Search results

That is most certainly not what we're debating. People did make the laws. You can disagree with them, I do sometimes. And you can debate their enforceability, copyrights on an individual level for example. But people still made them. People did not make economics though. It's more of a natural...

Sorry, you are correct. They gained their success by having an excellent product among other things. Preventing people from directly copying them forces others to attempt to make an excellent product as well in order to compete. They can't just do what Guinness does (no increase to total world...

Actually I meant far more recent than that. Blank cassettes still cost someone money to design, manufacture, and ship. Which make large scale free distribution something that simply didn't occur before digital transmission through the internet. It's easy to target and prosecute a company or even...

Quite the contrary, I'm making a batch of mead on Sunday. Green tea, cinnamon, and vanilla :) It's about experimenting and trying new things for the hell of it for the individual like me. However for a company (and remember Coca-Cola was you example that sparked this line of debate) it's about...

I'm saying that by individual beer recipes being secret this forces others that wish to make beer to create their own recipes both increasing the variety and they total beer industry sales and the total amount of knowledge in the world. If all beer recipes ever invented were instantly public...

I fail to see why any given human being has an absolute right to any knowledge. And while I agree that complete freedom of information is beneficial to democracy it is detrimental technological progress. We need a balance between the two. We're already in that territory. And given our...

Actually yes. So long as there is not the possibility of an industry scale monopoly then forcing competitors to develop new products does increase societal profits and variety. Nope. They had a problem due to lack of investment. Lack of IP right enforcement leads to lack a of investment and...

How so? Total investment in R&D by the USSR in non-militarily related technology was far lower than the US. It was the US private sector and not the US government that accounted for the majority of that. Lower investment in R&D leads to less advanced technology. That's pretty much indisputable...

What makes you think that won't happen? 4e torrents will be up by June 6ths or sooner. I predict Keep on the Shadowfell anytime now if it's not up already since advanced copies have now hit the wild.

It's about all of those things and more. There was little to no commercial interest driving investment of time and resources into those types of technologies therefore the USSR tended to lag behind overall (with certain specific exceptions naturally) in those areas. Now that was because of...

Yes and yes. The USSR had somewhat less sophisticated overall but essentially equivalent military technology with the US throughout the Cold War because it was government sponsored. However their other non-military technology was woefully lagging as a result of a lack of funding and emphasis on...

Agreed, and I absolutely support their enforcement against corporations or individuals attempting to profit from their violations. However there is little way to realistically enforce said laws on individuals. Therefore to a large degree it comes down to a personal question of right and wrong...

But the desire and ability to do it for free is fairly new. In previous years the copyrighted work was a style/design that was copied by competitors products for their monetary gain. Or something like a book or music required physical media that attached a material cost to the act of copying...

If you define stealing as taking something without legal right then yes it's stealing. If you define stealing as taking something away from another without right then no it's not stealing. As for wrong? It's a moral judgment call and everyone makes those based on their own subjective opinions.

Paladins are exceptionally difficult to kill and I've heard that rangers are very effective solo so I'd go with one of those.

You can't lose something immaterial that can be infinitely copied. Explain to me how if someone was never ever going to buy a product how that person pirating a product in any way shape or form harms the producer? If you steal something physical then you actively cause a loss as that physical...

Keeping track of every damn ounce is annoying but I don't mind hitting up the big items like armor, weapons, 50 lbs solid gold statues, etc. Then just throw a rough and reasonable amount onto the total for incidentals. That at least keeps the PCs from picking up every damn sword, helmet...

I'm simply assuming based on the fact that it's a polearm which traditionally has indicated reach. Then (assuming it's overpowered, we honestly don't know yet) it only becomes the defacto weapons for fighters and anyone else serious enough about melee combat to spend feats on it. No brainers...

So what's the disadvantage to reach weapons? It would seem that between the halberd being both an axe and a polearm in one thus allowing access to a wide range of powers and the ability to attack 24 squares rather than just 8 that it posseses significant advantages that might make it the...