Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the this-post-is-now-diamonds dept

Sun, Dec 18th 2011 12:00pm — Mike Masnick

The top two most insightful posts this week were both short and sweet, proving that you don't have to expend too many words to be insightful. First up, we had John Doe, responding to my point about former Judiciary Committee staffers now lobbying Congress on SOPA: "At the very least, it raises questions about who the staffers are really working for when they're in Congress: the people... or their future employers?" John Doe has a depressing, but accurate, response:

I don't think it raises the question, it answers it.

Coming in second was an Anonymous Coward, responding to a note that "supporters of SOPA will continue to say that it can't be abused," by noting that might be true, but for different reasons than you might imagine:

Well of course it can't be abused. Things like this are the intended use.

For editor's choice, we'll start with (a registered) Anonymous Coward's response to the DOJ seizing and hanging onto Torrent Finder, noting how this makes no sense:

The DOJ has a website that they say points directly to infringing material. Instead of using those pointers to all of that "obviously" infringing material, going to the source and taking it down, they want the search engine to hide it. It will still be there but now "one" search engine just won't see it. BOY IS THIS PROGRESS.

And, finally, we have Karl responding to a comment we get all too frequently, where people insist that the Constitution gave content creators copyright. We've gone over this in the past, but since this myth persists, it's nice to have a thorough debunking:

Sorta like how you're undermining the rights the founding fathers gave to the Constitution

You probably meant "in," but even that is inaccurate. The Founding Fathers were not "giving" fundamental rights, but recognizing them: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."

Also, you will notice that copyright was never granted to artists or publishers. Copyright was granted, exclusively, to Congress.

There is a very simple reason for this: Congress is supposed to be representing the public, not rights holders or private industries. It is the sole ability of the public to decide what copyright laws are, or are not, appropriate.

So, for example, Congress could do away with copyright altogether, and nobody's rights would be trampled upon. Copyright is purely, and solely, a creation of statute; and if those statutes disappear, so does copyright, "without claim or complaint from anybody."

That is because copyright's purpose is solely to benefit the general public. It may also benefit publishers, but it's not the reason copyright exists; it exists solely to benefit the public, and if the public loses more than it gains, then copyright law is wrong, and must be amended or repealed.

Moving on to the funny side of things. Dominating the voting (seriously, by a lot) was a comment from fogbugzd in response to Louis CK's awesome direct-to-fan experiment in which he was polite and human and offered up an awesome and convenient package. He applied a form of Masnick's Law to note that there's nothing to be learned from this:

Oh, sure. This works for nice guys who respects the fans. But this method would never work for the typical industry executive.

As amusing as that comment is, I have to admit, I'm kinda shocked that the second place comment didn't win, as it was my personal favorite for the week. It was from Jay in response to a regular critic who not only made a ridiculous argument, but thought that I had written a story that was actually written by Zachary. Jay decided to channel the Old Spice guy:

Look at the author, now back at your comment, back at the author, now back at your comment.

Sadly, the author is not Mike. But if you took the 5 seconds it took to make an intelligent argument like Zack you would have respected comments like Mike.

Look down, back up. What is that? It's a highly effective counter-troll. Look again, MY COMMENT IS NOW DIAMONDS.

Anything is possible when you think before you post.

I'm on a PC.

Seriously: well done, Jay. You win one thousand internets.

As for editor's choice, we've got John Doe again, responding to someone talking about "stealing someone else's identity":

I had my identity stolen once; I wondered around aimlessly not knowing who I was. After I got my identity back I was hoping someone else would steal it. After all, when it was gone I had not responsibilities, no job, nobody knew who I was. I could come and go as I please. Once I got it back people recognized me, made me report back to work, pay my bills and so on.

And, finally, we had an Anonymous Coward responding to a critic who complained that of the 40,000 blog posts I've done on Techdirt, 39,800 were about SOPA:

There's that Hollywood Accounting again.

No wonder you guys think you're losing billions of dollars - you can't count!

Now it's all clear...

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

57 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

A Guy (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 12:15pm

Hilarious
That was great Jay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 12:26pm

"And, finally, we had an Anonymous Coward responding to a critic who complained that of the 40,000 blog posts I've done on Techdirt, 39,800 were about SOPA:
There's that Hollywood Accounting again.

No wonder you guys think you're losing billions of dollars - you can't count!
Now it's all clear.."

Too fucking bad I don't work in the recording industry. It's why you guys have it wrong, you blame everything on "the industry" and accept no responsibility for your own actions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 12:44pm

Re:
And what are our actions again ?
Pointing at something that WILL be abused - guilty.
Pointing out blatant corruption - guilty.
Pointing out that the **AA's should probably try to adapt their buisness to fit reality rather than trying to adapt reality to fit their buisness - guilty.

Not what you had in mind ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 1:17pm

Re:
Which actions are those?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 1:45pm

Re: Re:
tacit support for piract.

tacit support for copyright violation.

tacit support for illegal acts online.

Etc.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:09pm

Re: Re: Re:
tacit support for piract.

tacit support for copyright violation.

tacit support for illegal acts online.

Recognising that something is inevitable is not the same as support.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:27pm

Re:
Actually I take full responsibility for my own actions. And statements and what I write. Pity you don't do the same.

And I have no doubt that you don't work for the RIAA. Maybe Righthaven but not the RIAA who had Sonny Bono in Congress to do their bidding. Anyway, at least when Hollywood flat out lies there's usually a face and person to attach to those lies. Even IF the best they can do is Scott Cleland.

You are symptomatic of far too much ingestion of the Kool-Aid (tm) that the RIAA and MPAA have been serving out all these years and the malnutrition that comes from that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greevar (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:28pm

Re: Re: Re:
Oh yes, we are all just a bunch of horrible criminals! We say the law is wrong and we are criminals for it. You accuse us, by way of ad hominem, of committing crimes for being opposed to the laws that forbid us from committing said crimes, without a shred of evidence of doing so.

It is the way of those in power to demonize those that challenge that power. The American colonists who also said the laws were fundamentally wrong and declared independence from England were also branded as "criminals".

I find it terribly ironic that people whom claim to be working in a creative industry lack the vision and imagination to conceive of a business model that doesn't rely on controlling speech. Perhaps there are too many MBA's in the industry and not enough BFA's?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:33pm

That post is an infinite number of thumbs up for laugh out loud funny, Jay!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:34pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Anyone know what a "piract" is? Some recent paleography discovery of the pirate-raptor-saurous or something?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Doe, 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:48pm

Wow, I am a double winner this week.
I am both funny and insightful. Oh, did I mention modest as well?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:48pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Oh yes, we are all just a bunch of horrible criminals! We say the law is wrong and we are criminals for it. You accuse us, by way of ad hominem, of committing crimes for being opposed to the laws that forbid us from committing said crimes, without a shred of evidence of doing so. "

What part of tacit approval are you not understanding?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:50pm

Re: Re:
Sorry John, I don't work for any of them. In fact, I don't work in the film or music industries at all.

Sorry to disappoint you. I don't like kool aid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Doe, 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:51pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I would say I move beyond tacit approval though I don't pirate myself. Copyright law is way, way, way to draconian now and only getting worse. The sooner the system breaks and we get a clean shot at reworking it to something sensible the better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 2:53pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What part of tacit approval are you not understanding?

Your misunderstanding of it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 3:04pm

Re: Re: Re:
Do you like punishing pirates? Sorry, copyright infringers? Do they make you angry, with their flagrant violations of the law?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tsavory (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 3:38pm

Don't Care
I don't know why any of us every to point out anything to AC all he is doing is trolling trying to find an argument. He uses 0 commonsense, can't find any creatable evidence, and basically sounds like MR Watt the other day ummm ummm I don't know ummm but ummm I don't believe so so ummm ummm I'm against it.

But I guess we all have some sort of personal obligation to at least do our best to educate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 3:53pm

Anyone else notice that out_of_the_blue has disappeared? I haven't seen any sign of him at all this past week.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greevar (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I understand it fine. I am merely responding to your tacit accusation that we are criminals.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tsavory (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:22pm

Have you infringed?
Its funny but if you really want to think about it I don't know of many people that have not infringed.

U.S. copyright law, ripping a song to your computer, then uploading a song to your portable player or copying it to a CD is considered unauthorized and illegal. Even the RIAA tends to look away from this.

Now with ones you download from Legal music sites need to follow their term and conditions but if you are to burn it a disk a normal CD-R is not acceptable it must be a Audio CD-R.
One can record a mix only using a "digital audio recording device." the Computer does not count You need to use a standalone CD burner.

Hmm I guess when I made that mix for my car from my bought Cd's I infringed since I used whatever CD-r I had laying around at the time. Things like this makes me not want to ever buy music again. I mean I have 13-15 songs on the mix in the car and "The minimum penalty is $750 per song." I am screwed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tsavory (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:23pm

Re:
SSHHHH don't want to wake him
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:44pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Anyone know what a "piract" is? Some recent paleography discovery of the pirate-raptor-saurous or something?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7PbGEP1owXc/SXVXpR9770I/AAAAAAAANpI/Qy6z6ay38kA/s1600-h/pira te.jpg
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:45pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sorry, credit where credit is due:
http://walkingprescott.blogspot.com/2009/01/dinosaur-for-all-occasions.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you feel like a criminal, that is your problem. I didn't say you were. Guilt is your problem, not mine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Atkray (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 4:58pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You keep using that word, I no think it means what you think it means.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 5:22pm

Re: Re: Re:
"tacit support for piract."

Call it what you want, it's not immoral.

"tacit support for copyright violation."

It's not a right it's a privilege.

"tacit support for illegal acts online."

[citation needed]

I support having the law be changed to abolish IP, I don't support breaking the laws in the meantime.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 5:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sorry? Let's use answers.com to give you the definition:

Tacit approval is a benign form of approval that is not expressed clearly, in words. It is silent approval. It is approval that is implied by other statements, actions or by a failure to clearly express disapproval with the situation, performance, idea, plan or request. Tacit approval may be expressed by body language such as smiling, a nod of the head, a pat on the back or a shrug of the shoulders. It can be a friendly form of encouragement and support. On the other hand it is approval that can be easily and conveniently denied as/if a situation deteriorates.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_tacit_approval#ixzz1gwQzvnZ1

Seems pretty clear to me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 5:57pm

Re: Have you infringed?
"U.S. copyright law, ripping a song to your computer, then uploading a song to your portable player or copying it to a CD is considered unauthorized and illegal. Even the RIAA tends to look away from this."

No exactly. If you didn't have to break any DRM to do it, then you likely fall under fair use. The RIAA doesn't "look away from this", they accept it under the law.

The rest of your points come to the same - fair use trumps whatever is in the "contract".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 6:04pm

Re: Re: Re:
Since you haven't provided any proof, I'm just going to have to assume that you're a liar.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dementia (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 6:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Damn, do I feel guilt? Am I supposed to feel guilt? What exactly is guilt? Should it be tacit guilt in this instance?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 6:35pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But but TACIT!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 6:37pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"If you feel like a criminal, that is your problem. I didn't say you were. Guilt is your problem, not mine."

Emphasis mine.

So, you admit that you tacitly said that we are criminals? After all, it is a way of saying things that is not expressed clearly, in words. So you're tacitly accusing us, without words! You should try to read your own definitions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 6:43pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"A tacit accusation is a malicious form of accusation that is not expressed clearly, in words. It is silent disapproval. It is disapproval that is implied by other statements, actions or by a failure to clearly express approval with the situation, performance, idea, plan or request. Tacit accusations may be expressed by body language such as frowning, a shake of the head or a wag of the finger. It can be a hostile form of disencouragement and opposition. On the other hand it is an accusation that can be easily and conveniently denied as/if a situation deteriorates."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 6:44pm

Re: Re: Have you infringed?
It's a good thing DRM doesn't actually exist, you know, like unicorns!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 7:30pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nope, I was not tacitly accusing anyone of being criminals. I said only that you give your tacit approval to the actions of criminals.

If you feel guilty about something, that's your own problem, not mine.

Sorry, you can't play word games here. I didn't call anyone a criminal, or even suggest it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greevar (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 8:16pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make a souffle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 8:38pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Likewise, dipshit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 10:29pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
neostyles understands very little in this world
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 10:32pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh hey Neo, I see you're still hunting pirates online. Keep going, I'm sure you'll succeed one of these days.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 11:27pm

Re: Re: Have you infringed?
What contract?
I don't remember signing anything and I don't remember being asked about any of this ever.

Besides I want to see anybody anger 7 billion people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 11:27pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Tacit approval is wrong, hundreds of millions of people just say flat out that copyright is a bygone law.

Don't like it?

Found a colony on mars and go live there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2011 @ 11:29pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Contrary to others here, I don't give tacit approval, I do approve out right piracy.

Piracy is a good thing, it what keeps creeps like you in control of social damaging monopolies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btr1701 (profile), 18 Dec 2011 @ 11:35pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
> What part of tacit approval are you not understanding?

What part of 'proof by actual evidence' do you not get?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 12:10am

Re: Hilarious
Aw shucks, thanks. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 19 Dec 2011 @ 12:37am

Face It...
All revolutions are, by definition, illegal. It doesn�t matter how many laws are passed against mass file sharing, it�s not going to stop. So yes, it�s a revolution, in the sense of overthrowing established authority.

Your only choice is either to help it happen cleanly, or force it to happen messily.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Dec 2011 @ 1:01am

Re: Re: Re:
Anything that ends and illegal monopoly is a good thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 1:04am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You sir just won yourself 10 billion internetz!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 1:17am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Stop trying to weasel word yourself out of something you said, you disingenuous chubby slimeball, with your broadbrushing freetardian tactics, stealing from Answers.com and everything.

Why won't you think of the terrorist pirate paedophile children?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 1:18am

Re: Re: Re:
Then you must be a lawyer, what with the apporval of a law that only benefits two people: IP lawyers and the MAFIAA-types.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 1:19am

Re: Re: Have you infringed?
Fair use should be the fucking dafault position. Not that the thieves at Disney, Warner Bros. Fox and their ilk give a shit about laws that they can ignore at will.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 2:28am

Re: Re: Re: Have you infringed?
And not just a defense, it has to be a right! As it is at the moment, no-one has fair use unless they're sued by somebody for copyright infringement and the judge rules that yes, they had fair use.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 3:02am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Have you infringed?
No need for that right.

It is natural.

Not everyone is born hitting the ground running.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
demented, 19 Dec 2011 @ 4:49am

Some fun quotes from our founding fathers:

Benjamin Franklin: They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

From 1776: Dr. Benjamin Franklin: A rebellion is always legal in the first person, such as "our rebellion." It is only in the third person - "their rebellion" - that it becomes illegal.

Thomas Jefferson: "Truth will do well enough if left to shift for herself. She seldom has received much aid from the power of great men to whom she is rarely known & seldom welcome."

Thomas Jefferson: "I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

Thomas Jefferson: "What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 7:49am

Re:
Just don't type out_of_the_blue one more time...it takes three to summon him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Dec 2011 @ 10:19am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Stop trying to weasel word yourself out of something you said, you disingenuous chubby slimeball, with your broadbrushing freetardian tactics, stealing from Answers.com and everything. "

For a moment there, I thought you were talking to (chubby) Mike!

As for answers.com, they encourage it. Why should I not use something with their permission? You guys are truly fucked up when it comes to understanding right and wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tsavory (profile), 19 Dec 2011 @ 2:24pm

Re: Re: Have you infringed?
Now will not dispute that as I had not looked into it that deep for years (probably 10+) and I am willing to admit I might be wrong.
So I thought I should apologize. I should have researched for new info as laws do change.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcel de Jong (profile), 20 Dec 2011 @ 12:28am

Re: Re:
Hmm, I'll take Hastur over that guy any day.
Who?
Why Hastur of course, you know HastARRGGGHHH
*carrier lost*
[ link to this | view in thread ]