Re: [dvd-discuss] Mobile phone cameras used for Digital shoplifting?

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

On 30 Jun 2003 at 8:55, Glendon Gross wrote:

Date sent:      	Mon, 30 Jun 2003 08:55:39 -0700
From:           	Glendon Gross <gross@xinetd.com>
Organization:   	Xinetd Communications
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Mobile phone cameras used for Digital 
shoplifting?
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> I would have thought that sending the photos via cell phone would increase
> sales of the magazine, rather than decrease sales!
> 
> I wonder if there is any tangible evidence that this behavior really hurts
> magazine sales, or if this is another case of "piracy" being
> used as a means to blame the customer  for a failure to sell product. It seems
> to me that there was a time when something like this would have been  thought of
> as free advertising for the magazine, rather than "piracy."  But the unchecked
> rise of intellectual property law seems to have criminalized many behaviors
> which otherwise resemble sharing.

I think that's an excellent statement. The whole notion of "intellectual 
propert" is the problem...I can only hope that the inventors of that phrase 
rate some cirle in Dante's Inferno....last weekend I decided that the creators 
of Lotus Notes deserve a place in the "deceivers" circle-those who practice 
deception and so distort the order of nature.


> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Glendon Gross
> 
> 
> "aicra@well.com" wrote:
> 
> > That is a little odd. Honestly, what is the "real" difference between
> > calling your friend to meet you at the mall or store to see the magazine
> > picture or taking a quick shot of it and sending it to someone to see what
> > he/she thinks of a certain outfit or hairstyle.
> >
> > Aren't a lot of these magazines just one large advertisement anyways...
> > So the product or style is advertised. The magazines are paid by
> > advertisers. The system is still working, isn't it?
> >
> > However, without sales, they probably will not be able to "gauge" how well the
> > system works, in the same way they have in the past. That might have an impact
> > on whether advertisers decide to continue with their ads.
> >
> > The future of magazines (???):
> > Maybe someday a proprietary device that the user connects using wireless
> > and authentication to receive information secured through the magazine
> > intranet. This way they could receive the most up-to-date information. The
> > magazine could charge more and if people went for it, they could make money on
> > the hardware end too. But that too will eventually be cracked to put pictures
> > on cells, sites, etc...
> >
> > what if, the "free" internet news was one day, intentionally delayed to
> > users, while the proprietary, paid information was up-to-the-minute. Ok,
> > enough of my vivid imaginative, speculating.
> >
> > *** ignore your rights, they'll go away ***
> > - marcia wilbur
> >
> > Original Message:
> > -----------------
> > From: Sham Gardner mail@risctaker.inka.de
> > Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:24:32 +0200
> > To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > Subject: [dvd-discuss] Mobile phone cameras used for "Digital shoplifting"?
> >
> > It gets ever more absurd...
> >
> > I just saw this article on BBC:
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3031716.stm
> >
> > If it were about people snapping copies of entire magazines I could
> > understand, but individual photographs? That strikes my as quite ridiculous.
> >
> > --
> > http://sites.inka.de/risctaker/DeCSS/
> >
> > "The essence of the evil government is that it anticipates bad conduct
> >  on the part if its citizens. Any overnment which assumes that the
> >  population is going to do something evil has already lost its
> >  franchise to govern." (Philip K. Dick)
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> > http://mail2web.com/ .
>