fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness) (fwd)

Forwarded message:

> Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 22:38:21 GMT
> From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
> Subject: fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness)

> Who cares if it's legal or not.

Lot's of people.

> I think the conclusion of crypto-anarchy is that copyright seems
> unlikely to survive as a schelling point for making money from
> publications.

Then crypto-anarchy is in for a big surprise.

> You can make money from information provision by charging extra for
> up-to-date news, or by charging so little that the cost from the
> original provider is so low that it's not worth anyones time to
> redistribute it,

That's true now, why don't we see these effects...

> or by providing higher bandwidth connection to the
> net than the mirrors,

Then why have the mirrors? There is also the issue of end-user bandwidth
limitations and network delays that make this less than decisive.

 or by making do with click throughs from the
> percentage of people who use the original rather than the cheaper
> mirror.

So, raise your rates to license the mirror.

> To say it's "not legal to republish" is saying what? that you think

It's saying it's not right  for a 3rd party to derive profit or income
from that work without a percentage being channeled back to the original
author (at least for a limited time).


    ____________________________________________________________________
 
            Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want
            the right answers.

                                        Scully (X-Files)

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim Choate wrote:
> > You can make money from information provision by charging extra for
> > up-to-date news, or by charging so little that the cost from the
> > original provider is so low that it's not worth anyones time to
> > redistribute it,
> 
> That's true now, why don't we see these effects...

We do. News inherently has a 'sell-by' date. The most obvious example is
stock quotes where delayed quotes are provided for free whereas
real-time quotes are heavily charged for. The recipients of such
information care very much about latency, since it's possible to trade
on any differences that may exist. There's even some research on attacks
that simply delay packets in such networks.

Cheers,
Frank O'Dwyer.

At 8:24 AM -0500 on 11/10/98, Frank O'Dwyer wrote:
> There's even some research on attacks
> that simply delay packets in such networks.

Right. In the movie "The Sting", they called this con "The Wire".

:-).

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga
-----------------
Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah@philodox.com>
Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'