TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by Dogfather  :The whole bill should have been vetoed. We don't need bigger gov't to service as private police for racketeers like the RIAA. The gov't isn't protecting RIAA. It is protecting "intellectual property" rights of many industries. And "intellectual property" makes up a larger and larger part of the US GDP and an even larger part of our exports. It is helping protect our economy from pirates.
said by DrModem :Train other countries?! WTFriggingheck? Yes, train other countries. Because it helps to get foreign countries to enforce laws protecting "intellectual property" rights of US companies and helps protect a large part of US exports.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
 jc100
join:2002-04-10
1 edit | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Here's where you are wrong TK.. Are you ever Right (nope)?. Tax Payer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. It' is THEIR JOB, NOT tax payers to do that... So yes, this is Big Government and Big Brother again. This time from the Democrats. Usually, it's been from the far right, but the left is starting their own stupidity. I'm amazed Bush was the one with COMMON SENSE here. This must be an alternate reality when I hear that said. | |
|
 | 
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
1 edit | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part But when the RIAA actually has to go to court and do their own dirty work they lose. So they have to buy off Congress to do it for them. | |
|
| |
| | |
| | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by Dogfather :Oh yeah, our EXPLODING trade deficit and decimation of our manufacturing sectors through outsourcing is proof the Federal gov't is protecting the US economy. What horsecrap. You are commenting on the governments ability to do a GOOD job. NOT on their responsibility to do the job at all. The job needs doing. It just needs to be done better. Maybe the new law will help them do that.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part More pro-corproate laws and bigger gov't aren't a solution. | |
|
| | | | 
bear73
Metnav... Fly The Unfriendly Skies
Premium
join:2001-06-09
Grand Forks Afb, ND
·Midcontinent Commu..
| While i agree with you TK that GOVT has the responsibility I have little faith that this new bill will actually result in them DOING a good job. IF there were bigger penalties for those in Congress, Judicial, and enforcement then I might have some faith. But until you see them held to the same standards that our military is held to (98% do The Right Thing and are held to it)then nothing will change. And onestly its do to a degradation of the morals of society. Things that are acceptable to the majority today would not have been tolerated 50 years ago.
--
If ya gotta go, Go with a SMILE!
»www.thereligionofpeace.com/ | |
|
| | | | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by bear73 :While i agree with you TK that GOVT has the responsibility I have little faith that this new bill will actually result in them DOING a good job. IF there were bigger penalties for those in Congress, Judicial, and enforcement then I might have some faith. But until you see them held to the same standards that our military is held to (98% do The Right Thing and are held to it)then nothing will change. And onestly its do to a degradation of the morals of society. Things that are acceptable to the majority today would not have been tolerated 50 years ago. I agree with you that the job isn't being done well. But I strongly disagree with those(like some above) that say since the job is hard to do and has been done badly, that it shouldn't be done at all. That makes the situation 10x worse. But there are many who think lack of morals and anarchy are a preferred way to operate in.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part So let's see. If you can't do it right, you should still try anyway? That works well. I mean hell, we got Iraq. We messed that one up, but YAY WE TRIED. Everyone in DSLREPORTS give us a cheer. Give me a break dude. Do you read what you write, or just type so you get responses out of us? Things need to be planned and executed and the cost weighed. With our economy going to SHIT, and taxpayers spending 700 billion PROBABLY, these PET PROJECTS are the last thing we need. Americans are losing their houses, jobs, etc. We don't need to be protecting corporate interests at our expense. IT IS THEIR JOB to protect THEIR PROPERTY. | |
|
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by jc100 :So let's see. If you can't do it right, you should still try anyway? You're right. We should capitulate and allow our society and economy to further degrade. That will help the situation. The US wasn't founded on the attitude of "hey, I didn't do it right the first time so I'm going to give up". But then again, maybe that attitude has allowed our country to get where it is today. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by openbox9 :The US wasn't founded on the attitude of "hey, I didn't do it right the first time so I'm going to give up". But then again, maybe that attitude has allowed our country to get where it is today. But that is the attitude of so many of the slackers that now are in school or unemployed. Just give up; watch videos on the internet or listen to the stolen music on their iPods.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs:
·Optimum Online
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Stolen Music?
Just like walmart is about to do to paying customers?
Steal what has already been paid for.
Yea TK.. The government always looks out for the citizens, i mean look at our universal health care, oh wait we blew all that cash in iraq.
--
Reach out and Tap someone! | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans
join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
·Bright House
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Universal healthcare ha...It took 5 weeks to get into see my family doctor that's the legacy of universal healthcare. Seriously are people still pushing for that down in the States?
By-the-by and going back to topic, I'd suggest going for a CD levy down there. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by Mashiki :It took 5 weeks to get into see my family doctor that's the legacy of universal healthcare. Just an aside, even here in the US, I have had to wait that long to see my neurologist at the time and, on occasion, a little over three months to see my PCP. This isn't a community clinic, but a private foundation hospital with an EXCELLENT reputation.
said by Mashiki :By-the-by and going back to topic, I'd suggest going for a CD levy down there. Not sure if you are kidding or not, but a CD levy addresses the problem from the wrong angle, especially when you consider that most infringement is not done with physical media. It might have made sense back before everyone had high speed internet and still relied on copying discs.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Copyright infringement isn't theft, it's copyright infringement. But thanks for the sensationalism. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08
1 edit | said by TKJunkMail :said by openbox9 :The US wasn't founded on the attitude of "hey, I didn't do it right the first time so I'm going to give up". But then again, maybe that attitude has allowed our country to get where it is today. But that is the attitude of so many of the slackers that now are in school or unemployed. Just give up; watch videos on the internet or listen to the stolen music on their iPods. Sorry I have to disagree with having a bigger government role. The current system works. There is the DMCA and it is enforceable once a person is caught. To make the FBI now go after people seems like more money spent in the wrong direction the US has other issues.
Terrorism is more of a threat to the US then copyright intriguers.
Artists can sue or the RIAA has sued and done much to make people aware of illegal downloads even suing them.
Now tax dollars via:FBI will educate other countries.
Why not the RIAA and the like spend there money on catching the people responsible, but no spend US tax dollars not like the US already has financial issues lets just throw that in the 700 Billion bailout and call it an ear mark.
If someone takes your property then you take them to court.
It has always been that way.
Why should the Elite few (artists) get special help from the FBI when the RIAA has enough money to track down illegal file sharing?
Waste of money and politically motivated by lobbyist's, as usual pay someone in office to pass a bill.
EDIT: FYI the FBI goes after Drug dealers along with state and local authorities because Drugs are priority to them.
Does the FBI stop people from taking drugs or deter them?
Answer: NO, people still do it. | |
|
| | | | 
uid1307457
Premium
join:2005-12-30
Tempe, AZ
·Qwest.net
·Convergent Interne..
 ·DIRECTV
| said by TKJunkMail :said by Dogfather :Oh yeah, our EXPLODING trade deficit and decimation of our manufacturing sectors through outsourcing is proof the Federal gov't is protecting the US economy. What horsecrap. You are commenting on the governments ability to do a GOOD job. NOT on their responsibility to do the job at all. The job needs doing. It just needs to be done better. Maybe the new law will help them do that. wow, I actually agree with that statement. | |
|
| | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Protecting the economy is NOT what this bill does. It protects PRIVATE CORPORATE interests at the expense of the Tax Payer. You bitch and bitch about big government, then support this law? Seriously, WHY SHOULD MY MONEY be spent to ensure PRIVATE interests. If you ran a car dealership, is it the cities duty to make sure it doesn't get broken into? Should they station a cop there 24 hours a day / 7 days a week JUST for your business? That's exactly what the RIAA is getting. A 24/7 Private police force that TAX PAYERS are footing the bill for. Police in a community protect everything , NOT JUST ONE asset. We're paying for this PRIVATE COMPANY to have their own force. What a joke. You can't justify it and there's nothing that you will say that will give justification. Go ahead and try. There's a huge difference between setting up an organization to see EVERYONE'S interests versus dedicating it to ONE SPECIFIC entity. Either way, tax payers shouldn't foot the bill on something like this pet project. End of story. | |
|
| | |
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by jc100 :It protects PRIVATE CORPORATE interests ... WHY SHOULD MY MONEY be spent to ensure PRIVATE interests. I know I can talk until I am blue in the face and you will NEVER get it or agree, but the law is to protect all IP(intellectual property) and not just the RIAA or MPAA. And protecting Corporate interests also protects about 75% of the US economy. Don't like that? Too bad.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
| | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
1 edit | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Protecting Intellectual Property is ONE THING. However, that is still PRIVATE ENTITY and the FBI is already there to do that. We do NOT need to spend MORE BILLIONS to set up separate departments to do the job. We already got ENOUGH FAILURE on their part. Can we say 9/11 anyone. Our money doesn't need to be further SQUANDERED to facilitate someone else's BUSINESS.
READ ABOVE. If you owned 10 car lots in 10 states, SHOULD TAX PAYERS cover the cost of stationing a 24/7 police officer there to make sure you CARS ARE NOT STOLEN. After all, your business HELPS the economy too. So let's just have EVERY BUSINESS get PRIVATE PROTECTION that OUR money is used for. That's what you are advocating on a GRANDER SCALE.
THERE'S no difference here. Private companies are responsible for THEIR OWN INTERESTS. Case closed. | |
|
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
1 edit | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by jc100 :If you owned 10 car lots in 10 states, SHOULD TAX PAYERS cover the cost of stationing a 24/7 police officer there to make sure you CARS ARE NOT STOLEN. After all, your business HELPS the economy too. But we do use tax revenue to fund and support law enforcement...to include protecting your 10 car lots. What am I missing? | |
|
| | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
2 edits | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Not my 10 car lot. it was an example. Law enforcement is there to protect COMMUNITY interests as a WHOLE. Police are NOT there to serve as 24/7 security to one individual. Look at it like this. Tax payers in X city foot the bill so police can patrol a city and stop crime. Yet, they DO NOT spend their entire day stationed at one area permanently. We are now paying for the RIAA at tax payers expense to have their OWN private police force that DO NOT do anything but handle intellectual property crimes. My example with the car deal is that the CITY POLICE are there to protect everyone's stuff. They are not just dedicated to the car dealer.
Hence, this is a mismanagement of tax payer money. It is the car dealer's job to set up security to protest HIS OWN INTERESTS. It is HIS BUSINESS after all. While the police patrol a neighborbood, he is not going to stay at that persons business every day all day. Hence, in this case, why should tax payers be footing the bill for the RIAA to have someone watching their stuff every day, all day, WHEN every other business does NOT get this luxury. Would you want tax payers to hire a cop for EVERY PRIVATE owned company so they EACH get 24/7 security too? Simply put, should Pizza Hut, McDonalds, and every millions of other corporations get a private cop stationed 24/7 to make sure no one robs or steals? I bet you'd say no. So show me why the RIAA does. | |
|
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part IP is a concern for more than just the RIAA. Take your blinders off and expand your vision a little.
Following on your auto dealership example, does the owner of the dealership have authority to pursue and punish a perpetrator that takes one of his/her vehicles without permission? No, that's what law enforcement is for. Sure, it is incumbent upon the dealership owner to maintain a security system to deter theft, but I can't think of any security system that will prevent theft. Allowing individuals to pursue and punish perpetrators leads to lawlessness, disorder and with international IP concerns, almost impossible recourse. | |
|
| | | | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Actually IP is no different. Your IP should only be obtained if through a COURT order and a crime proven. Rulings by recent courts have shown that MAKING AVAILABLE is NOT a crime. One must prove downloading occurred. The RIAA has yet to win a single case now. All their wins have been out of court settlements. As for other crimes, I've got no problems using the CURRENT legal channels. FBI obtains court order. However, the FBI should NOT be working to serve the interests of ONE GROUP/
As per car dealer example, you miss the point. Cops are CITY officials paid to protect everyone. THey are NOT there to sit at EVERY BUSINESS 24/7 as personal security to EVERY business. Tax payers wouldn't appreciate if Pizza Hut, McDonalds, etc each had their OWN full day cop at TAX PAYERS expense. As per leaving the lot, YES the dealer own COULD follow and make a citizens arrest. Otherwise, he could shoot the dumb fuck for trespassing depending on the state where he / she lives. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part I'm glad you expanded your vision beyond the RIAA.
Back to the car dealership. Law enforcement exists to maintain peace and protect life and property. As such, law enforcement agencies will protect the car dealership to the greatest extent possible. It is still incumbent on the dealership to protect their assets as much as possible, e.g. security cameras, private security, etc. But in the event that the dealership's security measures aren't sufficient, engaging a law enforcement agency is necessary to retrieve the property and prosecute those who have taken it without permission.
Have you ever made a citizen's arrest? I wouldn't place the security of the dealership's vehicles in a citizen's arrest. As for "shooting the dumb fuck", that's great if you don't mind going to prison for manslaughter. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part A) Yes and no. First, law enforcement is there to protect the GENERAL community as a whole. He / She does NOT sit in one spot and serve as 24/7 security to one entity. Their job as police is to POLICE the city they work for. Now, if they wish to moonlight as private security on their off time, they are welcome to. Yet, when tax payers foot the bill, their job is NOT to serve private / corporate interests. Would you want your cops taking free meals from restaurants, discounts from stores, etc. I think that would give an air of bias. So why should tax payers be footing the bill for the RIAA / MPAA to go after people using OUR MONEY. It's their business. Now if a crime is committed, they should report it to the FBI. You ever see that nice little logo on a DVD? Their job is to handle this matter. Now, I am sure they got better things to do, but it is still their job. Tax payers don't need to make other departments to serve Corporate interests.
As I said above, should we have a Fast Food Restaurant Czar to ensure fast food joints aren't robbed and no one uses their logos? Should car dealers get a Car Czar to make sure their vehicles are not stolen or subject to theft? Hell, the tax payers are a cash cow. Let's fund EVERYONE who cannot work to serve their own needs. Why have private corporations if tax payers are LEFT WITH THE BILL. IE 700 Billion economy bail out. This merger of OUR (Tax Payer interests) and Corporate seems to be blurring together. I DONT RECALL HAVING A HAND IN THEIR BUSINESS or SEEING the profits. Now if the MPAA / RIAA want to cut each and every tax payer a check + interest in the future, then that would be a different story. Until then, my money shouldn't be used to serve theirs or anyone elses interests.
As for a citizen's arrest, they are perfectly legal. Have I made one no. Is shooting the "dumb fuck" legal, YES. I'm from Ohio and our law says if anyone breaks into your property, you have a right to protect it. Now, I moved to Texas and the laws here are a LOT MORE RELAXED. You trespass onto someone's property, (don't even have to enter a building, just be on the grass), and THEY HAVE 100 percent legal right to take your life. I said it once, and I'll say it twice, every state is different. Yet, most afford you the right to protect your own property. This moral and ethical argument behind this is another matter. I'm just stating the law as it is in the two places I've lived. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part You do realize that the FBI is taxpayer funded and does not exist merely to "sit in one spot and serve as 24/7 security to one entity".
You're missing the bigger picture. Just as the $700B economic plan serves a much larger role than bailing out a few banks, protecting IP interests in the US and around the world serves a much larger economic role than placing money in the **AA executives' pockets. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part The FBI is tax payer funded and WORKS all security. That's my point open box. They are not dedicated to ONE ENTITY. Why should ONE BUSINESS get 24/7 protection when no other industry is afford that luxury.
Also, I realize it has to do with a bigger picture. The point still stands. Should Pizza Hut / Mcdonalds get a food Czar to protect their interest? Should the Porn interest have a Smut Czar? All these contribute to the economy as well. Tax payers do not need to be funding MORE programs, especially if their purpose is to serve a SINGLE industry versus that of everyone. Let's face it, this is being created SOLELY for the MPAA / RIAA. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part You still aren't grasping the fact that this new IPEC position will work to protect more than one business. Pizza Hut and McDonald's have the FDA which is different, but does mandate and protect the industry. The porn industry would fall under the IPEC since porn is copyrighted. The IPEC does not solely protect the MPAA or the RIAA. At least you expanded your vision beyond the RIAA, but you need to expand it further.
I do agree with your statement that taxpayers do not need to fund more government. I do believe that we should be reducing the government's size and rid it of waste. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part No grasping for straws. FDA regulates ALL FOOD whether from a restaurant or private company. Their job is to ENSURE that food is safe to it, not that it tastes good. Their job isn't go around to Pizza Hut, McDonalds, and say this stuff is good. Also their job IS NOT to hold anyone who might be stealing their recipe accountable. Simply put, the FDA just makes sure you WON'T DIE from what you eat. There's no grasping for anything.
As for the porn industry, their job is to protect copyright and the actors. However, they work FOR the industry as a PRIVATE ORGANIZATION. The same as the MPAA / RIAA. Neither are government funded.
See how you are missing the point? Why shouldn't these organizations FUND THEIR OWN POLICE / Copyright Czars instead of the tax payer footing the bill. Notice once again, these organizations are FUNDED BY THE INDUSTRY THEMSELVES. So their enforcement should stay that way and NOT BURDEN tax payers.
I think you were missing the ENTIRE POINT and did a fantastic job of proving mine. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part I said the FDA was different. I won't argue that point.
The porn industry will find protection under the IPEC. Your previous comment was "should the porn interest have a smut czar?" and my retort was that they will with IPEC.
If you think I missed my point and proved yours, then our discussion is done. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | IP = intellectual property, JC. Try to follow along with the class  | |
|
| | | | | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Sorry misread. Point stands. Intellectual Property DOES NOT need a CZAR. Do all private businesses need a Police / Czar. Shit, why not give Pizza Hut / Fast food Industry a Food Czar to make sure no one uses their logo. Why not give all car dealers a car czar to make sure their cars aren't stolen. I mean hell, let's be frivolous with tax payer money and cut blank checks for all. I think EVERYONE needs security and the tax payers should foot the bill. Who's with me (sarcasm). | |
|
| | | | | | | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by openbox9 :Following on your auto dealership example, does the owner of the dealership have authority to pursue and punish a perpetrator that takes one of his/her vehicles without permission? No, that's what law enforcement is for. Law enforcement is an entire system. The auto dealership has the right to make a citizen's arrest, and to press criminal charge against the alleged perpetrator; and may even be able to afford a private security agency with the power of arrest on his premises.
The RIAA pretty much has been employing similar techniques, hiring agents who monitor P2P activity, and provide information toward complaints. They don't need to have the DoJ acting as their private security agents; they already have their own, in Media Sentry, and the like.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | | | | | | | 
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| said by openbox9 :IP is a concern for more than just the RIAA. Take your blinders off and expand your vision a little. Yes, it is a concern of mine. As a photographer, I've had my images used by Big Bu$ine$$ but never received a dime for the publication despite my copyright. Where is MY U.S. government assigned/taxpayer financed private police force to enforce MY copyright? I would like the feebs to protect my Intellectual Property rights, after all, my images contribute to the economy in that monies received enable me to spend locally as well as nationally. My side photography business is good for the economy, but the feebs won't help me. Just the **AAs.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
| |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by major marco :Where is MY U.S. government assigned/taxpayer financed private police force to enforce MY copyright? Since the IPEC is an executive position and funded by taxes, it isn't a private police force. I don't understand why this misunderstanding continues to be repeated. The IPEC position was just established and the POTUS hasn't nominated anybody for the position yet. Even after an appointment is confirmed, the IPEC has 12 months from the date the bill was passed to develop a Joint Strategic plan against counterfeiting and infringement. So, your assistance is coming, it's just not here yet. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | 
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
49533
| said by major marco :said by openbox9 :IP is a concern for more than just the RIAA. Take your blinders off and expand your vision a little. Yes, it is a concern of mine. As a photographer, I've had my images used by Big Bu$ine$$ but never received a dime for the publication despite my copyright. Where is MY U.S. government assigned/taxpayer financed private police force to enforce MY copyright? I would like the feebs to protect my Intellectual Property rights, after all, my images contribute to the economy in that monies received enable me to spend locally as well as nationally. My side photography business is good for the economy, but the feebs won't help me. Just the **AAs. They won't help you because you aren't funneling millions of dollars into their wallets like the **AAs. | |
|
| | | | | | | 
TomClancy
Freedom isn't free
join:2003-04-23
... | Yep, you are correct sir.
That is why we have something called private security guards and not public police to do the dirty work for the private corps. | |
|
| | | | axgupta1
join:2005-02-13
Mechanicsburg, PA
·Comcast
| Aren't there enough laws already to protect IP? What about copyright laws, DMCA? Are you saying that 75% of our economy is IP? It should be in very good shape now if that is the case since our IP is pretty safe. Unfortunately, the stock market doesn't seem to agree with your definition of 75% of economy. | |
|
| | | | 
Nightshade
sic semper tyrannis
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR
2 edits | Where are you getting your corporate interests protects 75% of the US economy, when small businesses have produced half of the GDP of the US?
In a recent study of 16 major industrial sectors, the share of GDP accounted for by small employers held steady at 50 percent over a seven-year period, ranging from 18 percent in the information sector to 85 percent in other services, the agency said. Source: »www.inc.com/news/briefs/200704/0416gdp.html
--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire | |
|
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Small businesses can own IP as well. IP owners don't have to be large international corporations. | |
|
| | | | |
digitalfreak
join:2005-12-09
49533 | He just pulled the number out of his ass. | |
|
| |
| NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by jc100 :This time from the Democrats. Usually, it's been from the far right, but the left is starting their own stupidity.  They started their own stupidity in the '30s!
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Which was??? The Great Depression was due in part to what we have now. No regulation. Except back then, banks were not FDIC. So when they went under, they took everyone's money with. There were a LOT of banks in that era who were taking money and investing it in companies who had no real assets. Many companies inflated their worth and there were no checks to see if anything was true. That was the fault of the whole system back then. We should have learned from that and fixed it 70 years later. Last I recall, Republicans ran things the last 8 yrs. Matter of fact, if you go to the bls.gov website, every year republicans are in office, Unemployment and Crime go up. When Democrats are in, both go down. Strange, ay =). | |
|
| | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part said by jc100 :When Democrats are in, both go down. Strange, ay =). Ah. So let's just kill all the Republicans, and the right wingers, and be done with it.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| 
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| said by jc100 :Here's where you are wrong TK.. Are you ever Right (nope)?. Tax Payer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. It' is THEIR JOB, NOT tax payers to do that... Tell that to the $700bln+ bail-out plan on the table!
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 | |
|
| | jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Which I HIGHLY DISAGREE WITH.... HIGHLY and I'm a Democrat per / Independent per say... | |
|
| 
Boberator
@bellsouth.net
 from:
TKJunkMail
| said by jc100 :Here's where you are wrong TK.. Are you ever Right (nope)?. Tax Payer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. It' is THEIR JOB, NOT tax payers to do that... (snip) So when there's a fire at the factory, the fire department shouldn't respond, because taxpayer money shouldn't be used to protect the interests of corporations? | |
|
| | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: Thank Bush for killing the "Govt suing infringers" part Pretty much for people who argue against anything socialized. My belief, the government is needed AT TIMES but it should not be there to help private companies who make STUPID DECISIONS. It's one thing for tax payer money to build Roads, Fund Schools, Maintain Public Safety (Fire, Police, EMS), etc. It's another thing to expect tax payers to foot the bill for a PRIVATE COMPANY who offers NO REWARD to tax payers who will no doubt be on the losing end of this scheme. | |
|
|
|
Nightshade
sic semper tyrannis
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR
2 edits | said by TKJunkMail :Yes, train other countries. Because it helps to get foreign countries to enforce laws protecting "intellectual property" rights of US companies and helps protect a large part of US exports. Even if the foreign laws of intellectual property rights are different than US Laws?
Tell me TK are they gonna teach foreign companies US law or their own laws? If that's the case what laws are going to be more supreme, the laws of the US or the laws of the foreign country that the US companies choose to do business in?
I think foreign countries know their laws pretty well. After all, they did pass them. The last thing any foreign country want is some other country coming in and "training" them what the foreign country's laws are and it should be done their way. Many countries would consider that a threat of their sovereignty.
--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA
| but from what i can tell, the bill is focused more on protecting the 'IP' of the entertainment industry than protecting the IP of companies like Intel, 3com, GE, Boeing, Cisco, etc.. i always seem to seem to come across articles on how NBC, RIAA, MPAA, or some crappy singer (or some manager to a whiny, crappy band in the case of U2) on how people 'stealinz there philez'. i don't have any respect or pitty for the entertainment industry as they rake in millions of dollars by any means necessary to pay people that don't contribute a lot of good for society and when they do produce something, all it is is just the same old crap (or good made into crap) in a different packaging. last time i checked, america got to where it is today because of engineers, scientists, people in the high technology scene, and the like. the entertainment industry didn't develop that pushed america (or any other country) ahead. i think the entertainment industry has become a cancer upon society that needs to be put into check. | |
|
|
|
|
·
