Future of Intellectual Property?

READ DIS ARTICLE:

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/11/01/hollywood_after_the_.html

Will they really be able to get complete control over television?  And if they do, will that mean that fewer people will watch and buy TVs?

All I know is BORK BORK BORK.

haha anal hole. how funny...this is why i stopped reading shit like that

This isn't completely relevant to the ability to copy digital secrets, but my feeling is that we as a global culture have to get over this trade secret nonsense.  Everyone should know the eleven herbs and spices.  Everyone should know the coca-cola formula.  You should be able to view Windows source code.  You should be able to discover how cars are put together, etc.

What does this leave?  Celebrity.  People will still buy things because of a certain famous-factor attached, even when there's no mystery as to physical production values.

who actually watches tv any more?

>>4
Fat people who shop at wal-mart

>>3

Copyright and patent law is just an instance of the insane uber-capitalisitic philosophy of half the US.  Under current law, people buy and sell ideas.  Ideas have become a commodity.  If that doesn't hinder the progress of society I don't know what does.

>>6
Instead, everyone should give things away for free! That'll encourage people to develop new ideas!

On the one hand, I don't like restricting the transfer of ideas.

On the other hand, developing some of these ideas costs a lot of money.

Also, TV doesn't strike me as "intellectual" property...

>>7
Didn't stop Pixel.

>>9
Yeah, in the future, there will probably be hopeless nerds to do any new idea development you'd ever want, including in software.  They could probably develop common engines, and ultra-easy level design and game creation software, as neccesitated by the layout of the industry... Only thing is that these people would have to get day jobs and wouldn't be able to pay their bills anymore. 

Mozilla.org, amirite?

rather than promoting innovation, intellectual property rights allow people to come up with one or two really good ideas, and milk them for all they're worth.  allowing a 'free' market for intellectual property, the truly innovative people will be rewarded for coming up with new ideas regularly, whereas the copycats will always be one step behind.

when everyone's selling the exact same recipe for 'Coca Cola', you have to come up with something new to keep yourself ahead of the market if you want to succeed.

Actually, the people who usually succeed aren't the first ones to the market. It's usually the second, who learn lessons by watching the first, then coming in and eating their lunch.

>>10

I've honestly felt for a while that a free/non-profit path, for media at least, is going to be the big way forward. Most art, historically, was commissioned work for wealthy patrons, and was one-of-a-kind. Therefore, even copies were valuable. But ever since the printing press, the idea of an entity publishing works and profiting off the sale of duplicates under IP law has become more prominent, to the point of becoming a de-facto standard today.

However, with today's technology, publishing entities are unnecessary to publish the works. The original authors can do it very easily, within days of deciding to do so. Marketing is more difficult but not impossible. The unfortunate border cases are very large productions like AAA video games and movies, which will eventually need to find a way forward for their funding; but everything else is doable by individuals and small groups and can recieve compensation in bits and pieces: merchandising, donations, tours and other live events have all built sustainable ventures for media by people with the business sense to execute such offerings properly. Just take a look at what's happening with writing, music and comics for examples. The consumer marketplace for those mediums is increasingly being held online.

>>5

lmao

>>13 AAA video games and movies

Doukutsu Monogatari would have been a AAA video game ten years ago.  Napoleon Dynamite was made on a budget of under a million.  It'll get easier and easier, until we won't need big companies to make media.  Woo!

I think it'll be the rise of memetic cinema, you know, where one entity improves upon another's idea and passes it on.

Doukutsu Monogatari would have been a AAA video game ten years ago.

Yeah... ten years ago.

Call me when someone makes something at least Deus Ex grade.

>>15
we need 4chan cinema
more /b/tards need to make movies :/

>>8
The amount of time someone spends thinktanking, can be used, at the very least, flipping burgers, for pay.  Although I am a supporter of the free and open source software movements, I still have bills to pay.  On some level, I need to be able to use my skills for financial gain.

So, yeah, I see where you are coming from.

>>7
actually laziness will still drive the market. How many people even know where to get 11 herbs and spices, much less drive around for them?
Just look at how many people still go to crappy fast food places. Is it that hard to make a simple sandwich? American trends says yes. And it's branched out to other nations as well. For a dollar or so more, you can pay someone else to make it. And let's face it, making tacos is a pain in the ass. If we moved up a notch on the self-serve ladder, Demolition Man would come true. 5 minutes spent making a meal is 5 less minutes you have for looking at /h/ or downloading site rips. This is why holding onto ideas is stupid. You'll lose like, what? .3% of your consumer base of survivalist loonies in the boonies?

>>15
So will Donnie Darko lead to a reimagining where his sister is the main focus and the bunnyman is replaced by a bear? :B

Nope, it'd be completely different.   We wouldn't have movies and video games like we do now, because people will not be willing to pay for it. 

oh and I should add...this will only hurt the tech sector, which will be a good thing as it'll explode all kinds of custom software that even big companies will utilize. Because they're better than their own. This will in turn force everyone to progress as fast as possible to keep up with the geek down the street. Essentially, 1990s all over again. But with crappier music. Hopefully this will give enough money to basement dwellin' geeks to build their own rocket ships or genetic labs and then we can really see some wacky progressions in science.

>>18
No you can't.  It's impossible to think while doing menial jobs.  I work at Wal-Mart.

And the thing is, I'm doing a job which doesn't even really need to be done; ever been to an Aldi's?  people can do almost my entire job themselves.  I'm working a luxury, doing stuff just because people don't want to do it themselves.

Really, the reason why the unemployment rate is rising is because we just don't need people that badly.  Machines have replaced the brawn of our forefathers. 

Socialism is the wave of the future, not that that's a good  thing, but it's just that we really don't need people anymore.

>>22
social anonymity is the wave of the future look at freenet.
(then look at me rofl)

>>20

It's worth pointing out that big-budget movies, even today, aren't the same kinds of productions as late-50s and early-60s big-budget movies. Look at Lawrence of Arabia or Ben Hur, for example. High quality film, an enormous number of actors and extras, huge sets, the works; those were about as big as productions got. Fast-forward to today, and the costs are focused mostly on a few high-priced  actors and an enormous special effects budget, rather than "real" film material. Eventually, the movie will be one special effect, and you might venture to say that is already the case with some of the 3d animated features and action movies of recent years. (Sky Captain, anyone?) Movie budgets today, in fact, tend to be lowered from the early 60s after inflation adjustment. This is a promising sign for the future of film. The traditional methods may never return for cost reasons, but we can always take our best shot at reproducing them.

Games will probably be later to follow since their peak budget is not obviously in sight; it's gotten bigger every generation and will probably do so for some time to come, simply because the amount of content that is necessary for a game attempting photorealism is gobsmackingly large. (if not, then it will be because the market won't support such an investment from a single title.) This is an interesting quandary since games are as piratable as any other media, and then some since they were among the first digital content; will developers simply start lowering the budgets as society tends to accept more media "for free," or will they search for ways to support such massive projects?

Multiplayer servers that only work with purchased copies; subscriptions ala Steam.  THey're finding ways to make money on games.

BTW, windows vista will have DRM content management built in, so that even say winamp won't play those hundreads of fansubbed naruto episodes you've got lying aorund.

>>1
The People: This is bullshit. I'm not paying for it.
The Developers: People aren't buying our stuff because we spent hundreds of millions of dollars on DRM technology that completely assfucks any value the product has.
The Boss: OMGWTF! j00 said dis would bring in more monnies! I sue!

As for the future of TV? If they stuff it full of stupid restrictions and less people buy them, new broadcasts will form a movement on the internet, and new audience without televisions will watch those instead. High speed internet connections are more accessible now, and depending on what they plan to do with television, the network executives could be digging their own graves by buying into all these hated restrictions.