vivaelamor 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1585) comment rss

  • On the post: Jailbreaking Your iPhone? Legal! Jailbreaking Your Xbox? 3 Years In Jail!

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 26 Oct, 2010 @ 04:43am

    Re: Re: it's the purpose

    "Come on, don't even bother lying. Find me ten jailbroken iPhones that don't have pirated apps on them."

    I don't know three people with iPhones, let alone ten jailbroken ones.

  • On the post: Jailbreaking Your iPhone? Legal! Jailbreaking Your Xbox? 3 Years In Jail!

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 26 Oct, 2010 @ 04:30am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Under that logic, the wording of the law makes no difference."

    Precisely. I can only imagine they added the word to make it seem like the law is maintaining protection rather than the actual fact that it is the protection. They may as well have said 'it is illegal to fiddle with stuff without authorisation' and let companies put a sticker on saying 'don't open this'.

  • On the post: Jailbreaking Your iPhone? Legal! Jailbreaking Your Xbox? 3 Years In Jail!

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 26 Oct, 2010 @ 04:21am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "I think you're blaming the wrong branch of government. Didn't the legislature make the DMCA? And doesn't the Register of Copyrights work for Congress? Don't blame the courts."

    If the law doesn't make a distinction but the court does then why wouldn't you blame the court for that distinction?

  • On the post: Universal Claiming Dancing Baby Video Not An Obvious Case Of Fair Use

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2010 @ 02:31pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nature of the Copyrighted Work

    "It's not really a question of whether or not you buy it. I'm simply stating the fact of how these things are interpreted."

    I'd be interested in some evidence to back up such a broad interpretation. 'something to gain' does pretty much include every conceivable scenario. Of course, if you want to claim that there is no such thing as non commercial use then go ahead. Otherwise I would suggest clarifying your statement.

  • On the post: Mark Cuban: It's Okay For Broadcasters To Block Access Based On Browsers, Because They're Making Billions

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2010 @ 02:07pm

    Re:

    "if you want to watch on computer, then stop watching on TV"

    This old chestnut. I hope you realise that the only way they know whether you are watching TV or not is to ask you. Given that fact, it would make sense for them to also ask you whether you would prefer online services. The alternative is to stop watching TV, hoping that they'll ask you whether you watch TV.

    It's the same backwards philosophy that those blaming piracy for the death of the recording industry tend to use: if you don't pirate and don't buy their music, that'll show them what you really want. The fact is that if the companies cared then they'd have realised what people want a long time ago. It shouldn't be up to the consumer to make sacrifices because companies want to avoid change by ignoring consumer demand.

  • On the post: Kindle To Let You Lend Books, Just Like A Real Book… Except Not

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2010 @ 10:59am

    Re: Re: Re: Kindle To Let You Lend Books, Just Like A Real Book... Except Not

    "God forbid the publishing industry does something that increases value to their products and works in the customer's interests."

    My mobile phone provider just teamed up with a competitor to share coverage. Took them long enough.

  • On the post: Fallacy Debunking: Successful New Business Model Examples Are The 'Exception'

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 02:44pm

    Re: I'm a graphic artist...

    "...And the system is pretty much set up to screw me. I've never heard of graphic designers and artists getting royalties for CD covers, packaging designs, posters, etc. It's all "work for hire."

    Nor do I have the money for lawyers if someone does steal my stuff, so practically, the law might as well not even be there. More draconian laws wouldn't help, either.

    To be honest, it doesn't bother me. Someone may "steal" an idea of mine, but they will never be able to exicute it the way I would. If someone takes my art and passes it off as their own, I'll probably mock them if I ever found out about it. But it isn't worth me getting all bent out of shape for something I can't control."

    Work for hire is what nearly everyone else has to put up with. I'm just glad that more people, like you, are realising that relying on copyright as a crutch is not helping anyone. To use music as an example, if it weren't for the easy exploitation of copyright then there would be far less manufactured bands for dedicated musicians to compete with. I'd wager that you'd also see less professional graphic designers without copyright, but I'd also wager that the ones left would be better off; especially as I doubt there are any graphic designer 'rock stars' to lose out.

  • On the post: Fallacy Debunking: Successful New Business Model Examples Are The 'Exception'

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 02:30pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    "It's absolutely amazing how many names A-J can think up to post here under."

    Who ever it is didn't 'think up' that name, they copied it from a member of Led Zeppelin. I found it ironic as soon as I realised what they were arguing. Apparently douchebags pirate music, but real fans commit identity theft.

  • On the post: Fallacy Debunking: Successful New Business Model Examples Are The 'Exception'

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 02:26pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "I'm thrilled that unknown bands that people aren't paying attention to are creative with their promotion. It's great."

    I know them. I'm paying attention to them. I'm unsure where you got the idea that they were unknown and unpopular.

    "But it's been around forever. And it doesn't negate the damage done to most successful bands that have worked hard on their recorded output."

    Of course it has, but the recording industry needs to re-learn some lessons because saying 'thank you' to fans is much smarter than calling them thieves.

    "They're the ones that get ripped off because it's their music everyone wants to have."

    That makes absolutely zero sense.

  • On the post: Rethinking Handing Copyright On To Heirs Beyond Death

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 02:13pm

    Re: Re: Author's privilege..

    Whoops, hadn't realised this was an old story I had open. Hah.

  • On the post: Rethinking Handing Copyright On To Heirs Beyond Death

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 02:11pm

    Re: Author's privilege..

    "As an author, the most gratifying thing I find in copyright is knowing that my HARD work won’t be appropriated by others for profit (without my permission)"

    Apply the principle of universality to that statement and tell me why authors shouldn't face the same challenges as everyone else.

    "I do believe that people must make a living, and writing a book or composing a song can be as much hard work as working 9 to 5 every day"

    Presumably it was your choice to write rather than work 9 to 5 every day. I don't see how this justifies the luxury you are afforded of getting to do what you want and having a monopoly on the product of your work.

    "So, one should get a revenue for the sales of his work, as simple as that."

    Is this an assertion that there are no viable alternatives? Or are you just supremely confident of your entitlement?

    "As for the “copyright” extension to the author’s children... it’s plain idiotic. In Latin countries, copyright exists with a different name, a better one: “author’s rights”. Probably due to language discrepancies, Anglo-Saxon countries ended up calling these rights copyrights, but the Latin name really says it all: the rights of the author. Preferably alive. Period."

    While I wouldn't contest that copyright shouldn't extend past an authors death, I have to point out that you have just said 'it had a different name somewhere else', added your own qualifier and declared the discussion over. Who's not to say that 'authors rights' (were those words to mean anything concrete) couldn't include a right to provide for their family after death.

  • On the post: Fallacy Debunking: Successful New Business Model Examples Are The 'Exception'

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 01:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    fixed link, sorry

  • On the post: Fallacy Debunking: Successful New Business Model Examples Are The 'Exception'

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 01:43pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "When an album is made there are costs. Those costs are hopefully to be recouped with sales.

    Your pirating and copy distribution of music throws the supply end completely out of whack."

    For those who choose not to adapt, maybe. I'm inclined to listen to the actual artists, whom I'm supporting with my money, who send me thank you emails for helping put food in their bellies. After four studio albums I'm wondering how long it takes before your unbearable costs stop them making music.

  • On the post: Is Mark Twain's 'New' Autobiography Covered By Copyright?

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2010 @ 01:30pm

    Re:

    "Having read The Onion for years, I can safely say that that statement is almost certainly satire. How ironic would it be if Mark Twain's much-vaunted love of copyright was just sarcasm?"

    While the quote is satire, taken in context it is almost certainly self deprecating humour. He goes on to explain that while the justifications for lengthy copyright may seem absurd that he believed it was inconsequential given how few authors were remembered from forty two years before his speech.

  • On the post: Golan Appealed To The Supreme Court; Important Case About The Extent Of Copyright & The Public Domain

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 22 Oct, 2010 @ 04:08am

    Typo?

    "this is a copyright violation" (fourth paragraph)

    I think you mean 'this is a First Amendment/free speech violation'.

  • On the post: Visiting Australia? Make Sure You Tell The Customs Officials About The Porn On Your Hard Drive

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 09:16am

    Re: it's not at all clear what constitutes "illegal porn" in Australia,. Not much about the law is clear to Mike !

    "WHAT ???


    So here in Australia, we are not capable of working out what is legal or not ??

    Oh thats right, the mighty Americans know it all, and are the 'leaders' of the world.

    Got news for you buddy.."

    I have visions of you attacking a brick wall with mad fervour. A strange hobby you seem to have, randomly making up stuff to get mad at Mike about.

  • On the post: Officer Bubbles Sues To Find Out Identity Of Anonymous YouTubers

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2010 @ 05:42pm

    Re: Reason for arrest?

    "I find it curious that there's no mention or video in the recording of what the bubbles girl did (or didn't do) between being threatened with arrest and actually getting arrested. The video implies that there were a number of arrests for frivolous reasons (and I'm sure that will get hashed out in court). However, nothing is explicitly said about the bubbles girl -- not even in the extended video they link."

    I gather from comments on another article that the girl was arrested later for carrying eyewash (commonly used by protesters to deal with tear gas). Afaik, she stopped blowing bubbles when she said she would and the arrest was unrelated.

  • On the post: Officer Bubbles Sues To Find Out Identity Of Anonymous YouTubers

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2010 @ 05:37pm

    Re:

    "Really? How would you like to have a job where you have to put up with some weird person sitting and blowing bubbles on you? Do you really think she would have behaved like a normal person if he had asked her nicely? She was looking for trouble and found it. Good for the Constable, people should be held accountable for their actions and she had no right to be the pest you know she was being."

    I guess that you know something I don't and that the person blowing bubbles was lying in the interview where she said: "I was having a conversation with a female officer and I even asked her if my bubbles bothered her. She smiled and shrugged it off so I figured it didn't.... It's not like I was throwing stuff at them. Then this big officer marches over and he's totally in my face."

    The officer was an asshole. The 'weird person' blowing bubbles treated the asshole with a lot more respect than he was due. The police use tear gas to deal with protesters but you assert that the protesters shouldn't be allowed to blow bubbles? That sort of thinking leads to people expressing themselves in much worse ways than blowing bubbles.

    As for looking for trouble.. she was there as part of a peaceful protest. She was protesting peacefully. He was interfering with her peaceful protest. Therefore, he was the one looking for trouble.

  • On the post: Officer Bubbles Sues To Find Out Identity Of Anonymous YouTubers

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2010 @ 05:12pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    "That's stealing Nina."

    I'm guessing someone stole Nina, or someone stole your comma. I wonder what a Grammar Nazi protest would look like.

  • On the post: Months Later, Defense Secretary Gates Reveals Wikileaks Document Leak Didn't Actually Reveal Intelligence Sources

    vivaelamor ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2010 @ 05:02pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I guess that's okay then.

    I like this song title: Blasphemy (The Victimless Crime)

    The song contains swearing and other offensive stuff.

Next >>