The only thing that the LGPL allows that the GPL doesn't is the whole dynamic linking thing. That is not a relevant distinction here. So whatever Apple is doing that could p*ss off a Free Software developer applies equally to the GPL or LGPL.

The main difference between the two are how derivative works are defined.

> It's not Apple doing the abusing. It's the GPL that is incompatible with the App Store.

The GPL predates the App Store by about 20 years. If Apple decided to create terms for it's store that are incompatible with a 20 year old license then that is on Apple.

It's their decision to be jackasses.

The rest of us should not bow and scrape and grovel just because Apple has decided it can abuse the rest of us at will.

> How is creating an "enemies list" worse than targeting your enemies through the IRS

One can actually be attributed to the President and the other can't.

That said, Bush 2 is shameful when compared to Nixon on the environment. Nixon created an EPA that was effective and independent. Bush 2 did his best to tear it down.

You know it's bad when a president makes you nostalgiac for Nixon.

Yes. The one that had enough of a budget and commitment to actually capture the Zeitgeist of the Known Universe at that time.

What kind of idiot spends $1500 on a PC in 2013?

I spent half that for my current PC 3 years ago and I'm still hard pressed to find a reason to replace it.

With a cheap video card upgrade, a 5 year old craptacular machine can be a respectable casual gaming machine. It's not 1988 anymore. You don't have to pay through the nose for hardware anymore. System software needs to keep in step with that.

$100 is overpriced for this years version of a well entrenched monopoly product. If not for vendor-lock, the value of that product would be $0.

You had to dig back 7 years for that little statistic.

That really speaks volumes about the situation.

You didn't even follow up with the final numbers. It could be that he only blipped on anyone's radar for a single week and then quickly disappeared. A lot of crap movies do that. They make a somewhat respectable number for their opening weekend and then quickly fade.

It's all in what numbers you choose to present.

After 7 years it looks more like this guy belongs on an episode of "Where are they Now?".

People only have so much money to spend and they are going to spend even less on that on extreme luxury items like entertainment. The fact that people don't have an infinite amount of money to spend on pop music is totally a 1st world problem.

The real problem here is that you've got artists that aren't too bright about anything that isn't music having their heads filled with nonsense by media executives. They start drinking their own kool-aid after awhile.

It's far more likely that the explosion of digital media of all kinds has devalued ALL forms of entertainment. If you think you can get a bigger payday from someone else then you're probably just kidding yourself.

You have to compete against EVERYTHING that can distract your customer. This includes freebie tablet games and LOLCats.

It's not 1950 any more.

> I'm so tired of reading "I help myself to all their stuff but I'll buy their merch". Quit being a freeloader.

"Stop listening to the radio you thieving scum!"

...except it's usually because of "mere entertainment" that we end up with increasingly lopsided laws when it comes to technology.

Hollywood is happily contributing to the construction of the American gulag system.

Spotify pays up. It's the labels that aren't sharing.

Internet streaming services shouldn't be expected to pay any more per head than any other form of "broadcast" out there. If you put all of this stuff out of business, you will have NO ONE to help promote the talent.

You'll be trapped in a vaccuum where no one can here you b*tch and moan and whine.

Why not? You have no idea what is going to happen with the current flavor of the month. It might disappear next month or go on for years and years.

How do you know today what services will still be around in 10 years?

You don't.

Really the best option is to avoid them all entirely and stick to real purchases where you are in complete control of the product you've bought.

My oldest MP3s predate ALL music services.
My oldest MKVs predate ALL video services.

I suspect that I will still be able to use my media horde long after the current flavors of the month are long gone.

Until I can pay for a car in copies of some films from the Pirate Bay, your argument is total nonsense. It's your reasoning that's faulty.

Payment avoidance does not equal a gain.

> It's easy to give away something that someone else spent money to produce. Hence the need to enforce copyright infringement.

The Media Moguls and corporate shills are just mad that the pirates are making them look bad. The pirates are a cabal of volunteers that are doing better at providing a useful service than media companies owned by some of the biggest megacorps on the planet.

You're embarrassed because you look like an incompetent idiot.

When you aren't fixated on treating your paying customers like shit, a lot of technical challenges suddenly become easier because you aren't making the job harder than it needs to be.

DRM free content stomps all over the officially sanctioned products and services regardless of whether or not that liberated file is paid for or pirated.

You cannot subscribe to HBO in isolation.

You have to give a big pile of money to someone else on a monthly basis before you even have the option of subscribing to HBO (even assuming you have that option where you are).

So you cannot in fact "just subscribe to HBO".

You can only charge what the market will bear.

There is nothing "naive" about that. No what's naive is the assumption that any pirate represents a paying customer. A pirate is someone willing to "buy" your product for $0. That represents the value of "infinity" on your price/demand curve for an inelastic luxury item.

Some people will alway pirate. On the other hand, there is likely some price at which more people will pay you. It may even be to your advantage to price your good at that level.

It's all about making money.

Crime and punishment and artistic megalomania are nothing but red herrings.

It's not that the entertainment industry owes us something. It that the entertainment industry is not owed something. They don't have a right to make money. If they price themselves out of the market or abandon it entirely, then that's no one else's fault but theirs.

Degenerate moochers are just something to distract you from your own failure as an artist or businessman.