Comments on: Wow: PEACE declared?

By: ایران یو پی اس

ایران یو پی اس — Fri, 03 Aug 2018 16:16:00 +0000

By: seomed

seomed — Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:35:00 +0000

By: طراحی سایت

طراحی سایت — Thu, 08 Jan 2015 08:22:00 +0000

I tried doing that but it all seems exactly the same and still not working. I must have done something wrong chirnside park medical centre طراحی سایت بهینه سازی سایت

By: Ben Curtis

Ben Curtis — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:25:09 +0000

Apropos of little else but the topic, "2009" in roman numerals is "MMIX"

Happy 2009, Larry!

By: AA, from Brazil

AA, from Brazil — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 08:06:12 +0000

Very nice illustrated speech. We can agree with many of the concepts, but the basic: we, the creators, cannot create and pay for the bill. – So, who should pay the bill? The bill for the democratic use of our creation? Governments, Internet providers, the manufacturers of products involved in such enormous technology? What we are watching is something that is probably leading us to the end of copyright, being ourselves professionals or amateurs. The preset CC contracts, despite its efforts, are still far away from a solution for the ones who make their (our) lives and survival from their creation. And for the almost total majority of creators – who don’t know the law or, even, basics about copyright, it lacks the presence of a lawyer. It would be very ingenuous to think that creators from this planet would know what they are (were) signing…
The Internet use of our creations is a total confusion and a real mess. Our rights are being usurped by the infinity of explorers. A regulation of the creation usage is URGENT. Yes, we can start with the copyright law. – Why not? For example, in music, no matter what type of technology is being used, mechanical rights will be always mechanical rights (being it physical or download sales), performing rights will be always performing rights (being in a radio – internet radio, podcast, etc…, or as a background utilization on a website). As well as the above types of usages the copyright laws also contemplates synchronization, being in any type of broadcast, film, clip or Internet similar, being sharing a creation with some other author who mixes his/her creation to some existing one. And above all, there is still one of the most important conquests of copyright law: the moral right (the possibility of the author, the creator, to not accept the usage of his/her original creation once its use could corrupt its original intention.

Who is going to pay for the bill?

By: Etherspirit

Etherspirit — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 00:42:44 +0000

Working with ISPs to ban suspected copyright violators from the internet without due process is not peace.

By: allen

allen — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 22:07:56 +0000

first of all, it's art. or at least, in concept is suppose to be. why create art if you don't want to share it with the world. why put it out there. i can't say all of today's artist, but it certainly seems like most artist only care about making money and avoiding working a regular job. art should be created to express an issue, convey an emotion, share a concept, ect. whoever, it should never be used as a means to simply "make money".

my second point is, how many starving witters do you see out there? i can gladly go to any library and pick up any book i want. are writers going broke because people don't have to buy books? please. every store i go into has books, even the dollar store. there are places such as Barnes and Nobles who, surprise, sell nothing but books despite the fact that anyone can get them for free and without legal consequences.

personally i like the idea of radio head releasing their cd for free and leaving users to decide how much their music is worth. maybe artist need to start caring about their art and why they do it rather than peoples wallets.

By: Sam I Am

Sam I Am — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 04:16:29 +0000

Perhaps ceasing illegal downloading that infringes on copyright is a valuable option to consider too, no? Stop that and just pay for what you take as we always did and this whole mess goes away.

By: Another Kevin

Another Kevin — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 22:35:21 +0000

As far as I can tell, the RIAA has never filed suit against file-sharers in its own name. Rather, RIAA member companies file suits, usually with many plaintiffs joined against many defendants. So the RIAA isn't lying, exactly, quite. It's just stating an irrelevancy in such a way as to lead the reader to a wrong conclusion.

Scoundrels.

By: RainbowW

RainbowW — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 21:28:12 +0000

the riaa is lying.

they haven't told us the truth in the past. why should we believe them now?