Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
University of Auckland Department of Computer Science ^ | 23 December 2006 | Peter Gutmann

Posted on 12/23/2006 5:51:48 PM PST by IncPen

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last
To: packrat35
Downloading is NOT stealing, it is copyright infringement. It is NOT the same thing, no matter how many times people say so.

If I went to a book store and removed a copy of the book without paying - THAT would be stealing. I would have taken the actual physical item from the store.

Downloading is still wrong, but it is NOT theft.

Well, my dictionary says that STEAL, PILFER, PURLOIN, and FILCH are synonymous. It goes on to note, "STEAL may apply to any surreptitious taking of something and differs from the other terms by commonly applying to intangibles as well as material things."

However, let's not quibble over the meaning of the word. You and I agree that "downloading" is wrong. I am content to leave it at that.

Merry Christmas to you!

101 posted on 12/24/2006 8:18:50 AM PST by Logophile (No one is greedier than those who expect to enjoy the work of others without paying for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Because in order to protect your "rights", you are penalizing 99.99% of the people for the actions of 0.01%. NOT equitable. Most people ARE honest.

I agree with you. See Post 99.

And Jim Baen has settled the issue by actually doing the experiment. "Piracy" in actual fact acts as free advertising.

Baen's experiment is still ongoing. As I recall, Baen Books is in the business of publishing fiction, principally science fiction. It is not clear that its business model will work for other genres or media. If it does, then I am all for it. In the mean time, I will continue to publish non-fiction the traditional way.

And the copyright laws today are ludicrous. A patent only lasts for a very limited time compared to copyright. AT MOST, a copyright should be for the author's lifetime (if you want a legacy for your offspring, save and invest the money you make from the copyrighted material, and will THAT to them).

Again I agree with you. Patents and copyrights should last for a reasonably short time to encourage innovators to produce. After that, the innovations should be released to the public domain.

102 posted on 12/24/2006 8:33:28 AM PST by Logophile (No one is greedier than those who expect to enjoy the work of others without paying for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)

I specifically said that we do not know how it will be done, but...when money is involved, it will be done eventually.

Nobody knew how an airplane was going to fly 100 years before they flew.

103 posted on 12/24/2006 8:50:05 AM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)
A better word would have been "undeserved." While promotion, marketing, and financing are important in content utilization,the actual content creators usually see little of the profits (pennies on the dollar), simply because they are forced to sign over their rights to their creation in order to have it promoted. I'm sorry, but that has more to do with media monopolies than market practices.

I get a royalty of 15% on the books I write. At one time, I considered that too low; but then I figured out what it would cost me to produce, market, and distribute the books myself and decided that 15% was not too bad.

On the other hand, I already produce my books in digital format for the publisher to print. I can envision cutting out the middle man and distributing the files over the Internet directly to the customer. I could charge less and still make a larger profit. I would do that for my next book, if I could figure out a way to prevent one user from buying the book and "sharing" it with a dozen friends.

For the time being (at least until we can look at a universal ten year copyright): A work would be copyrighted by the creator for his or her life, with rights assignable for ten years to any corporate entity. Note that this would change the "work-for-hire" copyright provisions drastically (making far more content creators contractors rather than employees). At the end of any ten year period the creator could reassign the rights for another ten years (which, of course would probably mean more negotiations, contracts, and ultimately income for the creator and more competition for the corporations). Should the ten years lapse and the author be deceased, the copyright expires and the product enters the public domain.

That is a reasonable approach, one I could support.

There will always be thieves. The trick is to convince the average person to obey copyright.

That is what I am trying to do, one thread at a time.

It seems we agree in principle on what should be done. I am content to leave it at that.

Merry Christmas.

104 posted on 12/24/2006 8:51:08 AM PST by Logophile (No one is greedier than those who expect to enjoy the work of others without paying for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
"not to mention the absolute dependence our radiologic viewing (PACS) software has on Internet Explorer."

That's the dammed truth! Our remote PACS system won't even open on a non IE browser. This is more the fault of the developers of the PACS systems. They need make their systems compatible with other browsers, rather than forcing everyone to use an inherently insecure product.

105 posted on 12/24/2006 9:06:26 AM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: WildBill2275
The thing that disturbed me is that MS doesn't want the "card" manufactures to provide "Open Source" drivers for their products (with penalties). This is thrown in to put LINUX at a competitive disadvantage.

And now you understand why MS is doing it

Why does MS need to support "premium media content" under Vista? Why does Vista need to be able to play HD-DVD movies? Assuming that there are people who want to be able to watch the occasional movie on their PC, why stick that into Vista rather than just having an external HD-DVD player and have the monitor makers produce HD-capable monitors with a second imput jack?

The purpose of DRM is to lock out and cripple Linux

106 posted on 12/24/2006 9:12:50 AM PST by SauronOfMordor (A planned society is most appealing to those with the arrogance to think they will be the planners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin); Logophile
The original purpose of copyright was to provide an incentive to create original works, which would then finally fall into the public domain for the enrichment of the nation.

One problem with ultra-long-term copyright protection is that it results in much being forever lost. If a particular work is only moderately popular, it may not justify a run to produce more copies of it. The result will be that, when the copyright finally runs out, it's likely that no copies of it will have survived to pass into public domain

107 posted on 12/24/2006 9:23:25 AM PST by SauronOfMordor (A planned society is most appealing to those with the arrogance to think they will be the planners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce


108 posted on 12/24/2006 9:31:30 AM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: MikefromOhio

I agree 100% Mike.

I have said before and I will say again, this is my last Microsoft OS, I will simply not use Vista, period.



109 posted on 12/24/2006 9:42:28 AM PST by knews_hound (Sarcastically blogging since 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
Nobody knew how an airplane was going to fly 100 years before they flew.

But an airplane operates because it obeys the laws of physics. A non-"onerous" DRM requires a violation of physics (specifically entropy). The inclusion of DRM increases information costs, which can be paid in money, time (either yours or the processors, or restricted usage. Those are your only options, wishful thinking aside...

110 posted on 12/24/2006 9:45:05 AM PST by Charles H. (The_r0nin) (Hwt! Lr bi mst hord, solce!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

"The problem is that the hardware manufacturers will need to build their hardware in such a way for it to work with Vista. "

Yes I gathered that from the article. So stop buy the hardware too. Settle with what you already have for awhile. The hardware manufactures will the get the message and get rid of the crap too.

111 posted on 12/24/2006 10:28:07 AM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


I know what you mean, but as a professional photographer who relies on my copyright to protect my financial interests, I felt it would have been hypocritcal for me to just "use it."

It drives me nuts to see some high school kid using my sports photos on his "myspace" without even asking permission.

I know its small potatoes to these guys, but there are a ton of honest people who want to do the right thing--if only they could tell us how.

112 posted on 12/24/2006 10:40:48 AM PST by Vermont Lt (I am not from Vermont. I lived there for four years and that was enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

"I have heard that Microsoft only supports two OSes at the same time with patches, currently XP and 2000, but with Vista will drop XP. Can anyone verify this?"

I see that Syntyr has already answered this in post #96.   IMHO, MS won't drop support for XP until the majority of the marketplace has upgraded to Vista, even if that's beyond their planned lifecycle. 

If Vista is largely rejected and/or ignored over the next 2 or 3 years (most likely due to DRM issues), then look for a major service pack or possibly a new major release to correct the perceived shortcomings.

I believe that MS suffers from 'bloatware syndrome'. - trying to dominate the market through monopolizing all phases and services.  Just like big government, this leads to waste, mismanagement,  poor quality, poor service or very expensive service (support), superfluous and unwanted features, inflated costs and pricing, etc.

Linux  is looking better and better all the time.  Mac may be the answer for some, but will probably become as bloated as MS, if not there already.  Linux is the only solution that, to my knowledge, a user can configure to run mean and lean, with only the desired features.

It's sad that there are not many programmers left that use pure assembly language for their programs.  It produces code that is small, extremely fast, and efficient.  Steve Gibson is a long time professional developer who still uses pure assembly language for his programming.  He has developed many unique utilities that can increase system security and performance.  Most are freeware.  I highly recommend everyone to check out his website: GRC | Gibson Research Corporation Home Page - I've been using his products for years and really like them.

113 posted on 12/24/2006 11:32:30 AM PST by RebelTex (Help cure diseases:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser

Remember when you could run the old flight sim on a 286 PC-AT?

114 posted on 12/24/2006 12:39:16 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: jacquej

Translation: "We're angry because we can't steal copyrighted material"

115 posted on 12/24/2006 12:51:24 PM PST by Royal Wulff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; chance33_98; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Bush2000; PenguinWry; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; ...

Yeah, I'm late--but it's a holiday weekend. :)

116 posted on 12/24/2006 12:51:36 PM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
" Yeah, I'm late--but it's a holiday weekend. :)"

Merry Christmas! I hope you get lots of gifts that only a geek would enjoy. :p

117 posted on 12/24/2006 1:04:14 PM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: yield 2 the right
In short and in simple terms: How does this effect Free Republic?

It depends on how deep the imbedded the Intellectual Property Digital Rights Management goes and who buys into it. It may mean that photographs, graphics, and even some articles will not display on Windows Vista machines.

118 posted on 12/24/2006 1:48:06 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: MarkL
Not if there are direct hardware calls... Some things simply can't be virtualized.


There IS NO VIRTUALIZATION! Every Intel® Mac includes every piece of hardware that Windows XP or Windows Vista would make to "direct hardware calls"... the sole exception being the antiquated parallel port. Using "Bootcamp" the Mac becomes a PC running Windows XP or Windows Vista which, according to many leading PC magazine pundits, runs faster than equivalent PCs with the same hardware.

And in a dual boot environment, once MS has written apps to work exclusively with Vista, you'll have to run it on Vista compatible hardware.

The Mac is already Vista compatible.

119 posted on 12/24/2006 2:29:22 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: IncPen; Vermont Lt
. . . I saw Disney wanting to charge (interdepartmentally) $100,000 to use a Disney song in an invite to a party for people (sponsors) who give vast amounts of money to Disney companies.

While Disney has in the past been very militant about the use of the IP, I find this hard to believe.

Did you actually experience this or did you hear about it from a friend who knew somebody whose second cousin's ex-wife's barber's third cousin twice removed told them about it?

I work with a large singing group (150 member chorale) who produces both CDs and DVDs of their concerts. The licensing of the music produced (so long as we have the permissions of the professional musicians we hired as accompaniasts [we usually include the performance permission in their contracts and pay them extra for signing off on reproduction rights - getting permissions after-the-fact from 105 symphony musicians ain't easy!]) is handled either by BMI or ASCAP and the licensing is seldom more than $1 per CD or DVD produced. If we turn out 1000 copies, then we usually pay a license fee of between $500 and $1000 for all of the songs on the disk. We have performed Disney songs and the licensing was right in line with all other works. The Disney department could have gone directly to BMI (for this purpose, I think) and done the usual licensing that anyone else could do.

Some things are not licensable... songs from currently running Broadway musicals or those that may have been licensed exclusively to a specific artist are generally not available to anyone except the current licensee. Some, like the Beatles catalogue is retained privately.

Vermont LT, ASCAP and BMI act as a clearing houses for payments between consumers and producers of music, including composers, performers, and publishers. The only reason I can think of that prevented them from selling you a license for the music you wanted to use on your CD was that they did not have an agreement with those who produced or performed the recordings you wanted to use. Since you were going to use the actual performance recordings of some artists, the fee per CD would probably have been a bit more than the amount I mention above, but not much... Maybe $2 per CD produced.

That being said, I think there should be a limit before you are required to pay the fee... For your purposes, the use of the music as secondary to a video of the girl's Basketball performance, for under 25 copies, for distribution within a limited membership group, I think the the law should permit blanket use for the initial copies under the fair use doctrine.

120 posted on 12/24/2006 3:16:38 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Charles H. (The_r0nin)

I don't think you understand at all what I said.

I didn't make any snide comments to anyone about wishful thinking.

I said we haven't invented a painless way to do it, but we eventually will. We just don't know what is it yet or how it will be done.

121 posted on 12/24/2006 3:53:18 PM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: RebelTex

Thanks for that answer.

122 posted on 12/24/2006 3:54:14 PM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Syntyr
Also Games SUCK running on Mac's. I have tried. Flight Sim X, Battlefield 2142, Splinter Cell Double Agent... All suck. I can't even get Battlefield 2142 to run.

What Intel® Mac are you running? A Mac Mini?

That doesn't seem to match other's experiences. The Mac IS a PC when booted with Bootcamp.

Simon Ocean
Triple-A Player
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sherburn, UK
Posts: 57

To add my two penneth:

I have Vista Ultimate installed on a Boot Camp created partition. To date there has not been one single problem running it on my iMac.

In fact, it works better/faster than the exact same install on my 4.2Ghz Pentium.

Previously to Vista I had XP Professional installed, same with that, no problems at all.

It will even play games such as Splinter Cell-Double Agent that will not play on my Pentium!

Source - Mac OSX Hints

. . . I tested Office 2003, Photoshop, InDesign, and a number of games, along with periperhals such as printers, USB gaming devices, and FireWire hard drives. Everything just works.


Re: Multiple Monitors... the MacPro supports eight 30" monitors should you need them.

123 posted on 12/24/2006 4:02:44 PM PST by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

If it's a big enough problem, I think we will see the beginning of the production of open-source hardware.

124 posted on 12/24/2006 4:28:14 PM PST by B Knotts (Newt '08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: IncPen

Unfortunately you are incorrect in your assumption here. Every major video card manufacturer has had it's Vista compliant next generation of GPUs in the pipeline since late 2005.

Upgrading a Mac to a new generation video card will have a Vista fee associated with it, say $20 to $50 per card at the high end cards.

125 posted on 12/24/2006 4:35:54 PM PST by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: All

Ah, the fun's just beginning. Just imagine that Vista is two or so generations down the pike, and all the wrinkles have been ironed out. You've got two elements: hardware that can be linked to you and your online activities, and hardware that can be crippled remotely.

So it's 2015, and Italy's first Islamic Republic is elected to power. Maybe it's the U.K. The True Believers have a list of websites critical of Islam, and one of their first acts is putting into place a architecture that will identify and turn off every machine that contacts such a site from an Italian ISP. Sites like, say, the Vatican.

Or perhaps it's the US with "hate" speech. One day, Free Republic simply disappears, because every US machine stops working as soon as it contacts the server. Oh, maybe it take a few visits to take into account the possibility you clicked there by accident.

I hated Longhorn when I first heard of it, and I hate Vista now. It represents a grave threat to liberty.

126 posted on 12/24/2006 4:55:09 PM PST by GOP Jedi (Democracy, Immigration, Multiculturalism -- Pick Any Two)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Check your FR Mail...

127 posted on 12/24/2006 5:03:57 PM PST by IncPen (When Al Gore Finished the Internet, he invented Global Warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser; Northern Alliance

This article requires a Computer Degree almost.

You could be sorry if you want Vista for gaming. It is almost a given that your video card and monitor are incompatible with Vista if any HD content is running. Your game will be restricted to 800 by 600 or perhaps even 640 by 480. Your audio will be turned off or made to sound terrible. This could be content on a web page or on a CD. Microsoft could even decide your $300 Video Card was a threat to HD content and just deactivate it. Buy any new card and Monitor to overcome this and it will be slower or far more expensive in order to jump through all the new Copy Protection Hoops. Even dual core processors will be brought to their kneen by all the Copy Protection software Microsoft is requiring.

Vista will almost guarantee that PC's will be in the shop after a year or so. Dust alone can make the PC think it is compromised and then Microsoft will just dumb it down or not let it boot.

Drivers will be almost impossible to write and very, very expensive. Thus cards will be far less capable yet more expensive.

128 posted on 12/24/2006 6:22:22 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Very real.

HDMI you may have heard of. It is the newest thing in Video/Televisions.

This requires Video to be Encrypted 1024 bits all the way. This is very compute intensive. It has to be done in each device and over and over again in the PC. That makes for expensive and slow equipment.

129 posted on 12/24/2006 6:26:27 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: IncPen

You are dreaming Mac 10.5 or 11 will be the same. Apple led the way with Music Sales and it's locked down IPod. Otherwise you could play no HD content on a Mac. What good would it be then.

130 posted on 12/24/2006 6:30:03 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: barb-tex

This is not Microsoft.

This is Sony, RIAA, MPA, et all.

And you have another think coming if you think Apple won't jump on the bandwagon. Sony made Apple a new success.

131 posted on 12/24/2006 6:56:42 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog; IncPen; rlmorel; Logophile

Books are different than video. However Books are in libraries. It is obviously not stealing to go to a library.

In a way the internet is a library as well. Thus why is it "stealing" if you access the same thing to read/view on the internet? What is the difference? I see none.

Other material not available in a library is in a different category. But then it is copyright infringement not stealing. I deprive you of nothing by copying a movie on the internet. No property has changed hands. Study after study has shown that people that see/hear material on the internet are far more likely to buy that material than had they only seen advertising. After all no one can possibly buy what they do not know about. Without getting the word out you have no income. There are an increasing number of people never exposed to advertising. They surf the Web and don't watch TV or pay attention to adds on the internet. I am in this category. I watch TV but surf during commercials. Just how are we supposed to know something exist?

If the DRM people get their way they may make more money for a short time but they will kill the goose that laid the golden egg. VCR's have made far more for the TV industry through sales of Video Tapes/DVD/s than they ever began to cost in lost add revenue (which never happened). DRM was forced out of the MP3 market for a large part. Yet music sales went up. I can download movies on the internet but you better believe I pay to see them in a theater if they are worth seeing. But I quit NetFlix two years ago because there are so very few good movies any more. It the game to make bad movies but use DRM to get more money?

DRM flies in the face of everything that makes America Great. Totally enforced only a very few would ever have a chance to sell anything. This crowd would make writing a song and giving it away (to get noticed) illegal. They would force you to pay every time you listened to a song or watched a movie.

Every attempt at DRM has failed and this will as well. I pray it takes Microsoft down with it. Then we might get PC's that actually worked for us instead of Sony, Microsoft, etc. I hate it when Microsoft decides to reboot my computer even though I have done everything I can to deny them this ability.

132 posted on 12/24/2006 7:36:35 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
"... deprive you of nothing by copying a movie on the internet..."

I disagree.

133 posted on 12/24/2006 7:49:19 PM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor
" As a user, there is simply no escape. Whether you use Windows Vista, Windows XP, Windows 95, Linux, FreeBSD, OS X, Solaris (on x86), or almost any other OS, Windows content protection will make your hardware more expensive, less reliable, more difficult to program for, more difficult to support, more vulnerable to hostile code, and with more compatibility problems

This is interesting to me because I had purchased a software program that was compatible with MS back in June '06, loaded it and had some problems with it. I used it, unloaded it and just last week tried to load it again. I could load the program but I could not update the program service pack. MS windows installer told me to check with the vendor. The vendor wanted me to do a bunch of stuff to my computer. I said no that apparently their program was no longer compatible with MS because whatever they had in their Service Pack Windows Installer would not allow the replacement of the "protected file." I have XP Pro. The program is OmniPage 15 Pro. Anybody got any ideas? By the way I have the Installer version (v2)redistributed.

134 posted on 12/24/2006 8:04:13 PM PST by Snoopers-868th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Actually, they indicated to me that they no longer handled this type of synchornization license. They directed me to the different labels. $2 a CD would have been great with me and it would have made me feel like I was doing the right thing.

This was about six months ago, so who knows--

135 posted on 12/24/2006 8:21:27 PM PST by Vermont Lt (I am not from Vermont. I lived there for four years and that was enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Logophile


Sony just lost on this in court.

When your DRM makes my computer unusable you are at fault and liable for the damage the DRM caused. Thus the incentive to get Microsoft to do the dirty work (as it is so hard to win against Microsoft as they could care less about bad press).

Unless Microsoft offers a Vista DRM free they will either lose in court or be forced out of the market. I refuse to buy anything that hobbles my computer and makes it unusable for its real purpose and that is not HD Movies. I will not infect my PC with Draconian versions of DRM.

Us tech guys will get the word out and Vista will fail miserably. We already got Microsoft to stop it's scheme of making Vista only installable twice (Buy a third Hard Drive and the OS will not install).

Vista is simply not needed. We will force NVidia et all to make XP versions of hardware until Microsoft removes DRM from Vista.

Enough bad press and Microsoft sometimes listens.

136 posted on 12/24/2006 8:57:01 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

If I like something I buy it.

Thus if I copy your work and like it I will buy it. If I don't like it I won't buy it. However if I don't copy it I will most likely never know about it and thus never buy it.

Now other things I might borrow and rather than turn on the radio listen to an MP3. But once again if I like it I buy it to support the artist. I just hate commercials and refuse to listen to them under any circumstances so this is the only way I experience new stuff I like. Plus my taste are not on the radio much.

The internet is the greatest thing that has ever happened to the industry. It just hasn't figured it out because it is blinded by greed trying to figure out a way to extract even more. But I fear they will kill the goose that laid that egg if they force DRM down our thoughts.

137 posted on 12/24/2006 9:13:29 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton

You and I have a basic philosophical difference here.

I understand your analogy with the Goose and Golden Egg, and why you think that is something to beware of. I agree.

I just feel that the creators of content need to be adequately protected. And I simply think that letting people have complete and total access for free to a perfect copy with no restrictions on how it it used is wrong.

I understand your point of view.

138 posted on 12/24/2006 9:19:30 PM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
"...We already got Microsoft to stop it's scheme of making Vista only installable twice..."

I was unaware of this restriction until I saw it on Free Republic...and it may have even been you who voiced it. When I told that to my brother who works for himself doing PC tech support, he looked at me like I was a lunatic, and said..."WHAT?" I am no Microsoft fan, but I found that a bit shocking. Even as dim a bulb in some techorespects as I am due to my limited scope in certain areas of my work, I grasped the enormity of that pretty quick.

139 posted on 12/24/2006 9:25:21 PM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: IncPen

One solution that comes to mind isn't exactly legal. MSFT is forcing the inclusion of various "grenade pins", as the author calls them, with Vista. These pins can turn your Vista PC into a doorstop if pulled. The solution? Pull the pins.

What if malware writers started doing things with their code that messed with the host PC at a level that triggered MSFT's anti-tampering features? That PC would cease to function at the level the consumer expected as it attempts to protectss the Preciousssss premium contentsesss. (Though, it would still be just fine for use as a spam mailing zombie! In fact, it would work even better as a zombie. The CPU would no longer be wasting cycles processing encrypted video and audio data.) The consumer would, of course, blame MSFT for the outage. If enough PC users had their machines taken away from them by Vista, the backlash would force MSFT to back down. (And yes, they do respond to consumer pressure. Witness their repeated attempts to halt support for legacy software.) Such an approach would have to be implemented quickly; before hardware vendors make the investment necessary to play the Vista game.

As I said, action of this sort would be illegal. I am not endorsing it by writing this. I am merely thinking out loud. So if some hardware vendor with contacts in Russia should happen to read this, I didn't tell you to do anything. Whatever you do with this is your own business!

140 posted on 12/24/2006 10:32:38 PM PST by Redcloak (Speak softly and wear a loud shirt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImphClinton
"Books are different than video. However Books are in libraries. It is obviously not stealing to go to a library."

Uh, they're trying to do EXACTLY the same DRM stuff with "electronic books", which is why that has never taken off (and is exactly what Jim Baen proved with his "Free Library" was not necessary).

And there is these things called "Blockbuster" and "Netflix" that do exactly for video what a library does for books.

141 posted on 12/25/2006 3:54:05 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel-NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

"Thanks for that answer."

You're welcome.

Here's some interesting breaking news about Vista - I predicted that some flaws would be found in the 1st month  after release - I was right.  That has happened with most of MS OSes.

    Flaws Are Detected in Microsoft’s Vista - New York Times

Flaws Are Detected in Microsoft’s Vista

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 24 — Microsoft is facing an early crisis of confidence in the quality of its Windows Vista operating system as computer security researchers and hackers have begun to find potentially serious flaws in the system that was released to corporate customers late last month.

On Dec. 15, a Russian programmer posted a description of a flaw that makes it possible to increase a user’s privileges on all of the company’s recent operating systems, including Vista. And over the weekend a Silicon Valley computer security firm said it had notified Microsoft that it had also found that flaw, as well as five other vulnerabilities, including one serious error in the software code underlying the company’s new Internet Explorer 7 browser.

A thread about this was started earlier this morning.

Here's the link to that thread:  Surprise - NOT! Flaws Detected In Microsoft's Vista


142 posted on 12/25/2006 8:49:34 AM PST by RebelTex (Help cure diseases:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: RebelTex

This whole thing is making me nervous.

143 posted on 12/25/2006 10:55:38 AM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

    What, me worry?

144 posted on 12/25/2006 11:15:10 AM PST by RebelTex (Help cure diseases:
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: RebelTex

I've owned a Mac of one kind of another since 1987 and have never owned a PC, but my job involves the support and use of hundreds of PC's (75% Win2000, the rest XP) in a Radiology department. So I work with PC's and appreciate the relative advantages and disadvantages.

However, we are tied into Microsoft products, no getting around that. If we get into situations where they are not being patched/unsupported or whatever by Microsoft, my job is going to be hell.

I just have a hard time believing even Microsoft would go down this path.

145 posted on 12/25/2006 11:20:59 AM PST by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Logophile
I keep hearing the same assertion (1 wouln't call it an argument) from people who apparently think it should be their right to enjoy what I produce without paying me for it. They never can explain why I should consider this a Good Thing. Can you?

I think that's really the moral core of the whole issue. Not whether copying music is technically stealing or whether monopolistic control over a work is good or bad for innovation. The core is the idea that a person who expends effort deserves to get compensated for that effort. This is where I think most of the arguments in favor of "sharing" fall down. They want to use the fruits of another's labor but aren't concerned that they get compensated for the labor that produced the fruit.

On the flip side is the question of how much compensation a person deserves for a creative work. The ideologically pure free market conservative response is that the person who produces a work can set whatever value they want and should be able to stop anyone from using their work whenever they want. Where that argument falls down is that copying is so cheap, easy, and (sorry) natural (e.g., I copied your words as a lead in to my response, quote Monty Python and Star Trek with friends, sing "Happy Birthday" at birthday parties, save articles I've read online for reference, etc.) that it requires conscious effort or technological barriers for people not to do it. It's why footnotes and citations were developed. It's why most of Disney's most famous movies were based on traditional fairy tales, why parodies from Weird Al to the Scary Movie franchise are so successful, and, why movies, books, and music fall into identifiable genres in the first place. Heck, it's why the printing press revolutionized Western Civilization and the photocopier and fax machine revolutionized business. And like it or not, the world would work far worse if there were no free copying than if there were no copyright protections. Heck, the very act of learning is the act of copying information into your brain. It's an effort and burden not to copy whenever possible and build on what you've read, seen, or heard.

To the consumer, Buffy the Vampire Slayer fanfic is no different that Disney copying Beauty and the Beast or West Side Story ripping off Romeo and Juliet and the motivation is the same. It's not a matter of taking compensation from Joss Whedon but of building on something they learned and like. Technically, every next-day water cooler conversation that discusses what might have happened on a TV show if the main characters had done something different is a derivative work stealing someone else's creative effort to build on. And if you don't think a water cooler conversation is a problem, why does it suddenly become a problem if they type that very same conversation into their web page and post it?

So here's the deal. You deserve compensation for your work but it's not natural for people not to copy and build on it. Do you really think the best way to handle that conflict of interest is ever more onerous technological barriers that stop people from doing legitimate things (e.g., back ups of a DVD so I don't have to buy a new copy of a movie I already purchased if I accidentally snap the small plastic disk in half -- remember, I didn't pay for the small plastic disk) and ever more onerous legal punishments (e.g., fining parents tens of thousands of dollars for things they didn't even know their teenagers were doing -- what is too harsh of a punishment?)? Or maybe the problems are how people get compensated for creative works and how many people not involved in creating the work are sticking their hand out to take a slice, raising the price?

Perhaps. But the IP pirates have been stealing work that they had no hand in creating.

Did you never borrow ideas from any other author in your writing? You've never sung "Happy Birthday" at a birthday party without buying the sheet music? What makes West Side Story a legitimate play and Disney's Beauty and the Beast a brilliant adaptation but some geek's fanfic worthy of prosecution? Why is one artist's song that sounds similar to another artist's song simply in the same genre while another artist's song that copies one note too many (perhaps simply out of ignorance) illegal? Why can I sit around with my friends quoting Monty Python but if I want to write a story about my friends and I quoting Monty Python, with quotes, I need permission to use those quotes? Yes, you can give me explanations for all of those things but they will be justifications, rather than the natural moral conquence of the argument that taking the work of others that you had no hand in creating (the argument you are making above) is in some universal way immoral.

One could argue that Disney continues to produce movies financed in part by the "wild profits" they make. (By the way, what level of profit qualifies as "wild" in your view?)

In contrast, file sharers and other IP pirates produce nothing.

Should I point out that Cindarella is a derivative work. Snow White is a derivative work. Beauty and the Beast is a derivative work. Pinnochio is a derivative work. Need I go on? Why is it moral for Disney to borrow those creative ideas but wrong for a Disney fan to write Beuaty and the Beast fanfic based on the Disney movie?

(1) What is a "reasonable duration" of copyright protection, and why?

10-20 years. Why? Several reasons. First, it's about the time it takes for a work to become a "classic" or part of the "public conscience". Second, given that the purpose of a copyright is to encourage creation, that's more than enough time for a creator to come up with a new trick and free their creation for others to build on if they can't or won't do it. Third, it's often about the time things go out of print, become difficult to find, and get produced as cheap easy-to-buy copies. There will always be a market for official anniversary copies of popular works with new materials (e.g., commentary, introduction, a new song or cover of a song, extra material, etc.). I also believe most people would consider that duration fair, which would improve voluntary compliance. The exception I would make is that if a work took more than 10-20 years to produce, the copyright protection to extend to the time it took to produce the work.

I would also more tightly limit what's protected by copyright. If you utter something in public in a free and open forum or post something to an internet forum like this, I wouldn't protect it. I think a creator needs to make some attempt to control their creation for it to warrant protection.

(2) How would you go after the corporate "copyright leeches" without also harming writers, artists, and other producers of IP?

Put copyrights in the hands of the creators rather than corporations. Make the maximum time that a corporation can contract for a copyright only half of the duration of the copyright, maximum. Thus if the copyright law was changed to 10 years and a 10 year renewal, the most a record label could get a contract for is 10 years. So if a musician gets a hit, they can do whatever they want with it for the last 10 years. Yes, I know there are loopholes and issues like works for hire that would have to be addressed but I think this could help. Corporations can be a wonderful thing but they are not people and employees are not slaves.

(3) What would you propose be done about those who steal IP after the law has been changed to your liking?

IP owners can learn a good lesson from taxation here. When people think that taxes are fair, they pay them voluntarily. They don't cheat as much, don't look for as many loopholes, and don't complain as much. The right thing for IP owners to do is to make it easy for people to comply with voluntarily by making compliance cheap, easy, and fair. Yes, there should still be legal consequences to illegal copying just as there are legal consequences to evading taxation but look at what happens when people perceive taxes to be draconian and unfair -- the punishment becomes more and more draconian and the attempts to prevent evasion become more and more onerous. Where does it end in either case? With taxes, anyway, it ended with a harbor full of tea and a new country.

That last question is important because, despite your assurance that "all of this mess would go away," I am not convinced. Once a large number of persons come to believe they have the right to enjoy free music, movies, and other IP, why would they ever pay a dime for it?

That's a much bigger problem and it's two-fold. First, commercial television made people believe that television is free. I think the pay cable channels show the way out of that mentality. Second, I think creators need to think of more ways to get compensated before they create a work, not afterward. Old-fashioned patronage is one option there. Other options include what musicians do (get paid for appearances) and getting direct fan compensation through appeals (e.g., PBS member fundraising, telethons, etc.).

Finally, I think the value of creation is going down as the cost of creation has gone down. Word processors and a good education make almost anyone a writer who wants to be. Electronic music allows a single muscian to command a virtual symphony and there are all sorts of web sites that provide a delivery mechanism. As film shorts like Troops and fan efforts like New Voyages demonstrate that good production quality (though not always good acting or writing) are now within the reach of fans and amateurs willing to work for free as a labor of love. For better or worse, people are stepping in who are creating as a labor of love, willing to give their work away for free (as they are with open source software) and that's going to eat into the market for paid creativity.

146 posted on 12/27/2006 8:42:56 PM PST by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

I just tried Ubuntu Linux. If I can work out some hardware issues, figure out the convoluted process of installing files and "mounting" drives, I might consider flipping MS the bird.

This is ridiculous. Why have all this high-definition content if we won't be able to see it or hear it?

147 posted on 12/29/2006 11:16:58 AM PST by RockinRight (To compare Congress to drunken sailors is an insult to drunken sailors. - Ronald W. Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Northern Alliance

Mostly gaming. And I play SOME games, but not enough or often enough to need vista for now.

148 posted on 12/29/2006 11:18:10 AM PST by RockinRight (To compare Congress to drunken sailors is an insult to drunken sailors. - Ronald W. Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
It drives me nuts to see some high school kid using my sports photos on his "myspace" without even asking permission.

Is he charging money for it? Is it a full/high res TIFF, or is it some small JPG he thought was cool and visually represented something he wanted to convey?

If the latter he should at the very least credit you as the photographer if he knows, or the original source of say some web/news/sports site out there he found it on.

If the former then he should have gotten permission from you and arranged a percentage of sales. Did you contact him via his myspace page and ask him to at least credit you as the photographer?

149 posted on 12/29/2006 12:14:12 PM PST by AFreeBird (If American "cowboy diplomacy" did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
It drives me nuts to see some high school kid using my sports photos on his "myspace" without even asking permission.

I understand your aggravation.

What we have here is a two-fold problem.

1. Once you publish something, everyone has access to it. In the old days, someone would have to go to a library, check out your book, and take it to a professional publishing house or photo studio to copy your picture. Today they just go "click."

2. Copyright is a limited-time monopoly provided by the government. It's original purpose was to ensure that people don't hoard their artistic talents and sell them only to rich collectors. In return for the artist putting their work out into the public view, the artist is given a limited monopoly, after which the work goes into the public domain.

Since the 1930's or so, large companies have been lobbying Congress to push, twist and deform the "limited" part of limited monopoly until it has no meaning. Now that part 2 has been made meaningless, and part 1 has made ignoring copyrights effortless, artists have a problem.

So artists have two options. 1. Lobby Congress to make copyrights mean something again. People will be more willing to wait for something to go into the public domain if it's not 100 years from now. Or 2 figure out another way to make money off of your work.

150 posted on 12/31/2006 2:26:22 AM PST by Knitebane (Happily Microsoft free since 1999.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson