Next-Gen editor Collin Campbell wrote a lecture on the evils of selling and buying used video games. He claimed resellers of video games like GameStop are costing the industry $1 billion (source?) because when GameStop sells used games, the publishers receive no additional revenue. Instead of backing up his position with facts, Campbell follows the common practice of claiming that publishers have some entitlement to more money, rather than letting the market decide and recognizing that there is more money to made thanks to the second hand market.

Video game companies have been critical of used game sales for years, with Sony even attempting to build-in copy protection on PS3 games to prevent them from being resold (Sony did not include this feature). Even book publishers criticized Amazon.com, claiming selling used books would hurt the sale of new books. But no study has shown used game sales hurt the video game industry, though one study has shown sales of used books can actually help the industry. Campbell’s unsupported $1 billion cost to the industry is only attributed to how much GameStop makes selling used games, meaning Campbell is assuming every used game sale would transfer to a new game purchase. Of course, Campbell’s claim that GameStop forces used games on its customers is contradicted by reports that 17.6 percent of GameStop’s holiday sales came from used games - 43.2 percent came from new games.

Continue reading…

There are lots of sexy political issues, usually following whatever George Clooney is promoting that week, and sadly patent law is not one of them. Intellectual property issues and patent law is too complex to be highlighted on billboards, and from the public’s perspective, doesn’t affect our lives too much. But the more I learn about these issues, the more I realize how much America’s patent system is hurting us economically and intellectually.

But in my research and discussions with people, I found myself challenged as to describe my position. I am not specifically anti-copyright or anti-patents and wish there was a term to describe my political position so I knew what to call the Facebook group.

I would like to recommend Pro-Innovation as the term.

Pro-Innovation has that positive marketing spin, being for something rather than against something else. And innovation is good, and in truth, the intended purpose of a patent system. Unfortunately, for all the conventional wisdom, there is no evidence that more patents helps innovation, rather it hampers innovation more than helps.

The Pro-Innovation position looks to bring back American intellectual property laws to their minimalist state as dictated by the Constitution “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” Meaning any patent or copyright is granted only to promote the development or more and better stuff and only granted for a limited time (70 years after the creator dies seems a little long).

This is an extremely complex issue that I will be tackling more on Prodigeek, but I wanted to throw my suggestion in the ring. I have already trademarked Pro-Innovation and expect a quarter every time somebody says it.

Geeks aren’t the most important political voting bloc, but we have several important issues few candidates care to address.  These technology issues have major implications on technological development, the economy, and individual rights.  These are the issues most concerning to the under-appreciated geek bloc.

7. Expanding broadband

The fact that companies still advertise dial-up should concern everyone.  Europe and Asian countries have extensive broadband connectivity, even wireless technology which the United States has been unable to deploy in cities only.  The United States ranks 13th in broadband subscribers after Korea, Japan, and several Scandinavian countries with little strategy in how to expand access.  In fact, our government continues to fudge our own broadband numbers, even after other agencies have shown these numbers to be false.

6. Spyware, malware, and virus. Oh my.

All the spam, phishing scams, and crap software make the internet a scary and dangerous place.  All the information and technology available to the common person is locked behind firewalls, security warnings, and the fear of very website you visit and file you download.  While cautious is healthy in any scenario, the amount of people using the internet for evil makes for an unpleasant place to surf and enjoy.  And as the internet and computers consume more and more of our lives, these problems will only get bigger.  Both technology and the government have a vicious war ahead, which if the present is any sign, is destined to be as successful as the War on Drugs.

Continue reading…

Patent law really sucks these days.  Unfortunately, the insanity that is our patent system doesn’t get a lot of publicity.  The major issue is companies are patenting everything they can to either sue everyone else or protect themselves from lawsuits.  Patents and copyrights are meant to encourage innovation, not be used to scare off competitors.

So explain how Amazon patenting customized 404 error pages deserves a patent?  The Supreme Court ruled over a year ago that eligible patents had to be novel and not "obvious" to people of "ordinary skill" in the related field.  Amazon couldn’t have invented customizing 404 error pages.  That technology already exists and is very easy to edit even for beginning web developers using several hosting tools.  Amazon’s patent seems to make the process more complicated than just using the basic server services, so really they’re just patenting a harder way of doing something everyone does already.

This also reminds me that most blogs (and websites) violate another patent, held by notorious patent troll firm Acacia.  Acacia controls a patent over the "posting a JPEG to a website."  That’s why I plan on switching completely to PNGs.

So if you see calls for my legal funds, you’ll know why.

The crawl is turning into a steamroll as Marvel Comics has targeted another comic book torrent tracker, Komics-Live.  According to Lying in the Gutters, Marvel threatened legal action against the web site.  The site was down for several days and recently returned with no Marvel files.

Marvel send legal notices to torrent trackers Z-Cult and ComicSearch a few months ago and it seems the comic publisher is looking to follow in RIAA and MPAA’s foot steps.  No lawsuits yet.

The interesting part of the Lying in the Gutters post is the affect of Marvel’s legal notices has increased comic book traffic on the leading torrent site, Pirate Bay.  Users of these niche torrent sites are just switching to different providers meaning Marvel’s takedown strategy is not having a noticeable effect on stopping comic book downloads.  As I have written before, there are so many sources for pirated content, trying to take each down one by one is impossible. 

Marvel further has a large force in Pirate Bay.  The Sweden based website has been vocal in its opposition to all copyrights and has survived years of legal threats from the RIAA and MPAA.  The Swedish government even raided Pirate Bay’s servers and found nothing illegal since Pirate Bay doesn’t host any of the infringing content itself.

It’s worrisome to see Marvel continuing this strategy and questionable what they hope to gain.  Because Marvel’s own download service does not offer the same experience - small selection, lower quality, and no download option.  Very compelling.

One of the many debates spurned by technology has been the morality of file-sharing and piracy. David Pogue of the New York Times wrote last week about his talks to various groups where he discovered a surprising reaction to these ethical questions. First he spoke with groups of varying ages and asked which of many hypothetical situations were wrong, like borrowing a CD from the library or making a backup copy of a DVD, or replacing your 2,000 vinyl records with copies of CDs from the library. Pogue says as he went through scenarios, more and more hands went up showing a lot of gray areas to the debate.

Then Pogue spoke to a college audience. He went through the same list and says no more than two hands ever went up out of 500 people. Even when he went for the extreme “You want a movie or an album. You don’t want to pay for it. So you download it.” Only two hands.

Pogue’s unscientific but nevertheless revealing social study shows not only is the file-sharing debate more complicated than media companies claim, but there’s a generational gap in how people view the moral debate. Simply, young people don’t think file-sharing is wrong.

Continue reading…

I’m not sure if this supports my prediction that other BitTorrent sites would be targeted for distribution comic books. According to TorrentFreak, the administrators of ComicSearch sent Marvel Comics an open letter in support of Z-Cult FM, the comic book file-sharing site that recently removed all its Marvel comics at Marvel’s request. In response to ComicSearch’s email, Marvel has told ComicSearch to remove all Marvel comics and that the site is “on notice.” You can read the emails after the jump.

I worry that Marvel is running down the slippery slope already run down by the RIAA and MPAA. Going after file-sharing might help for the short term, but at best it ignores long-term potential and at worst it alienates the fans that love these comics. Someone had to spend time scanning all these comics to distribute, doing so for no profit at all. Marvel and other comic book companies managed to remain above this archaic thinking for years.

To the file-sharing sites’ benefit, comic book companies do not have a multi-million dollar organization whose sole purpose is to sue people, so maybe when Marvel sees just how widespread pirated comics are, it’ll think about how to create a compelling service itself rather than the good-start it currently provides.

Continue reading…

Z-Cult FM Comic Community, a popular site specializing in comic book BitTorrents was contacted last week by Marvel and DC Comics to remove torrents of their respective comics. Z-Cult has announced they are complying with the demands of Marvel but have special rules regarding DC Comics.

This move comes a few weeks after Marvel launched its digital comic book service providing online versions of 2,500 comics for one monthly fee. I guess it was only a matter of time before stamping out the competition.

Major comic book companies have been mostly silent about downloading pirated comics. Almost 90 percent of Marvel and DC’s 70 year-plus libraries have been scanned and released on BitTorrent sites and other file-sharing networks.

Z-Cult points out that they are not located in the United States and thus not subject to its laws, but they will work with copyright holders. Z-Cult has also removed SLG’s Disney titles at SLG’s request, but still provides torrents for SLG’s titles with their permission (SLG also has a download site).

To Marvel and DC’s credit, they did not sue Z-Cult, but followed the DMCA and asked that their content be removed. DC, according to Z-Cult, has not responded so as a caution, Z-Cult will not allow new DC Comics until 30 days after being released in stores. Both companies provided phone numbers to remain in contact with Z-Cult and confirm the validity of their copyright claims.

On the downside, it’s worrisome to see Marvel and DC following the lead of other media companies. Marvel and DC could argue there’s lost revenue in downloading free comics, but there’s also tons of publicity to consider. Since new comics come out every month, reading a bunch of older companies might inspire someone to read a new one.

It’s unlikely this will be an isolated incident since there are hundreds of online resources to download pirated comics. Just like the movie and music companies, Marvel and DC might find it somewhat impossible to find all the sources. And for completist comic fans, there is no cost-effective alternative to pirating comics. Marvel’s online offering is minimal at present (and DC’s is non-existent). Trade paperback collections of comics are limited samples and the originals are rare and expensive. I just hope no comic fans get sued for downloading some old Amazing Spider-Man.

It seems after Pinocchio got his wish, Jimmy Cricket went to law school. The owners of the song “When You Wish Upon a Star” are suing the television show Family Guy for damaging the “cultural treasure epitomizing the wonders of childhood.” In the episode “When You Wish Upon a Weinstein” Family Guy parodied the classic song as “I Need a Jew” when Peter Griffin tries to find a Jewish accountant to help him with his finances.

Okay, first, this is hilarious. The Bourne Co., owners of “When You Wish Upon a Star” apparently think the years of joyful memories this song has provided can be undone by a lone television episode. Frankly, I think that speaks more highly of Family Guy’s influence. Family Guy can make or break your reputation.

This episode has been pulled from the air because of anti-Semitic phrases.

“With its theme of wholesome hopefulness, the song has gained worldwide status as a classic. By associating Bourne’s song with such offensive lyrics and other content in the episode, defendants are harming the value of the song,” said CNN quoting the lawsuit.

This isn’t the first silly lawsuit against Family Guy. Actress Carol Burnett sued Family Guy for parodying her “charwoman” character from The Carol Burnett Show. The case was dismissed citing First Amendment protections; the same reason this case will obviously be thrown out.

Four months ago I wrote about Techdirt.com’s offer to give up to $1 million to anyone who could prove the Business Software Alliance was really giving out their own reward of $1 million for people who turned in software pirates.

Basically, the BSA made headlines back in June for promising up to $1 million for snitching on companies for using pirated software. The BSA’s fine print allowed them and only them to decide how much money to pay out and a CNET reporter found the BSA hasn’t paid out more than $5,000 to a single person.

So since Techdirt apparently has money to burn, they’re offering their own up to $1 million prize and wanted to remind everyone the prize it still up for grabs. So everyone, snitch on your company. It might make you a couple of bucks.

Will I get a reward for turning myself in for steal gum when I was five?