Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Movie/record Industry Rep Says That You Shouldn't Expect to be Able to Play Your Media for as Long as You Own it
BY Cory Doctorow
29 July 2009
Glyn sez, "Buying DRMed content, then having that content stop working later is fair writes Steven Metalitz, the lawyer who represents the MPAA, RIAA in a letter to the top legal advisor at the Copyright Office.
"We reject the view," he writes in a letter to the top legal advisor at the Copyright Office, "that copyright owners and their licensees are required to provide consumers with perpetual access to creative works. No other product or service providers are held to such lofty standards. No one expects computers or other electronics devices to work properly in perpetuity, and there is no reason that any particular mode of distributing copyrighted works should be required to do so."
This is, of course, true, but that doesn't make it any less weird. The only reason that such tracks are crippled after authentication servers go down is because of a system that was demanded by content owners and imposed on companies like Wal-Mart and Apple; buyers who grudgingly bought tracks online because it was easy accepted, but never desired the DRM. To simply say that they are "out of luck" because they used a system that the rightsholders demanded is the height of callousness to one's customers. While computers and electronics devices do break down over time, these music tracks were crippled by design.
I've got 78RPM records from my grandparents' basement that play just fine today -- and I've got Logo programs I wrote in 1979 that I can run today. I own a piano roll from 1903 that I can play back if I can clear the space for a player piano. I've got books printed in the 17th century that can still be read -- and if they can't be read, they can be scanned and the scans can be read. This is what an open format means.
It's hilarious that the same yahoos who argue for perpetual copyright (implying that copyrighted works have value forever) also argue for time-limited ownership (implying that people who buy copyrighted works should be content to enjoy them for a few weeks or years until the DRM stops working).
Remember: when you buy DRM, you really rent, until such time as the DRM company goes bust or changes its mind. When you buy DRM-free, you get something your great-grandkids can enjoy.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/07/29/movierecord-industry.html
29 July 2009
Glyn sez, "Buying DRMed content, then having that content stop working later is fair writes Steven Metalitz, the lawyer who represents the MPAA, RIAA in a letter to the top legal advisor at the Copyright Office.
"We reject the view," he writes in a letter to the top legal advisor at the Copyright Office, "that copyright owners and their licensees are required to provide consumers with perpetual access to creative works. No other product or service providers are held to such lofty standards. No one expects computers or other electronics devices to work properly in perpetuity, and there is no reason that any particular mode of distributing copyrighted works should be required to do so."
This is, of course, true, but that doesn't make it any less weird. The only reason that such tracks are crippled after authentication servers go down is because of a system that was demanded by content owners and imposed on companies like Wal-Mart and Apple; buyers who grudgingly bought tracks online because it was easy accepted, but never desired the DRM. To simply say that they are "out of luck" because they used a system that the rightsholders demanded is the height of callousness to one's customers. While computers and electronics devices do break down over time, these music tracks were crippled by design.
I've got 78RPM records from my grandparents' basement that play just fine today -- and I've got Logo programs I wrote in 1979 that I can run today. I own a piano roll from 1903 that I can play back if I can clear the space for a player piano. I've got books printed in the 17th century that can still be read -- and if they can't be read, they can be scanned and the scans can be read. This is what an open format means.
It's hilarious that the same yahoos who argue for perpetual copyright (implying that copyrighted works have value forever) also argue for time-limited ownership (implying that people who buy copyrighted works should be content to enjoy them for a few weeks or years until the DRM stops working).
Remember: when you buy DRM, you really rent, until such time as the DRM company goes bust or changes its mind. When you buy DRM-free, you get something your great-grandkids can enjoy.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/07/29/movierecord-industry.html
Maybe we can Thank Lou Dobbs
Maybe we can thank Lous Dobbs for something---that idiot racist TV bloviator. This birther nonsense shows what happens when these idiot conservatives are simply confronted with the facts. Facts are the blood enemy of conservatives.
by Eric Boehnert
Have you noticed Limbaugh's deafening silence about the birthers since July 20th? Have you noticed how the birther movement was in the news virtually every day last week, how the mainstream press was debunking it and calling out the right-wing nonsense, how NBC's Nightly News referred to Limbaugh in its birther report, yet Limbaugh remained mum? Rather than step forward in his natural role as a birther defender and attacker of all things Obama, Limbaugh has sat out the birther controversy and watched its members get mowed down in the press.
Limbaugh's scared to talk about the birthers and won't defend them because he has seen how Dobbs and the movement got manhandled by the press -- including by conservative commentators. Limbaugh saw how the press was sticking to the birth certificate facts and wasn't shy about knocking down high-paid radio hosts who tried to traffic in that nonsense.
And guess what? If Limbaugh won't back the birthers, that means most right-wing AM hosts won't either. Because that business is built upon a very simple (lemming) rule: Do whatever Rush does. And if Limbaugh won't line up on the side of the birthers, than means most AM talkers won't either, which means the birthers are going to be pushed back to the fringes where they belong.
And for that, we have Lou Dobbs to thank.
by Eric Boehnert
Have you noticed Limbaugh's deafening silence about the birthers since July 20th? Have you noticed how the birther movement was in the news virtually every day last week, how the mainstream press was debunking it and calling out the right-wing nonsense, how NBC's Nightly News referred to Limbaugh in its birther report, yet Limbaugh remained mum? Rather than step forward in his natural role as a birther defender and attacker of all things Obama, Limbaugh has sat out the birther controversy and watched its members get mowed down in the press.
Limbaugh's scared to talk about the birthers and won't defend them because he has seen how Dobbs and the movement got manhandled by the press -- including by conservative commentators. Limbaugh saw how the press was sticking to the birth certificate facts and wasn't shy about knocking down high-paid radio hosts who tried to traffic in that nonsense.
And guess what? If Limbaugh won't back the birthers, that means most right-wing AM hosts won't either. Because that business is built upon a very simple (lemming) rule: Do whatever Rush does. And if Limbaugh won't line up on the side of the birthers, than means most AM talkers won't either, which means the birthers are going to be pushed back to the fringes where they belong.
And for that, we have Lou Dobbs to thank.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
If You Are a Republican
Here is a clever little piece from Andrew Sullivan. If you are a Republican, you believe in magic. Reality has no place in the Republican world.
From Andrew Sullivan
If you're a Republican, a lot of things are logical: the entire debt began the moment Obama took office; Bush and Cheney never tortured anyone, but Obama is about to; the WMDs really are in Iraq; the president has the constitutional power to send tanks into the streets to arrest any American without charges; deficits don't matter; Obama is a Kenyan Muslim impostor; and Sarah Palin was qualified to be president of the United States at a moment's notice.
Politics as magical realism.
From Andrew Sullivan
If you're a Republican, a lot of things are logical: the entire debt began the moment Obama took office; Bush and Cheney never tortured anyone, but Obama is about to; the WMDs really are in Iraq; the president has the constitutional power to send tanks into the streets to arrest any American without charges; deficits don't matter; Obama is a Kenyan Muslim impostor; and Sarah Palin was qualified to be president of the United States at a moment's notice.
Politics as magical realism.
Twilight by Stephenie Meyer
This book is about the relationship between Bella Swan and Edward Cullen. It begins with Bella moving to Forks, Washington, and wishing she were still living in Phoenix instead. However, things change when she meets Edward, whom she falls in love with.
The only issue is that Edward is a vampire and is intensely attracted to the scent of her blood. This puts both Bella and Edward, along with his family of vampies, in danger. The plot plays out from there.
I think this concept is interesting, but the book was not engaging enough. It was usually too slow of a read. Also, Bella is a very irritating character. I am rarely annoyed by a character in a book, but she is just too much. Bella is overly dramatic and emotional. Her mood swings wildly and irrationally all the time. Plus, her relationship with Edward is presented as some great love, but they hardly know each other and she is only a teenager. Sheesh!
The only issue is that Edward is a vampire and is intensely attracted to the scent of her blood. This puts both Bella and Edward, along with his family of vampies, in danger. The plot plays out from there.
I think this concept is interesting, but the book was not engaging enough. It was usually too slow of a read. Also, Bella is a very irritating character. I am rarely annoyed by a character in a book, but she is just too much. Bella is overly dramatic and emotional. Her mood swings wildly and irrationally all the time. Plus, her relationship with Edward is presented as some great love, but they hardly know each other and she is only a teenager. Sheesh!
Garry Wills - James Madison (2)
I made quick work of this little biography but learned lots about James Madison, appropriately called The Father of the Constitution. Indeed, according to Wills, the 3 indispensable Founding Fathers were Washington, Franklin, & Madison, without whom we might not have had the Constitution as the country as we know it. Madison not only was the driving force behind the Constitution (along with the presence of Washington during the deliberations), he was also a driving force behind the ratification of the document both in Virginia and in the writing of the famous Federalist Papers which were very influential in the state of New York.
Madison's talents were greatest as a legislator. He was less successful as an executive although Wills gives him passing marks as President. Historians generally consider Madison an adequate chief executive but not a great President.
I had forgotten that during the War of 1812, which ended ambiguously, Madison and the US invaded Canada. Madison thought, in error, that Canada was there for the taking with Great Britain preoccupied with Napoleon. Anyone who thinks the United States is not historically an imperial country need only consider this part of our history.
Madison started out as a nationalist and ended up a Jeffersonian Republican. How his thinking drifted over the years I don't quite understand. Madison was inconsistent in this thinking, but so what: all great people are inconsistent.
At the Constitutional Convention, Madison fought for federal veto over all state laws. How the country would have been different had this idea been enacted!
This country evolved as it has. We should always remember that history is not determined. The structure and evolution of the U.S. could have been different in many ways. What if we HAD conquered Canada?
Madison's talents were greatest as a legislator. He was less successful as an executive although Wills gives him passing marks as President. Historians generally consider Madison an adequate chief executive but not a great President.
I had forgotten that during the War of 1812, which ended ambiguously, Madison and the US invaded Canada. Madison thought, in error, that Canada was there for the taking with Great Britain preoccupied with Napoleon. Anyone who thinks the United States is not historically an imperial country need only consider this part of our history.
Madison started out as a nationalist and ended up a Jeffersonian Republican. How his thinking drifted over the years I don't quite understand. Madison was inconsistent in this thinking, but so what: all great people are inconsistent.
At the Constitutional Convention, Madison fought for federal veto over all state laws. How the country would have been different had this idea been enacted!
This country evolved as it has. We should always remember that history is not determined. The structure and evolution of the U.S. could have been different in many ways. What if we HAD conquered Canada?
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Garry Wills - James Madison
I am enjoying this neat little biography of our nation's 4th President. Madison is a MOST interesting person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)