Music, technology groups agree on copyright plans

Associated Press | January 13, 2003 | TED BRIDIS

[Buckwheats]

Even though you alluded to yourself as being a troll (I'm not sure why) I don't see your post as particularly showing that; which is why I'm responding to it. However, since you accused me of being a troll (huh?...that's exactly what leftist nitwits do....accuse the person who caught them red-handed with their pants down of what they're guilty of), I will say a couple of things. Microsoft is obviously both good and bad (I'm currently using XP, BTW). Any fool can see that. That's OK but, I'm just sick of Bush-2000 hijacking every thread about computers, etc., etc., in order to spout his self-serving pro-Microsoft views. This moronic tactic robs the rest of us of maybe learning something. I feel the same way about Linux nuts. It would be acceptible for awhile but, it never ends. I could write his posts from memory. I'm sick of it. I'd like him to go away so maybe I could learn something I don't currently know. His constant MS-stumping is not only boring but, interferes with educational discussion. Do you not get it?

[Dimensio]

If the RIAA gets their way, federal marshalls can knock on your door and demand to search for illegal copies regardless of any evidence or probable cause.

I don't trust any company that lobbies for the right to break into my computer.

[Dominic Harr]

I would argue that it's not 'property' laws but 'minimum wage' laws that need to be the basis for intellectual creations.

We need not laws declaring ideas 'property' of their creator, but laws guaranteeing that the creator has the sole right to profit from that idea for a short period of time.

Ideas are not, and can not be, property.

[Dominic Harr]

I'm specifically referring to the portion of the law that considers the ideas/content 'property'.

I don't dispute the creator has sole right to profit from that content for a limited period of time. Such 'minimum wage' type laws would make sense.

But 'content' and 'ideas' are not 'property', and trying to apply 'property' laws to 'content' creates stupid, unenforcable side-effects like outlawing sharing.

[babylonian]

"If the RIAA gets their way, federal marshalls can knock on your door and demand to search for illegal copies regardless of any evidence or probable cause"

So what do they do, get names out of the phone book?

[VetoBill]

Interesting.

Suppose someone hacked into a personal computer, uncovering personal financial information, and then proceeded to post this information on a public website?

This information is still available to the owner, hence he has not been deprived of anything, but did anything illegal happen here?

[Dimensio]

Yes. It just wouldn't be 'theft'. There are computer trespass laws in addition to whatever laws cover revealing such private information.

[Dimensio]

Too many names. Start by looking for anyone on the internet who has criticized their practices.

[Drago]

Buck: you're not a Troll, it is just that it sounds like you are saying if a person comments on many threads with his views, he is a "troll" or is "hijacking" the threads. You are gonna make me do a search for all of Bush2K's posts now! ;-) It is dangerous to post if one is only a "casual" user...I haven't got involved in the MS flame wars here.

[Buckwheats]

I am definitely NOT saying what your impression is of what I said. Also, I am not involved in any flame wars. BTW, I'm equally bored with Dominic Harr. He's obviously got a financial vested interest opposite of Bush-2000. In fact, I wish those two would simply email each other to their hearts' content and, not force me to be privy to their discussion. I'm interested in computers (been using them for 15 years) and, while not interested in being a geek, am always looking for tips. It seems like every time I look at a computer thread (or anything related) on FR I run into these two. I'm sure they both have high IQ's but, they bore me to death and don't teach me anything I don't already know. I don't care if MS succeeds or fails. I'm not in that business. I just want to read interesting stuff (in this case, about computing) and not be subjected to never-ending diatribes from know-it-alls who are in the computer/software business and constantly take over the discussion.

[Right Wing Professor]

So if it's theft for me to download and listen to eminem (I choose the most hypothetical example I can think of; I'd rather put red hot nails through my eardrums), it's theft for you to download and read a copy of an AP article on FR.

That is true. Probably the reason that many news sources haven't asserted their rights in this regard is that the stated aim of this site is non-profit education/discussion.

I truly don't understand your position (and I'm not pretending to be stupid for rhetorical effect). Theft is surely a moral wrong regardless of whether or not one gets away with it. If reading FR articles is equivalent to downloading and listening to copyrighted music, and if the latter is theft, then the former is, too. And if you're suggesting that the latter should carry the moral opprobrium we attach to, say, shoplifting, then you seem to be quite happily doing what you condemn in others. We're all hypocrites in one way or another, but I'm rather surprised when someone admits it so frankly. Bravo, and all that, but It undermines your position.

[Bush2000]

We're all hypocrites in one way or another, but I'm rather surprised when someone admits it so frankly. Bravo, and all that, but It undermines your position.

It's a valid criticism. In the future, I will only post excerpts.

[Right Wing Professor]

In the future, I will only post excerpts.

Wow! Well, kudos for the consistency, but I still think you've got a problem reading articles others post. In reading those articles, you're making a copy to your computer; it may not be a permanent copy, but you're making use of the text under circumstances other than that envisioned by the copyright holder. For example, you could get access to a nytimes.com article by registering, but in doing so you'd be allowing the Times to email you 'offers', and you'd be exposing yourself to their advertisements. I'm fairly confident that simply reading it on FR is a violation of fair use; just as if I download eminem to a Realplayer, listen, say to myself "The end times are here", and hit CTL-ALT-DEL.