[
Quote:
Originally Posted by holograph
dozey, what I'm suggesting hasn't invented yet although it sounds similar to DRM. I'm all aware of failed DRM attempts.
If Gideon wants to timeshift his favorite TV channels let him go to his cable company and bitch about having all time access for all aired programs that he's subscriber of, ask them do netflix type of online site, ask them implement subscription validated tracker where he and other subscribers can share their recorded shows. Let him demand from Adobe if he uses their products to have license validated tracker where other licensees can redundantly backup their software. He will gladly pay premium for such services.
that will be fair use and valid timeshifting. all content freely available for anyone to download is not fair use it is piracy on global scale.
|
that statement proves you don't undertand what fair use is
restricting fair use to only what the copyright holder provides you at the monopoly price he want to charge you be definition destroys fair use
tv stations provided timeshifting before the vecr it was called "re-runs"
the whole point of fair use is to prevent copyright holders monopoly from holding back free speech AND technological advancements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by holograph
it doesn't mean there is no future for them. it takes many tries to get a rocket into space 
Gideons approach/suggestion to deal with piracy is to go after leeches with no fair use right. This isn't a bad approach and may work for huge mega corporations
What about little guys? small production shops, who are pushing only 1-2mil in revenues? let say there is a stock photo company, let say they release 10-20 CD/DVDs a year, and have generous 50% gross profit. One day someone decides to utilize redundant backup of modern public torrent trackers to store these DVDs. what happens next? almost instantly their content freely available on all pirate resources with 100 thousands of downloads globally. How this small shop can monitor all such resources and go after all leeches without fair use right? - Gideon suggests for this company to use most of their profits to legally pursue criminal offenders. I say it's impossible. Content should be protected and freely accessible illegitimate downloads should be prevented. There is no point for a small shop invest their resources in product and then they have to spend all their profits to go after leeches. next thing Gideon will say to this small company "fuck you, my vcr rights should allow anybody steal anything they want" |
you mean the companies who could adapt and exploit the technological advancements that would be created by the increased competition
the idiots who kept running porn theaters rather then get into the home viewing market
my own worst enemy got cancelled because not enough people watched it live. i don't say destroy the entire home viewing market , go back to reruns only so mowe wouldn't get cancelled. if a company can't survive under fair market competition, if they need to have monopoly to survive (above the monopoly that protects the revenue from the content sale ONLY) then fuck them they deserve to die.
That how the capitalist system works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by holograph
like Gideon says go after leecher without fair use rights,
I can say the same opposite - go after company who gives you content and doesn't provide you fair use and valid timeshifting methods.
|
the copyright act doesn't require the copyright holder to PROVIDE fair use right, they must just respect them. that actually a good thing, since technological improvements can come from other sources beyond the copyright holders.
now as i have siad i believe it should be strenghtened a little bit, if you attempt to use copyright to squash a fair use then that act should suffer the same penalty as any other monopoly trying to squash a free market (triple damages or a loss of the monopoly)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nautilus
Very well said. If it all was about backup/timeshift and whatever other fair use, what you're saying is the way to go. But ya know, it isn't about backup and fair use really  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nautilus
They can, but they can no longer use their fair use defence if caught - that's the plan according to gideongallery.
|
your an idiot
if the copyright holder is the only provider of fair use, and they are alloed to charge monopoly prices for that service then by definition that not fair use.
There is no point in having fair use under that circumstance.
you get crappy arguements like this
QUOTE=Robbie;17164772]What gideon"thief"gallery is leaving out on his bullshit "timeshifting" crap are these FACTS:
FACT: He LOVES to talk about a 40 year old ruling on VCRs. Why doesn't he just BUY one and stop using a torrent?
FACT: He could also use a DVR
FACT: The cable company ALREADY has FREE VOD to watch any program that you may have missed. They put it up on the VOD channel 24 hours after it airs and leave it there for a month. ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE to miss your favorite program
FACT: gideongallery needs to get a job.
FACT: The networks have websites now where they stream all their programs for free for you already
FACT: HULU
FACT: gideongallery needs to STOP watching so much television and do something with his life other than steal shit off the internet[/QUOTE]
the swarm provides infinately sized hard drive, that records and saves every single show bought, that allows me take the content and move it to any of my portal viewing devices.
and keeps cached copy so if my internet drops i can still watch that content i have local.
and it does it for free.
want to provide a link to a DVR that has all those features.
hell drop the free condition show me one that cost let then $200.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopottomouse
My mum still has and uses a VCR 
With locking stuff up using what sounds like online verification each time you want to play it what happens with all the portable devices that can play something but not connect to the internet to get permission to play it? |
this is exactly why fair use must stay open competition and out of the control of the copyright holder because they don't give a fuck about problems like this
to them protecting their monopoly is more important that inferior "fair use services"