Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
17 posts

Geek


  Reply # 461154 21-Apr-2011 00:46
Send private message

richms: If there is no DRM in a subscription service then people will be able to keep using the content they have licensed after they stop paying, they will be able to share the tracks with non subscribers and there is nothing stopping them just joining for a month, getting all they want and then canceling it.

The encryption just needs to work well enough to inform people that what they are doing is not within the license they have the goods under, That is why I have a problem with the use of the words "effective" in the DMCA since that opens up the argument that once it can be cracked easily (as is the case with DVD stuff) that you can violate your license without penalty.

The fair use thing is an issue, but IMO that is better tackled by allowing limited generation of a non DRM version that is all that is needed for the use in question, which should be able to be audited by the rightsowners for correct use of it.

What IMO does need to happen is that a clear difference between sale and license gets established, as right now you have people "buying" tracks off things like iTunes etc when they are not purchasing, they are licensing it for specific playback situations.


I appreciate that your arguments are comprehensive and well reasoned, but I do disagree with them.

To answer your first question, the availability of new content will keep people coming back, also you would be surprised that I really don't think that very many people would slurp all the content like you have suggested, but for the most part use the service as a convenience and as intended.  I honestly don't think this will be much of an issue in practice and will be far outweighed by not having problematic DRM technology interfering with the use of the service.

Another point I would like to make is that we feel that non-commercial copying should be allowed under copyright law anyways, so this becomes a moot point in light of that.

I do agree that people are left with the impression that they have "bought" tracks off of services such as iTunes, when in fact they ahve only licensed them for use under a very restrictive set of circumstances.


8019 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 384

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 461365 21-Apr-2011 16:04
Send private message

richms: 

Yes, just not the absurdity that they are so easy to get for random things. If you make a new video compression standard etc I think you should get rewarded by people that use it.



Creating an algorithm is just applied maths to solve a problem, you can't patent maths so why can you patent an algorithm?

If you allow patenting algorithm's you create all sorts of perverse side effects.  Example: Two different people in different countries have a problem they are trying to solve, they both independently write software/an algorithm to solve the problem.  Person 1 patents the software first in the US.... Person 1's lawyers then sues Person 2 to stop his software from ever being sold in the US.

Why should person 1 have the exclusive monopoly intellectual right to that?  It's BS, what happened to free market competition there?

Patents are government granted monopolies... they are anti free market by their very nature.

The patent system also doesn't scale.

We are inventing more things faster than every before and patent officers who review and approve patents don't have the expertise in all the various areas they need to review patents properly and throw out junk... these days in the US they rubber stamp patents and lets the courts sort it out later whether it's invalid which means big costs in lawyers fee's to prove patents are invalid/obvious.

It's a flawed broken backwards system.

 
 
 
 


17 posts

Geek


  Reply # 461372 21-Apr-2011 16:19
Send private message

Ragnor: these days in the US they rubber stamp patents and lets the courts sort it out later whether it's invalid which means big costs in lawyers fee's to prove patents are invalid/obvious.


Not only that, but the current patent law in the US has a presumption of validity on the patent in question, and courts are very reluctant to invalidate patents.  The assumption is that the patent office did their job in the first place when approving the patent (which, of course they didn't).  There is a case before the US supreme court (Microsoft vs i4i) now that is trying to change this presumption.  Check out groklaw.net for details on this case.


gzt

8887 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1186


  Reply # 461378 21-Apr-2011 16:31
Send private message

The cassette vastly expanded the market for music, and vastly expanded freedoms. Imagine if media companies had refused to release on cassette. Massive 'sharing' and commercially motivated piracy would have occured. Yes, exactly what happened with digital music.

Digital music had the potential to vastly expand the market, and instead a vast and horrible market contraction occcured.

Draconian law allowing arbitrary summons and enforcement won't change that situation one bit.

I agree with your points about sharing of culture. The current legal situation in regard to sharing of electronic media is just terrible and represents a massive loss of traditional freedom to share.

Without change to allow sharing, exactly the same situation will start to occur with books. It would be a disaster.

The most popular platform - iTunes - has made good (but slow) progress in removing DRM from music. It needs to move to allow sharing outside home networks in a way that preserves long established freedoms.

There are fairness problems inherent in reducing copyright length. It is a very common scenario for an author to work on a book for 15 years, release it, it gets a very small printing, then 10 years later it is recognised and gets widely reprinted, read, and discussed. It seems fair to me the author should benefit from the labour which others are only now finding useful. The same occurs for a lot of independent music and film.


Departed
10563 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4589

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 461398 21-Apr-2011 17:11
Send private message

Just like the best way to avoid being prosecuted for drink driving is not to drink then drive, the best way to avoid being hit with sanctions under this Act is, don't download illegaly.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


gzt

8887 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1186


  Reply # 461408 21-Apr-2011 17:57
Send private message

No part of my post advocated or even slightly suggested illegally downloading.

17 posts

Geek


  Reply # 461422 21-Apr-2011 18:49
Send private message

KiwiNZ: Just like the best way to avoid being prosecuted for drink driving is not to drink then drive, the best way to avoid being hit with sanctions under this Act is, don't download illegaly.


Except that with the new law you are presumed guilty upon accusation (by the record industry).  You are allowed to "defend" yourself in a special tribunal (which will ultimately end up being just a rubber-stamp).  And with the music industries record of accusing grandmothers who don't even use a computer, children, etc, I can say with reasonable confidence that you *are* in danger of being prosecuted under this Act even if you do not download illegally.

All that said, I never did say that the Pirate Party advocates illegal downloading.  What we are trying to do is change the laws to make it legal.


gzt

8887 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1186


  Reply # 461431 21-Apr-2011 19:24
Send private message

pajamian: All that said, I never did say that the Pirate Party advocates illegal downloading. What we are trying to do is change the laws to make it legal.


I thought you made a good argument for legal sharing, but I've yet to see you make a good argument for essentially anonymous download transactions of any media available.

17 posts

Geek


  Reply # 461433 21-Apr-2011 19:27
Send private message

gzt: I thought you made a good argument for legal sharing, but I've yet to see you make a good argument for essentially anonymous download transactions of any media available.


You just lost me there.


8832 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1341

Trusted

  Reply # 461449 21-Apr-2011 20:43
Send private message

[Except that with the new law you are presumed guilty upon accusation]

You are correct

[ (by the record industry)]

This statute is not about the record industry, it covers illegal filesharing and downloading, which are copyright infringements. May be the Record industry, Movie industry, TV industry, software industry, etc

[You are allowed to "defend" yourself in a special tribunal (which will ultimately end up being just a rubber-stamp)]

Your assumption

[ And with the music industries record of accusing grandmothers who don't even se a computer, children, etc,]

Another rash assumption

[I can say with reasonable confidence that you *are* in danger of being prosecuted under this Act even if you do not download illegally.]

Sure


[All that said, I never did say that the Pirate Party advocates illegal downloading. What we are trying to do is change the laws to make it legal.]

That is exactly what you are advocating. You want to make it legal to download media, which is illegal as it is copyrighted, which is why it is sold to buyers. So instead of buying the media, thereby giving revenue to those who it is due to, i.e. the creators and distributors, you want to make it legal to download for free. Ok, I get it now.








gzt

8887 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1186


  Reply # 461466 21-Apr-2011 21:30
Send private message

pajamian:
gzt: I thought you made a good argument for legal sharing, but I've yet to see you make a good argument for essentially anonymous download transactions of any media available.


You just lost me there.



Ok. I get how you want legal freedom to share digital media you purchased (music, movies, ebooks, etc) just like you have the legal freedom to lend your cds, books, or movies to a friend or even someone you just met. Like you point out it is an important part of cultural exchange. I fully support that, and I agree the law should be changed to preserve this fundamental cultural freedom. I think you made a good moral case for that based on cultural freedom and preservation of culture.

Here's the part I don't get - it looks to me like you are also advocating you should have the legal freedom to make available and obtain items for which you have not paid the artist/author anything at all. Do you have a moral justification or any kind of moral argument to support that?

80 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 461533 22-Apr-2011 11:05
Send private message

I'm amazed there are people who support these laws! Whose side are you on?!

I'm a reasonably well-paid professional, and never pay for movies or songs. Why would I spend money on something that costs nearly nothing to copy?

The only reason people can make money of these is because of stupid laws which defy any natural justice. Why should I pay for Bono's 'bation, Britney's C-sections or Polanski's and P-Money's problems?

I try to educate everyone I know on how to use torrents and get these things for free. The only "theft" is that being committed by overpaid drug-addled record company execs and overly-sexed "rockstars". They don't deserve a cent.

It's sad that celebrity is now so important that politicians will bend over backwards to give the superstars and their managers what they want - to the point of making it illegal to record soundwaves!

If someone takes a screenshot of this post, I don't expect to be paid royalties. I am paid to work, I get paid for my work. I don't get paid for a copy of it.

1539 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 39

Trusted

  Reply # 461537 22-Apr-2011 11:12
Send private message

tristanb: I'm amazed there are people who support these laws! Whose side are you on?!

I'm a reasonably well-paid professional, and never pay for movies or songs.




I wouldn't be so open to posting stuff like that in an open forum :P

80 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 461544 22-Apr-2011 11:29
Send private message

boby55:
I wouldn't be so open to posting stuff like that in an open forum :P


Of course I mean radio, TV and the multitude of free music on the internet deliberately put up for the public to download as use as they like. I'm astonished you'd assume that I'd be violating copyright! I'm no Melissa Lee.

Got to go soon, my data cap is nearly exceeded from downloading... Linux isos. :-D

8832 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1341

Trusted

  Reply # 461546 22-Apr-2011 11:38
Send private message

And no school today...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

How Oppo shakes New Zealand’s phone market
Posted 22-Aug-2017 18:32


Recognition for top small business advisors
Posted 22-Aug-2017 17:23


OPPO R11 dual 20MP camera phone debuts in New Zealand
Posted 22-Aug-2017 15:45


Intel introduces new 8th Generation processors
Posted 21-Aug-2017 19:02


Trend Micro launches Home Network Security
Posted 21-Aug-2017 18:38


Avondale College students at top of Microsoft Office Specialist World Championship
Posted 21-Aug-2017 14:11


Garmin introduces inReach SE+ and inReach Explorer+
Posted 21-Aug-2017 14:05


Public Wi-Fi plus cloud file sharing
Posted 18-Aug-2017 11:20


D-Link NZ launches professional Wireless AC Wave 2 Access Point for businesses
Posted 17-Aug-2017 19:25


Garmin introduces the Rino 700 five-watt two-way handheld radio
Posted 17-Aug-2017 19:04


Garmin announces the Foretrex 601 and Foretrex 701 Ballistic Edition for outdoor and tactical use
Posted 17-Aug-2017 19:02


Brightstar announces new distribution partnership with Samsung Knox platform in Australia
Posted 17-Aug-2017 17:07


Free gig-enabled WiFi network extends across Dunedin
Posted 17-Aug-2017 17:04


Samsung expands with connect Gear S3 Frontier
Posted 17-Aug-2017 15:55


Fact-checking Southern Cross Next cable is fastest to USA
Posted 17-Aug-2017 13:57



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.