Jamcleat » copyright

New Media Blues

cbcalvin — Sun, 09 May 2010 02:42:28 +0000

I read with interest this blog post. I got there from a link on Groklaw, one of my addictions. My thought on reading the excerpt quoted at Groklaw and again on reading the full text of the lecture at Columbia was that things have changed for better and for worse.
For years, I was bombarded with folks trying to get me to subscribe to magazines. I loved and still love paper magazines. But they take up space or you must discard them. Both of these activities give me discomfort. So my request to the solicitor was “Can you send that to me on color microfiche?” The response was invariably “What did you say?” What I wanted was the ability to (re-)locate an article I had read or that was referenced in a current article and (re-)read it for background or recollection.
Today, many magazines offer the entire collection of back issues on CD-ROM for what is more money than I have to devote to back issues, but on the other hand, not an unaffordable fortune. Wooden Boat is one magazine I would consider getting the CD, (now a memory stick) for.
But the pages are pictures of pages and who knows weather you can cut an paste the text or the illustrations.
With the paper version, I can put it on the scanner and get either without a problem, at least for issues I have not yet lost or discarded.
Getting back to the quoted article by Steven Berlin Johnson, the Wall Street Journal has had a corner of the op-ed page labeled “Notable and Quotable” for as long as I have been reading it (I still miss Vermont Royster). With the un-selectable glass box version, does this mean that the Noted but Unquotable version gets forgotten because it cannot be passed on, tweeted, facebooked, e-mailed.
Authors, retain the right to distribute your version and indicate that it is the basis of the published article. Then when someone searches for the quote, they find your version, if you have made it available.

Hangover

cbcalvin — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:07:22 +0000

America will likely wake up Christmas morning with a terrible hangover.
The Senate seems hell-bent-for-leather to get some sort of health reform bill passed. Or maybe that is slip one past. The vote set for Christmas eve will give Americans no health, no reform, no care, and a huge bill.
Nominally the bill is to reduce cost by reforming the health care industry and the way that insurance against illness is paid. But because of concessions to special interest groups, the tax payers will end up footing the bill for universal insurance for the indigent while the “Cadillac” health plan covered folk escape paying the proposed fees due to carve-outs and special exceptions.
Medicare pays so little for many procedures that many caregivers will not accept new patients if their only insurance is Medicare. If all patients fees are regulated at the same rate, the level of care will decline, if only because doctors and other personnel leave the system to find something they can afford to do. No there will not be death committees, but you may have to wait so long for care that you do die or wish you could.
This is not reform. This is more of the same nonsense that caused the problem in first place.
My recommendation:
End the deductibility of payroll health insurance. This should be taxable income to the recipient. This gets non-health care business out of the health care business.
End the limits that states can put on health plans sold in state. This would open the markets to all comers and give consumers price and coverage choices that are not available today. Existing consumer protection laws could be used to prevent fraud and abuse.
Have individuals pay for all medicine and procedures. Have insurance companies reimburse the individuals if they are insured. This will ensure that, where possible, families will shop for value, achieving a balance between level of care and affordability.
Publish the secret codes that describe medical procedures. This would allow consumers to ensure that they are billed for the care actually administered. Today the codes can only be used by those who have purchased the copyright license to the code book. As a result, it is impossible to determine what was billed for, insure accuracy in billing, or negotiate for a better price. Insurance companies pay more, consumers cannot assist in reducing cost. The code monopoly needs to end.
Allow purchasing insurance for all coverage with an exclusion for an existing condition. A phase in of coverage for a controlled existing condition could be an option.
The best outcome for the existing bill is that it will self-destruct in conference committee. The likely outcome is that it will get even more expensive.

In for a Dime, in for $6 Billion

cbcalvin — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:07:39 +0000

The RIAA’s sister organization in Canada, the CRIA has been called to account for $6 billion in royalties due to artists that have not been paid. Apparently this may have some effect on the juries that are deciding cases in their parallel anti-piracy cases. I wonder how much the U.S. RIAA has failed to pay.

Worthwhile

cbcalvin — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:47:35 +0000

I had resolved that I would not buy any CD’s while the RIAA continues to persecute. An exception is Judith Owen. I liked it so much I bought a copy of Lost and Found for each of my children and one for myself. Courgette Records does not seem to be a member of the RIAA. Instead they distribute through the Alternative Distribution Alliance (ADA). ADA is 95% owned by Warner Group which is a member and one of the vicious perps of RIAA extortion scheme.