Posted on 12/23/2006 5:51:48 PM PST by IncPen
I'll stay with the OS that runs my apps and hardware, which means that for the time being I'll keep XP on my desktop.
In short and in simple terms: How does this effect Free Republic?
Fun on a Saturday night.
Perhaps. But the IP pirates have been stealing work that they had no hand in creating.
One could argue that Disney continues to produce movies financed in part by the "wild profits" they make. (By the way, what level of profit qualifies as "wild" in your view?)
In contrast, file sharers and other IP pirates produce nothing.
How? By paying/bribing Congress to extend copyright protection well beyond any reasonable duration. . . . Return copyright to the original 7 years set by the Founding Fathers (or even to the life of the originator), and all of this mess would go away.
If you are trying to make the case that the intellectual property laws should be changed, then I am willing to listen. I would just ask that you answer some questions:
(1) What is a "reasonable duration" of copyright protection, and why?
(2) How would you go after the corporate "copyright leeches" without also harming writers, artists, and other producers of IP?
(3) What would you propose be done about those who steal IP after the law has been changed to your liking?
That last question is important because, despite your assurance that "all of this mess would go away," I am not convinced. Once a large number of persons come to believe they have the right to enjoy free music, movies, and other IP, why would they ever pay a dime for it?
It's the digital age, friend. Up until now the publishers had all the power and they sneered at their customers at the same time they artificially controlled supply and demand. Which is my entire point. Read Bethell's book. He makes a pretty solid case that 'intellectual property' pretty much evaporates as soon as an idea is expressed.
You seem to be under the impression that I should dislike big, bad media corporations because they have managed to get laws passed to protect their rights give them an unfair advantage in the marketplace.
As it happens, my books are published by one of those corporations. If they lose, so do I.
Can't help you there. Sign better contracts would be my advice.
Perhaps the companies have more rights under the law than I do. But tell me, what rights do I retain when the "file sharers" distribute my work without compensating me?
Well, if it bothers you so much, stop producing work in digital formats. It takes alot of Xerox paper (not to mention a compelling masterpiece) to make all that effort worthwhile.
But who really are the greedy parties here? It seems to me that no one is greedier than those who expect to enjoy the work of others without paying for it.
You seem to view yourself as some sort of victim.
Might I suggest that you stop writing and simply keep your ideas inside, where noone can see them without giving you your due?
At the very least, stop writing to me; I've lost interest in this, your latest novel.
No, it was a silly reply. Say what you will about the "dinosaur media companies," at least they produce something that other people want. In contrast, file sharers produce nothing.
Sensible public policy would encourage people to produce. It would not encourage people to steal other people's work.
If the church of the medieval monks had enough clout to outlaw the printing press, because it threatened an end run around their monopoly on hand copied books, that would not have make it right.
Bad analogy. A better analogy would be if the monks forbade anyone from printing copies of their illuminated books without permission. That would be their right.
If the owners of the printing presses wanted books to print, they would have to get permission from the church, hire their own authors, or write the books themselves.
Sometimes the law reflects good. Sometimes it reflects greed. . . . This seems to be a pretty clear case of the latter.
See my tag line.
What games now run better/faster on 64 bit systems?
In the end, it simply was too confusing. I WOULD have paid for it. I am in the copyrighted content business, and I felt it would only be right and proper. It would have been a good example for the kids and their parents.
However, getting the rights to the music for 15-20 DVDs was simply not worth the effort.
Make the fees reasonable and easy to secure, and most people will do the right thing.
Interesting post.
Some day I'll tell you about when I saw Disney wanting to charge (interdepartmentally) $100,000 to use a Disney song in an invite to a party for people (sponsors) who give vast amounts of money to Disney companies. And how including lyrics would be another $100,000. I'm talking about a party with a modest invitation list (less than 1500 people), but who provided $100 million in revenue to the company.
These fees were developed and administered by people who had nothing to do with creating the music or the lyrics. They simply owned the product and were charged (as a revenue center) with maximizing its value-- even to another department in their own company.
Needless to say, the petitioning department chose another route.
ping
Yes, it is the digital age. But stealing is stealing, whether it is done digitally or not. And no amount of rationalizing about "artificially controlled supply and demand" will change that. (Are you sure you wouldn't steal music and movies if you found some that liked?)
Well, if it bothers you so much, stop producing work in digital formats. It takes alot of Xerox paper (not to mention a compelling masterpiece) to make all that effort worthwhile.
As a matter of fact, I do not allow my work to be produced digitally. I would like to: It would be more convenient for my readers. But right now I cannot risk it.
You seem to view yourself as some sort of victim.
Not at all. I am doing quite well. I intend to keep it that way.
On the contrary, you are the one complaining about the unfair advantages that the IP laws supposedly give to sneering publishers.
Might I suggest that you stop writing and simply keep your ideas inside, where noone can see them without giving you your due?
You may suggest that; but I am not likely to follow your suggestion.
At the very least, stop writing to me; I've lost interest in this, your latest novel.
Gladly. I just hope that next time you show up to complain about IP laws you have something to offer beyond in vague generalities and sweeping assertions.
"Keeping the Timex Sinclair doesn't seem like such a bad idea after all. ;>)"
LOL - I still have mine.
;^D
So all us us must be punished. Sheer Genius. (sarcasm)
A few games have updates for Windows 64.
Flight Sim will have a Vista upgrade that is well needed, even a very high end system can't run Flight Sim X very well.
What's wrong with Zune?
"we have a huge amount of money invested in Microsoft workstations, servers and software, not to mention the absolute dependence our radiologic viewing (PACS) software has on Internet Explorer."
That could be big-time trouble. Assuming that none of those workstations or servers currently have 'Premium' content on them now, I can think of several ways that it might accidentally get introduced to the network.
And those are just some of the possiblilties.
I wish you luck if your employer upgrades to Vista.
Downloading is NOT stealing, it is copyright infringement. It is NOT the same thing, no matter how many times people say so.
If I went to a book store and removed a copy of the book without paying - THAT would be stealing. I would have taken the actual physical item from the store.
Downloading is still wrong, but it is NOT theft.
Zune is a flop.
Its main feature is "squirting" via wi-fi of music from one zune to another. Two problems, the person who gets the music can only listen for 2 days, doesn't mind if the music is free to distribute. And, good luck finding another person with a Zune.
My nephew bought one, I figure its going back. They have already figured out a way to hack the squirting of files, but the Zune, in its two color config (brown or white) has a nickname, the $**tbrick.
DRM is evil and needs to die. As long as DRM infects most LEGAL downloads, it only encourages ILLEGAL ones more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.