Jim in Anchorage Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 AOL didn't write the song "Happy Birthday". Yet they own it. That's why you never see happy birthday sung on TV. Khrushchev was right about American's and rope. Yet if you offered them royalties I bet they let you sing it. Don't you understand this at all? Why do you think M Jackson bought the Beatles songs? So he would never hear "hey Jude" in a elevator again?
dayman Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 http://www.extremetech.com/computing/111543-google-amazon-facebook-and-twitter-considering-nuclear-option-to-protest-sopa ^^google may go nuclear^^
CosmicBills Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 youtube.com/watch?v=JhwuXNv8fJM I'm not defending SOPA. As a bill it's highly flawed.
Beerball Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 You're an idiot. Dude, that phrase is copy written.
dayman Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 I'm not defending SOPA. As a bill it's highly flawed. I know just saying the conversation as a whole started leaning towards weather IP is legit (an idea Thomas Jefferson was iffy about and initially against)as opposed to the fact that this bill right now is terrible for people who use the internet.
Chef Jim Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) Yet if you offered them royalties I bet they let you sing it. Don't you understand this at all? Why do you think M Jackson bought the Beatles songs? So he would never hear "hey Jude" in a elevator again? And here's the B word. You know who gave MJ the idea to buy publishing rights? Paul McCartney. Edited January 5, 2012 by Chef Jim
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 And here the B word. You know who gave MJ the idea to buy publishing rights? Paul McCartney. Probably Sir McCartney was looking for a alimony payment...
CosmicBills Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 I know just saying the conversation as a whole started leaning towards weather IP is legit (an idea Thomas Jefferson was iffy about and initially against)as opposed to the fact that this bill right now is terrible for people who use the internet. As someone who makes his living off of IP, I find that a ridiculous statement. A movie, book or song is still a product. They always have been, and always will be.
dayman Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 As someone who makes his living off of IP, I find that a ridiculous statement. A movie, book or song is still a product. They always have been, and always will be. Everyone knows that it's a question of to what degree and the bottom line is our IP laws a whole should probably be revised to fit with the scheme the future will force on them one way or another. Note: revised =/= abolished. I'm sorry there is uncertainty in your field and change loomning. Don't label me a pirate b/c I don't support extreme protectionism for you.
ieatcrayonz Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 I know just saying the conversation as a whole started leaning towards weather IP is legit (an idea Thomas Jefferson was iffy about and initially against)as opposed to the fact that this bill right now is terrible for people who use the internet. I will say that I support IP but I have to agree with you on one thing. WEATHER IP IS RIDICULOUS. I have never heard of it until you just brought it up. I mean who really owns a thunderstorm? Everyone knows that it's a question of to what degree and the bottom line is our IP laws a whole should probably be revised to fit with the scheme the future will force on them one way or another. Note: revised =/= abolished. I'm sorry there is uncertainty in your field and change loomning. Don't label me a pirate b/c I don't support extreme protectionism for you. You make a convincing case there. I'm sure if you brought this compelling argument to Bill Gates he would e-mail you the source code to Windows.
dayman Posted January 5, 2012 Author Posted January 5, 2012 I will say that I support IP but I have to agree with you on one thing. WEATHER IP IS RIDICULOUS. I have never heard of it until you just brought it up. I mean who really owns a thunderstorm? You make a convincing case there. I'm sure if you brought this compelling argument to Bill Gates he would e-mail you the source code to Windows. IDK why you all are suddenly acting like my problems w/ SOPA mean I am against IP at all. I am not. I think we need some updates to the way the law works, and this bill isn't it.
CosmicBills Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Everyone knows that it's a question of to what degree and the bottom line is our IP laws a whole should probably be revised to fit with the scheme the future will force on them one way or another. Note: revised =/= abolished. I'm sorry there is uncertainty in your field and change loomning. Don't label me a pirate b/c I don't support extreme protectionism for you. I'm not asking for extreme protection. And it's not just for "me". It's for the society as a whole. In our society, if you take away the financial viability of the arts, which is what piracy does on a large scale, then you're going to get less choice as a consumer for your entertainment options. It's already happened in music. It's already happened in film. It will happen in TV too.
ieatcrayonz Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 IDK why you all are suddenly acting like my problems w/ SOPA mean I am against IP at all. I am not. I think we need some updates to the way the law works, and this bill isn't it. When you call people's concerns about their ability to profit from their hard work "extreme protectionism for you" perhaps it makes them wonder.
meazza Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Dude, that phrase is copy written. I've already paid royalties to Tom. How do you think he bought his bentley?
Chef Jim Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 I've already paid royalties to Tom. How do you think he bought his bentley? Shady real estate deals. Duh
Recommended Posts