It is a really tough one because there is clearly a massive grey area with this. Sure, if someone copies something 'word-for-word' style that is clearly against copy-write but when it comes to infringements it gets very messy.
Sure, people should protect their networks but some of my friends think that if a network isn't protected they don't mind their neighbours using it! At the very most it should be a fine.
This is the trick for entrepreneurs, having the vision for other ways to do things and monetising them. Stoll clearly made a big mistake, mainly through lack of vision.
Interesting points, obviously there are massive differences between unions and trade organisations but it would be interesting to see the analysis of similarities. Could there be cross-firm strikes? I doubt it but there is definitely an incentive to limit labor supply to drive up wage. The issue is that competition legislators should, if independent, maintain a level playing field and trade organisations shouldn't have enough power to significantly influence.
Very good points, they may very well make higher profits this way. It would be an interesting experiment anyhow. I particularly like your thoughts about a 'free' good feeding into paid goods. Just be careful when you try to get technical about economics because some of the finer points are not really true, for example, music downloads (even if free) are not strictly speaking infinite as it is a function of population, download speed, duration of popularity etc. I know this may seem picky in this example but an economic theory has to have multiple (if not universal) application. Just be careful rigidly arguing a good is infinite. very nice ideas though.
The definition of economics is the study into the efficient allocation of scarce resources, so if the resource isn't scarce it isn't economics. In any case, there can be a price of zero and scarcity if there are no clear ownership rights, which is economics. I don't think we have trouble with infinity, it just doesn't make logical sense because (as a planet) we have limited resources.
If Google doesn't was to create content then they needed to have tried harder to partner with cable providers. I think long-run this content will go online, it will turn out very much like the current situation in print media. As long as content providers have intellectual property they will still be able to generate add revenue, which is all they will get.
It is a really tough one because there is clearly a massive grey area with this. Sure, if someone copies something 'word-for-word' style that is clearly against copy-write but when it comes to infringements it gets very messy.
Come in....
Sure, people should protect their networks but some of my friends think that if a network isn't protected they don't mind their neighbours using it! At the very most it should be a fine.
The trick
This is the trick for entrepreneurs, having the vision for other ways to do things and monetising them. Stoll clearly made a big mistake, mainly through lack of vision.
Worth a look
Interesting points, obviously there are massive differences between unions and trade organisations but it would be interesting to see the analysis of similarities. Could there be cross-firm strikes? I doubt it but there is definitely an incentive to limit labor supply to drive up wage. The issue is that competition legislators should, if independent, maintain a level playing field and trade organisations shouldn't have enough power to significantly influence.
Very good points, they may very well make higher profits this way. It would be an interesting experiment anyhow. I particularly like your thoughts about a 'free' good feeding into paid goods. Just be careful when you try to get technical about economics because some of the finer points are not really true, for example, music downloads (even if free) are not strictly speaking infinite as it is a function of population, download speed, duration of popularity etc. I know this may seem picky in this example but an economic theory has to have multiple (if not universal) application. Just be careful rigidly arguing a good is infinite. very nice ideas though.
Not economics
The definition of economics is the study into the efficient allocation of scarce resources, so if the resource isn't scarce it isn't economics. In any case, there can be a price of zero and scarcity if there are no clear ownership rights, which is economics. I don't think we have trouble with infinity, it just doesn't make logical sense because (as a planet) we have limited resources.
Re: GoogleTV
If Google doesn't was to create content then they needed to have tried harder to partner with cable providers. I think long-run this content will go online, it will turn out very much like the current situation in print media. As long as content providers have intellectual property they will still be able to generate add revenue, which is all they will get.
Re: Whether its legal or not
It definitely should be illegal but in any case I have no idea why companies would do it, it's just annoying and makes consumers hate their brand!!