games

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2012 @ 07:40am

  Maybe it's preemptive, in case DOW is going to kill more Indian people with chemical plants, then try to block videos of it off of YouTube.

• On the post: Is Selling Your Ultraviolet Code Copyright Infringement?

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2012 @ 07:36am

  This is why I rarely buy media anymore - I don't really own it.
  
  Why spend the cash?
  
  They can 'say' I don't really own it, but guess what? If that money stays in my pocket - I do in fact own the money.
  
  So I'll stick with what I can really own.
  
  Kinda makes me regret I just bought a CD from them too.

• On the post: FBI Seized Anonymizer Server

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2012 @ 01:25pm

  I am trying to find the "right to anonymous communications" law... can't seem to find one.
  
  
  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
  
  The 'NO LAW' part... what part of that don't people understand?
  
  It doesn't say anything about having to list your name. It simply says 'no law'.
  
  See Government can't follow even this simple law - explain again why the people should follow the laws then?

• On the post: FBI Seized Anonymizer Server

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2012 @ 01:22pm

  Why is it that law enforcement almost never seems to think through the actual consequences of actions like these?
  
  Because, they don't care about our rights.
  
  Pretty simple - for if they did care, they wouldn't do these things.

• On the post: HBO Decides It Still Isn't Difficult Enough To Watch HBO Shows

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2012 @ 06:40am

  Oh good to know - I was just going to add a movie channel to my cable setup - no lie.
  
  I'll go with Showtime or Encore - thanks HBO :)

• On the post: Supreme Court To Review If It's Legal To Resell A Book You Bought Abroad

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 18 Apr, 2012 @ 08:51am

  This even needs review?
  
  How would this impact commerce? There are DEDICATED stores that sell used books. We also must consider college textbooks as well, right?
  
  Not sure if Amazon sells used books, but I know they do DVD's and CD's.
  
  How many businesses out there sell 'used' items?
  
  If this would apply to books - why not cars, houses, computers, appliances, furniture, clothing.
  
  So should we shut down all the thrift stores, pawn shops, used book stores, used record/DVD/CD stores?
  
  What about Video rental places like Blockbuster selling used movies?
  
  But the real kicker will be libraries and schools - selling used books too. I buy used textbooks from schools (there's a dedicated site for this too) for my daughter's home-schooling.
  
  This is totally ASININE.
  
  I have never sold any of my books, even college text books, but if it becomes 'illegal' to sell used books - I won't buy news ones OUT OF SPITE.
  
  This is just ASININE that it even needs 'looked into'.

• On the post: When The Kids Of Major Label Execs Get Accused Of Infringement…

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 18 Apr, 2012 @ 08:21am

  Wouldn't at all surprise me if these same execs are downloading movies, music, etc on Torrent.
  
  I'm sure many 'artists' do as well.
  
  But I found another good indie artist and just ordered a CD from them a couple days ago... and I think that's what the RIAA and friends dislike the most.
  
  The need for them is dwindling fast. They can find a new spot and likely do even better, if they weren't so focused on sustaining an old dead business model.

• On the post: Zenimax Files For Trademark On A Skyrim Internet Meme

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 13 Apr, 2012 @ 07:25am

  Who are they to say that a meme can't make money? They didn't create the meme. They didn't spread it. If someone wants to make money on the meme and the wider community doesn't like it, the community will solve the problem. They don't need a trademark to police the behavior.
  
  Yep, they did not create it.
  
  In my spare time, I enjoy modding Fallout 3 and potentially I will do some modding for Skyrim too eventually.
  
  But this makes us modders nervous. If I come out with some really good content, will they seek to trademark it out from under me? Even though I likely wouldn't make a dime, and never plan to - I would quit modding right away if they did that.
  
  While I wouldn't be annoyed about any 'profit loss' - it suddenly puts me in a position legally, that I wouldn't want to be in.
  
  Hmm, maybe I should find something else to do, huh?
  
  But if not for us Modders - Oblivion, Fallout, and Skyrim's re-playability would be *significantly* lesser.

• On the post: Chris Dodd Suggests Backroom Negotiations On New SOPA Are Well Underway

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 05 Apr, 2012 @ 04:27pm

  Government will obviously do what they want - and just keep routing around the PR mess.
  
  But then - so will the pirates, they'll simply find other ways around the laws and the monitoring.
  
  Loose/loose situation for both sides. Lawsuits and Laws won't fix this problem as it exists in the free market and is mostly based on perceptions of the cost of media.

• On the post: EU Cybercrime Bill Targets Anonymous: Makes It A Criminal Offense To Conduct 'Cyber Attack'

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 04 Apr, 2012 @ 06:47am

  Even more ridiculous? Merely "possessing... hacking software and tools" could lead to criminal charges.
  
  Define 'hacking software and tools'.
  
  The DOS prompt?
  Telnet?
  IP Scanners?
  Ethernet Sniffers?
  
  All of those - while being critical tools to 'hack' - are also have a quite legitimate and sometimes necessary role.
  
  I sweep subnets often at work looking for Remote Access Controllers since they don't register with DNS, and we don't use WINS.
  
  Ethernet Sniffers are sometimes the only way to track down rouge traffic on a LAN, situational, of course.
  
  And some of these tools are on just about every windows/linux install - so they need to arrest everyone with a computer.

• On the post: The Biggest 'Pirates' And 'Freeloaders' Of Them All? College Professors And Librarians

  

  Overcast ( profile ), 04 Apr, 2012 @ 06:44am

  I wonder where government domains rank on this list.
  
  The real interesting statistic I would love to see is where people that work for and run organizations like the RIAA rank...
  
  Just because they come out claiming to be all for copyright, etc - I wonder in their private lives if they practice what they preach.

Next >>