Switzerland declares piracy for personal use legal - Page 18

On December 06 2011 07:04 FabledIntegral wrote:


That isn't relevant. If they make good products, they still rely on donations.

On December 06 2011 07:15 Krikkitone wrote:


Exactly, unless they can force you(or someone else) to Pay for better products, then they will rely on donations.

Which means
1. Good Distributors pay money to so that there is content to be distributed (although anyone can distribute it)
or
2. The only content that is produced is adds (like the old fashioned soap operas).. watch the new movie "Jack in the Box 4: Meet the Mustard" where the entertainment value IS the advertising value.
(this include Political adds/Cultural adds/ artists that want the public to 'hear their message' and so get a rich patron who wants some PR)

On December 05 2011 23:39 Velr wrote:
Sorry, edited my post above.
Can you tell me what exactly is worse about streamed music... Must be one hell of a song if 1-2+ MB's/sec isn't enough to getit to you in decent quality... And this would actually have like nothing to do with the actual streaming but the record your streaming from and the speed of your connection?
Yes, on the road it's not "good" enough atm (and way to expensive) but that will change soon.

I recently downloaded Dota 2 from Steam.. 4MB/Sec and my connection is nothing fancy, just more or less standard cable. I would like to think thats sufficient for any kind of "quality" your music might requires and it will only get faster (abd usable "on the road") in the coming years .

Public libraries have been lending out books to people, for free, for the last 500 years or so. Publishers are OK with it because the library is paying for the book, and if it's a popular book, they'll buy multiple copies so multiple people can check it out at once. Then they'll replace those every couple of years, because if you read a book too much it falls apart at the binding.

But then the publisher invented a better book. An indestructible book called an ebook that could be read 10 billion times without ever falling apart. How much does it cost to manufacture this marvel? Not a goddamned penny. The readers have the ability to "manufacture" copies of their own, on their computer, at no cost to the publisher. It's a post-scarcity book.

So for the publishers, the next step was clear: Make the book destroy itself.

An ebook sold to a library will thus delete itself out of existence after a year, or after X number of times it had been lent out. This is a big source of controversy between publishers and public libraries, maybe because both of them know they've found the loose thread that can unravel all of society. After all:

A. Why can't the library just buy as many digital copies as are needed for the customers, and keep them forever, if they don't naturally degrade?
B. Wait a second. It's just a digital file. Why not just buy one copy, and just copy and paste it for every customer who wants to read it?
C. Wait a second. Why do you need the library at all? Why can't a customer just buy a copy from the publisher and "lend" copies to all of his friends?
D. Wait a second. If no printing and binding needs to be done, why do you need the publisher? Just buy it directly from the author.
E. Waaaaait a second. Why buy it? Once the author makes one copy available, why can't everyone just grab it for free?

On December 06 2011 07:04 FabledIntegral wrote:

Companies need to rely on donations now to make money? What a joke.

On December 07 2011 11:39 hypercube wrote:


"Companies need to rely on government backed monopolies to make money? What a joke."

Of course stakeholders will try to argue that copyright is like physical property. Many consumers argue that it's not. Where democratic institutions are weak copyright holders seem to be winning. Where they are strong consumers enforce their own interests.

On December 07 2011 11:39 hypercube wrote:


"Companies need to rely on government backed monopolies to make money? What a joke."

Of course stakeholders will try to argue that copyright is like physical property. Many consumers argue that it's not. Where democratic institutions are weak copyright holders seem to be winning. Where they are strong consumers enforce their own interests.

On December 07 2011 11:46 BlackJack wrote:


China must have the strongest democratic institutions

On December 07 2011 11:46 Krikkitone wrote:

However, IP still needs protection, otherwise culture/entertainment is 'underproduced' (same for research)