To elaborate on Clinton's reply regarding "scale," a sense of historical
perspective is needed.
In ancient times, communication was slow, passed originally by mouth to
anyone within shouting distance. When horses were domesticated, it became a
little faster, as people could shout to more people in less time. Devices
such as smoke signals enabled very simple messages to be "transmitted" over
a larger area by means of putting something large high in the sky where it
could be seen for miles.
The written word enabled communication to be transmitted more accurately,
and shared among more people. With the invention of the printing press, only
about 600 years ago, revolutionized communication, as it made written words
easily reproducable, able to be "published" (made available to the public)
in vast quantities for a relatively small cost.
About 150 years ago, the telegraph was invented by Samuel Morse. This
enabled words to be transmitted over long distances over a wire, at the
speed of light. Now we were cooking!
In 1876, the first telephone was created by Samuel Morse. While the
telegraph required a cumbersome code of clicks representing dots and dashes,
that was translated at one end from human language and at the other TO human
language, the telephone enabled people to actually talk to one another over
vast distances in real time. Now, there's a revolution for you!
Still, both the telegraph and the telephone were limited by the fact that
they required an uniterrupted wire between the people doing the
communication. Certainly, networks of wires and related hardware
proliferated. But there was more to come...
Very shortly after the invention of the telephone, Heinrich Hertz
demonstrated the existence of radio waves, and within a decode or so,
wireless communication by radio became the latest and greatest form of
communication. It linked the whole world together. Now people from China
could commjnicate with people in the United States, as long as they both had
a powerful enough radio, and they both spoke the same language.
Around the same time, Thomas Edison invented the Phonograph. This device
enabled sound to be recorded and duplicated, even published in a more or
less permanent format.
Combined with radio, the phonograph was different from anything else that
had come before because it made copy and distrubution on a vast scale both
possible and practical for the average joe, especially with peer-to-peer
hardware. Imagine the controversies that must have erupted among the vast
sea of ignorance in those days!
Fast-forward (just a bit) to the beginning of the 20th century. The
invention of the wire recorder and the tape recorder improved both the
quality and quantity of sound that could be recorded and distributed. By the
1930s, tape recorders were recording on plastic tape rather than steel, and
it became inexpensive to make tape recordings.
Meanwhile, research was being done regarding the unimaginable idea of
transmitting images by radio waves. The Cathode Ray tube was invented in the
early 1900s. In 1925 the first electronic picture was demonstrated on a
mechanical system. And in 1927, the first television transmission was sent.
Around the time of the seocond World War, radios were commonplace. The first
commercial televison sets were offered for sale. And a new invention began
to rear its ugly head: The computer. Meanwhile, U.S. government agencies
like the FCC were created in an attempt to manage the possible misuses of
these new broadcasting technolgies. Who could have imagined all of the
possible misuses of such technology, which opened up a vast realm of
undreamed-of possibilities?
Just a decade later, television was all the rage in the U.S., and beginning
to become popular world-wide. The VideoTapeRecorder was invented, enabling
television broadcasts to be recorded, duplicated, and distributed in a more
or less permanent format.
Combined with television, the VTR was different from anything else that had
come before because it made copy and distrubution on a vast scale both
possible and practical for the average joe, especially with peer-to-peer
hardware.
By the 1960s, broadcast satellites were launched into space, FM radio in
stereo was invented, remote controls for television were developed, the
VideoCassetteRecorder was introduced, solid state technology was invented,
and the first human being walked on the moon, powered by a rocket ship that
housed a computer the size of my office.
Communications media were by this time being introduced, popularized,
cheaply manufactored, and made obsolete at a dizzying rate. I was born in
the 1950s, so I can remember switching from radio to television, switching
from black-and-white tv to color tv, switching from 45s to LPs to tape
recorders to 8-tracks (remember 8-tracks? Most people don't), to cassettes,
to CDs, and so on, every couple of years. It was hard to keep up!
In the early 1970s, the microprocessor was developed...
Backtrack to 1957 for a minute, when the USSR launched the first satellite.
This was a cause of great concern to the U.S. Deparment of Defense. We
couldn't let the Soviets defeat us with technology. So, in response, a new
government agency was created, for the purpose of establishing a lead in
technology. It was called the Advanced Research Projects Agency, or ARPA for
short. Sound familiar?
In 1962, under the auspices of ARPA, the Rand Corporation, a U.S. government
think-tank was tasked with developing a reliable military communications
network that could survive a nuclear strike, decentralized, so that if any
cities in the U.S. were destroyed by a nuclear attack, the military would
still be able to launch a counter-strike. The proposed a "packet-switching"
computer network, in which data was sent in datagrams, or packets, so that
if any packet was lost, it could be re-tranmitted by the originator. By
1969, ARPANET, the realization of this idea, was born.
In 1972, the first email transmission occurred. And in 1973, a new network
protocol, TCP/IP was developed. By 1974, there were over 23 host computers
running on a 50Kbps network.
By the mid-1970s, ARPANET had become ARPANET and SATNET (the Atlantic packet
Satellite Network). In 1979, USENET (hello) and BITNET (Because its Time
Network) were added. In 1981, the National Science Foundation added CSNET to
the mix. And in 1983, the Internet Activities Board (IAB) was born, and
TCP/IP became the standard. There were now 562 hosts running on several
different and connected networks.
By 1985, T1 lines were developed, and fully deployed by 1988. Technology was
being developed so rapidly that the network was almost constantly being
upgraded. And by 1990, there were 313,000 hosts on the Internet.
In 1992, the World-Wide Web was released to the general public by CERN. In
1993, InterNIC was created to provide specific Internet directory and
database services, registration services, and information services. And a
graphical user interface called "Mosaic for X" was created, and the WWW was
introduced to the vast sea of ignorance.
The rest is (very recent) history.
So, yes, the Internet is different from anything else that has come before
because it makes copy and distrubution on a vast scale both possible and
practical for the average joe, especially with peer-to-peer software.
Or is it?
--
;-),
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Ambiguity has a certain quality to it.
"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
No Paul, I think Kevin's got it right but did not and need not elucidate
about every relevant circumstance. You're hung up on scale while Kevin
understands scope.
I replied earlier today but whacked my reply before posting. This issue of
copyright really doesn't matter too much anymore (to peons such as you and
I) thanks to fascist bastards like Sonny Bono turned out to be. Copyright
worked well for many many decades and its been the fundamentals of the
doctrine itself that the fascists have changed, not the means of that
which a copyright may secure.
I've learned these nasty lessons after having my architectural works
stolen.
I've learned these nasty lessons after having my published written works
vandalized and plaigarized by other architects.
The Internet only affects a matter of scale and the ease of use by which a
property may be misused. In context its all relevant and we need not get
into the metaphysical because I have interacted with the fascists on
multiple occassions and I know the facts of life in this context. You see,
a peon such as yourself will have to learn the same lessons as a peon such
as I. We lose. That's the way it is.
If and when you do have one or more of this type of life experience
perhaps then you will see things 'our' way. So for now can we let it go
and spend our time more productively within the realm where we may at
least hope to enjoy ourselves while we still may?
That would be using C# to write outstanding code of course :-)
<%= Clinton Gallagher
METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
"PJ6" <no****@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:eZ****************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... So, what new about this? Nothing. Nada. It's a dead issue. It will only
take the vast sea of ignorance another decade or so to figure it out. In
the
You seem very self-assured for taking such an indefnensible point of
view. Indeed this particular point is a dead horse, but the horse is dead
on the side squarly in disagreement of your assertion; the internet is
different from anything else that has come before because it makes copy
and distrubution on a vast scale both possible and practical for the
average joe, especially with peer-to-peer software. That you compare it
to a CD burner or a VCR baffles me. There is no comparison.
Paul
"Kevin Spencer" <ke***@DIESPAMMERSDIEtakempis.com> wrote in message
news:uA**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... The copyright laws will never be abolished.
And these issues are nothing new. Things have been copied since man
invented written language. Computers don't change a thing. Same issue,
different medium. People think it's something new because they don't
understand computers. You can copy written language by hand, by copy
machine, camera, computer, any number of ways. You can copy movies and
television shows using a VCR, DVD recorder, a digital home video camera,
computer, any number of ways. You can copy music from memory, a tape
recorder, CD burner, computer, any number of ways.
So, what new about this? Nothing. Nada. It's a dead issue. It will only
take the vast sea of ignorance another decade or so to figure it out. In
the meantime, politicans have to play along with the game, so the vast
sea of ignorance will think they are doing their jobs. And have somthing
to talk about.
--
HTH,
Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
.Net Developer
Ambiguity has a certain quality to it.
"PJ6" <no****@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:eI**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Every last bit of computer and internet technology is at odds with
"protecting" and preventing the copy of information. Maybe the RIAA has
a point, and maybe it really is "wrong" to download illegal copies of
music (just to give the most obvious example), but this is absolutely a
lost cause; I would like to see some serious study done on what could
happen if copyright law were abolished. Yes, it would be a terrible
blow to certain industries. But what would emerge - the good and the
bad? Would it be workable? If an industry comes crashing down and has
90% less profit - say, the movie business, for example... so what?
Paul
"clintonG" <cs*********@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in
message news:eM**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Noting there are limits but there is a fair use doctrine as well as
> other clauses that have enabled us all to use portions of the works of
> others to create what are called derivative works. Screen captures of
> images and website layouts can be considered fair use when used within
> the context of the fair use doctrine documented at the You should do
> some more study Darrel. Start here [1]
>
> <%= Clinton Gallagher
> METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
> NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
> URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
> URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
>
> [1] http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
>
>
> "darrel" <no*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uL**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>> I can appreciate the utility of doing screen caps
>>> off of other websites with PSP or PhotoShop to get some of my
>>> website's
>>> graphical elements,
>>
>> Thats plagiarism/copyright infringement. Not really a good idea if
>> you're
>> building commercial web sites.
>>
>>> but really I'd rather mostly generate my own graphics.
>>
>> Good.
>>
>>> Are these tools (I haven't looked at them yet) useful for authorship
>>> of
>>> original work?
>>
>> FireWorks, PaintShopPro, Photoshop, Illustrator, The Gimp, Corel
>> Draw,
>> Flash, etc...
>>
>> -Darrel
>>
>>
>
>
