http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_P4lJD_OPI
Hahaha! Superb stuff!
DITTO THAT IS BRILLIANT!
excellent !
yes - its great!
viva la revolution!
Yeah, and it's about time: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/20/britains-new-interne.html
Whilst the song is amusing, and the bill has downfalls, everyone seems to neglect the reason they are making a bill.
Children should be limited from seeing violence and nudity.
Torrenting copyrighted movies is stealing.
I don't see any reasons to need to elaborate on that.
Instead the focus of everyone goes to everything except the fact that the above does need to be addressed.
There is a problem. Maybe this bill is not the best solution, but don't be fooled by misdirection in order to avoid that there is a problem.
torrents, especially software, is more of a problem of outrageous pricing and attempts at control and abusing consumers.
I bet if the prices were reasonable more people would purchase.
Movies, music - why is copyright so many years when it is held by corporations and not the actual creator? And why can companies copyright things like sheet music to Bach and Mozart when these should be a universal possession of mankind?
When it comes to p0rn - yes a problem - and a parent's responsibility and programs and means to control this exist . I'd also say that sites that try to circumvent such a barrier should be shut down.
"Children should be limited from seeing violence"
I agree - Hollywood should be shut down since they are the #1 source of such violence. Honestly movies made these days seem to be just a framework for gun play and gore. But Hollywood is the source of all of this - and then games 2nd but I bet you'd see an uprising of Halo, WoW etc. were banned.
QuoteTorrenting copyrighted movies is stealing.
This is not true. No matter how many times people repeat that, copying is not equal to stealing, no matter how you put it.
QuoteI bet if the prices were reasonable more people would purchase.
That is not entirely true, as games like "World of Goo" show. The game was fair-priced and has been developed by an independent game studio. Their publisher went bankrupt because 80% of the users copied the game illegally.
shareware has been abused as well.
However, what I had in mind was Office, Windows, most every "commercial" VSTi, Photoshop, Creative Suite, etc.
The current culture is one of frustrated users abused by vendors who charge outrageous money for their work. Some justify the price by saying in effect the paying population supports the warez population. Almost all make me, a legal paying customer, go through stupid frustrating time consuming steps to install programs I paid for - copy protection that does not stop crackers. Its the legal users that bear the burden.
There are some companies whom I feel have given me a fair deal for my money, Tonehammer, Garritan. Just like there are artists whom I've paid for their music even though I didn't have to - Radiohead, treewave, pomplamoose to name a few.
I know what can be called stealing :
Sueing a single mother living on welfare because of downloading 24 songs.
She had to pay $ 250000 and is ruined for the rest of her life, living in poverty.
And yes, there is a problem :
But not caused by the public, but by the big mediacompanies, helped by tax authorities.
Who still try to protect their monopolies from the previous century.
They enforced the government to imply ridiculous laws by bribing then.
Their only answer is still just brute force to maintain their power, not adaptation to the new situation.
Personally, working as both a professional programmer and being a musician, I don't torrent software or music. I know just how much work goes into producing software and writing music, and, regardless of whether or not the 'evil' record companies get the majority of the money, I believe that not paying is, at the very least, disrespectful to the creators.
I do not believe that torrents, in and of themselves, are evil. I am more than happy to use torrents to download linux distros, TV shows, and the like. (As an aside, I have no qualms downloading TV shows that I would otherwise be able to watch on free-to-air television regardless.)
Well, those are my thoughts on torrenting. :)
QuoteTheir publisher went bankrupt because 80% of the users copied the game illegally.
Actually, this is turning things upside down.
The publisher went bankrupt not because 80% of the users did something wrong, but because the publisher chose a very ineffective business model. In the world of efficient copying technology trying to sell copies of files and creating a moral pressure is like throwing money on the streets and than calling people who pick them up thieves.
very good point LV
the test of this statement will by Ubuntu which is the flagship following the new business model.
From what I read they are not making money yet - but the jury is still out.
I read about many places in the world and yesterday this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peru
had this interesting fact:
Andean societies were based on agriculture, using techniques such as irrigation and terracing; camelid husbandry and fishing were also important. Organization relied on reciprocity and redistribution because these societies had no notion of market or money.[11]
so... yes a new (old) way is certainly feasible.
It is also a good point to note that not all things should be a business.
Nowadays many people, especially in Europe and USA, think in terms of business and look at the world through that prism, as if nothing else exists. As soon as something interesting pops up they immediately go - wow, how can we make a business out of it? And if they can't, the interest is lost.
Software development is much closer to scientific work than many would want to admit. And do you know how ugly science becomes when it becomes commercial? I've seen it personally in institutes with no government funding and which rely solely on jobs from various clients. This stops being science, it becomes a battle with the world and other scientists. That kind of science is not science at all.
So I personally do not think software should necessarily be a business. In fact, I think it shouldn't be. And if it means people will stop writing software for money - good. I'd love to see more software from programmers and people who love what they do, not from merchants who deliver "content" and "products".
well, the problem is, people need money in the current system to survive in any fashion besides off the land sustenance. And that is impossible in a city - because those who do it are really just living off of the left overs of those who are gainfully employed.
The world-wide eradication of money probably won't happen until an essentially free, reliable, and abundant energy source is found. From what I understand Japan is testing a satellite that beams down solar energy as microwaves. Something like that needs to become practical - and then the human population needs to be humanely reduced. ( not reduced by war, plague, poison, etc.) Once that happens the "star trek" future, as I call it, is possible - if a world dictatorship can be avoided.
Needing money to survive and doing business are two fundamentally different things. Copyright apologists often try to plump those together, saying "making a living" when actually meaning "making a fortune".
What's wrong with making a fortune?
There is nothing "wrong" with making a fortune. What's wrong is making it a necessity at the expense of the society.
So in that sense it's definitely proven wrong. Because the efforts are no longer in relation to the profit.
And it gets worse when people already have a fortune. The mind is weak and gets crooked with greed.
So they can afford to invest in an expensive campaign to 'milk' more fortune out of the common crowd.
About software : A genuine, efficient written program is a piece of art imo.
And scientists who are involved in commercial enterprice are making bad science indeed.
Because they start a research no longer with an open end, but are ordered to find something to make profits.
So any outcome during the research, that doesn't fit for the set goal, doesn't count and goes in the paperbin.