While I can agree that the costumes don't appear to be a work of art, are their other IP rights Lucasfilm could reference in their favor? I'm playing devil's advocate here but with real curiosity.
Could Lucas argue that the Stormtrooper name is a trademark of Lucasfilm and, should Ainsworth want to create a replica of the Stormtrooper costume to sell, he can't call the name? I'd think that Ainsworth marketing a non-Lucas Stormtrooper costume would cause confusion and dilute the trademark of the stormtrooper and Star Wars name/brand/likeness.
I'm obviously not a UK (or US for that matter) legal expert but I know that if I came across Ainsworth's Stormtrooper costumes, I could think they are official Lucasfilm merchandise and, might place value on it I wouldn't have otherwise. I recognize the circumstances around acquiring the costume might change this but, still. How can one not be confused by two different (but alike) Stormtrooper costumes?
Are you serious? It was obvious that everything was disclosed. In fact, the post leads off with "UPS recently asked us to create a series of three videos..."
I don't know if you can any more obvious by saying UPS helped produce the video even before you get into the main post content.
NOTE: I hope the sarcasm is obvious. If its not, I'll work on it for the next time.
I, for one, applaud Mr. Edwards for touching on a topic that, I'm sure, many of his fellow authors feel is important to them: maintaining the elitist class.
See I agree with Mr. Edwards that educational and cultural pieces of art in all its forms should be limited to those who can afford to pay for it. The freeloading and theft perpetrated by libraries & museums across the globe must stop now.
I submit to you that it is perfectly normal to exclude the non-payers from receiving any educational or cultural experiences. Can't afford all art? Too, bad. Can't afford any one piece? Sorry. In fact, I suggest that society as a whole is better off NOT having the very young, the very old, and the poor - who generally can't afford culture such as the kind Mr. Edwards is attempting to bestow on us rich elite who clearly recognize the value in paying for such artistry - because they might learn of human rights some say are inalienable. Should they read more than they should, they might rise against us and force us to give things away for free against our will!
I believe those who would consider enjoying a book for free are the worst kind of person; "libraries" are guilty of crimes against humanity. When we live in a world where those who can't pay for culture, don't get to enjoy it, I'll be happy just like Mr. Edwards.
Next time I'm asked to write a term paper on a novel, article, or text book, I'm going to claim I can't because I don't have permission from the rights holder to quote passages.
Just to see if people will really believe you have to get permission - academia or not.
I think its safe to say that our behavior can always be modeled and predicted. But good measurements come first. It just might be harder for researchers to measure Twitter's historical data.
I'm surprised to hear you're not convinced that free in the physical realm can teach us much about the digital realm. In fact, I feel it’s a STRONG example of how free can help one make money.
For years you've been saying free distribution has helped grow a fan base in the music/movie realm - sell tickets, t-shirts, special experiences, etc. - and Denny's promotion is no different. So you give away food like a meal or ice cream, coffee, whatever and, yes, you have to be very aware of the marginal costs involved, but if the experience (taste, convenience, service, etc) is remembered, that chain will be able to capture future business and take it away from others who - even with equal service and tasting food - will remember the special experience of the free food.
Now, the burden on the restaurants is to keep up the good service and continue to innovate in the promotions to control costs but keep people engaged in the brand/service/product but that's no different than the music business either. No amount of free music is going to get someone to buy t-shirts if the experience of the concerts or fan interaction isn't enjoyable.
I totally agree. It seems so easy to have done that. In fact, there are SO many ways to deal with the what-ifs of his concern. It didn't have to come down to a DMCA. Threatening an ISP or host doesn't seem like an action that needed to be taken. It's as if he's taking out his poor planning on the host and had he thought out how the tools should be used with the license he had in mind, this might not have been an issue.
"Though it linked to Plagiarism Today in the headline, it was not linking to or referencing my CC license nor was it referencing the “Share Alike” attribute. When combined with the hotlinked images, I decided to take action, filing a DMCA notice with their host, Joyent."
It sounds as if he was more upset that the aggregator didn't actively cite the CC license nor did say "Share Alike" as he would have wanted them to. Thus the DMCA notice. Wow.
Just like Anon said, you can sue every database company. You can also sue anyone who uses tags like Yahoo's Flickr, blogs like WordPress and TypePad, and Delicious simply because they assign meta data to data.
Not only is this idea obvious, the chances of someone ELSE owning such a patent is likely given the widespread use of such a broad patent years before the Internet was handed over to the public domain.
I'm usually one to side with Mike on these types of observations; technology doesn't ruin anything... it mostly changes it for the better. But as an avid hiker and outdoors person, I feel that holding a map - partially for the details that are missing from Google Maps (with no mashups yet created) and partially because sometimes I'm not in an area to get or use Google Maps - enhances the adventure. Maps, when properly drawn/printed, are great tools and the intangible aspect (the feeling of properly navigating with them in the world) is something that Google Maps & Mapquest can't give me.
That's not to say I use traditional maps often or feel Google is ruining their business... its changing it - like all technology. And technology's effect on the map is no different than other forms of distribution like audio/visual entertainment. The British Cartographic Society will have to evolve like all the others. But if they enhanced, or promoted, the experience of using a map in situations where the use of technology isn't right or out of reach; they might be able to share the feeling of what makes maps unique - and probably promote other industries as well.
The shortsightedness of the psychologist is almost hard to believe. Laptops, like cell phones, compasses, maps, swimming/ski/hiking gear, are just tools to use on vacation to enjoy it... to get more out of it.
I can recall using my laptop in London to navigate the streets and get directions. I also used my laptop to search for laundromats in Moab, UT when I went whitewater rafting. Ditto for finding a hiking trail in Hawaii.
What you get out of your vacation is up to the individual (mostly) and using or carrying a laptop is not going to make or break a vacation. It's how you use it.
If you use it to connect to work and check emails, one could argue you aren't really able to enjoy your vacation. But to simply not use a laptop - or any electronic device of similar capability - just for sake of getting "more" out of a vacation is silly.
I can think of one reason why anyone would want to flood the market with hacked cards to allow someone to get service for free... cash flow.
I can imagine a world where Dish Network's customers canceled their service - thus reducing the company's monthly income - while still getting service for free (or, if not canceling, reducing the money paid for premium content). This could force a cash crunch at the company and allow DirectTV to gain the upper hand - even if they don't actually compete in the market.
RSS
Twitter
Other IP Rights At Stake? (as Christopher Gizzi)
While I can agree that the costumes don't appear to be a work of art, are their other IP rights Lucasfilm could reference in their favor? I'm playing devil's advocate here but with real curiosity.
Could Lucas argue that the Stormtrooper name is a trademark of Lucasfilm and, should Ainsworth want to create a replica of the Stormtrooper costume to sell, he can't call the name? I'd think that Ainsworth marketing a non-Lucas Stormtrooper costume would cause confusion and dilute the trademark of the stormtrooper and Star Wars name/brand/likeness.
I'm obviously not a UK (or US for that matter) legal expert but I know that if I came across Ainsworth's Stormtrooper costumes, I could think they are official Lucasfilm merchandise and, might place value on it I wouldn't have otherwise. I recognize the circumstances around acquiring the costume might change this but, still. How can one not be confused by two different (but alike) Stormtrooper costumes?
Re: (as Christopher Gizzi)
Are you serious? It was obvious that everything was disclosed. In fact, the post leads off with "UPS recently asked us to create a series of three videos..."
I don't know if you can any more obvious by saying UPS helped produce the video even before you get into the main post content.
Oh the Irony! (as Christopher Gizzi)
Does anyone else think it ironic that the song used is this UPS video is from a band called The Postal Service?
:-/
Seriously, though. This is a great video... I can't wait to see the other two.
It's About Time! (as Christopher Gizzi)
NOTE: I hope the sarcasm is obvious. If its not, I'll work on it for the next time.
I, for one, applaud Mr. Edwards for touching on a topic that, I'm sure, many of his fellow authors feel is important to them: maintaining the elitist class.
See I agree with Mr. Edwards that educational and cultural pieces of art in all its forms should be limited to those who can afford to pay for it. The freeloading and theft perpetrated by libraries & museums across the globe must stop now.
I submit to you that it is perfectly normal to exclude the non-payers from receiving any educational or cultural experiences. Can't afford all art? Too, bad. Can't afford any one piece? Sorry. In fact, I suggest that society as a whole is better off NOT having the very young, the very old, and the poor - who generally can't afford culture such as the kind Mr. Edwards is attempting to bestow on us rich elite who clearly recognize the value in paying for such artistry - because they might learn of human rights some say are inalienable. Should they read more than they should, they might rise against us and force us to give things away for free against our will!
I believe those who would consider enjoying a book for free are the worst kind of person; "libraries" are guilty of crimes against humanity. When we live in a world where those who can't pay for culture, don't get to enjoy it, I'll be happy just like Mr. Edwards.
Well, there go all the term papers I plan to write. (as Christopher Gizzi)
Next time I'm asked to write a term paper on a novel, article, or text book, I'm going to claim I can't because I don't have permission from the rights holder to quote passages.
Just to see if people will really believe you have to get permission - academia or not.
The models are wrong. (as Christopher Gizzi)
I think its safe to say that our behavior can always be modeled and predicted. But good measurements come first. It just might be harder for researchers to measure Twitter's historical data.
Greatly Disagree (as C.G.)
Mike,
I'm surprised to hear you're not convinced that free in the physical realm can teach us much about the digital realm. In fact, I feel it’s a STRONG example of how free can help one make money.
For years you've been saying free distribution has helped grow a fan base in the music/movie realm - sell tickets, t-shirts, special experiences, etc. - and Denny's promotion is no different. So you give away food like a meal or ice cream, coffee, whatever and, yes, you have to be very aware of the marginal costs involved, but if the experience (taste, convenience, service, etc) is remembered, that chain will be able to capture future business and take it away from others who - even with equal service and tasting food - will remember the special experience of the free food.
Now, the burden on the restaurants is to keep up the good service and continue to innovate in the promotions to control costs but keep people engaged in the brand/service/product but that's no different than the music business either. No amount of free music is going to get someone to buy t-shirts if the experience of the concerts or fan interaction isn't enjoyable.
Re: Re: The issue is the CC license. (as C.G.)
I totally agree. It seems so easy to have done that. In fact, there are SO many ways to deal with the what-ifs of his concern. It didn't have to come down to a DMCA. Threatening an ISP or host doesn't seem like an action that needed to be taken. It's as if he's taking out his poor planning on the host and had he thought out how the tools should be used with the license he had in mind, this might not have been an issue.
The issue is the CC license. (as C.G.)
According to the author:
"Though it linked to Plagiarism Today in the headline, it was not linking to or referencing my CC license nor was it referencing the “Share Alike” attribute. When combined with the hotlinked images, I decided to take action, filing a DMCA notice with their host, Joyent."
It sounds as if he was more upset that the aggregator didn't actively cite the CC license nor did say "Share Alike" as he would have wanted them to. Thus the DMCA notice. Wow.
Sue EVERYONE!! (as So It's Come To This:)
Just like Anon said, you can sue every database company. You can also sue anyone who uses tags like Yahoo's Flickr, blogs like WordPress and TypePad, and Delicious simply because they assign meta data to data.
Not only is this idea obvious, the chances of someone ELSE owning such a patent is likely given the widespread use of such a broad patent years before the Internet was handed over to the public domain.
FAIL
I have to agree with the cartographer on this one. (as So It's Come To This:)
I'm usually one to side with Mike on these types of observations; technology doesn't ruin anything... it mostly changes it for the better. But as an avid hiker and outdoors person, I feel that holding a map - partially for the details that are missing from Google Maps (with no mashups yet created) and partially because sometimes I'm not in an area to get or use Google Maps - enhances the adventure. Maps, when properly drawn/printed, are great tools and the intangible aspect (the feeling of properly navigating with them in the world) is something that Google Maps & Mapquest can't give me.
That's not to say I use traditional maps often or feel Google is ruining their business... its changing it - like all technology. And technology's effect on the map is no different than other forms of distribution like audio/visual entertainment. The British Cartographic Society will have to evolve like all the others. But if they enhanced, or promoted, the experience of using a map in situations where the use of technology isn't right or out of reach; they might be able to share the feeling of what makes maps unique - and probably promote other industries as well.
Laptops are tools for anything (as C.G.)
The shortsightedness of the psychologist is almost hard to believe. Laptops, like cell phones, compasses, maps, swimming/ski/hiking gear, are just tools to use on vacation to enjoy it... to get more out of it.
I can recall using my laptop in London to navigate the streets and get directions. I also used my laptop to search for laundromats in Moab, UT when I went whitewater rafting. Ditto for finding a hiking trail in Hawaii.
What you get out of your vacation is up to the individual (mostly) and using or carrying a laptop is not going to make or break a vacation. It's how you use it.
If you use it to connect to work and check emails, one could argue you aren't really able to enjoy your vacation. But to simply not use a laptop - or any electronic device of similar capability - just for sake of getting "more" out of a vacation is silly.
I think he needs to have his head checked. ;-)
One reason... (as C.G.)
I can think of one reason why anyone would want to flood the market with hacked cards to allow someone to get service for free... cash flow.
I can imagine a world where Dish Network's customers canceled their service - thus reducing the company's monthly income - while still getting service for free (or, if not canceling, reducing the money paid for premium content). This could force a cash crunch at the company and allow DirectTV to gain the upper hand - even if they don't actually compete in the market.