Killing off the little guy (this time it's internet radio)

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
DRM has turned many former purchasers of online music into downloaders of music, including myself. I actually have a personal preference to see the artists get paid when I listen to their song - but it's nothing more than that, just a preference. So I used Itunes music store for a while. But then I tried to change computers. HOLY COW it is incredibly restrictive on how you can use your music. Only five computers are allowed to play it, you can't move music off your ipod and on to the computer...

It's fundamentally an inferior product to what you can get for free. DRM has pushed many many people into allofmp3, bittorr***, what have you, simply because the music you get from downloading is...better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks man. Ok, I did not know it in that language. But I have encountered DRM and I don't buy CDs anymore. I have no reason to. RIAA is a joke.

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
Copyright ... is a voluntary contract - it only covers works that are developed based on the copyrighted work.

[/ QUOTE ]Alright. But you are not too clear about how one protects his copyright in AC land. Please elaborate.

[ QUOTE ]
Patents, on the other hand, are involuntary, and if you independently invent something that someone else has patented, even if you have zero knowlege even of the existence of that patented item, you are infringing. That's a lot more than protecting your work, that's actively obstructing others' work.

[/ QUOTE ] And ?

And what ?

How do you prevent this from happening? How do you obtain compensation for it when it happens?

Mickey Brausch

[Poofler]

MB,

This discussion has been had a couple times. Use search for the obvious terms if you want to read through it all. In short, copyright would be protected just like it is now: litigation.

[NeBlis]

[ QUOTE ]
Laws to protect software, music, writing, inventions, etc...yeah, they just wouldn't work. Ideas aren't scarce.

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone always trys to make this "ideas aren't scarce" argument to say copyrights are a farce. Heres how that really works.

Sure everyone has "ideas" but a good or better idea is singular and unique. A child has the idea to bang on pans to make music, but on Jimmy Hendrix can make Electric Ladyland.
I am a photographer IP is my lifeswork I spend most days honing that craft. You have a camera at home and try to take nudes of your girlfriend. Trust me there is a BIG difference
IP is easily enforced by common sense simple contract law. And would be more properly enforced by a judge and fines than abused by money grubbing politicians as in this case.


BTW: great OP Neilsio !

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone always trys to make this "ideas aren't scarce" argument to say copyrights are a farce. Heres how that really works.

Sure everyone has "ideas" but a good or better idea is singular and unique. A child has the idea to bang on pans to make music, but on Jimmy Hendrix can make Electric Ladyland.

[/ QUOTE ]
You may be confused as to what the economic definition of "scarcity" is.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Copyright ... is a voluntary contract - it only covers works that are developed based on the copyrighted work.

[/ QUOTE ]Alright. But you are not too clear about how one protects his copyright in AC land. Please elaborate.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not my problem, it's for the guy who wants to protect his work to figure out.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Patents, on the other hand, are involuntary, and if you independently invent something that someone else has patented, even if you have zero knowlege even of the existence of that patented item, you are infringing. That's a lot more than protecting your work, that's actively obstructing others' work.

[/ QUOTE ] And ?

And what ?

How do you prevent this from happening? How do you obtain compensation for it when it happens?

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize I'm talking about patent law is it exists currently - in an objectionable, non-voluntary form? You obtain compensation (which you are not legitimately entitled to) through your friendly neighborhood monopolist of violence.

[NeBlis]

[ QUOTE ]
You may be confused as to what the economic definition of "scarcity" is.


[/ QUOTE ]

NOPE im not. in fact i was (perhaps poorly) explaining why ideas in certain cases do in fact fit this definition.

scar·ci·ty (skâr'sĭ-t&#275
n., pl. -ties.
Insufficiency of amount or supply; shortage: a scarcity of food that was caused by drought.
Rarity of appearance or occurrence: antiques that are valued for their scarcity.

[WillMagic]

neblis,

there is a difference between economic scarcity and scarcity in as it is used commonly.

a jimi hendrix song may be "scarce" in terms of being rare but it is not scarce in the economic sense of the word.

[NeBlis]

[ QUOTE ]
neblis,

there is a difference between economic scarcity and scarcity in as it is used commonly.

a jimi hendrix song may be "scarce" in terms of being rare but it is not scarce in the economic sense of the word.

[/ QUOTE ]

The RIAA disagrees with you [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

As do I and many other creators of scarce ideas. I agree whole heatedly that a goverment solution is substandard at best but ideas can in fact be scarce.

[AzDesertRat]

I think you are missing the point--this is not the Artist Industry of America, but the Recording Industry of America--the money that the recording companies is trying to squeeze from consumers is going to them, not the artists. In fact, the RIAA has been squeezing the payments to artists. Any time they claim that the artists lose out, everything they say before and after that should be considered BS.

As far as I am concerned, this is no better than an illegal monopoly or cartel and this cartel should be found so accordingly by the courts and disbanded. It would be for the benefit of everyone (except the companies of course).