I think you missed the point: that there are a number of skeletons that a film can easily fit onto: for example, a generic Romance will have a set number of components.
Just because I use a pseudonym does nto mean that I cannot be identified: rather, that I choose to be identified with a name that is not my own. However, you refuse to even take that step.
So, yes, it is markedly different.
Because it's easier to feign forgiveness than to ask permission.
Not really, but it is a fact that almost anything after 1980 is available, somewhere, on the Internet, and quite a bit from before then.
...And yet you continually refuse to tell us who you are.
I can think of at least two producers who would probably be interested in making this film, and one director (so long as they all got along, that is).
Apparently so, but not for the actual makers of the art, just the funders.
And if you are left with no alternative? For example, I cannot support progams such as The Legend of Korra because it is not going to be available until the Autumn scheduling.
No, it's time to start hassling these clownboat knobjockeys about their phones. After all, if the cunts at the Met can search your phone, then it should also be your legal right to search their phones. After all, they ahve nothing to fear, right?
Actually, I keep giving opinions and alternatives on that. And yet you and your ilk do not respond to that.
For example:
1) 5+5 copyright terms
2) 2+2 patent terms
3) Copyfraud punished with immediate revocation of all other held copyrights
4) Patents to actually be in a marketable and producable product within 12 months of application or it gets removed
This is all, of course, based on the statistics the USPTO and the RIAA/MPAA keep claiming for profitability.
See? Not that hard after all.
Sod Runnymede! I'm think more liek Cromwell at Preston and Warwick.
Yet. I'm going to be a Pirate Party candidate in the next General Election over here. I'll be paying my dues next month. And without the blockage, I wouldn't have even been sure where to start!
Thanks, BPI! Thanks a bunch!
A small subscription for unlimited access, anywhere, anytime, like $3-4/mo or $35/yr, which can be added on to a contract or used on PAYG, over Wi-Fi and through your consoles. And not a bit of it has to be saved.
Imagine a fully-functional Netflix streaming service with all the options of Google.
Even so, leveraging those for a few years, and attempting to give the artists the ability to gain back their copyright (with some exceptions, on account of them haveing a bad case of the deadsies). That can be leveraged to add value to the content.
Or, why not spend $1.1bn to do both, get full blanket licensing deals with everyone else, and have a truly sharing culture where everyone can win and everything is available wherever you wish?
So if we follow Shakespeare's advice, then Occam's Razor dictates that the level of frivolous IP lawsuits will diminish spectacularly.
Well, it was pretty well-known that Disney wanted the partnership to fail at the time.
Indeed. I'm reminded of the guy in my Intro to OS class accidentally removing everything from the Lecturer's computer.
Re: Re:
So the black hole is in the rational parts of their brains?
That explains so much.