Live data from Hacker News

'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

techradar.com

81–90 of 150 posts

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#81
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really, all of them? In the history of the world there has never existed a writer who thought, hey I think I can do that pretty well, I suppose I will give a try and see if I can make money. There has never been a writer who, writing for love, also thought, hey that is a great idea for a science fiction story, and that magazine is paying for science fiction, I will, in entrepreneurial fashion try to write a story so…

The profit urge was already made fun of in a recent novel. “And what does the author mean to do?” said Don Quixote. “What?” replied Samson; “why, as soon as he has found the history which he is now searching for with extraordinary diligence, he will at once give it to the press, moved more by the profit that may accrue to him from doing so than by any thought of praise.” Whereat Sancho observed, “The author looks for…

Definitely a sterling example of the benefits of not paying people, given that he died in poverty and spent his life working odd jobs despite writing what was a best seller in debtor's prison.

But as you found quotes from someone arguing that writing to be paid is somehow bad

"I agree with Balzac and 19th-century writers, black and white, who say, 'I write for money'" -- Maya Angelou

"No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money" -- Samuel Johnson.

But hey, I gotta admit, the first guy had one example of someone who wrote despite not having hopes of getting anything for their effort and now you come with one, so obviously my idea that not everyone has in the age of the world written without hope of compensation was wrong.

But let's go back to your quote, which for some reason you think is a good one against my assertion that there are people have written for money and to retain copyright.

Sancho makes the final point "It will be a wonder if he succeeds, for it will be only hurry, hurry, with him, like the tailor on Easter Eve; and works done in a hurry are never finished as perfectly as they ought to be."

Which is a really good point for someone writing in a time when copyright did not exist and the only way to ever make money from your writing was to write quickly and to get the work into someone's hands after which they paid you, maybe, once.

I'm of course in agreement, somewhat, that works done too quickly are not done well enough, but some people can write at a speed that to others may seem in a hurry but to them are rather slow.

But I will give an example, Mark Twain, who I've already pointed out is the perfect example of someone who definitely wrote for money, except for a couple things he wrote towards the end of his life when he was old and bitter and also pretty darn rich by the standards of his time.

He took 7 years to write Huck Finn. If he wrote for money how did he afford this? Well he shelved it for a bit when he had writer's block and wrote other things for money, but also because he was in a much more financially secure situation than Cervantes expected the writer for money to be, due to his success, part of that success based on copyrighting Tom Sawyer before its publication.

But he also did do a bunch of crap, including the sequels to Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn, and of course writing The Tragedy of Pudd'nhead Wilson too quickly to keep from bankruptcy from bad investments. I am not against the assertion that writing for money will produce things that are bad, but I do not believe that, quotes aside, it can be shown definitely that it will produce bad things.

At any rate if you read things written the last few hundred years and find them worthwhile, unless you are very particular in how you choose what you read, you probably have read lots of things that were written either partially or wholly for money.

Finally I notice neither you or other people who responded had anything to say to this part of what I wrote

"And of those who write even without monetary recompense, will they publish?

Will they send off to someone their writing and then sit through the editorial process for months, and agree to changes in order to get published?

Will they go through all the various parts of having to sell since they will not be getting paid for what they wrote?"

I look forward to the quotes from great works of literature detailing how the non-writing parts of the publishing process are required for the writer to produce something great and how they should not consider money when laboring on that either.

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#82
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really, all of them? In the history of the world there has never existed a writer who thought, hey I think I can do that pretty well, I suppose I will give a try and see if I can make money. There has never been a writer who, writing for love, also thought, hey that is a great idea for a science fiction story, and that magazine is paying for science fiction, I will, in entrepreneurial fashion try to write a story so…

"Writing for money and reservation of copyright are, at bottom, the ruin of literature. No one writes anything that is worth writing, unless he writes entirely for the sake of his subject." -- Arthur Schopenhauer If you find this quote interesting, you should check out this video[0] by Christopher Anadale who is a teacher who does long form deep dive analysis & commentary on classic works of philosophy. As an aside,…

I made a response on the Cervantes quote

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49002363

that pertains here to some extent.

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#83
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People do care about income streams for their descendants or charitable organizations etc. So it’s not completely ineffective. What’s broken is extending copyright after a work was already created. But that’s true even if the creator was still alive.

> People do care about income streams for their descendants or charitable organizations etc. So it’s not completely ineffective. It is once you make it to the other side of the marginal utility of a dollar. Suppose you write a popular work in your 20s. You make plenty from it, and then people keep buying it. As long as they do, why spend your time creating new works when you can drink whiskey or play video games or l…

Shorter copyright terms don’t prevent someone from retiring after making it big. To do that you’d need to cap how much they could make in total not the number of years their work was protected. Instead you’re essentially talking about hypothetical people rather than anything approaching a meaningful number of artists.

Further lotteries attract suckers based on potential payouts. Just as the NFL or NBA convinces young kids to work hard, successful artists are a major part of pipeline of young kids practicing their craft.

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#86
post #13

For those who (like me) missed the essential key word in the OP's title: This ruling is about copyright, and seems mostly unrelated to recent conversations about escaping censorship and surveilance, and the overall final throes of the open web. It's still pretty important since the lawsuit filed by the Anne Frank Fonds could be caricatured as "if this content is illegal in our country, it should not be on the Interne…

Somewhat related to this same debate on censorship: French regulators order block of Polymarket's website [0] > The French gambling regulator said the site's continued availability constituted advertising. A ban on financial transactions to the site was already in place. After failing to compel Polymarket to geoblock France, it's crazy that French "regulators" can just order ISPs to block a website without any judici…

>It seems like the EU in general is struggling badly with how to control internet access.

It struggles badly with how to control everything more and more. What was an economic union of markets has become an uber-government that gives more and more power to itself.

Not that the US or the rest is far behind, but in this case it's accompanied with even more incompetence and disconnected to the real problems.

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#87
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>US regulators don't order ISPs to block websites. Of course they do, mostly for intellectual property reasons.

Through the courts though, right?

If the courts are almost always sympathetic, does it matter?

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#88
post #86
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhat related to this same debate on censorship: French regulators order block of Polymarket's website [0] > The French gambling regulator said the site's continued availability constituted advertising. A ban on financial transactions to the site was already in place. After failing to compel Polymarket to geoblock France, it's crazy that French "regulators" can just order ISPs to block a website without any judici…

> It seems like the EU in general is struggling badly with how to control internet access. It struggles badly with how to control everything more and more. What was an economic union of markets has become an uber-government that gives more and more power to itself. Not that the US or the rest is far behind, but in this case it's accompanied with even more incompetence and disconnected to the real problems.

The EU was never just an economic union of markets. Hell, the Schuman declaration from 1950, the closest thing it has to a founding document, calls for an ever closer union.

Re: 'VPNs are lawful technical tools,' says EU Court in landmark copyright ruling

#89
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what happens when you have idealistic nerds implementing a vision of what they want , rather than the typical software that is designed and built almost like an representation of the organization that built it, i.e Conway's Law.

This comment sounds differently when you remember the Internet is from DARPA.

But then hopefully people also remember that WWW != The Internet and that WWW didn't come from DARPA at all but from CERN.
Post reply on HN