gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Stallman calls for an end to file sharing war


From: Hadron
Subject: Re: Stallman calls for an end to file sharing war
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:02:14 -0000
User-agent: Emacs 23.2.1

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Hadron<address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Barry Margolin <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> In article <address@hidden>,
>>>  Alexander Terekhov <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Uh comic rms.
>>>
>>> But at least he's consistent.  I haven't read the GNU Manifesto in a 
>>> while, but I'm pretty sure he suggested a similar system to compensate 
>>> programmers in a world where all software is free.
>>>
>>> BTW, we already have a program where the government pays artists: the 
>>> National Endowment for the Arts.  Does anyone really want to see that 
>>> become the sole way that artists get paid?
>>
>> Yup. In Ireland IMRO, Germany GEMA etc etc.
>>
>> And how does he propose to judge who gets what? Everyone gets the same
>> or what?
>
> Uh, how about you actually first _read_ what you are flaming about?
> It's not like he does not address this.

Oh please.

The whole subject is nonsense.

It was semi rhetorical.

People do work. They get paid. They try to protect their creations from
thieves. Unprotected music/video/sw is stolen.

A common view in COLA is that since its not a physical item you're not
really harming anyone : people dont think twice about downloading things
for free in far too many cases when its unguarded. The nonsense spouted
about how DRM only harms the legitimate purchaser is bullshit since the
HUGE majority of people dont know how to access a lot of warez sites or
are too frightened of malware and spies to do it. Give them the chance
to just "burn a copy" and they will.

The people who lose their hardwork to freeloaders know a hell of a lot
more about it than a bunch of dreamers who are setting themselves up as
big fish in a small pond I am afraid.

>
> One problem is that even the recompensation schemes he proposes (with
> diminuishing returns) are problematic to address works like the major
> works of James Joyce which were groundbreaking, but in rather limited
> circulation during his lifetime, for one thing because they were not
> easily accessible, for another, being prohibited due to pornography
> laws.

They dont want to pay for it again? Look after it. Ground breaking I
know but there you go.

>
> Even worse in that respect would fare J.S.Bach's magnum opus, the Mass
> in B minor.  Written by a protestant in an old catholic rite outdated
> for at least a century, it was not performable until churches opened up
> for secular music and concert halls for sacred music.  When it was
> initially performed in full, he had been dead longer than he had been
> alive, some 80 years after his death.
>
> How do you compensate somebody for great works written in the wrong
> century?

You don't unless he bequeathed the rights to his family. Are you really
asking such nonsense to try and muddy the waters? meanwhile the people
who produce it and publish it get paid. You know, orchestras, artists,
the recording studios. Good production qualities cost money. Which might
account for the awful tools available to do screencasting in Linux. Yes
we have ffmpeg. recordmydesktop etc. None of which come close to the
solutions on the Mac or Windows which feature proper annotation,
zooming, keypress hiliting etc etc etc.

>
> In the end, even the schemes Stallman proposes are based on numbers of
> copies in circulation.  So in special cases like that, humanity still
> has to be lucky.

And he knows the number in circulation how?

I mean, the Linux "advocates" in COLA tell us that the entire estimate
of Linux desktops based on the browser IDs monitored at OS agnostic web
sites (about 1.5% and dropping) is nothing more than a Microsoft
lie. What next? People hacking networks to 100x their "sales" figures?





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]