Comments on: May I Nominate Mary Bono For “Jackass Of The Week”? http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/ Little boxes made of words, by Jens Alfke Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:17:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: JulesLt http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1803 JulesLt Sat, 21 Apr 2007 18:36:47 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1803 Few thoughts - Ms.Bono may be right about Apple's priority is selling hardware, but she's wrong about Steve Jobs - she seems to have forgotten he's also on the board as Disney/Pixar and thus has a very significant interest in copyright - and those damned Mickey Mouse extensions. In addition, Apple do also have a lot of copyright software - given that new Macs are largely hardware identical to PCs the biggest single difference is the copyrighted OS X. Overall I agree with you - personal copyright theft needs to be treated as an offence comparable to speeding and fare dodging - as a civil rather than criminal act. If the RIA and similar bodies had gone with that approach, rather than ridiculously high costs, they might have got away with it. Receiving a $50 fine, a lot of parents would pay up, and then pay more attention to their kids running p2p software. When you get a $50,000 case - it's worth fighting. With regards some other (old) comments : Fairplay doesn't sell hardware. No one, but no one, buys an iPod so they can use the iTunes music store. The real lock-in is the iTunes software not working with other players - that you would need to port your library to another media manager. A smart company would do that (or even smarter let you keep your library in iTunes but provide software to sync their player). The final points about CDs bring up an interesting issue that I'm sure we'll see tested shortly - can I sell my non-DRM EMI AAC fi Few thoughts - Ms.Bono may be right about Apple’s priority is selling hardware, but she’s wrong about Steve Jobs - she seems to have forgotten he’s also on the board as Disney/Pixar and thus has a very significant interest in copyright - and those damned Mickey Mouse extensions.

In addition, Apple do also have a lot of copyright software - given that new Macs are largely hardware identical to PCs the biggest single difference is the copyrighted OS X.

Overall I agree with you - personal copyright theft needs to be treated as an offence comparable to speeding and fare dodging - as a civil rather than criminal act. If the RIA and similar bodies had gone with that approach, rather than ridiculously high costs, they might have got away with it. Receiving a $50 fine, a lot of parents would pay up, and then pay more attention to their kids running p2p software. When you get a $50,000 case - it’s worth fighting.

With regards some other (old) comments : Fairplay doesn’t sell hardware. No one, but no one, buys an iPod so they can use the iTunes music store. The real lock-in is the iTunes software not working with other players - that you would need to port your library to another media manager. A smart company would do that (or even smarter let you keep your library in iTunes but provide software to sync their player).

The final points about CDs bring up an interesting issue that I’m sure we’ll see tested shortly - can I sell my non-DRM EMI AAC fi

]]> By: Erik http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1802 Erik Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:36:41 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1802 In the mid-1990s there <em>was</em> controversy over the sale of used CDs. If I recall correctly, the recording industry threatened not to work with stores that sold used CDs. That didn't go over very well, but initially many "mainstream" stores did stop selling used. In the mid-1990s there was controversy over the sale of used CDs. If I recall correctly, the recording industry threatened not to work with stores that sold used CDs. That didn’t go over very well, but initially many “mainstream” stores did stop selling used.

]]> By: Jens Alfke http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1801 Jens Alfke Thu, 08 Mar 2007 02:02:31 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1801 Rob — There's nothing illegal about selling a CD. It's just like selling a car or a painting. The rights are transferred to the new owner. What _is_ illegal is selling a CD but keeping a copy of the music (MP3s or a burned disc). When you sold the CD you gave up your ownership of the music on it, so you were responsible for deleting any personal-use copies. Rob — There’s nothing illegal about selling a CD. It’s just like selling a car or a painting. The rights are transferred to the new owner.

What _is_ illegal is selling a CD but keeping a copy of the music (MP3s or a burned disc). When you sold the CD you gave up your ownership of the music on it, so you were responsible for deleting any personal-use copies.

]]> By: Rob http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1800 Rob Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:23:26 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1800 With all the DRM crap going on, and the RIAA after everyone, I often find myself wondering why used records and CD's are ok? Nobody makes a dime off the resale of a cd except the store. You think they would have been all over that years ago. With all the DRM crap going on, and the RIAA after everyone, I often find myself wondering why used records and CD’s are ok? Nobody makes a dime off the resale of a cd except the store. You think they would have been all over that years ago.

]]> By: Corvus http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1770 Corvus Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:15:30 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1770 <blockquote cite="So, why not just install automatic speed cameras? They pay for themselves, allowing police to look out for other crimes. They are also fairer, because they are non-human, and not subject to the biases of human police officers. Better yet, how about not making pointless analogies? Computers and digital media are not like cars."> Well, actually, the analogy does work. People self regulate---sometimes for love, sometimes for enlighted self interest. As any thoughtful parent knows, when you set standards of behavior and---this is a very important "and"---let you kids know you trust them (which implies respect and love), they will usually follow those standards. The same applies to speed limits and music copyright without artificial means of protection. In the same way the typical driver will not do 80 in a 60, the typical music buyer will not steal. Some will, and, when that happens, enforce the law. However there are times when both 80 in a 60 and making fair use of music are necessary, and the right thing to do. In those cases the camera is not fair and never will be, and DRM is always unfair. The majority of the honest people should never be restricted limited because of the dishonesty of the few. If you really want to steal, the iTunes DRM is pretty easy to bypass.</blockquote>

Well, actually, the analogy does work. People self regulate—-sometimes for love, sometimes for enlighted self interest. As any thoughtful parent knows, when you set standards of behavior and—-this is a very important “and”—-let you kids know you trust them (which implies respect and love), they will usually follow those standards. The same applies to speed limits and music copyright without artificial means of protection. In the same way the typical driver will not do 80 in a 60, the typical music buyer will not steal. Some will, and, when that happens, enforce the law. However there are times when both 80 in a 60 and making fair use of music are necessary, and the right thing to do. In those cases the camera is not fair and never will be, and DRM is always unfair. The majority of the honest people should never be restricted limited because of the dishonesty of the few. If you really want to steal, the iTunes DRM is pretty easy to bypass.

]]> By: Aughr&#8217;s Blog &#187; links for 2007-03-03 - auto-posted http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1799 Aughr&#8217;s Blog &#187; links for 2007-03-03 - auto-posted Mon, 05 Mar 2007 03:49:01 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1799 [...] 2 - May I Nominate Mary Bono For “Jackass Of The Week”? — Thought Palace [...] […] 2 - May I Nominate Mary Bono For “Jackass Of The Week”? — Thought Palace […]

]]> By: telos http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1798 telos Sun, 04 Mar 2007 13:58:53 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1798 Jens: "That is the whole point of patent law: to keep inventors from hiding their ideas, and to encourage creativity and innovation by letting inventors freely build on the ideas of other inventors Nitride: "Patent law was created to protect patent holders" You are both wrong. The "whole point" of patent law is to give people an incentive to innovate. The _means_ is the granting of a temporary monopoly on inventions. But that temporary monopoly is not an end in itself. In fact, it's a necessary evil. Jens: “That is the whole point of patent law: to keep inventors from hiding their ideas, and to encourage creativity and innovation by letting inventors freely build on the ideas of other inventors
Nitride: “Patent law was created to protect patent holders”

You are both wrong. The “whole point” of patent law is to give people an incentive to innovate. The _means_ is the granting of a temporary monopoly on inventions. But that temporary monopoly is not an end in itself. In fact, it’s a necessary evil.

]]> By: Jens Alfke http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1797 Jens Alfke Sun, 04 Mar 2007 09:30:13 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1797 Nitride — You are partly correct about the purpose of patents; but an equal goal is to bribe inventors into disclosing their inventions rather than keeping the principles secret, so that other inventors can refine and improve the ideas. The word "patent" is Latin for "to lay open". The term of patents is not and has never (to my knowledge) been 10 year. It used to be 17 until recently, and (according to Wikipedia) is currently 20 in most countries. It's funny you should claim that "copyright never expires", as this is absolutely untrue (current terms are on the order of a century) but it does reflect the pernicious trend of governments to keep extending the term, as well as limiting fair-use rights, at the bequest of the entertainment industry. If you're not familiar with this, you've missed most of the back-story to this post and should really go read up on it (I recommend Lawrence Lessig's books) before commenting again =) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law Nitride — You are partly correct about the purpose of patents; but an equal goal is to bribe inventors into disclosing their inventions rather than keeping the principles secret, so that other inventors can refine and improve the ideas. The word “patent” is Latin for “to lay open”.

The term of patents is not and has never (to my knowledge) been 10 year. It used to be 17 until recently, and (according to Wikipedia) is currently 20 in most countries.

It’s funny you should claim that “copyright never expires”, as this is absolutely untrue (current terms are on the order of a century) but it does reflect the pernicious trend of governments to keep extending the term, as well as limiting fair-use rights, at the bequest of the entertainment industry. If you’re not familiar with this, you’ve missed most of the back-story to this post and should really go read up on it (I recommend Lawrence Lessig’s books) before commenting again =)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law

]]> By: Nitride http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1796 Nitride Sun, 04 Mar 2007 08:09:12 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1796 Patent law was created to protect patent holders, not make it easier for people to use the patented ideas for profit. The Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that someone could come up with an original idea and benefit from it, for a limited period of time. The fact that patents are on the internet is part of the public disclosure requirements of the government. Patents were not meant in the way you describe them. Patents expire after 10 years btw, while copyright never expires unless the author explicitly places the material in the public domain. Patent and copyright are completely different beasts, and I will admit that confusing the two concepts (and the speed limit analogy) was stupid on Bono's part. Patent law was created to protect patent holders, not make it easier for people to use the patented ideas for profit. The Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that someone could come up with an original idea and benefit from it, for a limited period of time. The fact that patents are on the internet is part of the public disclosure requirements of the government. Patents were not meant in the way you describe them.

Patents expire after 10 years btw, while copyright never expires unless the author explicitly places the material in the public domain. Patent and copyright are completely different beasts, and I will admit that confusing the two concepts (and the speed limit analogy) was stupid on Bono’s part.

]]> By: Jens Alfke http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/comment-page-2/#comment-1795 Jens Alfke Sun, 04 Mar 2007 07:19:14 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/03/may-i-nominate-mary-bono-for-%e2%80%9cjackass-of-the-week%e2%80%9d/#comment-1795 F.C. — Great scenario. "The patents for the wheel, movable type, and Pop-Tarts are all on file at the local patent office on Alpha Centauri. It's not our fault if you won't do some due diligence before releasing your own knockoffs of them." (With apologies to Douglas Adams) F.C. — Great scenario. “The patents for the wheel, movable type, and Pop-Tarts are all on file at the local patent office on Alpha Centauri. It’s not our fault if you won’t do some due diligence before releasing your own knockoffs of them.” (With apologies to Douglas Adams)

]]>