The real cost of being sued by Getty [Digital Cameras]

Prev: I'm so proud, I weaned someone off a P&S to a DSLR!
Next: |GG| One more nail in the optical viewfinder coffin

From: sobriquet on 21 Oct 2009 19:29

On 22 okt, 01:15, "NotMe" <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> "sobriquet"
> :
> : It used to be effective for that purpose, when there were only centralized
> publishers who benefited from copyright as a means of protection against
> unfair competition from other publishers.
>
> : At this point with decentralized publishing on the web, where
> : everybody can publish and distribute things equally effectively, the
> : traditional purpose of copyright has been completely
> : lost
>
> I presume you're aware of the adage that one can't sell from an empty wagon.
>
> Once the information wagon is empty where do you propose to source new
> information for your free mart?

That's why it's important to tax information and to device a fair
system of distributing
those taxes amongst people who create new things.
Copyright is completely ineffective, so by getting rid of it, we
improve the situation right away but we might as well maintain
copyright until a fair system of taxation is implemented which can
replace copyright as a means to ensure that people who come up with
new content can earn an income in this fashion so they can devote
their time to their creative passion.
In practice, there is no copyright on the internet as 99% of the
people who exchange information online tend to ignore copyright issues
(the bulk of online communication concerns data on filesharing
networks).

At this point there are so many opportunities to automate work, that
nobody should feel forced to work for a living and the government can
provide an unconditional income for free.
This means that people can devote their time to their hobby or
passion, regardless whether or not they earn any money with their
activities. Because there is more than enough material wealth and
technological ingenuity that the production of basic necessities
(food, clothing, shelter and internet) can be fully automated.

From: Jerry Stuckle on 21 Oct 2009 20:04

J. Clarke wrote:
> sobriquet wrote:
>> On 21 okt, 17:29, Bob Larter <bobbylar...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> sobriquet wrote:
>>>> On 21 okt, 00:07, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 04:03:44 -0700 (PDT), sobriquet
>>>>> <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 20 okt, 06:19, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...(a)sum.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:32:17 -0700 (PDT), sobriquet
>>>>>>> <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19 okt, 20:24, "NotMe" <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [..misguided and deluded nonsense snipped..]
>>>>>>>> IPR is a figment of your lively imagination.
>>>>>>>> All people with any understanding of information technology and
>>>>>>>> a tight budget can simply download everything
>>>>>>>> for free and pay taxes in compensation for copyright
>>>>>>>> infringement.
>>>>>>> And how does the creator of the original work survive? Is he
>>>>>>> employed by the state?
>>>>>>> Eric Stevens
>>>>>> The state should provide an unconditional basic income (for food,
>>>>>> clothing, shelter and
>>>>>> internet), so people don't feel forced to waste their time in
>>>>>> exchange for money.
>>>>> From where does the state get the resources for the "unconditional
>>>>> basic income (for food, clothing, shelter and internet)"?
>>>> It's simply a matter of coming up with smart technology that can
>>>> create and maintain itself.
>>> Gee, it's that simple?
>> Once you have a robot that can build itself from scratch which can be
>> deployed for arbitrary tasks, it becomes very simple indeed. We're not
>> talking about something complicated like a robot that can improve upon
>> it's own design when it builds a new copy of itself.
>
> Fine, create such a robot.
>
> It's amazing how simple things are when somebody else has to do the work.
>

Me thinks someone's been reading too many Science Fiction stories...

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(a)attglobal.net
==================

From: NotMe on 21 Oct 2009 20:25

From: sobriquet on 21 Oct 2009 21:33

On 22 okt, 02:25, "NotMe" <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> "sobriquet" <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ac3618ef-1731-4329-9f56-da3c238acbc7(a)h2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
> : On 22 okt, 01:15, "NotMe" <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> : > "sobriquet"
> : > :
> : > : It used to be effective for that purpose, when there were only
> centralized
> : > publishers who benefited from copyright as a means of protection against
> : > unfair competition from other publishers.
> : >
> : > : At this point with decentralized publishing on the web, where
> : > : everybody can publish and distribute things equally effectively, the
> : > : traditional purpose of copyright has been completely
> : > : lost
> : >
> : > I presume you're aware of the adage that one can't sell from an empty
> wagon.
> : >
> : > Once the information wagon is empty where do you propose to source new
> : > information for your free mart?
> :
> : That's why it's important to tax information and to device a fair
> : system of distributing
> : those taxes amongst people who create new things.
> : Copyright is completely ineffective, so by getting rid of it, we
> : improve the situation right away but we might as well maintain
> : copyright until a fair system of taxation is implemented which can
> : replace copyright as a means to ensure that people who come up with
> : new content can earn an income in this fashion so they can devote
> : their time to their creative passion.
> : In practice, there is no copyright on the internet as 99% of the
> : people who exchange information online tend to ignore copyright issues
> : (the bulk of online communication concerns data on filesharing
> : networks).
> :
> : At this point there are so many opportunities to automate work, that
> : nobody should feel forced to work for a living and the government can
> : provide an unconditional income for free.
> : This means that people can devote their time to their hobby or
> : passion, regardless whether or not they earn any money with their
> : activities. Because there is more than enough material wealth and
> : technological ingenuity that the production of basic necessities
> : (food, clothing, shelter and internet) can be fully automated.
>
> You've been reading too many utopian space cadet dime novels. Not even
> Ashmoe's wildest works went that far.
>
> An aside you've still not answered the question where you propose to source
> new information for your free mart? Hint: magic is not a valid response

You're sorely mistaken if you think the universe revolves around work
and making
a living. Money might disappear in the near future when we have
nanotechnology or other revolutionary innovations which allow us to
duplicate physical commodities as easily as bitstrings.
This might sound like science fiction to people who don't follow
technological developments, but if you would have told people 100
years ago about the technology we have today (like lasers, microwaves,
cellphones, gps, and computers) they would consider these claims
deluded fantasies from people who have been reading too may science
fiction novels.
So 10, 50 or 100 years from now, who knows what amazing new inventions
the scientists will have concocted? But it's unlikely that money will
play a significant role in the future as society gradually begins to
revolve around information instead of money.

From: NotMe on 21 Oct 2009 22:07

�

2
0
0
8

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
;

n
o

p
o
r
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
i
s

p
o
s
t

m
a
y

b
e

u
s
e
d

a
n
y
w
h
e
r
e

e
l
s
e

o
r

a
r
c
h
i
v
e
d

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

w
r
i
t
t
e
n

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX18dYnWvZ1ioNoFRCE6t0c1619C+c0tQkgxducmyZlaQUg==
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 091021-0, 10/21/2009), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:q0SyPPxM/zRMU30X5CXhnezXlqg=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.netfront.net alt.www.webmaster:4897 rec.photo.digital:34866

"sobriquet" <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:209e0748-5b2a-4603-a103-bebbade10064(a)e34g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
On 22 okt, 02:25, "NotMe" <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> "sobriquet" <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ac3618ef-1731-4329-9f56-da3c238acbc7(a)h2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
> : On 22 okt, 01:15, "NotMe" <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> : > "sobriquet"
> : > :
> : > : It used to be effective for that purpose, when there were only
> centralized
> : > publishers who benefited from copyright as a means of protection
> against
> : > unfair competition from other publishers.
> : >
> : > : At this point with decentralized publishing on the web, where
> : > : everybody can publish and distribute things equally effectively, the
> : > : traditional purpose of copyright has been completely
> : > : lost
> : >
> : > I presume you're aware of the adage that one can't sell from an empty
> wagon.
> : >
> : > Once the information wagon is empty where do you propose to source new
> : > information for your free mart?
> :
> : That's why it's important to tax information and to device a fair
> : system of distributing those taxes amongst people who create new things.
> : Copyright is completely ineffective, so by getting rid of it, we
> : improve the situation right away but we might as well maintain
> : copyright until a fair system of taxation is implemented which can
> : replace copyright as a means to ensure that people who come up with
> : new content can earn an income in this fashion so they can devote
> : their time to their creative passion.

> : In practice, there is no copyright on the internet as 99% of the
> : people who exchange information online tend to ignore copyright issues
> : (the bulk of online communication concerns data on filesharing
> : networks).
> :
> : At this point there are so many opportunities to automate work, that
> : nobody should feel forced to work for a living and the government can
> : provide an unconditional income for free.
> : This means that people can devote their time to their hobby or
> : passion, regardless whether or not they earn any money with their
> : activities. Because there is more than enough material wealth and
> : technological ingenuity that the production of basic necessities
> : (food, clothing, shelter and internet) can be fully automated.
>
> You've been reading too many utopian space cadet dime novels. Not even
> Ashmoe's wildest works went that far.
>
> An aside you've still not answered the question where you propose to
> source
> new information for your free mart? Hint: magic is not a valid response

}You're sorely mistaken if you think the universe revolves around work
and making a living.

Life revolves around expenditures of effort and energy for which the various
entities gain a return on their investment. Those with a net gain live
those with a net loss die.

}Money might disappear in the near future when we have
nanotechnology or other revolutionary innovations which allow us to
duplicate physical commodities as easily as bitstrings.

Yea and if pigs had wings etc.

}This might sound like science fiction to people who don't follow
technological developments, but if you would have told people 100
years ago about the technology we have today (like lasers, microwaves,
cellphones, gps, and computers) they would consider these claims
deluded fantasies from people who have been reading too may science
fiction novels.

You're not talking science fiction but economic fantasy.

}So 10, 50 or 100 years from now, who knows what amazing new inventions
the scientists will have concocted? But it's unlikely that money will
play a significant role in the future as society gradually begins to
revolve around information instead of money.

I was born before the atomic age and can well remember the claims made for
'unlimited energy' and energy so cheap it would not be metered.

Wind energy may be free but the gen sets and turbines cost a fortune.

I repeat: you've still not answered the question where you propose to
source new information for your free mart? Hint: magic is not a valid
response

Last how do you propose to realistically fund the R&D for these wondrous
nanotechnologies?