Paul Markham

Your idea falls on these hurdles.

1. The assumption that Governments will treat the Internet better than they treat charities. By not using their involvement to control what's published on sites relying on this system.

2. That all the Governments of the world will join the system.

3. People will start to pay. Yes the tax credit won't cover all the payment to the creators. Unless you think Government swill cover the cost 100%

4. That those who pay are covered by the tax system.

5. That any site can just set itself up as a site that will be able to take a donation for the creator and then pass it on.

6. That the donations will cover the cost of the creation and profit of the copyright works.

7. Populations excepting extra taxes to cover the "tax credits: to pay for Government involvement.

This system now pays for the entire industry of creating movies, games, programs, music, porn, etc. So where does the "$200-$300 million" come from before the film is released. If not from the companies investing the money before anything is created. Or do companies opt for one of these processes. Go cap in hand to the Government for the money or risk that the people will pay rather than get it for free?

Paul Schrader says the money raised isn't going into saleries. So are you giving examples of schemes where people work for free? Give examples a lot more movies made by raising $10,000,000 and we can start looking at this idea. For tiny little projects.

I did and it's fine for small projects.
so the system of private funding already exists and no need to invent one and when it becomes better than raising the billions needed for an industry like movies. They can do away with the copyright system of ROI.

No you didn't. You showed a few examples that raised pocket change in the terms of money needed. Go and show how it elevates itself to the level of billions.


So anyone who wants to go this route, can do. Better today as people have a choice. you want to remove choice.

It covers far more than the porn industry, it covers anything the Government decided shouldn't be covered.

So this only works in the US. Fine, what happens in the rest of the world or will the US tax payers cover all the costs.

And people are now free to choose either system, they can get use the copyright system or the donations system. what's your problem.

Are the projects launched under Kickstarter covered by the copyright system? Of course they are.

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

gideongallery

and that why i specifically said you do both

make buying cc-sa content 100% tax deductible

and balance that lost revenue by taxing non cc-sa content that want to keep the current under the existing copyright protection


The current choice is to give up all the benefits of the government granted monopoly (because your nice)

vs taking the full benefit of government subsidization.

Both sides should be equally subsidized by the government, or neither side should be subsidized by the government.

let the market decide which is better thru equal competition.

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

ADG

__________________
Asian Diva Girls - Exclusive Photos and Videos



Asian Diva Girls Affiliate Program (50% ccBill Revshare)

gideongallery

line got deleted because of a double click select and typing over it

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

Robbie

Unread Today, 10:29 PM
gideongallery
This message is hidden because gideongallery is on your ignore list.

Look gideongallery...if you need someone to talk to let me know. I think you really, really need help.

It's just a sad, sad situation for you man. Do you have any kind of family to help as a support system for you? Maybe you could talk to them and try to work out whatever mental and/or emotional issues cause you to come to GFY and post...then re-post pro-piracy threads over and over and over.

Look man, don't despair. You're still young and the world has a lot to offer you. You just need to get away from the computer.

From looking at your posts I would say that you have an addiction to the internet, a desperate need for attention, and a nasty masochistic streak (probably born of your severe insecurities)

Dude, there is medication out there. And good doctors and support groups who can help you get through this.

Now keep in mind...you can not download or pirate this help. It's going to require you to interact with actual grown-ups in the real world.

But here's a bright spot for you...your health care is probably free. So that should sooth your worries.

Just please brother...get yourself some help. Come back a year from now when you are straightened out, actually have a job, and are a productive member of society.

You could be the greatest success story of GFY of all times.

If you don't...I'm afraid you're going to continue to spiral down in the world of fantasy and make-believe that you have created as "gideongallery"

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Dirty Dane

It's funny Gideongallery. Earlier you worried about the privacy of people hunted for downloading pirated porn. Now you assume the same people will file their porn addictions on tax forms

I read the theory by Dean Baker. Besides it's 10 years old and based on old prices and technology (hosting and bandwidth is cheap today), the paper is only 8 pages and too simple. Looks like something written by a first year high-school student.
By comparing charity with real business, the hole theoretical model become bogus. It's not going to work in any open economies, and certainly not for adult business.

Few is going to choose the second "privacy option", which is keeping direct payment records for later tax audit. Most people will choose the tax form option, instructing government controlled entities, where to send the money.
Since the first option doesn't need any records, money will often be sent to other creators rather than the ones from which they consumpted. For instance, no one is going to instruct on a tax form to send money to a producer of midget gay bukakke porn. Instead, they will write something else unrelated to porn (or other unrelated themes, because why would anyone share their private interests with the government anyway?).

Besides privacy issues, the biggest bogus here is time. With charity, the concept is mostly to raise money, but real business depends on many other things. Since most will choose the first option of tax deduction, the timeline from consumption to payment can span up to 2 years. This leads to many disadvantages compared to charity:
Humans are humans, no matter the digital technology. Most people can't remember everything they consumed longer time ago, and certainly not details like name of creators.
A business can not wait too long for their money and statistics. Long term uncertainty about their economic situation and market position does not work for business models that need to react fast.

The model also open up for excessive fraud. Copyright protection today is not only granted to the 500,000 suggested, but everyone who publish any of their own creations on internet. Anyone can simply take one picture of the sky and place it "for sale", then anyone can also deduct money given to themselves.
The only way to prevent this kind of fraud, is for the government to evaluate and control content. And that is not "free internet", right?

Paul Markham

So I'm in Czech and want a copy of an American film and where do I get the 100% tax deduction from, the US or Czech Government?

So how does it work on an International basis?

Neither side should be subsidized by any Government. If people want to donate to projects, let them and if companies want to invest in projects let them. Leave it exactly as it is and squash pirates with some new and better laws. Like making all those who profit from piracy, liable to the damages.

This is why there will have to be massive Government controls and as he says it doesn't stop piracy. Because companies who can opt for the present system still have to deal with piracy. So build more bureaucracy, tax laws and piracy still remains. Plus the problems of regulating it on an International basis are unsolvable.

So why even bother?

Seems all he wants is for the present system of schemes like Kickstarter, to have the donations tax deductible.

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

gideongallery

Well the currently system of pay us or face massive government granted penalties has a problem with international sale too.

Piracy enforcement make it really difficult to get those people from foreign countries (since the "need" for sopa)

so the problem your complaining about is balance.

That being said

you would be allowed to take the content for free (under cc-sa conditions) and the copyright holder would have to use the other methodologies to convince you to pay for it.
ie (dan bull method, zoe keating method, louis c.k. method ......)




Granting someone a right to charge monopoly prices is a form of government subsidization

so you just argued to abolish all copyright protection.

of course if you want to keep that subsidy then you need to equally subsidize the cc-sa side of the equation just to be fair.








1. not all kick starter campaigns only those which release the content under cc-sa

2. and not just kick starter but every sale across every network. Buy music that cc-sa from dan bull web site get to write it off your taxes.

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

gideongallery

idiot the artist still has to declare the money paid as income

so paying yourself doesn't create any tax benefit

you would get 100 tax deduction from your other income to declare an extra 100 dollars of artist income.

net effect is zero.

The so called fraud that would require government control to prevent, can't even exist.

Ergo the need for government control

oh and btw unless your stupid enough to put the charge for your porn content as "giant dildo in your gay ass inc"


the tax deductible purchase would be just as hidden as it it now.

hell if your using crowd funding agencies like kick starter, even more so.


This process would require no more control/regulation then the current dividend tax credit that countries give to spur investment in local stock market.

In fact it could be even simpler.

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

pimpmaster9000

gideon...


how much money has your system made?


you keep shitting left and right about how great a system you have how much money have you made?

Paul Markham

So your idea doesn't work. I can't get paid using your system, unless they allow tax deductible payments to overseas companies. Nor can I deduct a payment to a foreign country under my tax system.

And replace it with a system that doesn't work.


I can't write it off. I'm not in the US.

And replace it with a system that doesn't work.

Then tax people via the charges added to content companies don't want to give away under your plan. Does the added tax apply to International sales or do we get it cheaper?

Your idea will never ever, in a million years happen. so go think it through a lot more.

You haven't explain away the Government control element. Does the US Government allow tax deductions on a charity to support dependents of suicide bombers? Extreme but you get my drift.

First Amendment doesn't cover your scheme which is about payment. If it does, you don't have a snowballs chance in hell of getting this through. Not that you have a chance any way.

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

Paul Markham

And you've seen this system?

Or is it another of his dreams?

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

pimpmaster9000

No I have not seen it LOL but he has this 45 step system where he will generate "more traffic than with any other method before"

But this magical system does not seem to make him any money and its based on his "give shit away for free model" no surprise there....

gideongallery

93% of all the current tax systems have treaties with the US that would in fact allow you to make the tax deduction if you simple extended 501 c to include cc-sa. (either totally for free or with a couple of hours of paper work)


for that 7 % that isn't covered (your specific example being one) it doesn't work.

Woopptie fucking do.

That still a much better success ratio that trying to get US copyright laws to be enforced in other countries.






1. never said replace simple allow the option or choice

2. with one simple change (extending 501 c status to cc-sa ) you would get a better international support then the current copyright treats provide for the current system.


so y





so your so disperate to try and make the government control your equating open content to terorism

your like the morons who claim that you should have a right to censor free speech commentary "this is a great video" because it illegal to FALSELY yell fire in a crowded theater.

As if loss of a couple bucks of revenue is equal to getting trampled to death

As if loss of a free expression which serves a constructive bases of the community is equal to expression which only results in pure harm (trampled to death, damage to property, loss of paid for service etc etc etc.

When open source becomes declared a terrorist organization you can argue such control is necessary.

you have to cross a very high bar to justify denying this.

sure it does.

Your subsidizing one form of free expression thru the granting of a monopoly power that by definition put limits on people free speech rights.

and your providing no equal compensation for system that by definition does not hinder a persons free speech rights.

The act of denying the tax deduction as a charitable contribution for public good (openly accessible content to build derived work upon ) would represent preferential treatment for a censoring based solution.

That preferential treatment for a censoring based solution is very much a first amendment issue.

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

Paul Markham

As it's never going to happen. Your ideas are pointless.

Now tell us about your system to generate traffic. Does it actually happen?

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

pimpmaster9000

good luck with that one

epitome

Thievery is a relic of the middle ages and has no place in an advanced society.

-Henry Kissinger