Wow, thanks!

But I am! I am WILDLY violating copyright laws by copying every movie I own, sometimes even many times when my network storage makes multiple copies! Can't you see how that is destroying the movie industry and making the movie maker not be able to get paid and cover the millions it takes to make his movies?

You just repeated my point. I don't show my backups in theaters, because the quality sucks, and everyone by they has already seen the movie. I do at times pay theaters to see good movies on a big screen, and I also show my own copies of movies to friends on my home theater system for free. Though na lot of those movies they have also seen and paid for in movie theaters previously.

But, again, PLEASE guess how well those copyright notices work at stopping me from copying or showing my movies to peopl. Please? I mean, you just seem SO confident that they are the reason movies aren't copied all over the place, and I so want to shoot down your point!

Oh... Why did they settle if they knew the judge would likely give them the same judgement/settlement? Or are all your cases usually the type where the person settling would otherwise get severe punishments?

:|

Where the hell do you live? Even corrupt cesspools like mafia ridden Russia, Bulgaria, and southern Italy, and lawless places like Somalia value contracts highly and have severe penalties for breaking them.

If i make this, I wont make any rules. You would have to decide.

Can you guess how much of an effect those notices have had on me to stop me from making copies (backups) of those movies? Please guess!

First of all, businesses are not stupid enough to cheat other businesses. If you cheat someone, no other business will ever deal with you, and you might as well close shop. If the issue is that Peter promised working gadgets to Paul by a certain date, and the gadgets came in a week late with a lot of them broken, after which Paul decided not to pay Peter, then either Paul can walk away from the settlement, and risk others not wanting to deal with him out of fear he won't pay them either, or they can both come together for a mutually agreed upon decision, such as Paul will pay Peter for the gadgets, and will older another full batch, but will pay 1/3rd the price for the new batch. Both companies get what they want in that case.

FROM WHOM? WHERE? HOW?

Can a new "state" version of private defence emerge on something like a virtual world, where everyone who can afford to can just buy their own defensive weaponry I wonder?

No it doesn't If Apple and Samsung are doing business, it would be mutually beneficial for them to continue to do business, so both have an incentive to get the issue settled. Summons is usually needed for things like tort (intentional or unintentional harm). And if Apple or Samsung doesn't show up, there's not much the other party can do other than to never do business with them again.

The part where you still can't show me how or where a theater can get film quality movies to show. Especially on movie release dates. Also still waiting for explanation of how do download stuff from Hulu...

They are suing in a court of the country that issued the pattent, since that is a dispute. Had the issue been defective hardware from Samsung, or Apple not honoring a contract to pay for Samsung's hardware, Apple would've wanted to settle this is US court, Samsumng in Korean court, and both would likely end up settling in international court.
I'm not making this international court thing up. It's a real issue that businesses are trying to solve.

They don't sue for piracy. Theaters don't have enough cash to make paying for expensive lawyers worth it. They simply never sell movies to that theater again, and let it go out of business. Movie theaters also know that if they want to continue getting good quality movies on opening days, they must honor the contracts not to distribute the movies.
What part of that are you not able to understand?

There is a way for them to get a return, and make the movie theater pay for it, and prevent the movie theater from making or getting copies of it, all without IP laws.

I do believe I have mentioned the newly forming international law and arbitrage system, that is being created to shtat multinagiona corporations can settle disputes when the litigated actions did not take place in any specific country? Those laws and courts are existing outside of states and state laws, and are being created entirely voluntarily by businesses and corporations themselves. This is also why i've said before that trying to prove how a libertarian system is bad is pointless, since we are slowly moving to it on a global scale anyway, so might as well spend your time trying to figure out how it works and how to live with it.

ExistED or exist? It still exists...

There is a way for them to get a return.

Are you saying you want others to pay for you to be able to see a good movie, even if they don't like the movie, instead you yourself paying more for it?

I lost 2 when my Android app crashed and there was no way to back it up (still none short of rooting your phone). I suspect small losses to phones, and when we get smart cards and magnetic strip charge cards, will happen often as those are lost or broken.

Lookie here!

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/10/anti-piracy-com.php


This census of actual pirates says 24% of them have already pre ordered the game, 25% will buy it later, and almost 50% said they just wanted to try it out. Seems the company who made the game would still make money.

This actually also brings up a major problem with IP laws: If I buy an electronic gadget, and it sucks or I don't like it, I can return it. Better still, I can try the gadget before buying it to see if I'll like it. With IP content like games or movies, I have to pay ahead of time, and if I hate it, I can neither return it nor get my money back. IP laws essentially enable fraud, where I can be lied to about a movie being great, have my money be taken from me, and when I realize I was lied to, have no recourse for compensation.