A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old January 12th 18, 02:24 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,272
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 12:05:47 +0000, Indy Jess John
wrote:

On 12/01/2018 11:23, Chris Green wrote:

If I could buy (say) a book and know that most of
the money I pay goes to the author I'd be much happier.

The trouble with that comparison is that a book has to be typeset,
printed on paper and then bound and shipped to the retail point so that
you can buy it.

That will make a substantial amount of manpower, materials, maintenance
provision on the printing and binding machinery, and transport
overheads, additional to the effort the writer put into creating the
text that you read.

Jim


Exactly. And even when an author's efforts are not invovlved it costs
money to manufacture, transport, etc, a notebook with completely blank
pages.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
Ads
  #82  
Old January 12th 18, 03:07 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Robin[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 506
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

On 12/01/2018 15:19, Jim Lesurf wrote:
snip
OK, here is a simple set of ideas as examples.


Thanks. That's a useful start.

1) All forms of IPR could be harmonised to the same, short (by current
standards) term - e.g. 20 years for books, music, patents, etc. Note that
this is wrt the 'copy' rights rather than the full range of copyrights.
e.g. The write of the author or performer to be indentified as such (if
known) should remain indefiniately. And there can be no material changes
that alter the meaning without permission of said author/performer.


Widening the debate from copyright to patents adds a whole new can of
worms as you recognise. And then there's "trade secrets" which as
you'll know are usually not even part of the formal intellectual
property system.

if you can't make a decent income that way after a few decades, then up to
you to get on with producing something which will make you a return. Ditto
for the publisher, hence...

2) A "fish or cut bait" requirement. i.e. if a work is left unpublished
for, say, 5 years, the author/performers should have the right to terminate
any publication agreement and find another publisher *if* their existing
one is incapable or refuses to reprint on terms equivalent to previously.


I'm not aware of anything to stop authors etc writing that into their
contracts with publishers. If it's a practical problem for authors why
don't they do that?

This would sweep away crazy differences like written material being
copyright for well over a century in some cases, long after the author and
his initial publisher may have gone, whereas something like a patent lapses
in a shorter time. Or the way an author's work may become unobtainium and
they can't earn any more money. This can be particularly important for
technical info which people can't get. That impedes progress and
development.


I take it you don't think much of the legislation in the Enterprise and
Regulatory Reform Act 2013 and the scheme introduced under it to
license works in the UK where the rights holder cannot be located; and
for libraries to digitise and display works where they cannot find the
rights holder.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/copyright-orphan-works

Of course you do need to know where to find a copy for this to help.
But ISTM that's not an issue with copyright as such.


3) Actually *enforce* the basic requirement that a patent, to be legal, has
to specify *all* that is needed to replicate the 'invention'. (This
requirement exists in law, but it routinely flouted by keeping key details
as 'trade secrets'. Thus defeating the purpose of patents so far as society
is concerned.)

Patents were meant to offer a *short term* monopoly in exchange for a *full
disclosure* that *everyone could then use after that term. Way to feed
further development, etc rather than having it impeded with 'trade
secrets'. And when an author/performer produces something, it needs to
remain available for them to benefit.


FSVO of "short term. I only ever worked on anything to do with patents
briefly some 20 years ago but IIRC UK patents lasted 16 years from 1852
so the current (uo to 20 years?) figure is not so very different. And
the unwillingness to disclose "trade secrets" strikes me as largely the
result of the impracticability of enforcing sanctions for breaches
internationally.

But you'll get no argument from me about the need to reform the patent
system in many other respects.

Different that is from the one devised over many years not just
nationally but internationally.


Actually copyrights vary from country to country, sometimes in
contradictory ways. The EU and IPO are trying to 'harmonise' this... but
what they mean by that is 'screw upwards what companies can control'. Not
'make sense of the system for citizens or authors'.

(Copyright in the EU is governed by a number of Directives, so I assume
your views on politicians being in the pockets of commercial interests
applies to the Commission and MEPs too. And then there's the Berne
Convention...)


See also IPO and various other bodies with irons in the fire.

Yes, politicians are like lawers, as defined by Ambrose Bierce. 8-]

One of the uses of PE is to see who is paying who. :-)


You are free to think they publish nothing but the truth and have no
agenda of their own.

I'm quite happy with the idea of copyright and IPR. But I want it to serve
those who create/produce and people in general. Not to become a weapon,
control system, bargaining chip, or capital for big business.


In my limited experience much of the pressure for change came from
"creative" individuals. But my experience was very, very limited.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  #83  
Old January 12th 18, 04:23 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Jim Lesurf[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,326
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

In article , Robin
wrote:
On 12/01/2018 15:19, Jim Lesurf wrote: snip
OK, here is a simple set of ideas as examples.



2) A "fish or cut bait" requirement. i.e. if a work is left
unpublished for, say, 5 years, the author/performers should have the
right to terminate any publication agreement and find another
publisher *if* their existing one is incapable or refuses to reprint
on terms equivalent to previously.


I'm not aware of anything to stop authors etc writing that into their
contracts with publishers. If it's a practical problem for authors why
don't they do that?


There is nothing preventing the author from trying to do so. But they may
get a flat refusal. Then have to decide if they want to see if anyone else
will publish the work on that basis. Often authors and performers sign
because they worry that otherwise they won't 'get the gig'. Many many
simply want to be published and paid, without thinking about this until
later.

I've always tended to work on the basis of arranging something more
suitable (to me). But I haven't tried to write for a living, just as a part
time interest. So I haven't had to write to pay the rent. Others won't be
so lucky.

In general, when I've suggested to a magazine that I'm selling them
non-exclusive first publication rights (i.e. I'm free to re-use material
some time afterwards) they've agreed. Ironically, the only magazine which
refused this was a *Linux* magazine. The irony being that Linux is open
source. So when they refused, I put the item on the web instead. But of
course, a publisher can either accept or refuse, just as an author can. The
snag being that for some authors the money may be needed.



I take it you don't think much of the legislation in the Enterprise and
Regulatory Reform Act 2013 and the scheme introduced under it to license
works in the UK where the rights holder cannot be located; and for
libraries to digitise and display works where they cannot find the
rights holder.


https://www.gov.uk/guidance/copyright-orphan-works


I can't comment on that at present as I don't enough about it. I was just
responding to your invitation to give some examples of the kinds of things
where I have concerns.



See also IPO and various other bodies with irons in the fire.

Yes, politicians are like lawers, as defined by Ambrose Bierce. 8-]

One of the uses of PE is to see who is paying who. :-)


You are free to think they publish nothing but the truth and have no
agenda of their own.


Yes, people are free to think such things... But I don't, however, think
what you assert. It would clearly be daft to assume any publication is 100%
always the 'truth'. Once again, your comment is based on a false dichotomy.
The reliability or 'truthfulness' of publications will vary. My experience
is that PE seems pretty good, particularly at exposing things when others
fail. But being better than most isn't the same as perfect.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

  #86  
Old January 13th 18, 09:42 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,246
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 17:23:06 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

2) A "fish or cut bait" requirement. i.e. if a work is left
unpublished for, say, 5 years, the author/performers should have the
right to terminate any publication agreement and find another
publisher *if* their existing one is incapable or refuses to reprint
on terms equivalent to previously.


I'm not aware of anything to stop authors etc writing that into their
contracts with publishers. If it's a practical problem for authors why
don't they do that?


There is nothing preventing the author from trying to do so. But they may
get a flat refusal. Then have to decide if they want to see if anyone else
will publish the work on that basis. Often authors and performers sign
because they worry that otherwise they won't 'get the gig'. Many many
simply want to be published and paid, without thinking about this until
later.


There seems plenty of scope for the Law to make certain types of
contractual clauses illegal, the above being a good example. Generally
if anything is "optional", it's whoever has the money and/or power
that gets to exercise the option, which is exactly the kind of
imbalance that laws are supposed to even out.

Rod.
  #88  
Old January 13th 18, 10:08 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Robin[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 506
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

On 12/01/2018 17:23, Jim Lesurf wrote:
snip


I'm not aware of anything to stop authors etc writing that into their
contracts with publishers. If it's a practical problem for authors why
don't they do that?


There is nothing preventing the author from trying to do so. But they may
get a flat refusal. Then have to decide if they want to see if anyone else
will publish the work on that basis. Often authors and performers sign
because they worry that otherwise they won't 'get the gig'. Many many
simply want to be published and paid, without thinking about this until
later.


Well of course they *may* get refused. But reversion rights were a bog
standard part of publishing agreements for many a year. I just checked
that they still are according to people who know much moire than me. Eg:

"It’s important to ensure that the author can get back the rights to
their book if the publisher either fails to stick to the terms of the
contract or lets the book go out of print. Historically, if the
publisher left a book out of print for 6–9 months after receiving a
written request to reprint it, rights would revert. However, ebook and
print-on-demand formats mean that standard ‘stock level’ reversion
clauses no longer provide adequate protection and new triggers for
reversion need to be agreed. This might be a rate of sale or revenue
threshold. It is well worth reclaiming rights to out-of-print books as
it may well be possible to re-license them later on."

https://www.writersandartists.co.uk/...ing-agreements


And the same is true of music where contracts can provide for rights to
reverse automatically if the agreement is not honoured - eg royalties
not handed over.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  #89  
Old January 13th 18, 10:10 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Robin[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 506
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

On 13/01/2018 10:42, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 17:23:06 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

2) A "fish or cut bait" requirement. i.e. if a work is left
unpublished for, say, 5 years, the author/performers should have the
right to terminate any publication agreement and find another
publisher *if* their existing one is incapable or refuses to reprint
on terms equivalent to previously.


I'm not aware of anything to stop authors etc writing that into their
contracts with publishers. If it's a practical problem for authors why
don't they do that?


There is nothing preventing the author from trying to do so. But they may
get a flat refusal. Then have to decide if they want to see if anyone else
will publish the work on that basis. Often authors and performers sign
because they worry that otherwise they won't 'get the gig'. Many many
simply want to be published and paid, without thinking about this until
later.


There seems plenty of scope for the Law to make certain types of
contractual clauses illegal, the above being a good example. Generally
if anything is "optional", it's whoever has the money and/or power
that gets to exercise the option, which is exactly the kind of
imbalance that laws are supposed to even out.


I am unclear what you are asking should be outlawed given authors and
publishers routinely agree contracts with provision for reversion. See
my reply to Jim.

Is it a ban on contract where a publisher gets the exclusive right to
publish and sell the work in certain forms, in certain territories, for
the term of copyright? Do you want eg to limit the term to a maximum of,
say, 5 years? If so, what do you think that is going to do to - among
other things - the amount publishers are willing to pay up front for the
rights, and the amount they are willing to spend promoting the book?



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
  #90  
Old January 13th 18, 10:48 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Indy Jess John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,307
Default Why do people buy 2nd hand Sky boxes?

On 13/01/2018 10:16, Roderick Stewart wrote:

Really? We actually have a policy that encourages the use of a
material resource, instead of something that occupies zero shelf space
and requires no packaging or fuel to deliver it? Why on earth would we
do anything as daft as that?


It is probably a default from the way the legislation is written. If
the description is "printed material" or something similar because
newspapers are vat exempt, then an electronic version which is not
printed becomes liable to VAT as a default rather than as a specific
intention.

Jim
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.