Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States Your Rights Online

Top Ten New Copyright Crimes 42

Posted by timothy
from the sarcastic-followups-are-the-best-kind dept.
anon writes: "Jamie Kellner, chairman and CEO of Turner Broadcasting (an AOL Time Warner company), was recently interviewed on the future of television. In the interview, Mr. Kellner said some very interesting things, including characterizing those who skip television commercials as thieves.' To help develop Mr. Kellner's unfortunately common (at least in Hollywood) view of copyright, LawMeme offers the top ten new copyright crimes, as well as further choice quotes and commentary from Mr. Kellner's interview."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Top Ten New Copyright Crimes

Comments Filter:
  • #11 - Averting your eyes from roadside billboards long enough to watch where you're going.
    #12 - Being Blind or Deaf...
  • wait a sec... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Rerun... [slashdot.org]
    • Not only that, it has the exact same title! Hmm, perhaps they could search for previous postings before posting a new story?

      Is that too much to ask?
  • Hemos [slashnet.org]:
    Here's the reality:
    You block ads.
    You cost us money.
    Ultimately, I mean.
    • What he said is true, though. Each page you hit costs them a small amount in bandwidth and CPU time. Note that he didn't say "If you block ads, you're a thief" or "If you block ads, you're stealing our content" or "It's part of the contract between us and you that you read and click on our ads." What he said was completely correct, and in the midst of a plea to support them by other means than advertising.

  • Just as I said [slashdot.org] earlier.

    My mistake, though, I guess he figures it's OK if you can go to the bathroom in 30 seconds.

    Why is he this tolerant? Maybe going to the bathroom counts as a sufficiently similar experience to enduring commercials.


  • This article is a dupe from late last week....
  • by knabar (261612) <[knabar] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @03:03PM (#3478892)
    ...because we were told some of you did not look at the ads shown with the story the first time.
  • Unless these are the same ten? [slashdot.org]
  • Hitting your mute button and closing your eyes is not a crime!
  • We need T-Shirts. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SocialWorm (316263) on Tuesday May 07, 2002 @03:10PM (#3478931) Homepage
    More public exposure for Mr. Kellner's ideas would be most helpful. As the previous story mentioned, he is our "friend" due to his downright draconian opinions. Any guesses on how long it will take Copyleft or Thinkgeek to do something like this? I know 2600 used to have an anti-Jack-Valenti shirt.

    Also: There is an anti-Kellner Open Directory Section. It seems rather sparse though. http://www.dmoz.org/Arts/Television/Networks/WB/An ti-Kellner [dmoz.org]
    The sites mention the cancelation of the Animaniacs, but nothing too serious.
  • ...all over again.
  • by tps12 (105590)
    The one that says PBS is unfair because of competition is a non-sequitor. It has nothing to do with ad views. It looks to me as if the folks who wrote the story are trying to slip some pro-PBS ideology into a story that would otherwise appeal to Libertarians. Comments?
    • Sounds like your comment has a strong ANTI-PBS bias. Discounting beg-a-thons, PBS does not run commercials. If skipping commercials on regular TV is against the law, (as suggested) then being able to switch to PBS where there are no commercials is clearly an unfair advantage. Of course, under that premiss, you have to stay tuned and watch all the PBS fundraisers also. I guess you choose how you want your ads: 10 min. out of every 30 or 24 hours in a row every month. I must be just about a tratior, I hahdly watch any TV anymore - what with all the commercials and lousy content. DirecTV - 150 channels of nothing worth watching.
    • Maybe I have been watching a counterfeit version of PBS, but here in Silly-Con Valley we have our choice of 3 PBS stations. All 3 run several nationally distributed programs, and every one of those programs comes complete with several corporate "underwriting" announcements at both the beginning and the end of each program, and those anouncements look and sound a whole lot like commercials.

      So what is this non-sense about PBS being unfair because it's gov'mint financed and does not have ads? Someoone should tell the folks who keep beating their "Pledge Now!" drums that they are well financed by their gov'mint. Or are the folks beating those "Pledge Now!" drums all lying to me about how much it costs them to acquire those ad-laden national programs?

      IMHO, the real problem here is that this "friend" of ours apparently thinks our only reason for living is so we can watch ads for and to buy junk we don't really need. I hate to be the bearer of bad news for him, but there is more to life than watching ads and buying "stuff!"

      I, for one, happen to enjoy walking on the ocean beach. (One place where I see or hear few ads of any sort.) Does this man actually believe that walking on a beach as I do should be a crime? Does he think I would be better off "enjoying" a nice collection of ads instead of watching a beautiful susnset out over the Pacific ocean?

      Gimme a Break! This clown is certifiable!

No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.

Working...