Like patents, it's become a popular punching bag here on HN. Well, I stand loud and proud against "the HN mob" of wanna be's and know it all's. I'm ready to get downvoted to hell on this one, but it's important that someone speaks up. I am pro DMCA! (And patents!)
Generally speaking, DMCA and patents are a pain in the ass for a really young company. Startups want to move fast and break stuff... which is great... except they typically do so at the expense of people who came before you and busted their butt just as hard as you're busting yours. Why should you get to play by a different set of rules then they did? You shouldn't.
When -- if ever -- your startup grows up, DMCA and patents are how you stay in business. It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero. Intellectual property protection is the keystone of a modern knowledge economy. And if you don't understand why, I'd recommend taking a microeconomics 101 on iTunes U or Youtube. VC, private equity.. hell, even Wall St., wouldn't be in America were it not for our world-class intellectual property laws.
Just because 100,000 people sign a DMCA petition doesn't make it right. 1,000,000 McDonalds hamburgers are sold every day... is that the right thing to eat just because a million people are doing it? My point is: one of the downfalls of voting websites like HN, reddit, or even the whitehouse.gov platform is people who know nothing get their votes counted the same as people who are experts on the subject. Well, I've been litigated for patent infringement, and I work with DMCA at my current company, and I know both issues intimately. DMCA, and patents, work. I know there are other startups out there who depend on DMCA, and if you're one of them, upvote this.
For everyone else, please educate yourself on what exactly DMCA does and the importance of IP laws in the American economy.
(N.B. Yes I am lumping DMCA and patents together a lot here, because the complaints behind both of them stem from a lot of the same entitlement mindset that startups are somehow entitled to implement technologies or host data that is not theirs.)
it's important that someone speaks up. I am pro DMCA!
The petition isn't entirely anti-DMCA and neither are many people on HN. The DMCA offers a safe harbor for websites that host user submitted content and it gives a mechanism for truly infringing content to be taken down. There are alternative approaches that some might like better but they are unlikely to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, these two aspects are both good for businesses and I doubt that they're as controversial here as you state they are. There are, however, serious issues with the DMCA. One of these is that there's little to no recourse when the DMCA is abused by a company to take down materials that they don't own the copyright to (this happens frequently). Another issue is that circumventing DRM is illegal even if no copyright infringement is taking place (this is the actual point of the petition). It's not impossible to support the positive aspects of the DMCA while simultaneously recognizing that it is far from perfect and in need of reform.
PS - I downvoted you. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I agree with you. You're baiting for upvotes/downvotes with statements like "I'm ready to get downvoted to hell on this one" and "I know there are other startups out there who depend on DMCA, and if you're one of them, upvote this." You're also being unnecessarily insulting and condescending when saying *"I stand loud and proud against 'the HN mob' of wanna be's and know it all's," when this adds nothing to your argument. This behavior is clearly against the Hacker News Guidelines (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and more importantly it's both rude and nonconstructive.
I agree with your comments on DMCA. Good thoughts here.
As for stating the truth -- how I don't care if people downvote my opinion, observing how HN is filled with a majority of wanna be's and know it all's and very few do'ers, or encouraging startups with similar views to support my comment -- it isn't necessarily "baiting" for votes. That's colorful language meant to incite dissent, and for that I applaud your salesmanship; but, I actually find your PS to be a bit sanctimonious and churlish. But -- we all have a choice to up/down vote based on content or presentation of someone's comment. I guess I just care more about the content.
one of the downfalls of voting websites like HN, reddit, or even the whitehouse.gov platform is people who know nothing get their votes counted the same as people who are experts on the subject.
>When -- if ever -- your startup grows up, DMCA and patents are how you stay in business. It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero. Intellectual property protection is the keystone of a modern knowledge economy.
Hmm. Then explain to me why the GPL and other free and open source software licenses have been booming and Creative Commons has been getting tons of attention, because I just can't seem to connect the dots.
I don't have a problem with copyright. Takedown/safe-harbor isn't perfect, but I don't have a big objection there either. The anticircumvention provisions of the DMCA, on the other hand are bad.
In most cases, they only affect people trying to play by the rules; outside of a few specialized niches, almost all software and content ends up cracked and on The Pirate Bay no matter what. On the other hand, my right to back up content I legitimately purchased or use such content on a device that hasn't been authorized by some third party is restricted. Phone unlocking and jailbreaking are affected even though they're mostly about interoperability, not copying content.
"Why should you get to play by a different set of rules then they did?"
Because 1)the rules are arbitrary, and 2) the same argument was made by the first guy to get locked out of commercializing his own invention because someone else patented it first. The "because: the status quo" argument is isn't very compelling.
"It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero."
The incentive might shift, but certainly not disappear. The focus would be on tangible and less speculative areas (food, shelter, basic tech; all positive in a recession), but I wouldn't expect to suffer. Fear of eliminating patents and copyright is a boogyman. (Edit: To elaborate: you don't "protect" ideas, and winning by holding people back is misanthropic.)
"VC, private equity.. hell, even Wall St., wouldn't be in America were it not for our world-class intellectual property laws."
Correlation is not causation. I would say "in spite of". The US (and NA) markets are different, and arguably less competitive, than even 50 years ago. (Edit: The current economic downturn coincides with ramping up on copyright and imaginary property law, among other things.)
"the complaints behind both of them stem from a lot of the same entitlement mindset that startups are somehow entitled to implement technologies or host data that is not theirs."
That entitlement is the sentiment that used to be associated with "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," IMHO. Hardly something to dismiss or resent.
Like patents, it's become a popular punching bag here on HN. Well, I stand loud and proud against "the HN mob" of wanna be's and know it all's. I'm ready to get downvoted to hell on this one, but it's important that someone speaks up. I am pro DMCA! (And patents!)
Generally speaking, DMCA and patents are a pain in the ass for a really young company. Startups want to move fast and break stuff... which is great... except they typically do so at the expense of people who came before you and busted their butt just as hard as you're busting yours. Why should you get to play by a different set of rules then they did? You shouldn't.
When -- if ever -- your startup grows up, DMCA and patents are how you stay in business. It has to be easy and cost-effective to protect your creations, or else the incentive to create is greatly diminished and the ROI for R&D is zero. Intellectual property protection is the keystone of a modern knowledge economy. And if you don't understand why, I'd recommend taking a microeconomics 101 on iTunes U or Youtube. VC, private equity.. hell, even Wall St., wouldn't be in America were it not for our world-class intellectual property laws.
Just because 100,000 people sign a DMCA petition doesn't make it right. 1,000,000 McDonalds hamburgers are sold every day... is that the right thing to eat just because a million people are doing it? My point is: one of the downfalls of voting websites like HN, reddit, or even the whitehouse.gov platform is people who know nothing get their votes counted the same as people who are experts on the subject. Well, I've been litigated for patent infringement, and I work with DMCA at my current company, and I know both issues intimately. DMCA, and patents, work. I know there are other startups out there who depend on DMCA, and if you're one of them, upvote this.
For everyone else, please educate yourself on what exactly DMCA does and the importance of IP laws in the American economy.
(N.B. Yes I am lumping DMCA and patents together a lot here, because the complaints behind both of them stem from a lot of the same entitlement mindset that startups are somehow entitled to implement technologies or host data that is not theirs.)