how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2008-05-09 09:21:18: Last summer, NBC issued a statement to the FCC demanding that broadband ISPs be forced employ copyright filters on their networks. ..
| |
 DMNTD
join:2002-10-19
usa
 ·AT&T DSL Service
2 edits | Its true... When is enough enough? I'm 25 surrounded by dinosaurs that need to go EXTINCT, copyright as it stands benefits 3%(distributors!)of the population!?!!?
The way copyright works is an attack on the constitution it favors only the rich/dictorial and has always been this way. It has MORE than already killed creativity and I blame the sell-outs for even buying into these deviant contracts. So thats fine, they made a choice and so can we. Its just laughable when WE can make a choice they tell everyone we are being thieves. Prove that these people are making money and then your flaccid copyright will matter.
MEDIA - SIGHT, SOUND, INFORMATION, VIEWS, bottom line they are not wanting to stop infringing they DON'T want to spend money on forming a new formula until THEY want to. So as of right now certain people are so-called forcing them to and they believe they move for no one. I LEAVE YOU! with THIS: »questioncopyright.org/promise | |
| 
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| How Congress Voted -- There is Work to Do! First, it will prioritize intellectual property protection to the highest level of our government by creating an office in the White House that will be responsible for coordinating the IP efforts of eight diverse agencies and producing a national Joint Strategic Plan for IP enforcement.
»www.opencongress.org/roll_call/show/4627
Really? IP is more important or as important to 95% of Congress as Education, Health Care, and Defense?
I think we need to do a national "gut check" on how we really feel about IP. The American public still thinks that IP has to do with those library signs on Xerox machines prohibiting the copying of books. They have no clue about how much it has grown and how much it has become abused.
-- Robb (a supporter of copyright, but not like this!)
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...
| |
| ncguy68
join:2006-10-14
Kings Mountain, NC | Farmers..... The farmers are not producing popcorn anymore....they sell all the corn for bio-fuel. So I doubt if they are hurting. | |
| | 
redcornolio
@telus.net
| Re: Farmers..... said by ncguy68  :The farmers are not producing popcorn anymore....they sell all the corn for bio-fuel. So I doubt if they are hurting. Come on now, there is only ONE uses for corn and that is to sell popcorn in the movie theaters for $10 a bag! | |
| 
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs: | no no corn is being SOLD for GAS
--
space bar is broken | |
| | 
danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA | Re: no no exactly.... farmers right now are laughing all the way to the bank with their corn crops...what a complete tool to even mention that farmers are being hurt... | |
|
imagaymer
@comcast.net
| pathetic They already charge people for "exclusive" content on wireless for their shows now this. I think that one again our privacy is more important than piracy. I don't care if someone does or doesn't pirate whatever comes on nbc but I do care that nbc seems to want to know what I'm doing with my connection. | |
| dougau
Premium
join:2007-08-09
Dickson, TN | Whos the fugly guy in the picture? Thats one sorry ass excuse for human DNA  | |
| | 
Unit649
I B U, Who U B?
Premium
join:2000-01-22
Stockton, CA | Re: Whos the fugly guy in the picture? One sorry ass RICH AS H*** excuse for human DNA.
Fixed that for you.
Oh, and from what we're seeing here, he wishes to be richer. Greed is too nice of a word  | |
| Exothermicus
join:2007-05-24
Denton, TX
| How when where who decides what gets filtered? The Stupidity of this guy's statement, just shows how little he knows about Copyrights, Networks, and the Web.
He wants all copyrighted content filtered? Then how is the hardware / software going to decide what should be allowed or not? At least here in the United States, a Copyright, is a Copyright, regardless if it is registered or not. A copyright does however need to be spelled out.
When was the last time you watched network television? The credits for a program are usually squashed to the point of being unreadable, so the network and stations can promote some other brain dead show. Also during such shows, the networks put banner ads for what is going to be on next, typically right where, the credit for the stars is shown at the beginning of a program. If I was the producer or a star in such a program I would be sending the networks C & D letters over this.
Everything on the web is copyrighted by someone (even stuff that is deemed Public Domain, was at one time copyrightable by someone). The whole point of a copyright is to spell out what can and cannot be done with a work, and who to contact to get permission for uses not covered by fair-use laws.
The last time I looked, most CD and DVD's in my collection only state: All Rights Reserved, unauthorized duplication prohibited, for private home use, public performance prohibited, or some form equally as short, and without any information as to the rights holder to contact for permission. Sure I can attempt to call Paramount, Viacom, or NBC, and maybe 20 calls later, actually talk to the rights holder, but how am I to know if this is the one with the rights or not? Look at any book, this stuff is clearly spelled out with the copyright, it may be stale, with one publisher buying out another, but it is a whole lot more info than is provided with CD and DVD's.
It may sound as if I'm saying that there needs to be something like DRM, to spell out the permissible uses. Definitely not in it's current invasive, bait and switch, bordering on malware crippling form. But maybe something open, as simple as a digitally signed and verifiable XML formatted record that states who is the rights holder, how to contact, and that I can use it wherever and whenever I want to (as long as it is me). But I prefer the pre-DMCA copyright law that requires the right holder to police the use of their content without technological measures. Much the same as trademark holder's have to defend their mark. That means sending a representative out to catch the guys on the corner or at the flee market selling bootleg copies out of the car boot, and leaving individuals free to trade and borrow, so that word-of-mouth marketing can actually generate future sales. So much of what is produced today is here yesterday and gone tomorrow, he does not want to know how many time I wanted to purchase something that was no-longer stocked a few weeks after it's initial release. This is where their lost sales are coming from!
I have said in other forums previously, I was heavy into home taping for several reasons. Radio was failing to promote what I liked, so I would borrow, listen and record my friend's albums, and they would do the same with mine. I also would only purchase in vinyl or CD format, and record my own tapes, simply because the mass produced tapes did not have consistent head alignment and sound like crap on my equipment. To coordinate our teenage buying power (not much, if we were lucky, maybe one album each a month), we would each buy something different and trade amongst ourselves. You may say that we cheated the record companies out of multiple sales, but let me continue and I will prove my point that it created future sales on the stuff we actually wanted. Over the months and years the stuff I liked and frequently played would wear out, and require that I record a new copy, well in some cases I could have just borrowed that album from my friend again, but in many cases I went out and bought my own as I could afford to do so. In many cases both vinyl and again on CD. Many of the albums I taped got few if any playings after my initial recording, and many of those were never purchased, simply because of my lack of enthusiasm for the material. However even some of those translated into purchases, if and when I saw a good close-out deal, despite being something I rarely listened to.
As I said everything is copyrighted in one form or another, how is something to know to filter my streaming the local radio station, from, downloading a purchased copy from itunes, or someones file sharing site? You can't say block this or that protocol because it is used for trading copyrighted material, because such protocols are content agnostic, they can, are and have been used for downloading content authorized by the content holder. A good example is large Open Source Software projects, like Linux, the preferred way to download them is using distributed protocols like Bit-Torrent. This country was founded on allowing the small guy to step up and create free enterprise. Protocols like Bit-Torrent allow such small guys to distribute what they create with little or no cost to themselves.
Don't get me started on Patents, but just let me say, that it used to be valid to patent a device that can work with or enhance another patented product. Not today, you get slapped with claims and counter claims that you somehow reverse engineered or used their patent without permission. All I can say is do you want to sell more of your product because mine exists or not!
Quit saying keep the change and hold onto a little common sense.
Exo | |
| | | |
|
