895 posts • joined Wednesday 6th September 2006 11:02 GMT
Re: 100:1 it was due to DRM as well as stupidity
I'll take you up on that, Pu02.
I suggest £50. Now show me the money.
Re: Re: Solution
When the state gives one sector, or one company a huge advantage over the others, it is as you say, corporatism. This isn't some precursor to fascist economics however, it *is* fascist economics: the state picks "winners", and protects them.
Re: Re: Solution
"No, Capitalism is the pursuit of wealth"
So is doing the lottery every week. You're on to something, but you have to be more precise.
Re: Hang on...
"Hang on - moist [sic] of the infringements are done by a mere 3.2%? Doesn't this kind of blow the whole "piracy is costing us beeeeeeeelions!" thing out of the water?"
Only if you have a turnip for a brain. It means a) enforcement should be targeted at the wealthy few who do most of it and b) since they're generally wealthy, services should think about nice premium services.
Rewarding people who actually pay for stuff would be nice, too. ("FREEZE! IT'S THE FBI")
Re: Re: Concert spending
About a dozen studies. I know of one that says otherwise, the effect is neutral.
But I wonder which you'll choose to believe? With "copyfighters" it's all about choosing the evidence to back up your prejudice. You must reject all evidence that doesn't.
"Copyfighting" is really creationism's twin brother.
It doesn't matter if copyright lasts 2 or 2,000,000 years - if it can't be enforced.
That includes the same copyright that gives you ownership of your photos, by the way. Which Instagram and the UK Gov want to grab.
Re: No mention of CC
Of course it doesn't figure in the stats.
Somebody who "only downloads Creative Commons music and videos" is either telling a porkie, or is so unusual they deserve to be on the Fourth Plinth at Trafalgar Square.
Re: Concert spending
You're not really following the arguments or the evidence. There are many studies of this, discovery is an element but the overall effect is negative.
Which is what we'd expect. Why pay for something when the alternative is substitutable and there's no risk? That's a rational economic decision.
Re: "Excels as an integrated organiser"?
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall any Nokia feature phones doing what you require in Paragraphs 1&2. Psion's organisers had a very rich Agenda, Nokia gradually made their phones dumber, with the 9300 Communicator probably being the last to have a semi-decent Calendar app. That was a Hildon device pretending to be a Series 80 device.
Very nice post, though TFMR. It shows how much work needs to be done, to get us to where we were in the 1990s.
Re: Re: rights/privileges again
"The purpose of IP Rights (including copyright) is surely to encourage the sharing of creative works"
The exclusivity is there to encourage trade in something we value highly as a society. It's the trade, aka a healthy market, that provides the incentive for the dissemination. It encourages investment in the business of disseminating the stuff.
Is a 1:1 exchange of an image "sharing" or is it "trade"?
Re: Two sides to the orphan issue?
This is the best explanation of how it's done today, with orphan works being made available to us in many forms:
And many good ideas for making digital copies of orphans abound, most OW schemes make use of narrow exceptions.
What the issue is here the proposal is so broad and clumsy (it was written by activists who don't really understand copyright, they're quite new to it, and not lawyers) it threatens primary licensing. The UK IPO had every opportunity to narrow the wording of OW/ECL so there would be no ambiguity and no threat to primary licensing at all. They declined the opportunities.
@ "Dr S"
Can you be more honest in your representation of yourself? Calling yourself "a copyright lawyer" implies you practice law, rather than study it.
You could start by providing your full name and credentials.
Your personal opinion on whether the UK contravenes Berne is counter to other expert rather better-informed opinion, and perhaps reflects your agenda.
Re: Re: Completely blown out of proportion
"What am I missing?"
I'll assume you're not trolling, anon.
You're missing pretty much everything, to be honest.
Allowing the commercial use of a piece of work without a license turns property rights upside down. The burden of proof falls on the property owner to seek redress. Any other property rights you'd like to rewrite. (Eg, "Nice sports car, shame the owner left a crappy lock on the door"....)
Try reading up some background, particular on property rights, why "diligent search" is nigh impossible, and think about market alternatives to screwing over individuals. Such alternatives exist and are widely supported, and benefit all parties.
And don't take my word for it. (Or anything).
Here's David Bailey on the subject:
Yes, *THAT* David Bailey. What do you think he knows about photography?
Re: copyright != human right
In other words, PyLETS, you have absolutely no idea you've just been shafted.
This is *very* bad news for the lube industry.
Re: Re: Excuse me
"Metadata stripping is already illegal.' But nearly impossible to police."
You'd be amazed how the prospect of dropping a bar of soap in the showers can focus the minds of a senior media executive.
Re: @Andrew Orlowski: Re: Excuse me
"It's not really illegal until the courts have started enforcing it. Have they?"
No. Good point.
Re: Completely blown out of proportion
You don't understand the law, Tim, and you don't understand the act. It's that simple.
"In all the cases laid out in the article here like users' photos on Facebook, Instagram, or Flickr then those photos immediately have an account associated with them, and the author can easily be found."
There are many ideas on how to deal with orphan works. The EU directive which would have become UK law forbids commercial use. But there has been nothing like this anywhere, which reverses the law so completely.
Re: Re: Excuse me
Image matching (eg, Getty PicScout) is now fast and reliable.
A registry of images (eg the copyright hub) would provide the author info. Large users who solicit and use "unidentified" photos (eg Daily Mail, BBC) could be obliged to register them. Metadata stripping is already illegal.
So Registry + ImageRecog + Law solves the Orphan Works "problem" with the law we already have, it removes uncertainty for users and creates a new market. This is all photographers were asking for here.
Other people have other agendas.
Of course, some people were in a hurry. When the
Re: IP profits lawyers and extortion style law suits
Ah, you don't understand how to protect IP.
That explains everything.
Re: And this is why...
"Vasilenko's attitude seems to be fairly Creative-Commons; good to see"
No, this is the simply freedom given to you by strong copyright law. This includes the freedom to change your mind - which you surrender when you put a restrictive license on your work.
For example: you may let the BBC use your picture but refuse it to the Daily Mail. The next day you change your mind about The Daily Mail. You cannot do this with a restrictive CC license. The whole point is to make a sacrifice "for the good of the commons", aka, The Greater Good.
"Considering the absolute impossibility of determining authorship of a digital photograph"
A contender for the most fuck-witted remark I've ever read here, or on the internet.
Image recognition can *already* identify images even using a partial match. It's a lot easier than the face recognition used by Facebook, Apple etc. Gettys PicScout is an example.
Build the database, ensure what goes in is accurate, and the rights trading marketplaces will follow. You get that part right.
"Or stop whining".
Yes, please do.
Re: There's no need for press regulation per se
"It's incidents like this (plus 3 months of examples in the inquiry) which demonstrate why the regulation as it exists is toothless and needs to be strengthened"
It is being strengthened anyway. You make no case for any kind of state regulation, at all.
What you're doing is what I describe in the piece. Find a victim - pin their corpse to the front of your bulldozer, and steam through the crowd.
It's pretty shameless.
Re: There sure as hell is a need for press regulation
"Do I want journalists to have completely free reign?"
Re: Out of sympathy
"While I respect freedom like any other person..."
Arguments to curtail freedom always being with something like this.
Re: I think its you with the problem guvnor
"Orlowski gets a little bit cross when Mr Fry attempts to explain tech concepts that aren't 100% accurate. "
Garbage In, Garbage Out, Garbage All Around!
It's the producer's fault as much as anyone's. I grew up in the 1970s when the presenter of a science or technology program had a decent technical education. Think James Burke - much mocked at the time, but he was able to talk about the material at length.
Wrong explanations are not "less than 100 per cent" right, they're wrong. That is all.
You're having a stupid moment.
Re: Re: Bloody tired of freetards
Nobody "owes" anybody a living. But this argument is a giant red herring.
The property grab applies to everyone who does stuff: amateurs who post to Flicker as well as professionals. It applies to all classes of work not just photographs (as another poster has said, correctly).
Re: Steganography/digital watermarks ?
Not even necessary anon - image recognition software like Getty's PicScout, or the software developed in house at Facebook and Google, can do a reasonable job. Add in the database of owner information and you have all you need for a rights trading market place. This is the thinking behind Hooper. (Reg passim).
Re: Re: My Precious
There's no need to wonder, Dave, the EU has agreed an Orphan Works proposal of its own, which would become UK law too eventually.
The EU scheme is not brilliant, but it specifically prohibits commercial use of other people's stuff, unlike the UK proposal, which allows everyone to profit from a photo except the person who took it. That's the big difference - it's like an Instagram landgrab, but much much bigger.
The EU allows national orphan works schemes that *are already in place* to remain intact, so the copyright zealots at Whitehall are on a mission to push this one through as fast as they can.
The rational solution is a better rights trading marketplace so users of photographs taken by businesses like Webbaviation could acquire them easier - backed by strong law to make life harder for rip-off merchants. This is what the industry is moving towards. But it is not what a copyright-is-evil zealot wants to see. Copyright is evil, and so it must be dismantled - British businesses are collateral damage.
Re: Re: Bigger pic
Was there a point to that?
More Bank Holidays, maybe? I'm up for that. Or fewer Bank Holidays to compensate for economic damage caused by piracy?
Re: Re: The customer defines value
In ten years you've never had a single new idea, PyLETS. I am not surprised you dislike people who do have new ideas, and want don't want the ideas to be ripped off.
"Intellectual property is a monopoly" is a child's logic. IP is in international treaties and national law, because it's the least-bad way we have come up with of encouraging new work. Property is property, and rights are rights: and activists who want to rob people of their rights (as the UK Coalition Government is doing) find that it's expensive and ends in defeat.
Envy seems to be a motivation with you. You really seem to hate people who are more creative, I think.
Re: Re: The customer defines value
There's a dozen studies on this. One says "no harm", the rest say a bit or quite a lot. You can look some of these u.
Naturally, I'd expect someone who doesn't like the conclusion not to accept the evidence. Cf. fossils.
"Really the impact of piracy is overrated.. if someone is going to pay, they will pay"
Maybe it's overrated, maybe it's underrated. I don't think there's anyone left (except the loony fringe) who thinks it causes no economic damage. The 1 in 20 get very little sympathy from the 19 in 20 who do the right thing.
We know most people actually like buying stuff. The bigger issue for the (c) industries is getting more money into the system, and making it easier for us to pay for stuff. Until that happens movies and music that's made is going to fall short of its true value.
Re: I think theres a bit more to it than risk free and saves money.
"Pricing - Generally for TV and Film I refuse to buy when first released"
That's actually a very valid market decision, by you as a punter. New films are under a fiver on Virgin and you don't want to spend a fiver to see it. That's fine.
It's not an ethical "reason to pirate", though, is it?
"I would admit though since signing up for Netflix and Lovefilm the amount of movie piracy I do has taken a massive dive."
I tried Blackberry-enabled SIMs and regular SIMs, and there's no difference. I thought it was a bug, rang Canada to check, but it's a feature.
You can make your own arrangement and buy a hosted Blackberry email account, or add Blackberry to a hosted Exchange account (it's a free addon from some mail providers).
The market is much healthier now than a few years ago, as most clients now support Exchange, and you can buy hosted Exchange for around £3/mth.
It doesn't have the 'bedside mode' of BBOS, which means when you drop it in a cradle it can turn off the radios, and change all kinds of notification options. BB10 has a sleep profile with a nice clock. Not the same thing.
Re: Mine is waiting at home for me
> Any word on voice recognition?
It's very good. Task driven (eg, "Email Jim") voice recognition is done on the device and works as well as anything I've tried. Other v.r. is done server-side by software licensed from Nuance.
Re: Another vote for the "I just don't get your point" brigade.
" Nobody is suggesting that the item is flat priced."
Plenty of people are. And part of the storage locker assumption is that price is zero.
You post shows you haven't really thought this through.
Re: I don't get it
That's because Mega is creating a scarcity and then charging you for it. In effect, it's creating virtual property.
Some lockers do this, but many don't.
Re: When Journalist become flamers...
So you're not really disputing anything of substance, you just want "a more "wholistic energy policy".
I'm not sure what your idea of "a range of technologies" means, but whatever is in that range has to be cost effective. Presumably it doesn't include hamsters on treadmills.
"People worried about earthquakes and contaminated drinking water are hippies? Interesting."
"People worried about earthquakes and contaminated drinking water are largely irrational and poorly informed."
Fixed it for you.
Re: bonus tracks (tech speak alert)
Thanks Matt - we should link to this inline.
Re: So, Andrew
I'm living off loans and antiques right now. WinPho for the last month...
This UI and the Lumia 920 would be a nice combo. I'd settle for that.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire