4merper4mer Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 Incorrect. Regardless, that's inconsequential. You cannot own, police, and charge for the use of thought. In your world why would anyone in their right mind spend man years developing software and then license the source code?
dayman Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 In your world why would anyone in their right mind spend man years developing software and then license the source code? What
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 (edited) Except the markets you describe are not natural markets, but black markets that are created to trade in stolen goods. You agree to the terms and conditions and EULAs when you buy or use copyrighted products. Just because the distribution medium has changed doesn't give you a license to trade in them. Again it's your moronic obsession that non-physical goods are a different animal. And your examples are crap, because when you "buy" a reproductible work you are not buying that work, but the right to use that work on the medium you purchased. The law also allows you to copy to other media for personal use. You do not have the right to distrubute or copy to others, because you never bought that right, unlike buying the car. Government is not interfering in the markets. The government is protecting individuals' rights to their owned property, comrade ... You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what constitutes a natural market. Black markets are the natural market's response to regulations of any sort. You can't suppress real demand for an existing product, and any attempts to create those black markets. The only unnatural part of the process is the governmental restrictions placed on the market that created the need for the black market in the first place. A market being classified as criminal has nothing at all to do with it being natural. If you disagree, I'd love to laugh at the mental gymnastics you'll be engaging in to make that argument. As to your EULA contention, multiple courts have disagreed with you. And lastly, your assetions that an individual can own thoughts is absurd, and anti-capitalistic. It doesn't surprise me, however, because your entire world view is driven by neo-mercantilist near-facism. In your world why would anyone in their right mind spend man years developing software and then license the source code? LINUX doesn't exist. Edited May 8, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker
4merper4mer Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 ... LINUX doesn't exist. OK so you have demonstrated you know nothing about software. Congrats. In your world, why would someone experiment with chemicals in hopes of finding a medicine they could sell? Let's say the R&D costs a billion or so but that once discovered the medicine is cheap to produce. Like, say cutting and pasting 10,000 lines of software code. Who would be sucker enough to put in the billions?
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 OK so you have demonstrated you know nothing about software. Congrats. Quite the opposite, actually. Open-source, and free-to-use shells with fee for additional service is the future. Markets respond quickly. In your world, why would someone experiment with chemicals in hopes of finding a medicine they could sell? Let's say the R&D costs a billion or so but that once discovered the medicine is cheap to produce. Like, say cutting and pasting 10,000 lines of software code. Who would be sucker enough to put in the billions? Actually, the current model is why we have long-term treatment solutions being developed rather than cures. It incentivizes keeping people sick in order to turn a perpetual profit on the maintenence of their medical issues. Revove that incentive, and you'll see a shift in business models.
GG Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 Quite the opposite, actually. Open-source, and free-to-use shells with fee for additional service is the future. Markets respond quickly. Actually, the current model is why we have long-term treatment solutions being developed rather than cures. It incentivizes keeping people sick in order to turn a perpetual profit on the maintenence of their medical issues. Revove that incentive, and you'll see a shift in business models. Yes, there's no cure for cancer or aids because it's more profitable to find the treatment than the cure. I don't need to engage in any mental gymnastics because laws and precedent are on my side. Genius deserves to be rewarded and protected from pretenders, who do nothing but regurgitate crap they read and think they're savants.
truth on hold Posted May 8, 2013 Author Posted May 8, 2013 Yes, there's no cure for cancer or aids because it's more profitable to find the treatment than the cure. I don't need to engage in any mental gymnastics because laws and precedent are on my side. Genius deserves to be rewarded and protected from pretenders, who do nothing but regurgitate crap they read and think they're savants. In this day and age, its getting harder to define and defend IP
GG Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 In this day and age, its getting harder to define and defend IP Not really. People just have more technology available to get "free" stuff.
truth on hold Posted May 8, 2013 Author Posted May 8, 2013 Not really. People just have more technology available to get "free" stuff. Including people who develop ideas they seek to patent and trademark. Theyre using a lot more open resources in their design and development, diluting their claim of exclusivity.
dayman Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 In this day and age, its getting harder to define and defend IP Ultimately it's gotten difficult to protect IP under old business models. New delivery methods, new ways to monetize services, on and on. They say piracy is mostly a content delivery and services problem. They're mostly right.
GG Posted May 8, 2013 Posted May 8, 2013 Including people who develop ideas they seek to patent and trademark. Theyre using a lot more open resources in their design and development, diluting their claim of exclusivity. That's like saying Lennon and McCartney don't deserve any credit because they also didn't invent the guitar.
UConn James Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 This situation loses a lot of merit when the SCOTUS recently ruled that books bought overseas for pennies on the dollar can be resold here in the US, and that national 'exclusive rights' contracts mean bupkis in this regard. What does that mean for ebooks? What does it mean for DVDs or movie downloads? Inconsistent much?
DC Tom Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 Its offshore and its private. US has no authority shutting down foreign companies for activities outside US. They do if they have legal agreements with the countries that host such, that allow such countries and the US to cooperate in shutting them down. Why don't you go read the applicable treaties between NZ and the US, before you spout off this crap...
truth on hold Posted May 9, 2013 Author Posted May 9, 2013 They do if they have legal agreements with the countries that host such, that allow such countries and the US to cooperate in shutting them down. Why don't you go read the applicable treaties between NZ and the US, before you spout off this crap... LOL dumbass Megaupload is a Hong Kong Company ... nice work doing the research before "spouting crap"
DC Tom Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 LOL dumbass Megaupload is a Hong Kong Company ... nice work doing the research before "spouting crap" So go look up the applicable treaties anyway. Demonstrate why New Zealand can't arrest and extradite to the US executives of a Hong Kong based company.
truth on hold Posted May 9, 2013 Author Posted May 9, 2013 (edited) So go look up the applicable treaties anyway. Demonstrate why New Zealand can't arrest and extradite to the US executives of a Hong Kong based company. if there's anyone who needs to do some reference work prior to posting that would be ummmmm .... YOU. Good grief I take you off ignore after several months and the first post i see is yet another complete whiff. Edited May 9, 2013 by Joe_the_6_pack
GG Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 LOL dumbass Megaupload is a Hong Kong Company ... nice work doing the research before "spouting crap" Doesn't matter where they're headquartered. They used US based infrastructure to move bits and bytes.
DC Tom Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 if there's anyone who needs to do some reference work prior to posting that would be ummmmm .... YOU. Good grief I take you off ignore after several months and the first post i see is yet another complete whiff. No, it wasn't. Go look up the applicable treaties before you spout crap.
meazza Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 (edited) No, it wasn't. Go look up the applicable treaties before you spout crap. I'm still waiting for him to explain the US involvement in Syria which is prolonging the civil war. Once he's done that hard hitting research then he can answer you Edited May 9, 2013 by meazza
Recommended Posts