Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
What did give (you?) up to gain the benefit of copyright protection Rob?
I gave up the right to take the law into my own hands and retaliate against people who infringe my rights as I perceive them, medieval no more.
same as you did when you bought a house and planted a garden on your property full of produce you see as yours, you gave up your right to maim and or kill people who challenge your perceived property. civilized pacifist that you are.we all make bargains to live in a society in peace. one of the conditions of that bargain in return for giving up or right to lawless violence is that society protects the fair rights of the individuals in it, even if they are a minority group. At least that's the guiding principle behind it how ever it may be abused by shifty mega suits.
I perceive the results of my labour, talent or skill to be mine where they can be identified as mine, ie by recognised sounds (my voice, my recording) or images (that I captured or made) or words (that I wrote conveying ideas that I came up with). Society at present see fit to see it that way too for a limited time (which I dispute, but we've already had that conversation).
Are you arguing by saying copyright is "a bargain for the creatives" that the fruits of someones labour, talent, or skill are not theirs to do with as they wish but is in fact yours? -
I have a huge and significant interest in Copyright. I think I have earned the right to lobby and talk about free media, thanks.
I can see you like to rebel against something, somehow don (as I noted by your indignant 'thanks') but to be fair that comment wasn't directed at you at all. it was in direct response to something Russell said which nicely illustrated a point. Not an all encompassing point which referred to all things copyable but specifically to one area, maybe two.
I acknowledge anyone's right to give their stuff away for free, surely you can acknowledge someones right to want to recoup their costs for liberating a valuable collection of music.That said I am really interested in your experience in your field. There a similarities and there are some massive differences. The business models for a start are hugely different. I don't expect the rules that apply to what I know to apply to your area of expertise and likewise you shouldn't expect other media to fall into the models you are versed with.
I likewise wanted to address a point you made about criminalizing your kids cos they're only doing what we did as kids.
There is one major difference between peer to peer file sharing and home taping and that is the issue of the personal nature of mix tapes as opposed to the impersonality of anonymous sharing, which is closely related to the scale of the whole thing.
There is a massive order of magnitude difference of your kids making a copy of their favourite songs for their mates and getting online with strangers and anonymously trading copyright material.the later is similar to taking a swag of counterfeit copies of an album down to a market and distributing them.
The alternative to criminalizing your kids is for you to teach them permissible behavior. you grew up in the home taping environment, you read the copyright warnings on the records and cassettes, you practiced your technically illegal but tolerated media sharing (for which I know of no one who ever got prosecuted), you didn't pop down to the local market and distribute copies of recent movies, and you turned out ok, surely you can install the same degree of respect in your kids, or is that too much to ask of a modern parent?
in some cases it is, but in principle ......
I've said all of that without any malice or personal slight on you.
hopefully you can take it in the spirit intended and give us an insight into your business model in more depth. -
you use the word amortizing in everyday conversation?
-
-
Mildly amused that anyone would bother.
there goes that kiwi self depreciation.
-
And then, of course, I would instantly become a copyright fascist
though that does illustrate nice the issue of perspective and personal investment.
it's pretty easy to lobby for free media when its not your media and you have nothing to lose, or in the case of purchasing the flying nun catalogue nothing to recoup in your investment/costs
It becomes a completely different scenario when you see the real time and or money involved in the creation. -
my pet peeves are natural disasters and thermo nuclear war.
I also find them turn offs. nothing throws me out of the mood quicker, other than wet towels on the floor of course. -
so it's hard to see how they could receive payment for it.
I think paul was just making a point, although maybe he wants people to donate to them for downloading it from that site, probably would have helped if he directed them to a site where they could do that but he may not be that net savvy. he didn't see the other bats albums up there yet.
-
It combines my two pet peeves: serial killers and fascism.
pet peeves....?
I thought pet peeves were a lot more low level, like leaving wet towels on the floor, or not putting the lid on the tooth paste. -
Every Full Member shall have one vote plus one additional vote for each complete $500 of such member’s earnings during the preceding financial year.
geez, that sounds like the american legal system with college votes, or some out dated medievael system. Thanks for drawing my attention to that. I'll be sure to make a fuss about it at the next public meeting they have.
re dexter, ok I'll pick another example, um, is there any good tv left, battlestar has descended into nonsensical rubbish, lost has lived up to its name, and everything else has been canceled.
breaking bad was ok, the IT crowd?