<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Shelly Palmer: &#8216;Suing YouTube is Not the Answer&#8217;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13057/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13057</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:27:55 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13057/comment-page-1#comment-163253</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13057#comment-163253</guid>
		<description>In the same way that sueing Napster out of business was a poorly thought out answer. It&#039;s the short-sighted one looking at quick short-term gain with no glance at long-term viability. 

It&#039;s precisely what has put the media in the place it is now. Everyone of them is trying everything they can do to establish a market in the e-world. iTunes trumpets of X sold since enception of on line business is but a pale 1/2 truth compared to what is passed about by people every month. 

Napster already had members on line. They had already established themselves to millions of people. The infrastructure was there to make a start. In sueing the file trading company out of business, they got nothing for their time and efforts. Being awarded big eye-popping sums in court doesn&#039;t mean the winner gets it. Especially if the one they sued doesn&#039;t have millions. 

Today everyone wants to equate intellectual property to be the same as tangibale property for value. But the ip property doesn&#039;t come with fences around it identifying whose the owner. The movie houses pretty much id theirs but once it is put on p2p almost none of them retain those identifications. Music has always preferred not to say who own what. So there is no ready way for most to say I know who to pay money to or that this particular peice is owned as opposed to it being a free to use work. Nor who to pay it to. 

It appears they do this on purpose.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the same way that sueing Napster out of business was a poorly thought out answer. It&#8217;s the short-sighted one looking at quick short-term gain with no glance at long-term viability. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s precisely what has put the media in the place it is now. Everyone of them is trying everything they can do to establish a market in the e-world. iTunes trumpets of X sold since enception of on line business is but a pale 1/2 truth compared to what is passed about by people every month. </p>
<p>Napster already had members on line. They had already established themselves to millions of people. The infrastructure was there to make a start. In sueing the file trading company out of business, they got nothing for their time and efforts. Being awarded big eye-popping sums in court doesn&#8217;t mean the winner gets it. Especially if the one they sued doesn&#8217;t have millions. </p>
<p>Today everyone wants to equate intellectual property to be the same as tangibale property for value. But the ip property doesn&#8217;t come with fences around it identifying whose the owner. The movie houses pretty much id theirs but once it is put on p2p almost none of them retain those identifications. Music has always preferred not to say who own what. So there is no ready way for most to say I know who to pay money to or that this particular peice is owned as opposed to it being a free to use work. Nor who to pay it to. </p>
<p>It appears they do this on purpose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ummm</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13057/comment-page-1#comment-162779</link>
		<dc:creator>Ummm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:42:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13057#comment-162779</guid>
		<description>B, bu, but YouTube/Google has a really LOT of m, mon, MONEY!!! How could suing them NOT be the answer???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>B, bu, but YouTube/Google has a really LOT of m, mon, MONEY!!! How could suing them NOT be the answer???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
