The real cost of being sued by Getty
in [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: Ray Fischer on 28 Oct 2009 23:30 sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On 28 okt, 05:09, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> sobriquet �<dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >On 28 okt, 03:23, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >> sobriquet �<dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >On 27 okt, 18:57, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >> >> sobriquet �<dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >On 27 okt, 04:20, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >> >> >> >> >Have you ever been able to get bitstrings from the ATM? >> >> >> >> >> Yep. >> >> >> >> >Liar. >> >> >> >> Shrug. �It's called a "reciept". >> >> >> >A receipt is not a bitstring. Humans denote numbers in the decimal >> >> >rather than the binary system. >> >> >> An idiot's quibble. �A decimal string is wholly equivalent to a binary >> >> string. >> >> >Well, either way, this is leading nowhere, as the receipt is not >> >intended >> >to represent the actual money >> >> I didn't say that it was, crook. > >Then what is your point? Far beyond your immoral "intellect". > We don't use bitstrings to represent money, Yes we do, crook. Most of the world's money exists only as computer data. >> >> > because the act of making a copy never takes anything away >> >> >> Except the money the author could have earned by selling his >> >> property. >> >> >So people who read books for free at the library >> >> The library that PAID for the books, crook? >> The people who PAID for the library, thief? > >In both cases, authors do get a financial compensation. And you thieves want to steal WITHOUT paying any compensation. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Ray Fischer on 28 Oct 2009 23:31 sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On 28 okt, 18:39, Walter Banks <wal...(a)bytecraft.com> wrote: >> sobriquet wrote: >> > But I guess the concept of a tax on information is beyond the >> > comprehension skills of a nazi cockroach like you. >> >> If you want respect for you ideas then you will need to be >> respectable. > >If people refrain from calling people thieves in case they infringe >copyrights, If you don't want to be called a thief then don't steal, crook. >Calling people thieves when they share information is demonization. YOU ARE STEALING! -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Walter Banks on 29 Oct 2009 11:07 sobriquet wrote: > So my mode of operation is to respect people who respect me and to > disrespect people who disrespect me. Sounds morally bankrupt
From: sobriquet on 29 Oct 2009 17:30 On 29 okt, 04:30, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > sobriquet <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >On 28 okt, 05:09, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >> sobriquet <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >On 28 okt, 03:23, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >> >> sobriquet <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >On 27 okt, 18:57, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >> >> >> sobriquet <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >On 27 okt, 04:20, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > >> >> >> >> >Have you ever been able to get bitstrings from the ATM? > > >> >> >> >> Yep. > > >> >> >> >Liar. > > >> >> >> Shrug. It's called a "reciept". > > >> >> >A receipt is not a bitstring. Humans denote numbers in the decimal > >> >> >rather than the binary system. > > >> >> An idiot's quibble. A decimal string is wholly equivalent to a binary > >> >> string. > > >> >Well, either way, this is leading nowhere, as the receipt is not > >> >intended > >> >to represent the actual money > > >> I didn't say that it was, crook. > > >Then what is your point? > > Far beyond your immoral "intellect". > > > We don't use bitstrings to represent money, > > Yes we do, crook. Most of the world's money exists only as computer > data. Not consumers, well, when they are internet banking. But apparently, using bitstrings to represent money (as opposed to using bitstrings to represent intellectual property), doesn't cause issues with copyright infringement in the say way that intellectual property does. So the nature of money (as opposed to the nature of information) is such, that you can use bitstrings to represent money and hence property but it's done in such a way that consumers can't duplicate money as they see fit to increase the amount of money they have or to share some of they money with others by providing them with a duplicate of your money. If people could duplicate money as easily as bitstrings, then how would you prevent people from sharing and distributing money freely online in the same way they share and distribute information online (like on p2p networks)? There might be problems with internet security where people hack into the relationship between the customer and the bank to abuse their online banking account, but in that case they do actually steal money in the sense of taking money away from one account and transferring it to another account, so that's different from sharing a copy with friends and infringing copyrights that way. There are no cases of copyright infringement where people have duplicated money as bitstrings and distributed them illegally. If copyright for bitstrings would work as good as digital money, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. > > >> >> > because the act of making a copy never takes anything away > > >> >> Except the money the author could have earned by selling his > >> >> property. > > >> >So people who read books for free at the library > > >> The library that PAID for the books, crook? > >> The people who PAID for the library, thief? > > >In both cases, authors do get a financial compensation. > > And you thieves want to steal WITHOUT paying any compensation. Lies. I already pay compensation when I buy blank media and it's legal for me to download most things for personal use for free. You pay less for blank media, but for you it's illegal to download things for personal use (assuming you live in the USA or UK). But copyright laws differ from one country to the next. > > -- > Ray Fischer > rfisc...(a)sonic.net - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven - > > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
From: sobriquet on 29 Oct 2009 17:33
On 29 okt, 04:31, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > sobriquet <dohduh...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >On 28 okt, 18:39, Walter Banks <wal...(a)bytecraft.com> wrote: > >> sobriquet wrote: > >> > But I guess the concept of a tax on information is beyond the > >> > comprehension skills of a nazi cockroach like you. > > >> If you want respect for you ideas then you will need to be > >> respectable. > > >If people refrain from calling people thieves in case they infringe > >copyrights, > > If you don't want to be called a thief then don't steal, crook. If you don't want to be called a nazi cockroach, don't accuse people of theft when they copy bitstrings. > > >Calling people thieves when they share information is demonization. > > YOU ARE STEALING! Nonsense. You can't steal if you don't take something away. Steal this bitstring 1111010101011010000010101011100. Go ahead. Make my day, you nazi cockroach. > > -- > Ray Fischer > rfisc...(a)sonic.net |