Print 81 comment(s) - last by reader1.. on Sep 30 at 7:50 AM

Sweeping IP reform sails through half of congress

Redoubling its commitment to fight piracy, the U.S. senate passed sweeping intellectual property legislation set to install a new position in the presidential cabinet: that of the “Copyright Czar”.

S. 3325, commonly known as the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008, sailed through the Senate Friday in a unanimous, bipartisan consent vote.

The Copyright Czar, known formally as the “Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator,” will report directly to the White House and Congress while creating and executing nationwide anti-piracy initiatives. These policies will govern oversee nearly all forms of intellectual property in the United States, including digital media, counterfeit goods, and the “unauthorized recording of motion pictures.”

While the IPEC will head an “advisory committee” for the assistance of its duties, S. 3325 explicitly limits its power over other government agencies: exercising control of “any law enforcement agency, including the Department of Justice,” is forbidden.

According to Wired’s Threat Level, labor unions, manufacturers, the content industry, and the United States Chamber of Commerce backed S. 3325 heavily.

The bill originally included a provision that would see the Department of Justice filing copyright infringement lawsuits on behalf of the entertainment industry; however, it appears that those sections were removed at the DOJ’s behest (PDF).

“[EIPRA] will undermine existing intellectual property enforcement efforts by diminishing the effective use of limited criminal enforcement resources and creating unnecessary bureaucracy,” it wrote. “It will also improperly micro-manage the internal organization of the Executive Branch.”

The DOJ also noted that the IPEC already exists as a position in the commerce department, and raised constitutional objections to its appointment to the presidential cabinet. Such a change “constitutes a legislative intrusion into the internal structure and composition of the President's Administration,” and cannot be allowed due to the principle of separated government powers.

A number of digital and public rights groups, including Public Knowledge, joined the DOJ in opposing the bill.

Public Knowledge president Gigi Sohn said she was “pleased” that the DOJ is relieved of its lawsuit requirement.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce heralded S. 3325 as a win for IP creators.

“This is a win for both parties and, more importantly, for America's innovators, workers whose jobs rely on intellectual property, and consumers who depend on safe and effective products," said Chamber CEO Tom Donohue.

S. 3325 represents the latest development in an ongoing, divergent attitude between judicial and legislative branches of the U.S. government. With civil courts, at both state and federal levels, issuing a string of rulings against the content industry – including, most recently, ordering the retrial Jammie Thomas’ $222,000 jury verdict – it appears that content executives are pushing heavily for legislative change in order to shore up their positions. This effort, which includes lawmaking in both the congressional and international arenas, could make future piracy far more dangerous for infringers.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

huge waste of tax dollars
By the goat on 9/28/2008 4:03:46 PM , Rating: 5
The US government should not be concerned with enforcing copyrights on US soil. The copyright holder should be responsible for that. The US government should ensure foreign governments respect would copyrights so that copyright holders can enforce the copyright in other countries.

A lot of the pirating problem would be resolved if the copyright length was shortened back to something reasonable. The founding fathers set it at 14 years (28 years maximum with an extension). After that the work should fall into the public domain. That would encourage people/companies to make more new content instead of mooching off of enormous catalogs of work that have already generated millions of dollars in prophet.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By Spivonious on 9/28/2008 4:16:26 PM , Rating: 1
lol, sorry but you cannot be more wrong. From the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8 (listing powers of Congress):

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries

I do agree with your point though; the copyright term needs to be shortened considerably. I think 14 years is plenty of time to make money off of an invention.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By the goat on 9/28/2008 7:30:43 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think I am wrong. That section of the Constitution gives the legislative branch the power to grant copyrights. My point is, that section does not compel the executive branch to enforce the copyright on behalf of the author/inventor. Once the copyright has been granted it is up to the holder to enforce it (utilizing the judicial branch).

Checks and Balances my friend. . .

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By shin0bi272 on 9/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By the goat on 9/28/2008 8:50:22 PM , Rating: 4
So youre saying its up to Metallica to police the internet and sue everyone who downloads their music even though its in the constitution that the congress has the ability to secure Metallica's IP till their copyright is up?

No I am saying it is up to Metallica to enforce their copyright (buy sewing everybody who downloads their music). The constitution gives congress the power to grant Metallica the copyright in the first place.

Without that section of the constitution congress could not grant Metallica the copyright and Metallita could not sew anybody. That section of the constitution allows congress to give the artist/inventor the power to protect their exclusive right. Nothing more nothing less.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By foolsgambit11 on 9/28/2008 10:28:44 PM , Rating: 2
Read more carefully. The section says that Congress has the right not only to grant a copyright, but to secure the exclusive right of the holder. Securing the copyright holder's right is an active power, one that authorizes government enforcement. In other words, the Constitution not only lets the Congress grant copyrights, but also lets them enforce (secure) those copyrights. Of course, it doesn't require that they do this, it just says that Congress shall have that power (no duty to exercise it).

So you could say that it should be up to Metallica to secure their copyrights, but you can't say it's a violation of the Constitution if the government takes on that role.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By stilltrying on 9/28/2008 10:55:36 PM , Rating: 4
Since when has any of the branches followed the constitution lately? Very infrequently. Border searches and seizures. If we are going to start following the constitution then all of the other fascist unnatural laws need to be taken off the books like many from the DHS or actually the entire DHS department.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By Ringold on 9/29/2008 12:24:07 AM , Rating: 1
When Democrats agree to give up unconstitutional wealth redistribution, and Republican's agree in trade to give up a strong but corrupting and pervasive military, then your wish may come true. Search & seizure along national borders pales in comparison to.. well.. just about everything else going on the past several decades.

I wouldn't get my hopes up though; we're as socialist as any part of Western Europe or Asia at this point, not so much because of the above-board financial system rescue but the last-minute stealth 25 billion in heavily subsidized loans given to GM, Ford and Chrysler that the media has barely talked about. We've abdicated our right to bitch about Chinese tariffs or subsidies and European support for EADS/Airbus for at least a little while. 25b isn't a big number in the scheme of things, only 7b at risk, but it's the principle of the matter...

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By Oregonian2 on 9/29/2008 3:52:58 PM , Rating: 2
Have those gone through? I know how a loan guarantees for large amounts are being pushed for by Ford and Chrysler (it's been in the press quite a lot, I'm not sure what press hasn't been covering it that you're referring to) but those AFAIK are just guarantees, not actual out of pocket expenses (lowers the interest rate the companies need to pay for the loans). Of course we could just have those companies go bankrupt (along with all those companies that supply them parts and services) and spend ten times that in outright expenses for the unemployment related issues that might follow.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By Spivonious on 9/29/2008 7:53:22 AM , Rating: 2
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;

Homeland Security sounds a lot like "common defense" to me.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By foolsgambit11 on 9/29/2008 2:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
Again. Read more carefully. The Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. It then goes on to talk about the requirements for warrants, but there's no guarantee that the two clauses cover all searches an seizures. For instance, warrants may only be necessary for searches that would be unreasonable without them. That is a completely valid and internally coherent reading of the 4th Amendment. It's certainly more coherent than reading a personal right to bear arms into the 2nd Amendment, where it's alleged that the two parts of the amendment have apparently no bearing on one another (but let's not get off topic talking about that, please....). On topic, this reading would still leave a whole class of searches (the reasonable ones) which could be performed without a warrant.

Secondarily, Congress, when enacting DHS legislation, would be acting within the context of the Judicially described boundaries of what constitutes a 'search' in legal terms. You may consider it a search when you get your bags opened before you fly, but the Supreme Court (see Katz v. US) says it's only a search if there is a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. But that reading is not, prima facie, obvious, and I could understand some confusion about the implementation of the 4th Amendment based on a 'common usage' interpretation of the word 'search'. But at its heart, this reading says the same thing as the first reading I gave - there are, in layman's terms, 'reasonable searches', which can be performed without triggering the constitutional requirement for a warrant.

As a side note, has reading comprehension been stripped from school curriculum? It sure seems like it.

I understand Constitutional purists who argue about federal encroachment into state powers, via broad readings of powers like the interstate commerce clause, or people who complain about our money not being gold or silver coin. I understand people who are concerned about encroachments into the unenumerated rights of citizens alluded to in the Bill of Rights. But I don't understand people who refuse to see what the Constitution obviously says.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By ZmaxDP on 9/29/2008 7:04:39 PM , Rating: 2

"No I am saying it is up to Metallica to enforce their copyright (buy sewing everybody who downloads their music)."

So, are you advocating removing their skin and sewing that into some kind of stage outfit, or are you suggesting that we actually sew their entire bodies in some manner? For that matter, aside from the obvious pain and suffering that occurs when one is sewn, what exactly is the intent of sewing those who infringe upon your copyright? Is the intent to keep those who infringe from unraveling into worse crimes? (Wait, I don't think that is sewing even, more like serging or something...) Either way, there are plenty of ways to stick people together besides sewing. Maybe they should try Velcro? That might hurt too though. Isn't there a constitutional clause that limits cruel and unusual punishment though? If so, this conversation is probably moot since sewing definitely fits the unusual bill...

Sorry, couldn't help it. The word you were looking for is "sue" I believe...

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By the goat on 9/30/2008 7:50:14 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, couldn't help it. The word you were looking for is "sue" I believe...

Of coarse you are correct. Whatever I originally typed was flagged red by the spell check. I just picked the first suggested correction and I picked wrong.

RE: huge waste of tax dollars
By Spivonious on 9/29/2008 9:19:29 AM , Rating: 2
And here I though the executive branch was created to execute the laws creating by the legislative branch...

By djkrypplephite on 9/29/2008 1:49:27 AM , Rating: 4
I feel like with the need for $700 billion dollar bail-out, two wars, and federal debt as it is, we could find other ways to spend taxpayer money in ways better than chasing kids who download music. I'm not saying piracy isn't a problem, but some of this is ridiculous.

Totally Unfair
By Flunk on 9/28/2008 3:10:48 PM , Rating: 5
I see the concept of fair use no longer exists. Gee I wonder why people wonder if the US government is in the pocket of big business...

RE: Totally Unfair
By Spivonious on 9/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: Totally Unfair
By mindless1 on 9/28/2008 6:53:24 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, previously they were trying to ignore fair use, and now they're saying "and this is what we're going to do" while ignoring fair use. It is an extension of the problem.

RE: Totally Unfair
By Spivonious on 9/29/2008 9:54:06 AM , Rating: 2
Please point out to me where in the bill it says that the Fair Use section is no longer valid.

And anyway, sharing MP3s is not fair use, and never has been.

RE: Totally Unfair
By mindless1 on 9/29/2008 4:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
Please point out to me where in the bill that it singles out MP3 sharing.

RE: Totally Unfair
By GaryJohnson on 9/28/2008 7:37:09 PM , Rating: 2
Fair use will never really exist till we do away with IP alltogether.

RE: Totally Unfair
By Aloonatic on 9/29/2008 5:19:01 AM , Rating: 2
At least you guys have "fair use" to argue about.

In the UK there is no such thing as fair use, so copying your CD to your iPod/mobile phone/PC etc or even just backing up/copying a CD to use in your car where it might get scratched are all a breach of copyright.

By Darkefire on 9/28/2008 3:28:26 PM , Rating: 5
They're creating a copyright czar that is forbidden to excise control over "any law enforcement agency, including the Department of Justice." What exactly is the purpose of this position, again? Oh, that's right, the big media companies need someone hanging directly on the arm of the president to influence policy choices, instead of having to work through various underlings and senators. Should we just nickname him "Wormtongue" and be done with it?

My only consolation is that this will have roughly the same effect on piracy that the Drug Czars have had on illegal drugs in this country. Except in this case, it's going to be roughly a billion times harder to actually catch and prosecute somebody if the burden of proof is set where it is supposed to be by the courts. Pirate junkies don't have the same sunken eyes and nervous twitch that juries love to spot.

RE: Sooo.....
By RdBiker on 9/28/2008 5:01:36 PM , Rating: 5
Well think of all the lobbying dollars they save. Is this the first time a group of companies gets their own representative next to the president?

RE: Sooo.....
By murphyslabrat on 9/28/2008 5:04:19 PM , Rating: 2
Except in this case, it's going to be roughly a billion times harder to actually catch and prosecute somebody if the burden of proof is set where it is supposed to be by the courts

The problem being, that the bar is still set for the 2006's Olympic pole-vaulters.

RE: Sooo.....
By Darkefire on 9/28/2008 8:11:43 PM , Rating: 5
I think the problem is that while the rest of us think pole vault, the RIAA and MPAA are thinking limbo contest.

no wonder...
By shin0bi272 on 9/28/2008 4:29:27 PM , Rating: 3
no wonder congress has a 9% approval rating....

RE: no wonder...
By Regs on 9/28/2008 5:56:59 PM , Rating: 3
We don't need Obama, we need Robin Hood for president.

RE: no wonder...
By shin0bi272 on 9/28/2008 7:40:53 PM , Rating: 2
oh Robin Hood... I thought you said... something else.

RE: no wonder...
By AlexWade on 9/28/2008 9:12:26 PM , Rating: 3
I just saw a commercial where Obama said that we need to get away from lobbyists, yet here we are with a Democrat controlled Congress listening to lobbyists. Mr. Obama, money talks. You may not take money, but the vast majority of Congress does no matter what party they are from. Unless you propose banning lobbying and then somehow convince 400+ senators and representatives to give up easy money, Congress will always listen to special interests no matter who is in office. Oh, they'll clap and cheer when you make that claim, but then they will never mention it again. Or kill it quickly and silently if it is mentioned. The same goes to you McCain and your straight talk express.

I don't know what is sadder: we have one of the most unpopular Presidents ever, or that our Congress is less popular than our pariah President. Stuff like this and the bailout except for the ones who really need a bailout just prove it. Money talks. I just wish I had enough money to break the anti-consumer grip of the RIAA/MPAA.

RE: no wonder...
By AlexWade on 9/28/2008 9:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
EDIT: I hope I'm right on the count of senators and representatives.

RE: no wonder...
By TheFace on 9/28/2008 10:26:37 PM , Rating: 2
435 congressmen, 100 senators. Close enough.

Fools bargain
By icanhascpu on 9/28/2008 3:43:52 PM , Rating: 4
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

RE: Fools bargain
By xii on 9/28/2008 3:57:13 PM , Rating: 2
So very true, very well quoted

RE: Fools bargain
By foolsgambit11 on 9/28/2008 10:38:08 PM , Rating: 2
Truer words were never spoken.

But your words aren't really on topic. I seriously doubt Ben Franklin would have called the ability to burn a CD 'essential liberty'. There are liberties, and then there are essential liberties. If this were the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act, or some other intrusive extension of government power, it would apply well. But to apply it to a bill whose only purpose (and likely only effect, if any) is to streamline and increase the effectiveness of already existing limits on unessential liberties is a gross stretch and a watering down of the poignancy of the quote's message.

Look, I support reforming IP law to make it much less stringent and to shorten the protected periods, &c. But you're being a little melodramatic.

RE: Fools bargain
By icanhascpu on 9/30/2008 4:14:45 AM , Rating: 2
I would assume the 'essential liberty' in this case is privacy not piracy.

Seems unnecessary
By joex444 on 9/28/2008 2:59:02 PM , Rating: 5
This article seems to suggest that it is targeting street level pirates offering copies for a usually small fee, as well as screen cammers.

Both of those things are already very well defined as illegal. It's like reiterating that the policy we had yesterday is the policy of tomorrow, except now we're "serious." I don't particularly see how we have the budget in most cities to have officers patrolling for piracy. I'd rather they prevented crimes against people than crimes against faceless multibillion dollar organizations who use tactics more in line with the mafia than anything else.

The future I foresee
By jimbojimbo on 9/29/2008 3:00:35 PM , Rating: 3
I'm waiting for the time when it'll be less of a crime to break into someone's house and steal all their DVDs than it is to download the same movies.

Sounds logical
By icanhascpu on 9/28/2008 2:55:07 PM , Rating: 2
Lets fine people for crazy amounts of money so they have no choice but to pirate things in the future.

By bobobeastie on 9/28/2008 8:05:30 PM , Rating: 2
I hope the Czar s given a large enough budget to insure that anyone who even thinks about copyright infringement gets 10 years in the big house and a $10,000 fine.

Just kidding, I guess beenthere had better things to do on weekends, so I though I'd help us all out a little.

The Bureaucracy.
By TheFace on 9/28/2008 10:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
"The bureaucracy must expand to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."

That is all that this brings to mind for me.

By puckalicious on 9/29/2008 8:59:14 AM , Rating: 2
What a terribly shortsighted and punitive layer of the executive branch. Yet again, our government thinks attacking the symptom will cure the problem.

Have a drug use problem in the country? Declare war on it and incarcerate thousands upon thousands of non-violent drug addicts.

Have a copyright infringement problem? Declare war on the consumers that bypass the intrusive (and sometimes destructive to your PC) copyright protection on media that was legally purchased.

I agree that we need to go after the mass suppliers of drugs/counterfeit goods, but leave the non-violent end user out of it by giving them other options.

By iondragonfly on 9/29/2008 10:38:06 AM , Rating: 2
It seems that as a society, we have more pressing issues to deal with. Nothing will be solved until the public stops rewarding any level of government for wasting time and money. We need to elect people willing to be "public servants" instead of "elected officials". At that point, we'll have people in positions to study the data and make informed decisions in the public's best interest. Until then, these things are just well placed distractions to keep us all in line.

Just what we need!
By iFX on 9/29/2008 12:36:57 PM , Rating: 2
Another faceless government general who has the power to throw your ass in jail, oh and he also reports directly to the president. Surprise!

Look out War on Drugs! Here comes the War on Piracy! You think the jails are crowded now. Just wait! All we need now is yet ANOTHER armed para-military force ala BATF to start kicking in the doors of 12 year olds and hauling their criminal asses to jail!

A Piracy Czar- WTF?
By johnbuk on 9/29/2008 1:04:41 PM , Rating: 2
A cabinet level position whose only purpose is to defend one special interest group's legal wrangling? How could anyone with half a brain think that this is a good idea? Are other special interest groups or companies going to get their own cabinet positions? How about a shoplifting czar- no wait that wouldn't work- you can actually prove that theft is taking place and assign a legitimate true value without getting politicians involved. What about a FedEx czar to help the president make sure my consitutional right to have packages get to where their going overnight is met?

By Xenoterranos on 9/29/2008 1:30:03 AM , Rating: 1
I just finished a reread of Snow Crash, and I can't really tell if I've stopped reading it or not. Scary.

Whinning won't change the law
By Beenthere on 9/28/08, Rating: -1
The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By Methusela on 9/28/2008 9:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
Somehow you seem to miss the idea of a free market economy. Monopolies are bad. Competition drives innovation, as well as lowers prices. These truths are diametrically opposed with what you're claiming.

It sounds to me like you're the pinko, you commie scumbag! :)

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/28/08, Rating: 0
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By GaryJohnson on 9/28/2008 10:33:05 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, well, if you look at it from an application standpoint, each console is an apple or an orange (or some other kind of fruit). Each has its own exclusive applications or, and therefore each is its own little minimonopoly if what your wanting is access to a specific app.

For example, If you want to play Fable 2, XBOX360 will have a monopoly on Fable 2 gameplay.

By Donkeyshins on 9/29/2008 4:50:56 PM , Rating: 1
Isn't it obvious? The solution to stopping piracy is to outlaw the following:

- eyepatches
- peg legs
- frilly shirts
- parrots
- cutlasses
- flintlocks
- galleons

Problem solved. And if that doesn't work, round up anyone found saying 'Arrrr!'

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By Etsp on 9/28/2008 6:16:14 PM , Rating: 5
-Better, more efficient, cheaper software
How? By requiring a product to be rewritten over and over again to support a different closed system?
-Fewer bugs
See above, that process will introduce bugs unique to each system.
-No viruses
HA. That's all I have to say.
-Simpler, easier computers
It's simpler and easier to understand how to walk, but people still drive cars don't they? Simpler and easier is not necessarily better. Especially in this case.
-Cheaper computers
Closed systems means closed architectures which means everyone has to have their own standard. Costs go up for EVERYTHING.
-More competition
I don't see how making everything more expensive to develop and deploy encourages competition.
-Higher profits
Not gonna happen for above reasons.

PC's are popular because of their versatile nature. The devices you listed each had one main function. Smart phones aren't meant to replace PC's, but to simply enhance their abilities.

Your example of an open cable TV is flawed on various levels... cable transmissions are standardized. Meaning, the signal is OPEN to multiple devices. Transmission of this signal may not be open, but the infrastructure of cable wouldn't allow it to be this way in the first place.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By Ticholo on 9/28/2008 6:48:46 PM , Rating: 2
You want to bite him first, or should I do the honors?

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By borismkv on 9/28/2008 7:30:37 PM , Rating: 4
I wouldn't do it. Looks like he has Rabies.

By shin0bi272 on 9/28/2008 8:18:47 PM , Rating: 2
But Im hungryyyyy :(

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By Bremen7000 on 9/28/2008 7:49:42 PM , Rating: 4
Sounds like a Mac.

They have more efficient, cheaper software, fewer bugs, no viruses, simpler computers, cheaper computers, more competition, and higher profits, right?

Wait... no, no, no, check, no, no, check. Sounds like a great business move, though.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By shin0bi272 on 9/28/2008 8:34:07 PM , Rating: 3
honestly... you dont know what youre talking about. A PC is a very fast adding machine at its core. To not allow anyone to develop software for an OS would cause that OS to be used by fewer and fewer people. An open system is going to be far superior when it comes to software development than a closed system. In a closed system if the programmers release a buggy POS program you HAVE to use it if you want that functionality. In an open system you can either program it yourself or find a better program that does what you want.

Look at Macs. At MOST they are 10% of the market now. Thats after dumping their old hardware and OS and allowing other companies to write software for their OS (after originally saying they wouldnt).

They currently have a great profit margin because their OS is essentially Debian linux repackaged and their cpu is Intel now and not IBM PowerPC anymore. So their hardware cost is way down and their prices have stayed the same. Their cheapest laptop is 1200 bucks and it probably costs them 400 or so to make it (since you can get a dell for 499 Id guess thats about accurate). Plus their snobby fascist ads which entice people who have all of 2 brain cells to rub together, to buy their computer have been amazingly effective on people like you who think that buying a PC is giving in to "the man". When in reality Mac users are the ones who have to fall in line and use whatever Mac decrees they can use.

Also you sound like one of those 18 year old mac using college students so let me be the first to say STFU and log off the internet forever youre clogging up my bandwidth with your mindless drivel.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By anotherdude on 9/28/2008 9:02:43 PM , Rating: 2
That is if you count people outside the united states as people.

By anotherdude on 9/28/2008 9:04:12 PM , Rating: 2
the above post was supposed to have the title " Macs at most have 4%" if you count the rest of the world outside the US as people that is.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By andyjary on 9/28/2008 9:56:11 PM , Rating: 2
That is if you count people outside the united states as people.

Unless, of course, we counted them as morons? That means you would have to leave the country though, right?

By anotherdude on 9/28/2008 11:04:07 PM , Rating: 2
I am afraid your snide convolution went right over my head. Perhaps you missed my sarcasm?

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By CloudFire on 9/28/2008 10:56:33 PM , Rating: 2
wow your idiocy just doesn't stop now does it?

piracy exists on closed consoles as well, go on any major torrent sites, i'm sure you'll be able to find games that are pirated for closed console systems.

PC gaming hasn't died, i don't think it ever will. have you not seen the list of games coming out for PC's? let me list you a few million seller titles in the past year or so...

Team Fortress 2
Mass Effect
Age of Conan
Call of Duty 4
Sims and almost every Sim's related product
World of Warcraft and it's expansion

for future games that are expected to be great you have...

Mirror's Edge
Call of Duty 5: World at War
Far Cry 2
Crysis Warhead (came out already)
Starcraft 2
Diablo 3
Left 4 Dead
Street Fighter IV
WOW: Wrath of the Lich King
Gears of War 2

and so on...

PC gaming isn't going anywhere...get your facts straight, noob.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By Nat495 on 9/29/2008 12:33:59 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree. With more and more computers and people connecting to the internet, it creates another avenue for spreading of ideas, and thus you get more open source software. If anything, Open Source software will get stronger. There's a reason why Firefox has a sizable minority in the internet browser war and is continuing to grow.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/29/08, Rating: -1
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By DigitalFreak on 9/29/2008 8:35:34 AM , Rating: 1
... and the moron, goes trolling, along.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By reader1 on 9/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By jRaskell on 9/29/2008 12:14:12 PM , Rating: 2
I can't help but get a strong sense of the pot calling the kettle black when reading that post.

By Ringold on 9/29/2008 12:47:43 AM , Rating: 2
If anything, it looks like the opposite may take place. One of these days, all this disparate linux groups will grow up, shave their beards, get their priorities right in life, and instead of making a million different distro's that are all mediocrity warmed over, they'll combine the efforts of the best in the community in 2 or 3 distributions. (And don't flame me over my assessment of their current situation, linux market share indicates I'm not far off)

And then there will be real competition for the desktop, a system that would be 100% open, not closed. It'll never wipe out MS and Apple, there are advantages and disadvantages to each ones approach that'll ensure all 3 settle in to some sort of cozy market share arrangement, but it's a long way off from your prediction.

Of course, on the server, linux is already here.

As for the hardware, I don't see NewEgg going anywhere any time soon. I'm not opposed to buying pre-made machines occasionally, but I think many a fellow geek would share the sentiment that we'd never, no matter how busy we are, buy a Dell instead of hand-building our custom personal rigs. And even while laptop sales eclipse desktop sales, we now see a movement of hardware manufacturers to allow modular home assembly of laptops as well.

In other words, the markets are trending in the exact opposite direction of which you predict.

By Reclaimer77 on 9/29/2008 6:01:42 PM , Rating: 2
No, but the PC is going to die,

Lots of weed makes you stupid fyi.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By jonmcc33 on 9/29/2008 7:30:35 AM , Rating: 2
Their cheapest laptop is 1200 bucks and it probably costs them 400 or so to make it...

But you pay for the experience of owning a Mac! That is what justifies the extra cost! <rolling eyes>

By anotherdude on 9/29/2008 8:41:04 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget to factor in the coffee expense entailed with 'showing off' that Mac at the cafe.

RE: The solution to stopping piracy is...
By lagomorpha on 9/30/2008 2:18:00 AM , Rating: 1
"...closing the PC."

I think I speak for the entire Linux community when I say, "die in a fire."

"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki