Whatever 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1712)

• On the post: US Copyright Office Asks For Public Comments On DMCA's Notice And Takedown

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 05 Jan, 2016 @ 04:31pm

  The numbers add up

  Here's the latest from google:
  
  https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/
  
  67 million requests to remove, and of those not removed, most of them (you can go look at the individual cases) are because of multiple reports. The average us 1000 URLs per domain, which gives you a very good idea that the vast majority of DMCA complaints are about a very small subset of the internet.
  
  So when you talk about "unintended" consequences, just remember that they are relatively exceptional cases in a sea of valid claims. Perhaps the real issue here isn't the "unintended" consequences but instead the fact that so many notices are required at all. Business models that are predicated on the notice system would fail rapidly if they could no longer hide behind this safe harbor system, and most of this problem would disappear pretty quickly.

• On the post: And Of Course: Authors Guild Asks Supreme Court To Overturn Fair Use Ruling On Google Books

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 05 Jan, 2016 @ 07:42am

  Re: Re: Death and Values

  "Copyright's job isn't to assign value to a work, that's up to the market and/or public. Copyright's 'job' is simply to provide incentive to creators so that they create more(high quality, low quality, doesn't matter), and (theoretically) have the public benefit more as a result. "
  
  Copyright doesn't assign value, that's silly. It does however create certainty about a certain type of ownership and control, which is important in defining economic value. It doesn't assign value.
  
  "Say the creator was a craftsman with a valuable business making customer furniture,"
  
  The difference here is that the craftsman is paid full value for each work as he goes along. Build a table, sell it for $1000, end of story. A writer may write a book that sells a million copies, and generates tens of millions of dollars, but it does not do that in a single sale. Rather, it happens over a long period of time over many individual transactions - some of which may occur after his or her death. The author may never in their lifetime actually obtain the full market value of their work as a result.
  
  The writer doesn't sell their work outright (unless they are doing work for hire), but instead sells fractional copies of the work. That process may take longer than the writers lifetime to complete.
  
  Put another way: If your craftsman sold a table for $1000, but got only $100 today and the rest due next month, and then he died, would his heirs be allowed to collect the other $900? Of course they would. The value of his work didn't disappear because he died, it still has to be paid for.
  
  As for Google Books, the question remains - is digitizing the works transformative, or derivative? The search is value added after the fact, the work is digitized in it's entirety and stored - the search and presentation are secondardy to the initial making of the copy. Yes, there is benefit in being able to search the work, but where is the creator's choice to be indexed or not? The non-transformative digitizing would appear to violate the rights of the author or rights holder to decide how their work is distributed.

• On the post: And Of Course: Authors Guild Asks Supreme Court To Overturn Fair Use Ruling On Google Books

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 05 Jan, 2016 @ 07:30am

  Re: Re: Re: Death and Values

  It's pretty funny to watch you guys pile on. Nobody says the books wouldn't get written (or the movies made, or whatever) but with a copyright term that could end at any time, it would be less likely that companies would be willing to take a risk, or might pay significantly less to an author for the rights if the book might be in the public domain the next day. It wouldn't stop the authors from writing, it might just make it harder to market their work or get decent distribution or exposure.
  
  Repeat: I never said people wouldn't write. It's entire an economic question, not a creation question. Creation would continue, but you and I might never know - we might never get to know the work.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Jan, 2016 @ 10:40pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  I have cone to the conclusion you are trolling.
  
  "When people complain about the general state of things, you tell them not to complain and run away from the system."
  
  Not at all what I said. I said rather than waste your time telling others what to do, do things for yourself, in your own way. If you take all the energy wasted banging your head against the wall, perhaps you can accomplish something that makes that "wall" irrelevant.
  
  "When people dislike how corporate contributions create lopsided balances in law, you tell them to vote better next time."
  
  Ahh, so we should tell them to vote worse? Vote stupid? Stop trolling, voting is the way the public can make a rela change. It doesn't matter how much money a corporation or an industry puts up, the people still get to vote. Figure out why the people are voting that way and change that, and then all the money in the world won't mean shit.
  
  "And when people dislike laws like SOPA chucklenuts like you start whining about how Google magically influenced people."
  
  I have never said that. I do think however that Google does have a bully pulpit, and they have certainly been caught stacking their results in their own favor. I am sure "chuckleheads" like you would be complaining if TV and radio suddenly ran pro-SOPA pieces all day and all night too, right? Stop trolling.
  
  "Every single "proposal", "solution" or "suggestion" you make is poisoned with fine print and "Gotcha!" moments on the other side. And you actually think people don't notice."
  
  No such luck, amigo - there you go trolling again. Every solution comes with the usual "you actually gotta do something to make something happen". Techdirt is lots of talk, not so much action. Converting the energy that generates hundreds of angry and semi=angry posts a week into something positive and creative would perhaps be the biggest gift Mike could give the world. But I do think it's easier to bitch, right?
  
  So stop trolling, I'm done with your lies and misrepresentations.

• On the post: And Of Course: Authors Guild Asks Supreme Court To Overturn Fair Use Ruling On Google Books

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 05 Jan, 2016 @ 05:18am

  Death and Values

  One of the reasons copyright doesn't end at the moment of the authors death is because that would make it a lot harder to place an economic value on a book. Imagine if you will someone who is dying of an incurable disease, who writes a masterpiece. What is it's economic value? Since the resell time would be incredibly short (perhaps days) or might even occur after the death, then the work would be economically worth very little, as there is little chance that anyone would want invest in something which could be public domain in the morning.
  
  Copyright is often not just licensed, but sold outright. When do you consider a company dead? What happens if the company never ceases to exist? Would it be granted a longer copyright (it's life ) than someone else?
  
  Death is arbitrary. A celebrated author today could be tomorrow's hood ornament for a city bus. Does her heirs deserve a lesser value from her efforts because she didn't look both ways before crossing the street?
  
  As for the story itself, the real question here for me is the simple: "is converting something from printed matter to digital format transformative in nature?". Does the court ruling essentially mean that each author would have to file a copyright case individually to find out where they really stand? Does the court system really want to retry essentially the same case for every copyright literary work? There is a point where SCOTUS maybe could add some light in the situation, because if moving something to digital is transformative, then it's pretty much free game for any work out there.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Jan, 2016 @ 06:08pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  "When it comes to issues of public policy they absolutely should be. "
  
  Read the rest of my comment. The elected officials are the public's representation at these things. The public is included in the discussion via these channels. Would you open up every meeting and every policy debate to each individual citizen who chose to appear? It's why we have elected representatives, so that we can actually get things done without having to ask each citizen individually on every item.
  
  "By not inviting us to issues of public policy they have failed to represent the public."
  
  The problem here is that almost everything is public policy. How would you manage this? Public forums for every proposed law? Congress is already slower than snail snot in winter, do you want to make it millions of times worse?
  
  "It is a special government granted privilege to those who get a license and only a limited number of licenses can be issued"
  
  Yes, but there is no restriction on who can have one. A limited number does not imply privilege to a certain race, creed, color, or social group. The US has over 15,000 full power and more than 1000 low power radio stations. That's a pretty big number, and many places still have plenty of space for new stations.
  
  Moreover, in the new media world, you can stream if you like. You could make a deal to be on Sirius XM or whatever. There are many ways to communicate without some form of restriction (beyond equally applied regulations). The point of licensing is to avoid what happened at the dawn of radio and TV, with transmitters being put up, knocking others off the air with higher power signals, spurious interference, splatter, and generally making it a case of "the richest and most powerful win". Now every station in a give market has about an equal chance of success based more on content than ability to outspend others of higher power transmitters or stealing their frequency. Regulation is needed for the public as a whole to get the most benefit from what is a limited resource.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Jan, 2016 @ 09:42am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  Techdirt is a pretty big echo chamber, built on certain premises and on from there. It's an anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-establishment collection of horror stories and scare mongering that, like what passes on conservative talk radio, plays very well to it's audience but is laughed at loudly by everyone else.
  
  "As for Karl, he's a reporter"
  
  No he's not. He's an anti-cable crusader with an agenda, a keyboard, and a huge pulpit from which to preach. You only have to look at his site (dslreports) to understand that he has a monotone, one sided view of cable, ISPs, and the like. Not that he is actually doing anything about it, he's just talking about it. Perfect fit for Techdirt I guess.
  
  "Encouraging people IS sound advice though. I hope you actually do it some day!"
  
  I encourage all the time, I often encourage people to consider another possible outcome, possible view, or possible conclusion based on things provided. We all see the world through our tinted lenses (rose and otherwise), and put our own spin on things. I think techdirt's spin is often negative and accusatory when reality seems to show no true malicious intent. Karl's big story a couple of weeks back about a problem with a Cox subscriber was classic in this field, something as simple as a typo was turned into a sort of federal case. Clearly if they can make a typo, they MUST be scamming you, and the bandwidth metering must be 100% false and incorrect in all cases.
  
  That's not reporting - that piling a huge pile of personal opinion and other manure into a bad, wrapping it with a small piece of truth, and trying to turn the whole thing into the truth. Sadly for Karl, it's still manure on the insane. But that's okay, perhaps he can learn something from the experience and move forward in 2016 with a wee bit less attitude and a wee bit more factual information.
  
  So yeah, let's encourage the Techdirt staff to stop worry so much about what everyone else is doing, and put some positive stuff out there, taking some concrete action towards doing something - and not opening another site to talk about doing something... actually doing it! Power in 2016, they could have it!

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Jan, 2016 @ 09:30am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  "He's never expressed anything that actually suggests he works in a creative field"
  
  Do you honestly think I would do that here? I have seen what a "drudge-ing" can do to a site, why would I want to open up my life here? It's not about me, is it? It's about Techdirt and the opinions expressed by Mike and his minions. When you start making it about me, you have already lost the plot.
  
  The rest is just stinky trolling. Again, I would hope the Techdirt community would join in pushing the "report" button to get rid of your nicely phrased personal attacks.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Jan, 2016 @ 09:27am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  "Ahh, so you mean like how the RIAA/MPAA and industry interests unreasonably conspire with regulators to arrange secretive meetings that the public is not invited to and how they sneakily use backdoor dealings"
  
  Actually, YES. However, there is a catch here, I don't think the public should be invited into everything all the time. The elected officials are there to represent the public. If they are failing to do that, they should be replaced.
  
  "If the spirit and intent of the law is to ensure that privilege holders get paid that is an unreasonable intent and spirit. "
  
  No, there are no "privilege holders", sorry to say. Anyone (and I do mean anyone) can get a license to put a TV or radio station on the air (providing there is space on the band in your area) and you can do almost anything you want with it, within the confines of the law. One of the things that comes with this is that people who choose to rebroadcast your signal are required to pay an amount for the use of the copyright material. There is no monopoly privilege. The only monopoly is that single wall in the middle of an empty parking lot that you keep banging against.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Jan, 2016 @ 09:22am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  Sorry, not in MY post history. Techdirt has a small flaw that allows people to post under a user's name without logging in, and thus people have posted stuff under my name. You have to look very closely to see that they are not me logged in. Hey, Techdirt, how about fixing this pretty sizable flaw?
  
  So no, you can't bait me into anything, sorry.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 03 Jan, 2016 @ 07:59pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  "Isn't the definition of a 'loophole' finding a new way?"
  
  No, for me a loophole is a sneaky way to do something that otherwise isn't legal, permitted, and reasonable. Aereo was the perfect example, attempting to twist a number of court rulings into a legal knot, trying to touch all the bases while knowing full well that what they were doing would likely get shut down at some point. They technically touched the bases, but violated the spirit and intent of the laws. They were hoping to use a small hole between the laws and the rulings to make something otherwise clearly not legal into something legal. It didn't work.
  
  Aereo could have been a success if they had played more by the rules. The concept is quite possibly one of the better ones in the last while. But their failure to play by the rules means they and consigned to the scrap heap of loophole tech companies.
  
  "It's called democracy. What you are asking us to do is to not participate in the democratic process because you are not interested in democracy."
  
  There is no democracy in telling private companies what to do. Calling Cox cable liars or cheats or whatever doesn't really advance things, does it? If you want to change things, VOTE THE BUMS OUT. The true issue of American politics isn't the corruption, it's that voters keep re-electing nearly the same group of corrupt idiots each cycle, and then complain about it. It's laughable.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 03 Jan, 2016 @ 07:49pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  "your advice is roll over for the large corporations"
  
  No, not at all. My advise is to walk away from them (heck, run as fast as you can) and do your own thing. If they are "owning" your culture then create culture without them in it. Work towards something that doesn't involve them at all, so you don't have to roll over or do anything else like that - just do your own thing.
  
  Your false restatement of what I said suggests "bend over and take it like a prisoner". I am telling you to get out of jail and run as far as you can. Make your own world where you don't worry about dropping the cultural soap.
  
  Don't roll over - but don't waste your time hitting your head against the wall either.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 03 Jan, 2016 @ 09:16am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  "Of course, this is exactly what Copia is NOT doing."
  
  Yet, a Think Tank by definition is about ideas, and not about execution. The site itself isn't very helpful (blog is 3 months out of date, including the "monthly" feature thing), and most of it seems to be about trying to tell others what to do. Ideas are great, execution however is everything. 100+ posts a month here, and yet your new babe doesn't get an update for 3 months? You must really be working hard on that one!
  
  So far this is looking like Step2, case studies, and the like. Lots about words and telling other people what to do, and very little actual action. I know you hate it when I point it out, but there you go.
  
  As for calling me a liar, well, that's the easy defense of someone who doesn't like to hear all the truth.
  
  "eventually he'll go away and come back again under another name. Right?"
  
  Actually, I have switched names a couple of times (much like members of your staff, oh, oops, sorry to point that out), in part to see the reactions when people here aren't focusing on WHO but on substance. it's remarkable to see their change in attitude when you (or one of your staff) let on who is posting under a given name. Suddenly, they stop paying attention to the ideas and the bandwagon of trolls (which you oddly tolerate) goes on the rampage.
  
  Hope you enjoy 2016. I hope you enjoy trying to explain why a think tank isn't a think tank, and why it's not just a fancy way to be able to put your opinion out there under different pretense. it seems to be about as hot a property as Step2, because there ain't much going on, is there?
  
  Oh, and I know the answer... you will call me a liar and say "you don't know what is going on behind the scenes". I have read that excuse before... usually just before something quietly gets taken out behind the shed and put out of it's misery.
  
  Have a happy 2016 - here's to hoping you can execute as well as you talk, dip, and dance.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Jan, 2016 @ 09:45pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  " if you think the law and the economy can be sliced up into these neat compartments"
  
  Not at all. My points generally are rather than trying to make (inseet copyright, patent, trademark, cable, whatever) company here do it your way, put all your efforts into doing it a new way and in a meaningful way.
  
  If you end up fighting them at that point, then more power to you. If they throw up a roadblock, attack the road block. Don't tell them how to do business or that they must absolutely change to your way - find a way to work around them.
  
  "What if creating an alternative that clearly and plainly avoids all the walls is deemed by folks like you as "exploiting loopholes" in the walls?"
  
  There is a huge difference between exploiting loopholes and actually coming up with something new. Aereo is a perfect example, their entire premise was to try to exploit a loophole to build a business and avoid paying rights holders for they content they were re-broadcasting. They would have done remarkably better to up their price a big, get rid of the silly "legal requirement" antenna farm, and get pay the proper fees for the channels they wanted to offer. Even at $10 or $20 a month, I guarantee they would have had plenty of uptake. Instead, they tried to sneak under the law and got squashed. That's not innovation, that's stupidity.
  
  Yes, sometimes it works. Uber has managed to avoid being completely shut down in most places, but now faces a long series of legal battles on everything from their fare base to "contract workers" and labor laws. They are busting down the walls, but in doing so, they are very likely to have one or more of those walls fall on them. Some things are not as simple as others.
  
  I would love to see the Techdirt staff working on new things and fighting to get them to happen. But instead they are leaning towards things like the Copia Institute Think Tank, which is basically politics and trying to force others to do things your way. It's not the act of doing, it's the act of talking - and that rarely gets things done. That isn't an accomplishment, it's more of waving the white flag and surrendering to politics as usual. It may or may not pay out in the very long run, but mouth piece new release organizations, even with links to existing senators or house reps generally don't accomplish much except generating news clips and sound bites.
  
  The future isn't made of sound bites.
  
  (see, again, I am talking about concrete things. You are talking about me. Do you understand the difference?)

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Jan, 2016 @ 09:03am

  Re: Re: Happy New Year

  Except they really aren't doing it. It's like a bunch of fat guys sitting around eating that extra slice of pizza talking about having big muscles and getting all the girls. They talk a good game, but they aren't doing enough about it.
  
  Picture all of Karl's hateful venom towards the cable industry instead focused on creating an alternative. Perhaps starting his own online steaming video channel with his own content. Perhaps building a business plan that could actually work where Aereo and others have failed. Instead, the energy is dissipated as he bangs his head against the virtual walls of the cable company head offices.
  
  Breaking down the walls is almost a meaningless concept. If you want the walls to go away, offer an alternative so great and so wonderful, that the walls are meaningless - and those on the other side will clamber over to join you. Prove them wrong - don't just tell them they are doing it wrong and offer them nothing of substance.
  
  Also, and this is very important - I am not telling anyone to do anything they don't want to do. I am encouraging them to actually do it. I am not asking them to change their goals, I am hoping they focus on them. All that energy, put towards a future where copyright, patents, and so on are meaningless is a noble goal. But the solution doesn't start by slagging off the existing players and asking them to jump blindly into your imaginary paradise. Creating that paradise and inviting them in is likely way more functional.
  
  The future, well... 20 years of techdirt, and we still have copyright (and more of it) and patents (and more of them) and trademarks (and even sillier ones). Isn't it time to act rather than talk?

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Jan, 2016 @ 08:56am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  Since we aren't here to talk personality but are here to talk tech, the future, big government, and whatever else tickles Mike's fancy, perhaps you might want to focus on that more. If you don't like my comments, just don't read them and move along.
  
  The personal attacks are generally because you don't want to engage the ideas, you just want to make it personal. That usual means you already lost the point (and the plot). So don't worry about it, every one of your hateful posts just proves my point.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 01 Jan, 2016 @ 08:55am

  Re: Re: Re: Happy New Year

  I appreciate all the wonderful personal attacks. Might I suggest a new years resolution that you stop worrying about me and start worrying about your own sad self?
  
  As for substance, well... I doubt you would know it even if someone clubbed you over the head with it.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 31 Dec, 2015 @ 05:37pm

  Re: Re: Happy New Year

  Sad news for you, I post a lot less here than ever before, as I am busier than ever before. Techdirt is my downtime hobby. Some people collect things or what have you, I spend some of my free time enjoying the often vapid stupidity that can be Techdirt (especially Karl these days, he's risen above his grade).
  
  So to explain: If copyright is a wall that stops you, then go the other direction. Rather than worry about what the "copyright monopoly" is doing, work on producing material that is GPL or better. Rather than dwell on the negative of this artist suing because of a sample or whatever, why not put more time on promoting and supporting artists who make their work freely available?
  
  One road is negative, hit your head against the wall type stuff, and the other is positive and uplifting.
  
  The same applies when it comes to cable / ISPs / service providers. Rather than hit your head against the wall against Cox or AT&T or whatever, why not work more on supporting initiatives to bring fiber to every house? Celebrate the victories and work on building more, rather than banging your heads against the ISP wall and complaining about the pain.
  
  So many things could happen if alternatives aren't just pointed to in vague terms, but moved forward in real terms. Real grassroots support for things changes the way the world works. Hitting incumbent players over the head with a stick trying to get them to give up a big part of their income to do it your way isn't going to work out very well. Don't worry about them, do your own things and make them better.
  
  It would be a great thing to be able to sit here next year and look at a list of accomplishments and initiatives, rather than reports of a whining, self justifying think tank and a few amusing but mostly arrogant staff writers. Imagine all that energy channeled towards something useful, rather than just in angry air.
  
  2016 could be so good. They get to choose.

• On the post: New Year's Message: Keep Moving Forward

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 31 Dec, 2015 @ 10:08am

  Happy New Year

  Happy New Year to everyone here (even PaulT, if he logs in).
  
  I have an important tip for you if you really want to "move forward" in 2016: Stop worrying about what everyone else is doing, and do your own thing. Stop trying to make other people do it your way ("you are not doing it right!"), and work instead of blazing your own trails and doing things your own way.
  
  Copyright, trademarks, and patents are at best three walls of a room that hold you in. The fourth wall doesn't exist. So rather than spending all your time banging on the walls, perhaps it's better to turn around and go the other direct, to move around the obstructions.
  
  Complaining that X company is doing it wrong, or that Y government agency is clueless is perhaps entertainment, but it's also zero traction stuff. You most often won't accomplish much (there are exceptions) but you can waste a lot of time.
  
  If you want 2016 to truly move you ahead, work within your own ideas, walk away from what blocks you, and you will move ahead. Will the world be with you? You never know until you try.

• On the post: Who Needs A No-Fly List When You Can Just Ground 91 Million Citizens?

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 30 Dec, 2015 @ 09:46am

  Wow

  I have to say, this is one of those wonderful anti-government scare articles that makes Fox News look reasonable.
  
  91 million people didn't lose a right to travel. That's crap. 91 Million people live in states which refuse to properly control and administer their ID systems in a manner that makes them meet a standard published more than 10 years ago.
  
  If you want to lay the problem somewhere, lay it at the feet of the states who refuse to offer proper and complete services to their citizens. They had 10 years to get their shit together, and failed in a massive, massive way.

Next >>