1998-11-10 - Re: fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness) (fwd)

Header Data

From: “Frank O’Dwyer” <fod@brd.ie>
To: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
Message Hash: ec8a764fc7055740a6a6d97426d0dce9b7ffd556f80798b7d010ee5fbe76b34c
Message ID: <36483E87.E735E257@brd.ie>
Reply To: <199811100539.XAA16120@einstein.ssz.com>
UTC Datetime: 1998-11-10 14:14:18 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 22:14:18 +0800

Raw message

From: "Frank O'Dwyer" <fod@brd.ie>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 22:14:18 +0800
To: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
Subject: Re: fuck copyright (Re: Advertising Creepiness) (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199811100539.XAA16120@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <36483E87.E735E257@brd.ie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jim Choate wrote:
> > You can make money from information provision by charging extra for
> > up-to-date news, or by charging so little that the cost from the
> > original provider is so low that it's not worth anyones time to
> > redistribute it,
> 
> That's true now, why don't we see these effects...

We do. News inherently has a 'sell-by' date. The most obvious example is
stock quotes where delayed quotes are provided for free whereas
real-time quotes are heavily charged for. The recipients of such
information care very much about latency, since it's possible to trade
on any differences that may exist. There's even some research on attacks
that simply delay packets in such networks.

Cheers,
Frank O'Dwyer.





Thread