Posts by Don Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
no one here has argued that.
Yes you have, both here and on other threads where DRM has been discussed.
What else should I read into this statement:
I'm not sure why you've been so offended by creatives pushing for more control over their works.
How that "control" has been enacted in legislation is invidious.
I'm really glad I wasn't the guy who told the internationally acclaimed award winning author of the bone people essentially to get a real job.
Except that is not what was said, by Mark. Jesus, now only "famous" people are allowed a say.
-
simon or myself would know that being the only 2 people engaged in this discussion that actually have worked in that industry for over 25 years.
You know what they say about old dogs. You are failing your industry, robbery.
Robin is right, you clearly don't understand what he is doing for "your" industry nor have you attempted to to comprehend his very lucid comments and links. That is a shame and to the detriment of the people you claim to represent, IMHO.
Now a little something from Peter:
-
Simon
DRM is gonna be a what-were-they-thinking museum piece in a year or two, it's largely academic now anyway.
Which is why it is such a pity it has been enshrined in legislation. Along with a whole lot of other technical "solutions" that will soon be outdated. This is of course our biggest beef with Minister Tizard's law.
robbery, I don't think Simon has been trying to hand our arses on a plate. He has made several points, many of which I agree with, one of which I don't (extension of term. Robin's point about the optimum economic point being 14 years is pretty valid. And I suspect that with the distributed production system that is peering and the internet that optimum is falling not increasing).
It is worth remembering that Copyright and Patent law applies to many fields of endeavour, yours is just one of them.
-
-
is this you
http://nzoss.org.nz - the give away is using my real name and the little blue circle image under my little picture.
-
you do substantial work on them and give both of them away,
no one knows what happens to you (you probably starve or live in your mum's basement)Oh, I see. A troll.
-
robbery - I have missed the last few comments but I have not seen *anyone* on this list who is "anti-copyright".
Honestly, your misrepresentation of what is being discussed is getting tiresome. You are putting up strawmen, constantly.
Just because you fail to comprehend different business models in the arts and software doesn't mean they don't exist.
What has been discussed, usually intelligently, is:
the length of term; what Copyright actually means; enforcement issues and - what impact the these points could have on artists, writers, publics' right to privacy *and* occiassionally software developers (regardless of whether their code is open source). -
And for once, I wish Plunket had actually "hectored" a bit more -- you know, asked for straight and coherent answers to straight and coherent questions.
Sure, but the latter surely needs to proceed the former. It would be nice if Sean could stray from his scripted questions occasionally to take account of the proceeding answers.
As for Bollard I think many of the calls he has made over the last few years, including running higher interest rates than the rest of the world and not caving into the demands of Aussie owned banks to move completely offshore, are being shown as extremely prudent. Time will tell, of course.
Oh, and I presume the RB has made a killing from selling off the $ at .79 last year.
-
Again, the affordable art show's cool and all, but it's a middle-brow show (at best) that hangs like the Salon.
...that put over $800,000 dollars in three days into local artists pockets. Give me the low brow approach any day if it gives food to artists.
TLC was an example of a local art school. There are of course many others. It is *far* too early to state that it has never produced a decent artist.
I am saying it is very frustrating seeing people with little evident knowledge of art history mouth off about how artists don't care too much about getting paid etc.
What I hate is people who put words in my mouth as you have now done twice.
-
Instead there has been a fairly rapid divestment of the control of copyright back the creator.
Simon, that really is good news and I think a positive development. Unfortunately the technical enforcement rights around Copyright is being placed more and more in the hands of the mega corps and *this* is what has a wide and chilling affect.
youse don't actually know a huge amount about how culture & fine arts work, do you?
Is that a joke or an elitist statement? Just how much did Caravaggio's estate get paid for the copies of his work being sold at this year's Affordable Art Show? The Renaissance was the dillitants ultimate wet dream. Are you suggesting we can only have one life experience?
I don't think people discussing these issues on this thread have to justify themselves. There seem to be some pretty interesting and valid points all round. For example, I think Islander should run classes for content producers on how best to licence their work. Her early advice was gold dust.
However, the assumptions being made by yourself and robbery (who I don't associate with big industry BTW, just bad ideas :-)) about the ignorance or otherwise of others on this thread WRT Copyright, patent, other IP issues and the arts is making an ass out of your points.