theskyrider 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (60) comment rss

  • On the post: University Of The South Says No Creativity Allowed If It Involves Tennessee Williams' Characters

    theskyrider ( profile ), 06 Feb, 2009 @ 08:45pm

    "And the South wonders why non-Southerners (and the more enlightened Southerners) hate the South."

    Don't blame Southerners for this, blame all the lawyers they kicked out of New York and Los Angeles, the South is just where they happened to end up because nobody else in the country wanted them. (That includes East Texas.)

    Yes, I am from the South, in a little burg in (South Carolina.)

    Another thing: Here in the South, we have practiced 'BuyItNow' for ages before there was an internet and eBay, and many an auctioneer has been baffled by the story I tell them about the patent fight that happened over 'BuyItNow.'

  • On the post: Details On The FTC's DRM Workshop

    theskyrider ( profile ), 28 Jan, 2009 @ 07:35am

    Re: DRM is GOOD

    Sorry, you must be a MPAA shill instead, Voice of Reason, sorry.

    Reason this: There are thousands of consumers who have been burned by DRM, in my case, DRM on cellphone ringtones. My daughter was dismayed that she couldn't move her ringtones from her old cellphone to her new one because of DRM.

    This DRM was put in place to keep 'consumers' from buying one ringtone and sharing it amongst their friends, but in this case prevented a LAWFUL use.

    My solution? I went and downloaded the songs, cut them up into clips and put them on her new phone. I had to hack around the DRM on the new phone to get it to recognize the clips as ringtones as well.

    Does that sound fair to you? It probably would sound fair to the Voice of Reason whose object is to get customers to pay for the same thing over and over again.

    IT DOES NOT sound fair to a customer who has to buy the same thing over and over again.

    I saved $60.00 and got a lesson about how in bed the cell-phone companies are with the Industry.

    Final words? Take your reasoning and shove it where the sun don't shine.

  • On the post: Warner Music Pitches Music Tax To Universities: You Pay, We Stop Suing

    theskyrider ( profile ), 04 Dec, 2008 @ 04:57pm

    get on board with the SHIP act

    Since the **AA's and the politicians are so fond of acronyms. Let's call it the 'SHIP ACT' for (Safe Harbor Internet Protocol) A person pays x amount of dollars a month (call it $5.00 for music or $15.00 for music and movies. or $20.00 for music, movies, ebooks and software) said person will then be able to log on to a server and download whatever they want (with no DRM). No pay, no access....

    As a bonus - if the person helps re-distribute the work, they get a partial credit on their bill for their time and bandwidth.

    All copyrighted works will be included because this would be a federal law and therefore override all contracts and distribution agreements.

    This is, of course, only valid in the United States of Fantasyland, because the content owners (not to mention the cable and satellite companies that love to sell you everything piecemeal hence five-and-ten dollaring you to death) would never let such open and consumer-friendly legislation see the light of day.

  • On the post: What A Shock: Another Wireless Standard Beset By Patent Problems

    theskyrider ( profile ), 14 Nov, 2008 @ 05:55pm

    I second that

  • On the post: Kentucky's Gambling Domain Name Grab Sets A Terrible Precedent

    theskyrider ( profile ), 13 Oct, 2008 @ 04:50am

    "Trying to explain "stupid" to a southerner isn't the easiest of tasks."

    You do know that Kentucky sits further north than most of the state of California, right?

    In fact, you follow that same line that passes through Louisville, Kentucky east, and it comes very close to passing through the District of Columbia.

    You can make all the hick jokes you want, maybe even say that the mountain air does no good for the brain, but please don't try to call them southerners.



    I can imagine that the **AA's are watching this very close. After all, they would love to seize piratebay's domain. Then, after that victory, they might even get around to seizing techdirt.com because Mike offers a contrary view which might 'promote piracy.'

  • On the post: Because There Aren't Enough Anti-Piracy Lobbying Groups…

    theskyrider ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2008 @ 04:12pm

    Re: Piracy is about...

    "...people getting content that they want, when they want, and the way that they want it."

    Didn't you mean that?

    If CBS would put their most recent episode of say...CSI:Miami online in a non-DRM'ed HD format (See .mkv) for two dollars- I'd buy it in a minute. Hell, if they made it a torrent, I'd seed it for them too. (Not on Comcrap)

    What happens if five million people buy it? (If a season of Enterprise cost $38 million to make, then CSI must be lower.) And they run 24 episodes and make $10 million each.....

    I would probably buy every Crime-Time CBS show every week. (Including but not limited to: CSI, CSI:NY, CSI: Miami, NCIS and Numbers.)

    I know there are a lot of me out there - willing to pay $$ for content but want it DRM-free. No DRM makes for infinite storage or conversion, and No Windows.

    Somebody step up, I'm tired of using my Tivo.

  • On the post: Groups Demanding That ACTA Negotiations Be Made Public

    theskyrider ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2008 @ 04:51am

    "While those involved in negotiating the document will continue to do what they've done all along (i.e., ignore the requests), hopefully some politicians will start to notice the complaints and begin asking questions."

    It has to be in the mainstream press for our politicians to notice it, (see California train wreck and the resulting call to ban cell-phones for engineers.) And since the people that own the mainstream press stand to benefit from ACTA, we won't hear anything about it.

    And if some politicians do hear about it, and question their copyright-funded benefactors, said benefactors will say "it's just a bunch of thieves complaining about it (ACTA) and they aren't voters anyway, they are copyright anarchists."

    ACTA will continue to be negotiated in secret, (unless somebody from wikileaks gets a hold of a final draft and is paid obscene amounts of money to leak it.) And then ACTA will be run through a lame-duck Congress (probably voted upon favorably by all the politicians voted out of office in November and looking for 'retirement funds' and passed by said Congress, just like the DMCA was.

    I know that's a glass half-empty view, but that is what's going to happen.

    Yes, opposition managed to kill the CBDTPA (see 'Fritz chip', 'broadcast flag',) but that legislation was a public bill in a mostly-public system. (not to mention the numerous re-tries.) Content owners got so frustrated that they tried an end-run around Congress by submitting a form of the CBDTPA to the FCC to pass as a 'rule' rather than a 'law.'

    The EFF and the ALA (two of the groups trying to get ACTA into the light) finally got a court to say that the FCC didn't have the power to regulate signals after the consumer had received them. Now we have a slew of devices that respond to the 'broadcast flag' anyway.

    Best-case scenario - ACTA gets brought into the light, and doesn't get ratified. What will happen then is that ISP's will still implement content-filtering (via 'filter your networks or we'll sue' agreements between ISP's and **AA's,) Computer makers will still implement hardware that makes fair use very hard (Trusted Computing,) and Customs will legally be able seize any computer that has non-drm encoded movies on the hard drive. (what's another rule here or there?)

    Sounds like lose-lose to me.

  • On the post: Disney Joins NBC And Viacom In Demanding UK ISPs Kick File Sharers Off The Internet

    theskyrider ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2008 @ 01:55pm

    They're just trying to get the UK politico's to agree on some sort of punishment for file-sharers, knowing that if they tried something like that in the United States - particularly around election time, they would get laughed out of Congress.

    Look out, because once they get all of their cronies elected or re-elected - Hear me 'Hollywood Berman?' They will be trying it in the United States. - Even if it is some fine-print amendment attached to an appropriations bill that funds the war in Iraq or Afghanistan for another year.

  • On the post: Telus Kicks Customers Off Of Unlimited Plan It Sold Them Not Too Long Ago

    theskyrider ( profile ), 28 Aug, 2008 @ 03:27pm

    Re: Re: dial-up is better.

    Except for the fact that I couldn't connect above 33.6kbps, it looks like your math is pretty good. (I won't mention the 1,024 multiplier because it doesn't make that much of a difference, except for when you buy a 500GB HDD and it only reads as 465GB.)

  • On the post: Telus Kicks Customers Off Of Unlimited Plan It Sold Them Not Too Long Ago

    theskyrider ( profile ), 27 Aug, 2008 @ 06:00pm

    dial-up is better.

    When I was on dial-up, I could get 4~5 megabytes an hour, which translates into ~3.5 gigabytes a month (24/7 service was something that my dial-up provider could do well.) A one gigabyte/month plan? you do the math.

  • On the post: Now The Senate Wants To Add A Copyright Czar To The White House

    theskyrider ( profile ), 25 Jul, 2008 @ 07:48am

    Reason why the house and senate want copyright czar

    Because if they don't, the members of the MPAA will stop holding Michael Moore back from doing FAHRENHEIT (insert senator or representative name here) movies.

    Every Senator or Representative will be tailed around by hidden cameras, every speech will be sound-bited to death, and ALL the skeletons will be put on display.

    THAT is why the house and senate want a copyright czar, because they don't want Moore-Gate. They could care less about propping up an obsolete business model.

  • On the post: We Need More Sunlight On ACTA: Where Is The Mainstream Press?

    theskyrider ( profile ), 04 Jun, 2008 @ 03:53pm

    The Mainstream press...

    Is owned by the companies who are pushing for this law. You think the AP, AFP, or UPI don't want stronger copyright laws?

    Let's not hope for any coverage from CBS, or ABC and especially not NBC or FOX either. We all know the reasons why that is.

    All that remains to spread the word are blogs. Anything that you might see in the mainstream press is some executive praising the treaty for its 'step forward in combating counterfeit goods.'

    You won't see anything about ISP filtering, P2P squashing, or any other negative aspect of the treaty (negative from my point of view) until it has been ratified by a lame-duck congress - JUST LIKE THE DMCA.

  • On the post: Since When Has Copyright Become Life Plus 343 Years?

    theskyrider ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2008 @ 06:37am

    re: duh - RTFA.

    "Despite the fact that the museum normally allows photographs (as long as there's no flash)"

    and in the original article-

    "The Met normally allows photography just about everywhere, provided that no flash is used - which is sensible both for preservation and politeness reasons."

    And, of course, my original favorite- the museum that doesn't even allow sketching. http://joi.ito.com/archives/2005/01/09/stop_sketching_little_girl_those_paintings_are_copyrighted.html

  • On the post: Are College Lectures Covered By Copyright?

    theskyrider ( profile ), 05 Apr, 2008 @ 06:30am

    public money - public information

    "The employment agreement for some universities stipulate they own the rights for any products created with university resources on university time. So, technically, the university would control any copyright on a lecture, not the faculty."

    I could understand private universities, but what about the ones funded with 'taxpayer dollars?'

    It seems to me that a lecture given by a professor being paid with our tax dollars should automatically be in the public domain.

    Maybe one could go so far as to demand that lectures given at schools who accept federal grants also be in the public domain. This way, everybody could learn something.

    The real value of going to the school and participating in the class is the degree they give you. Joe Schmoe can't claim 'I listened to x amount of lectures that equals a degree' now, can he?

  • On the post: Instead Of Recording Music, Recreate It 1,000 Times More Efficiently Than MP3s (But Only For Clarinets)

    theskyrider ( profile ), 03 Apr, 2008 @ 03:10pm

    21 years ago, give or take

    and it's called MOD

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOD_(file_format)

    a little bigger than midi, because it carries the sound samples with it.

  • On the post: Danish Court Tells ISP To Block PirateBay

    theskyrider ( profile ), 05 Feb, 2008 @ 08:54am

    Various replies:

    "The movie industry "Moviebay" site may be a good idea. But if they charge anything, sites like the Pirate Bay are in direct competition. Competition is fine, but not when the sites you are competing with use your own product to compete with you."

    The majority of people, like myself, will pay. I told you in a previous blog post, if the 'industry' comes out with a pay service without DRM, my visa card would probably melt. Since the 'industry' is so good at promoting things, they could 'educate' consumers as to which are the 'good ones' and which are the 'bad ones.'

    "And AC is right, how many 70 year old works have you downloaded? That being said I do know an author who is in his seventies and published his first book 50 years ago. Its long out of print, but is a fine book and if it does go in print again, then people are still enjoying his product and he should be paid."

    A>> My point about the 70+ years is looking forward, not backward.

    A movie released today won't come into the public domain until the year 2083. (longer, if the corporations get their way.)

    What will the world be like in 2083? I don't know. But until then, the 'industry' has a lock on it.

    Let's take that a step back, shall we? There was a movie release in 1983 called 'Brainstorm.' Way ahead of it's time back then. A 26-year copyright on that movie would expire in 2009 (without the extension granted by the 1976 'revision' of the copyright act.)

    That would give somebody the freedom to re-make that film, and start shooting it TODAY. But you can't unless you are willing to wade through the 'licensing' and everything else that comes along with a work still under copyright.

    B>> Seriously, you think somebody should get paid for a work that they did 50 years ago?

    I'm not trying to be callous, but 50 years?

    Let's expand on that, shall we? I go to sell my 2006 Pontiac, and just when I am ready to sign the papers, a lawyer comes up and demands payment on behalf of the UAW workers that helped put it together.

    "For what?" I ask.

    "Because there was intellectual property involved in the creation of that vehicle. You don't think that the worker who made that vehicle deserves to feed his great-grandchildren?"

    Granted, this is about a 'tangible' item. But what about Garth Brooks? (he was a person who wanted royalties from used CD's)

    How long before the corporations start lobbying congress to give them royalties from every used dvd that sells on ebay?

    Now to draw the line between the two.

    Yes, an author should get paid for a work, including royalties for each work sold.

    No, the term should not be 75 years (or life +95 years). If he hasn't created any new works since the publishing of that work, then he needs to get a job or starve.

    That is one of the problems with today's society, we have too many people sitting on their asses.

  • On the post: Danish Court Tells ISP To Block PirateBay

    theskyrider ( profile ), 05 Feb, 2008 @ 07:27am

    Corey strikes back....pitifully.

    "We do have copyright for a reason."

    That's true, but copyright was never meant to last 75 years plus.

    "There are people who making their living off of intellectual property."

    That is also true, but copyrighted works should go into the public domain after a period of time, not go to support the orginal artists' children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren.

    My biggest question, why isn't there an industry-sanctioned site called 'The Movie Bay?' This would be the place where everybody could download works, and the 'industry' would get paid. And, if you seed a movie, the 'industry' gives you money back for helping them distribute the movie.

    Make 'The Movie Bay' $15 a month, and of course NO DRM. Maybe add 'The TV Bay' and 'The Music Bay' as well.

    How about it, Corey? Why doesn't the industry do this? They could make millions (billions) off of the consumer in this way, but they don't.

  • On the post: What Good Will A Swedish Lawsuit Against The Pirate Bay Do?

    theskyrider ( profile ), 29 Jan, 2008 @ 03:00pm

    Go Corey!!! NOT!!!

    "In all your blogs you go on and on about the "new business model" the movie and music industry need."

    The movie and music industries need a model where they offer their product at a reasonable price and without DRM. Scratch that, only the movie industry needs to do that now.

    If the music industry had the copyright protection that they demanded, we wouldn't be seeing DRM-FREE MP3's for sale. (In fact, we probably wouldn't see any music on the internet except for Indie music.)

    The music industry adapted, albeit a little late.

    The movie industry, on the other hand, instead of pursuing a DRM-FREE Download model (and reasonable prices) has taken to suing anything/everything in sight. CinemaNow/Movielink was a joke, and so are the iTunes movie store and Amazon Unbox. As long as there is DRM on the video, I will not buy it, sorry.

    The consumer is speaking, and the industry is not listening. NO DRM - So that I can move content that I have paid for to any device or stream it to any device from my computer. The only thing the industry is 'competing' with (in my eyes) right now is DRM-FREE, not FREE.

    If an (industry-sponsored) movie site came online tomorrow, offering (recent) content at a fair price (if a movie sells for 19.99 in the store, then the download should be half that) WITHOUT DRM, then I would have my visa card out so fast that it would make your head spin, Corey.

    "What you seem to ignore is this, even if they all adopt new business models and offer the free content you want (which is really what everyone complaining about the MPAA and RIAA want, its not about right),"

    I don't want free, see above.

    "Whether the movie and music industry need new business models is irrelevant to whether we need copyright protection (which we do), and your bringing it up in every blog you write makes it sound more like an excuse of a whiny little kid - like their lack of creating a new business model entitles you to steal."

    No, it entitles me not to buy.

    "If you don't like their product or what they charge, live without it."

    I can live without the industry, can the industry live without me? Probably. Can the industry live without a million of me? They'll just call it piracy and try to get some legislation passed that demands that every consumer spend at least a hundred dollars a month on their product.

    Can the industry live without ten million of me? How about a hundred million?

  • On the post: AP Looks At Piracy Around The World… Misses The Real Story

    theskyrider ( profile ), 05 Jul, 2006 @ 06:26am

    AP is just another IP company

    When it comes down to it, the AP is an IP company, they sell articles to make money.

    People license their "wire services" for a fee, just like any other 'wire service" I.E. Reuters, AFP, API (just more alphabet soup.)

    It's no surprise that they published the article, they are in the IP business after all.

  • On the post: Would You Buy A DVD Of A Show You Recorded?

    theskyrider ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2005 @ 06:33pm

    Re: Buy a DVD of one already recorded?

    "I think the point of the industry take on this problem is the act of illegally swiping someone's creative produce without paying for it." By Mitch McGuire

    So the supreme court was wrong in Sony V. Universal? People have been archiving their shows for 20 years, Legally.

    When put into that perspective, all of your analogies are garbage. You sound like old-bald-head in charge of the MPAA. (Dan Glickman)

    So the MPAA introduces the broadcast flag, with which YOU *mpaa stooge* can control the recordings that consumers make.

    I wouldn't be suprised if some 'broadcast flag' recordings expire on the date that the dvd is released, FORCING you to buy the DVD.

    My response to the MPAA and their 'DVD' scenario is this. I WILL record everything I can in HD (using non-broadcast flag equipment). I will BURN them to Non-DRM'ed formats. (minus the commercials of course).

    I WILL NOT buy any more seasons of my favorite shows on DVD until the MPAA stops this broadcast flag nonsense (In essence turning all of your viewers into criminals.)

    If, by some streak of providence, the MPAA sees the light and stops trying to lock down everything (I mean region codes, and all the restrictions they are trying to put on HD-DVD) I might start buying TV shows on DVD. Not until.


    The MPAA gets the broadcast flag through congress? I have two non-broadcast flag compliant HD recorders. When those break, I will watch what I recorded until I get bored. When I get bored, I will read a book.

    CBS - you want to pull all your HD programming? Go ahead, I have enough of your HD programming archived to last me until I get a good supply of books built up.