[nylug-talk] silly DMCA tricks

[alex at pilosoft.com]

> The question was for Joe, as in, what benefit did he personally get from
> it.  But it does apply generally as well.  Google for "Baen Free
> Library" and you'll see that giving away free electronic copies of books
> increases sales of the dead tree version.  WHAT?!?!  Sacrilege, you say?
It works for them, fine. It doesn't work for me. 

>  No, just a different way of looking at things: the problem facing most
> companies selling stuff is getting it in front of your customers.  The
> more free samples you give out, the better the sales of your product,
> and this scales all the way up until your product is already in front of
> every human on earth (at which point you should cut down on the free
> samples, since exposure is already maximum).

What right do you have to tell me what is good and what is not for my
business? When you write your code, feel free to release it under GPL.

When I develop MY code, I either release it under GPL or I don't. If
someone steals my commercial software, I want a cudgel to hammer them and
NOT having to wait months and years for courts to work their way, by which 
time the offender has likely to have moved to a different site.

I'm glad that I now live in a country where "but the world would be much
better off if we all share" is not considered a valid argument.

> > Judicial process is impossibly slow compared to Internet time. Again,
> > I refer you to pre-DMCA time and warez scene, once again.
> 
> So?  What's your point?  Letting mobs lynch people accused of thievery
> would substantially speed up the justice system as well.
> 
> But it would be bad justice.  That's why we don't do it.

Have you read DMCA? Have you ever used counter-notification provisions?
It is fair and balanced.

> > I find comparison ridiculous.
> 
> Which is to say, you don't have any real argument here.  The laws that
> the RIAA and MPAA have proposed to legalize their hacking into machines
> to stop copyright infringement are absolutely no different than the
> notice-and-takedown process in the DMCA.  What the MPAA et al. are
> saying, in effect, is that notice-and-takedown is too slow, and they
> should be allowed to speed it up.  What's your problem with that?

Notice-and-takedown is merely a legal procedure where ISP is informed of
infringing material and is confronted with a choice of accepting the 
liability for the material or taking it down. 

Again, to anyone of sane mind, comparison is ridiculous.