Why I’m Suing the US Government • Hacker News Board

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#281

Post by unabst » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 3:30 AM UTC

cloudjacker wrote: post #268

unabst wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just one scenario, but you can imagine a system where the person who profits over any IP would pay IP tax, which would then get distributed upstream to previous registered contributors. IP producers would need to be tracked, but this is something that systems such as github already do extremely well, and credit card companies already run systems that process fees for every single transaction. Producers will a…

Okay, now one more paragraph about how anyone is incentivized to create anything in this system

Ah... You miss an important point. There doesn't need to be an incentive to create anything. Creation is the reward. Creative minds will create no matter what.

The trick is to create a society where creators get fed, and that still remains compatible with capitalism because we are in love with capitalism.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#282

Post by emmelaich » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 3:30 AM UTC

DoubleGlazing wrote: post #150

toomuchtodo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much do you think it'd cost to replicate the software as an open source tool? I've written grants before for funding open source projects, and this anecdote boils my blood.

Its really simple software, essentially a VU meter. The therapy involves getting patients to shout in a certain way and try and reach certain volume levels or follow certain volume patterns. E.g. shout gently for five seconds and gradually ramp up the volume over 10 seconds. It would be really easy to replicate. I reckon the most time consuming part would be testing and calibration. The whole app directory is less th…

Seems like a audio program like Audacity or maybe Ardour would do the job.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#283

Post by mveety » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 3:33 AM UTC

sneak wrote: post #106

mtgx wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about using the same tactic many smartphone makers use: "We're allowing you to unlock your bootloader, but if you do, you're voiding your warranty." Similarly car makers could say as soon as the user unlocks the car's systems for modification, the company is no longer responsible for any accident that might happen. It seems like a rather good compromise to me.

The car company is already not responsible for any accident that might happen. The operator of the vehicle is responsible for safe operation, period.

Except for failures not caused by poor maintenance or poor/reckless driving. Like if your rear diff falls out because the bolts weren't done up at the factory, etc.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#284

Post by int_19h » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 3:35 AM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #183

thinkMOAR wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people, citizens. Though i'm curious what kind of laws are rolled back in the US because a citizen decided to sue to government. Do you have any nice examples (preferably of some law effecting many but sued by just one person?)

This is a pretty big part of what the Supreme Court does, although I guess the majority of the time it's because of an appeal or a lawsuit against some other entity and not a lawsuit against the US government directly.

Usually it's a lawsuit against some state government. Which shouldn't be surprising, since most laws affecting day to day lives of citizens are state laws, rather than federal laws, due to constitutional limitations on what can be enacted on the federal level.

So, basically, go here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Supreme_...

and pick any case titled "{Person} v. United States" or "{Person} v. {State}". If the winning party is {Person}, chances are good that it repealed some law or another.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#285

Post by int_19h » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 3:41 AM UTC

ryanswapp wrote: post #28

I studied section 1201 thoroughly during law school and I think this post doesn't give a fair characterization of it. The reason this statute exists is because companies were unable to devise protection for copyrighted works that hackers were not able to immediately circumvent. As a result, the government stepped in and created 1201 to make it illegal for someone to circumvent some form of access control that a compa…

The purpose of me setting this bush alight is not to start a forest fire; it's to cook some marshmallows. I don't see anything wrong with that [even if it does actually start a forest fire].

If a law has unintended consequences of the magnitude that exceeds the supposed beneficial intent of the law, it's a bad law.

If there's no way to write a law without such unintended consequences, it shouldn't exist.

In this case, there's also the additional orthogonal argument that the law violates the First Amendment by prohibiting speech. Even if the law didn't have unintended consequences, this alone is sufficient to justify getting rid of it - if we allow unconstitutional laws because they serve a good purpose, all constitutional protections go out of the window.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#286

Post by evincarofautumn » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 4:10 AM UTC

seanp2k2 wrote: post #166

safeignorance wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking on Pearson and other companies that use similarly predatory tactics to extract value from society's most disadvantaged is exactly the sort of "disruption" that the world needs more of. That said, I doubt one could go at it alone with no support or with only a grant -- building up mind share, fighting off BS patent threats, and doing enough sales to break even on these non-development costs aren't the sort of t…

Agree re: disruption. I've thought about this type of thing a lot, and I wish there was a way to fix the root cause instead of what I consider the symptom (dodgy overpriced software for a specific niche, especially when it targets non-technical users and/or has to do with medicine / HELPING HUMANS PHYSICALLY). I came to the conclusion that it's Very Hard to disincentivize greed. Anyone have any ideas for what could b…

I’m not sure there’s any overt greed exactly. A company saw a market and launched a product for that market. But like most companies and products, especially in the case of a de facto monopoly, they’re not very good. When there’s no competition, why spend the money to innovate or improve? Your customers are still going to buy your shit.

The best way to improve the status quo on a case-by-case basis is to introduce competition, say by developing a better product, marketing it well, and basically out-predating the theretofore market predators. The marketing is easy if you can get enough momentum behind it:

“FooCorp wants to sell you these materials for $absurd. We made these better alternative materials. You can print the basic set yourself for free, or order any of our wide, high-quality selection, starting from $reasonable.”

I don’t think there is a general solution to the underlying cause, though.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#287

Post by evincarofautumn » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 4:20 AM UTC

imglorp wrote: post #190

toomuchtodo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much do you think it'd cost to replicate the software as an open source tool? I've written grants before for funding open source projects, and this anecdote boils my blood.

Another business that does this is the hearing aid racket. An audiologist examines a patient, comes up with a patient's profile (some kind of EQ / convolution map), and then loads that into the hearing aid using proprietary programming cable and software. There are other settings more under the preferences category than DSP, like what profiles go on what switch setting, beeps, things like that. But these are all guar…

I saw this kind of predation secondhand when my maternal grandmother (I know her as “babcia”) went in for hearing aids. Her main problem was actually earwax buildup, not general hearing loss. But there’s no money in giving a patient a script for ear drops, so they managed to convince her to drop thousands in insurance dollars and no small amount of her personal dollars as well.

But, she can hear, and she’s happy. I guess that’s how these companies get away with it—you can satisfy a customer without doing a whole lot of actual good for them.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#288

Post by ankurdhama » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 4:30 AM UTC

The problem is this new business model where they don't just sell you things/stuff, rather they also sell you "specific rights" along with the stuff. The usual things like you cannot do this or that with the stuff that you bought from us. The sole purpose is to keep earning money even after the one time deal of buying the stuff.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#289

Post by milankragujevic » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:21 AM UTC

hueving wrote: post #262

beachstartup wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

permanently modifying the hardware is the more portable solution. it will always work with unmodified software i.e. at a colleague's location. i presume your wife works with others that use the same platform.

>permanently modifying the hardware is the more portable solution. it will always work with unmodified software i.e. at a colleague's location. No, as OP mentioned, the software was compiled to match the device ID of the mic it was shipped with. So it would only work with versions of the software that were the same as OP's.

I think you misinterpreted. It's the USB device ID, which contains a unique to the model ID and the vendor ID, so any software would work with any device if it has the same model ID. There isn't a such thing (at least not standardized) as a unique device ID.

Re: Why I’m Suing the US Government

#290

Post by URSpider94 » Fri, Jul 22, 2016, 5:29 AM UTC

blastrat wrote: post #194

nitrogen wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No customer is or should be obligated to make obeisance to a company's "sacred" business model.

this company has not taken action to enforce DMCA or any other licensing gripe with the guy, so as yet he hasn't forced to pay obeisance to anything, and he didn't, so that issue is not really on the table. you are essentially taking the position that the company should be forced to sell its software unbundled with hardware because you would prefer it that way. Under your logic, the unicorn Uber could be forced to pr…

Your argument is a non-sequitur. Bunnie's lawsuit, and this guy's situation, are not about using something they haven't paid for. In fact, they are about having the full rights to use something they HAVE paid for. You, as someone off the street who would like to use Uber's software, haven't paid for that right. Nobody here is suggesting that businesses should have to sell off their proprietary systems to anyone who wants to buy them.