22 Aug, 2010, Dean wrote in the 121st comment:
Votes: 0
Cratylus said:
Looks like I need not have bothered telling the story of my research survey.


I found it interesting and it confirms my own research albeit into different subject matter but the sentiments are the same.

People think they are entitled to something, Law dictates otherwise. In the battle between ideology and law, I know which side will win out 9 times out of 10 in this day and age. :wink:
22 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 122nd comment:
Votes: 0
David Haley said:
Well, I hope you do not make a living from software, for otherwise your position would be astoundingly hypocritical. Oh, wait, you did use to make a living from software. So, uh, I guess you're astoundingly hypocritical. :sad:

I do not distribute for free some work expecting then to be paid for the same exact work, it would be totally stupid….

David Haley said:
Turan already said that he's very happy for music to be on the radio, because it gives people a chance to consider a purchase. But you're not happy with radio. You seem to be happy neither with radio, nor with selling music in stores. What exactly would it take to please you? What is the conclusion you are driving at? Should all recorded music be free in all circumstances? Should it only be available for purchase/subscription?

Err did you even read a word of what I was saying:what you air for free is free….
What you do not air for free (the rest of the album) has to be paid for….what did you not understand ?

David Haley said:
Your position is incoherent and only leads to absurd conclusions.

Maybe you should read first what you comment.
22 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 123rd comment:
Votes: 0
Yes, I read what you said, and I maintain that your position is incoherent and leads to the absurd. Your defenses so far have been along the lines of:
- think of what the "common man" would believe, he doesn't understand the law and this is how he'd interpret it
- well I wouldn't be so stupid as to air something for free

so you're arguing a position for the entirety of society based on the beliefs of people who don't understand this stuff, and your personal preferences regarding what you'd air on the radio. How is this supposed to not be absurd?
22 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 124th comment:
Votes: 0
It is not a defense but the explanation of why trying to make people pay for something that is distributed freely by the author otherwise will never work, law or not. This is the real absurdity…the fact you are a patent lawyer probably hides this from you.
22 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 125th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva said:
This is the real absurdity…the fact you are a patent lawyer probably hides this from you.

:surprised:

I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this. :rolleyes:
22 Aug, 2010, quixadhal wrote in the 126th comment:
Votes: 0
I played God of War 3 for 5 minutes, standing at the demo setup at Best Buy the other day. Does that mean I should be expecting Sony to mail me a Blu-Ray disc for the PS3 soon, since I did try it for free and thus shouldn't have to pay for it, right?

Boy, it's great saving all this money that I don't have to pay for cable TV any more! I just walked past a TV display and saw stuff, so now it's all MINE! Sure, I had to put my own cable splitter on the neighbor's line, but I paid for the splitter AND the 50 feet of cable, so that's legal, right?

Come to think of it, I've had electricity for YEARS! I shouldn't need to pay for that either since I'm pretty sure I will actually die without it (in the winter), so that means they have to give it to me for free. Sweet!

I'm glad you kids have shown me the light. Look at all the money I'll save! I'm gonna go convince everyone else to do the same since none of these things really costs anything to make. Woot!!!

*The above was a dramatization. No actual crimes were committed. This message is for the sarcasm impared.
23 Aug, 2010, Rudha wrote in the 127th comment:
Votes: 0
He probably wears a tinfoil hat too.

Let me correct one thing though, and actually speaking from personal experience here: Radio - in Canada, at least, and I would assume the states as well - is NOT distributed freely. Radio stations pay a bevy for the services that they provide to the average communter on the road or other person listening to radio (does anyone still listen to radio at home other than me?). First of all, they have to pay licensing fees to the CRTC - or the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission - basically the government agency which controls and regulates radio. On top of that, if they don't fill a certain quota of "canadian content" they either have to pay a fee monthly, or a much larger fine after the fact. Finally, each and every record label that owns the music you play on the station is owed licensing fees. (Ever wonder why music often gets played to death on the radio, certain songs? Or why theres a half-billion 'oldies' stations? Thems be the stations that wanted to minimise licensing fees.)

It might be free for the consumer, but it is not free period. Someone pays for it - its just not you.

- Maya/Rudha
23 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 128th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
It might be free for the consumer, but it is not free period. Someone pays for it - its just not you.

I think Rarva knows this; he's essentially saying that as soon as the consumer gets anything for free they have the right to own it thenceforth… the question of "well I got it for free, so why isn't it mine?".
23 Aug, 2010, chrisd wrote in the 129th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
It is not a defense but the explanation of why trying to make people pay for something that is distributed freely by the author otherwise will never work, law or not. This is the real absurdity…the fact you are a patent lawyer probably hides this from you.


Are you still talking about songs played on the radio? Because those aren't made freely available.
23 Aug, 2010, Rudha wrote in the 130th comment:
Votes: 0
I actually think its more in the vein of: "as long as someone is giving things away for free, similar paid ventures won't succeed."

No one tell him about commercial Linux d...

Maya/Rudha
23 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 131st comment:
Votes: 0
quixadhal said:
I played God of War 3 for 5 minutes, standing at the demo setup at Best Buy the other day. Does that mean I should be expecting Sony to mail me a Blu-Ray disc for the PS3 soon, since I did try it for free and thus shouldn't have to pay for it, right?

The game is distributed for free ? Nope, your analogy fail….what you get is a sample….If you could play the game in its totality for free, regulary, you would have a point.

quixadhal said:
Boy, it's great saving all this money that I don't have to pay for cable TV any more! I just walked past a TV display and saw stuff, so now it's all MINE! Sure, I had to put my own cable splitter on the neighbor's line, but I paid for the splitter AND the 50 feet of cable, so that's legal, right?


BTW the TV display probably have no rights to show cable TV programs in a shop.
And is the cable TV distributed for free otherwise ? Nope you have to pay for it…so what is the point of your analogy ?

quixadhal said:
Come to think of it, I've had electricity for YEARS! I shouldn't need to pay for that either since I'm pretty sure I will actually die without it (in the winter), so that means they have to give it to me for free. Sweet!

Actually yes they should provide either a mean to get you hot OR allow you to go cut wood to burn for yourself.
Since you cannot do the second solution because it is probably 'owned' by someone else, not my fault you live in a stupid country that dont give a fuck about their citizens.

quixadhal said:
This message is for the sarcasm impared.

Try better analogies next time….
23 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 132nd comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
Since you cannot do the second solution because it is probably 'owned' by someone else, not my fault you live in a stupid country that dont give a fuck about their citizens.

This kind of talk is inappropriate for this forum, because it is swearing and political… if you insist on making it political, there is the controversial topics section for this talk.
23 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 133rd comment:
Votes: 0
Rudha said:
I actually think its more in the vein of: "as long as someone is giving things away for free, similar paid ventures won't succeed."

No one tell him about commercial Linux d...

Maya/Rudha


ROFLMAO, RedHat does not sell you the code, they sell you support. No one told you about CentOS ? Oh man you made my day !
23 Aug, 2010, Cratylus wrote in the 134th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
not my fault you live in a stupid country that dont give a fuck about their citizens.


You mean like Sarkozy cares about the Roma?

Rarva, your attitude is why DRM exists. "If I can physically copy it, I'm allowed to" is pretty much what
you're saying, and it's why copy protection schemes have been put in place. Really annoying
copy protection schemes. Because of you.

Thanks.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
23 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 135th comment:
Votes: 0
David Haley said:
Quote
Since you cannot do the second solution because it is probably 'owned' by someone else, not my fault you live in a stupid country that dont give a fuck about their citizens.

This kind of talk is inappropriate for this forum, because it is swearing and political… if you insist on making it political, there is the controversial topics section for this talk.

Heh patent are a political problem in the first place, only in the USA can you patent obvious methods…
23 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 136th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
David Haley said:
Quote
Since you cannot do the second solution because it is probably 'owned' by someone else, not my fault you live in a stupid country that dont give a fuck about their citizens.

This kind of talk is inappropriate for this forum, because it is swearing and political… if you insist on making it political, there is the controversial topics section for this talk.

Heh patent are a political problem in the first place, only in the USA can you patent obvious methods…

You chose to make a very political, and some might say politically offensive, comment. Patents are a general concept that exist in basically every Western country, and many others in the world. Discussing whether or not something is in violation of a patent, or even whether a given patent should exist, is not a political question. Whatever your opinions about US (or French) politics, they do not belong here – if you want to talk about them, go to the controversial topics section.
23 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 137th comment:
Votes: 0
Cratylus said:
Rarva, your attitude is why DRM exists. "If I can physically copy it, I'm allowed to" is pretty much what you're saying,

Nope it is not….but I give up, since either you do not want to read what I am writing, or I am not good enough at explaining it.
23 Aug, 2010, Cratylus wrote in the 138th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
Nope it is not….but I give up


how typical
23 Aug, 2010, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 139th comment:
Votes: 0
David Haley said:
or even whether a given patent should exist, is not a political question. .

Then you do not know the state of patents in Europe.
You cannot patent business methods in Europe as you can do in the USA , even if many lobbies want our politics to vote for it.
They try again and again for many years now. It IS a political problem.
23 Aug, 2010, Cratylus wrote in the 140th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
They try again and again for many years now. It IS a political problem.


Your failure to understand intellectual property rules is not a political problem.

It is a deficit of some other kind.

A song being on the radio does not make it yours.

Understand that.

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net
120.0/157