Meet The Internet Defense League (And Join It, Too)

from the defend-the-internet dept

Thu, Jul 19th 2012 7:15am — Mike Masnick

A bunch of the folks who were instrumental in the SOPA/PIPA fight have been working together over the last few months to build The Internet Defense League, which is launching today. Techdirt is a founding member, along with a number of other organizations and sites, including Reddit, Mozilla, Cheezburger, EFF, Fark, Imgur and more. The process is being driven by the awesome folks at Fight for the Future, who were the ones behind the American Censorship Day effort during the SOPA fight. The launch is today, in part because today is also the day that the new Batman movie opens -- and part of the IDL's concept is that when the internet is at risk, it can shine a "cat signal" to alert the internet to jump in and do something:

Believe it or not, they've actually put together a few of these cat signals in real life, so look around tonight in a few cities and you might see one.

Taking a page from Kickstarter, the IDL has set up various tiers to which you can donate to get your own personal mini-cat signal or a t-shirt or some other fun offerings.

Earlier this year, I wrote about the Hacking Society gathering, put on by Union Square Ventures. During that discussion, Clay Shirky brought up the idea of an "Internet Volunteer Fire Department" and Tiffiniy Cheng, from Fight for the Future, explained the IDL and how they were already working on it. You can watch that discussion to get a sense of the thinking behind this effort: We're proud and excited to be a part of this effort. We, like many, hope that the IDL is actually a wasted effort and is never actually needed. But, given what we see happening all the time, it seems unlikely that the IDL will never need to be called into action.

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

Filed Under: defense, free speech, internet, openness
Companies: cheezburger, eff, fark, imgur, internet defense league, mozilla, reddit

136 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:21am

The cat signal will be sued into oblivion...
Any bet takers?

Yes, I'm that jaded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:22am

TD usual critics bang their heads on their desks in despair: the biggest pirate apology league has set sail!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:36am

Hahahhahaha.... what a fucking joke. I can see Masnick mincing around in his tights and cape exhorting his brigade of tinfoil hatters to do battle against the evil AA's.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:36am

It's a sad day
It's sad that the internet even needs a defense league.

Something truly revolutionary in the history of humanity. Packets of data can be sent from anyone to anyone else on the planet, instantly, at nearly zero cost, or cost so cheap as to not matter.

These packets can enable all kinds of applications (web, voice, news, radio, commerce, video chatting or conferencing, blogging, etc etc). And yes, communications can be used for good or evil, but that's not the fault of the technology.

With that new era of communication comes transparency and whistle blowing. Citizens also can "assemble" in ways they couldn't before without physical assembly.

It also brings disruption of business models that depend on artificial scarcity. The cost of packets on the network is nearly zero.

People who say or do stupid things can now be laughed at by a much larger audiences, much more quickly, providing vast numbers of people endless entertainment pleasure.

People can oppose things like SOPA . . . oh, wait. Nevermind. That was all Google's doing and just Google alone. Because Google is pro-piracy. Please discontinue subversive thinking now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:39am

I want to see some concept art with the Justice League members portrayed as various tech companies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:40am

Re:
A joke, huh, then why'd you feel the need to comment on...oh, right agenda and all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:42am

it can shine a "cat signal"
Gotta come up with a better avatar.

I know I know, cat rhymes with bat, and the whole Batman thing, but IMHO, the cat looks like he ate a paw full of bath salts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:45am

Funny
I also think it is funny how a group discussing the internet and how to protect it does not allow the internet to comment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nigel (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:47am

Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Whooooooooooooosh

Hope yer trolling my friend because you totally missed this one...

N.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zangetsu (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:47am

It's a shame that it needs to exist
Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, said that:

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us�that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion�that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain�that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom�and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

What he said with regard to the survival of the United States is just as relevant when we talk about the survival of the Internet as a medium for unfiltered communication. Yes, some of that communication is vile filth, but some of it is pure magic. You can't see one if you don't see the other.

Voltaire said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." Many Americans have embraced that slogan. Many American soldiers have died defending that right. Is the Internet the straw that breaks the camels back? Will soldiers go to war and die, protecting free speech, while the average American sits and home and is fed the information that some small group in a boardroom wants them to hear?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bob, 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:51am

What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Somehow I think that the IDL has a very narrow definition of what needs to be protected. This is all just astroturfing for Big Search, Big Hardware and Big Piracy. This is why Google supports the EFF with such generous, tax-dodging "gifts" and the IDL is just an extension of it.

Lets say some big company takes your vacation photo and uses it without paying you squat. The IDL will be there claiming that it's "fair use" and you're merely trying to censor the Internet by trying to stop people from replicating your photo everywhere.

The organizations involved in the IDL don't care about individuals rights-- unless they're the so-called right to pirate anything anywhere anytime. The folks in the IDL try to avoid doing anything to defend the hard work of people because that would mean defending copyright and there's nothing that Big Search, Big Hardware and Big Piracy hate more than is the copyright law and the way it can force them to respect the hard work of the average person.

So expect that the IDL will insist that an ever expanding concept of "fair use" is essential or else the Internet will be broken. Because the billionaires who are paying for the IDL want it that way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:54am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
"The organizations involved in the IDL don't care about individuals rights-- unless they're the so-called right to pirate anything anywhere anytime"

Hm, where did they say this?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cory of PC (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:57am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Hi, bob! Welcome back! Hear for another roasting?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:03am

pirate mike supporting whole sale theft, destroy content industry for the sake of big search (Google). In there pocket. Also the Game.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cory of PC (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:09am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
OK, I'll be serious on this post, but bear in mind I'm going to comment on your title, not your confusing rant.

Now I believe that anyone can create something without being pirated. I got a plan that will involve selling my book in three different forms, one in digital form, and I'm planning on doing a free sampling of the first few chapters and offering the full version for a very cheap price. And I am considering doing a free event that will enable people to get a copy of my story for free, in either forms, just because I'm willing to try a different

And if I were to look at the word "piracy" as "the act of stealing something and claiming it as my own," then yes it would be a bad thing. But with everyone getting uptight that people are looking for something that they like for cheap, even free, and these corporations holding these items back because they aren't getting money... I don't know how to word it. I do like to get some money on my work, but I don't want to lock up my work and go suing innocent people of every last cent just because they want to read a new story. If I want to do that, I'll sue the big corporations you are apparently supporting.

I may have missed the point, but I tried to decipher whatever the freak you're saying. Please, for the love of God, add links and some examples to back your claims! It might make you appear smarter, but each time that you appear, your posts make us dumber from reading your rants!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:10am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Disjointed, illogical, blind rant as usual. No IP-literate person would EVER suggest that commercial use of a vacation snap is fair use; but it's a wonderfully outrageous claim, designed to make like-minded nutters' blood boil. And it's amusing to see "Big Search" vilified in favor of "Big Legacy Entertainment". Since "non-Big" artists never actually get paid by "Big Music"... since "Big Films'" books are cooked to prevent showing profits for distribution to writers... how about taking a stance that favors the "non-Bigs" -- individuals -- instead of shilling for corporations?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cory of PC (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:10am

Re:
Fail. Also I won.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pixelation, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:11am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
"Somehow I think that the IDL has a very narrow definition of what needs to be protected."

That's a bad thing? Why your precious SOPA and PIPA, etc are making such a stir is they are trying to do too much. They go too far and make a gifted monopoly trump the rights of others. Copyright is a gift not a God given right. If the price of a "free" and "open" internet is someone might take my vacation photo and use it to make money, so be it. There are already laws in place to deal with that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:13am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Big boB is back. Missed ya boB. I needed a good laugh today.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:13am

Re:
I think you're looking for the ESL class... that meets two doors down, on the left.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zangetsu (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:13am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
The organizations involved in the IDL don't care about individuals rights-- unless they're the so-called right to pirate anything anywhere anytime.

I hear that Pearle Vision is offering a deal on Team USA Olympic glasses. You should get some so that you can see reality.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:14am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Big Piracy still cracks me up. I'm gonna head down to the yacht club and see if I can find some piracy tycoons to talk to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:15am

Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Help me out Nigel I am a little slow today. What exactly did I miss?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:16am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
"What about my freedom to create without being pirated?"

You can create whatever you want without it being pirated. But just as it has always been, you lose control once you release your creation in the world. That has always been the case and will always be the case no matter what laws are made. Just because you want something doesn't make it a right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:17am

Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
And if I were to look at the word "piracy" as "the act of stealing something and claiming it as my own," then yes it would be a bad thing.

How about piracy as the act of obtaining something of value from another without compensating the rightful owner.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:20am

Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Other than the internet being synonymous with cat pictures I also don't think I get it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:20am

Re:
So close to being hilarious, then FAIL.
I can see Masnick mincing around in his tights and cape exhorting his brigade of - Tee hee hee. funny.

tinfoil hatters - See here is where you failed. We are not tinfiol hatters, we are freetard, lord high apology pirates. Get with the program.

You must have us confused with Alex Jones.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baldaur Regis (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:21am

Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Gotta go with weneedhelp on this one, Nigel. The idea of lolcatz is instantly recognizable as an internet meme, and the article does mention merch possibilities. The cat shown illoed just isn't....ironically stupid... enough for a symbol.

Thoughts? How would you describe an idealized lolcat?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:21am

Re: Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:21am

Re:
God no! I am actually laughing out loud. A group like this is excellent, because it forces the people trying to "defend" the internet to actually come behind one group and express themselves directly.

Once that happens, the laughter will set. It will be much easier to take what a group like this publishes and point out the similarities to hippies or perhaps a kibbutz.

There is no sadness today, just a giggle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:22am

Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
If you release something people feel deserves compensation they will happily throw money at you.

The ability to force people into paying for something before they can make the judgement is disappearing. Sorry industries that got rich buy shoveling crap into people heads.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fickelbra (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:22am

Re:
Obvious troll is obvious.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
rubberpants, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:24am

Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Under that definition I can see why you post here without expectation of renumeration.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ken (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:24am

We Are ALL Stakeholders Now
Copyright used to be the sole domain of professional publishers. They were able to make laws with impunity because there was not a perception that they effected the public. Even today with international negotiations the content industry are considered the only "stakeholders".

In the internet age that narrow view of "stakeholder" no longer applies. We are all stakeholders now and our voice must be heard.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fickelbra (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:26am

Re: Funny
Yeah, because they don't announce right on the site that they have a subreddit. And Reddit is famous for being incredibly difficult to sign up for and join in the conversation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nigel (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:27am

Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Seriously? Ok, I will bite.... Its the lolcat, you know, internet meme, likely one of the first at that. Its a perfect illustrative depiction of the task at hand and actually sorta funny.

It has nothing to do with rhyming with bat.

More coffee, less Bob lol...

Nigel
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:27am

Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
"How about piracy as the act of obtaining something of value from another without compensating the rightful owner."

And that's an even stupider definition. I quite often obtain something of value without compensating the rightful owner. I'll give even point out how there's no copyright infringement on my part whatsoever, before you call me a pirate/freetard/thief.

I on a daily basis watch television without paying anyone to do so. I also on a daily basis listen to music for free. I do so by listening to the radio in the car or through the use of various apps on my phone (iHeartRadio/Pandora/Slacker/etc.). I also routinely walk into grocery stores and am given samples of various food substances.

Now, before you say, "Yeah well advertising or blah blah blah", keep in mind your definition of piracy just stated moments ago. Obtaining something of value without compensating the rightful owner. I DID AND DO NOT PAY ANYONE TO LISTEN TO THE RADIO (ESPECIALLY NOT THE OWNERS OF THE MUSIC WHICH WOULD BE VARIOUS LABELS). I ALSO DO NOT PAY THE MAKERS OF THE VARIOUS FOOD PRODUCTS I AM SAMPLING. I ALSO DO NOT PAY ANY STUDIOS TO WATCH THE SHOWS THEY PRODUCE. So yeah, I meet your definition on a regular basis.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pjerky (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:27am

Signed Up
I signed up. I have also joined some of the dev projects.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:30am

That cat is on drugs, look at his eyes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:33am

Re: Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
that is a lolcat. I never knew there was a cartoony symbol to represent an actual picture of a cat being retarded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baldaur Regis (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:35am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
You know, boB, you're absolutely right. I can't WAIT to steal your inane fucking ramblings about Big Whatever and claim them as my own.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:35am

Re:
Well, if the copyright industry has to be destroyed in order to restore my rights to do what I will with my own equipment (a right that copyright law has taken away from me) then so be it. The copyright industry has no divine mandate to exist, once the internet came around, they lost all relevancy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:39am

Link to kitteh
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120718/18073319750/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nigel (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:39am

Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
To clarify, it originated on 4chan.(still don't quite get that place) who were censored by AT&T at one point.

N.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeff (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:44am

Re: Re:
Because... you know... we'd all rather spout your corptocratic party line than think for ourselves right??? After all, you have all the answers, and we are just the unwashed masses right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:50am

Re: Re: Re:
One day you will figure out I don't work for any big corporations, and that my interest is only my own. Then you may grasp the concept that individual citizens actually support some of what goes against the unlimited freedoms on the internet.

Then you can stop spouting the techdirtcratic party line and start thinking for yourself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
anon, 19 Jul 2012 @ 8:51am

Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
LO they did not say this, this is a troll trying to muddy the waters so that people do not get together and use there strength of numbers to protect themselves and the internet as a whole

Saying that fair use can be rather complicated, for instance any company making a profit from using someones art should be paying for it, but news sites can claim fair use as can parody sites.

The main aspect though is that big business cannot take anyone's content and use it as there sole source of income without paying the content creator.

If i have a site with all of the music in the world and let anyone come to my site to listen to it, as long as i do not make money from the site it seems like it should be fair use.

If use the same site and get ad revenue i am generating income from the content and should be paying the artists, i.e like youtube and other content sites.

The problem comes when we have torrent sites, there we can get anything and it is actually fair use, but artists expect to be paid for there content which is reasonable. If anything the more paid sites we have the better the artists would be compensated as people would rather download content from a site that they know compensates the artist.

But the problem at the moment is that big business has twisted copyright law so much it is being used to stop torrent sites instead of compete with them with a better way to compensate artist.

as an example. If there was a site that provided torrent links to every bit of content out there, and they made sure only quality content was represented with no fake or virus ridden torrents more people would use them, thereby increasing traffic and add revenue and thus being able to compensate artists, even if they has a donate button on every page to donate to the creator of the content i am sure they would make a lot of money, even then if they wanted to they could charge a fee for access to there torrents.

Most if not all of us would rather pay something to compensate the artists if we could , we would pay a subscription fee or view adds but only if there was a good infrastructure and quality content as with torrents.

But this removes the power from the big Hollywood copyright groups to make money controlling the content. They are fighting to stop just anyone from making a profit even if they are paying the artists more than they do at the moment.

As soon as people start realizing this the sooner we can overcome the lies about fair use.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Berenerd (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:03am

Re:
Google would be Batman...cause they have all the neat gadgets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeff (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:04am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I figured it out a long time ago, but your interest in the internet if fundamentally opposed to mine. I *will* oppose your *all* efforts to control my ability to communicate on the internet; because when I don't oppose then I lose. Just like the proverbial camel putting his nose in the tent, once you let *some* control in, then all control is possible. There is only one freedom on the internet - the freedom to communicate, and it is only an extension of our ability to communicate with each other. By allowing the corporate masters to dictate the terms, we all lose. By allowing banana republic dictators to set the terms, we all lose.

Which side do you want to be on?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:06am

Re: Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
I'd expect it to be both, personally. cats represent the internet fairly well (in as much as anything does, at least), cat rhymes with bat, internet defence league, justice league, batman movie...

it all sort of ties together in a big ball of tie-y... stringy... stuff.

it's a logical yarnball, i guess?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:06am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Too much freedom is always a bad thing. Especially digital freedom!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:07am

Re: Re:
Did you actually trot out the "dirty hippies" epithet? Now I'm the one that's laughing!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:08am

Re: It's a shame that it needs to exist
... whatever they've been lead to believe, free speech is not generally what the average US soldier is actually protecting.

it's a fortunate by-product, at best.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:09am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Oh, bob, how we missed you!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:11am

Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
hey, see if anyone's got a battleship they want to get rid of... i've always wanted one of those...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:13am

Re: Re:
unless it is (failed) pre-emptive troll-trolling, which is not unusual here... in which case i suppose it's still obvious trolling, but...

ok, yeah, i lost my point.

yarn!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:17am

Oh Lord, kill me now. Really, Pirate Mike? Can't wait to see the first thing you're going to sick your basement-dwelling thugs on. Sigh.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
anon, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:17am

Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
The problem for any content creators is that there is a lot of competition out there, for every book with a price on it there are hundreds you can get free.

If anything the future is free with a donation button, that's it, that's the only way to compete with free.

I searched a torrent site for a book i wanted to read but it was not there, that tells me a few things, one it is not very popular and two i will not be reading it.

If i could i would be donating to authors but hey they do not have that button anywhere for me to donate yet , so until they do i will continue reading free books.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baldaur Regis (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:23am

Re: Re: Re:
It reads more like the output of a beta trollbot, just grabbing random catchphrases and stringing them together. Needs more cowbell.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:28am

That cat is on drugs I tell ya.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:44am

Re:
That's funny coming from someone who supports punishing people for not going along with state granted monopolies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:49am

Re: Re:
Opposition to absured goveerment regulation and goverment granted monopoly does not a hippy make
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:53am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
You do not have a moral right to state granted monopoly.

I'm so sick of people like you who think that just because the goverment regulates something you are entitled to that regulation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:55am

Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
By that defintion if someone created something and release it for free they're inducing piracy of their own works.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Cat, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:00am

Re:
Lies-nya! I'm an upstanding cttizen of Nekomerica-nya!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:04am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nobody is trying to control your ability to communicate on the internet. Why would you think that?

Oh, however, communicate doesn't include breaking the law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeff (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:07am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Whose law?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:10am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Godwins's or clarke's third.

Take your pick
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:12am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nobody is trying to control your ability to communicate on the internet. Why would you think that?

Perhaps because we're seeing a series of legislative attempts to do exactly that? SOPA, etc., all control our ability to communicate on the internet, even when that speech is legal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:25am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Godwins's or clarke's third.

Take your pick
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:32am

We Are ALL Stakeholders Now
Copyright used to be the sole domain of professional publishers. They were able to make laws with impunity because there was not a perception that they effected the public. Even today with international negotiations the content industry are considered the only "stakeholders".

In the internet age that narrow view of "stakeholder" no longer applies. We are all stakeholders now and our voice must be heard.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:33am

Re: Re: Funny
If there was a link to Reddit your sarcasm might be justified, but it was the embedded video from youtube. The video:

Hacking Society: We Need an Internet Volunteer Fire Department
https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=XDTD9laPQWo
and:

Hacking Society: Visualizing the Web's Hidden Economies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV7aQonUFi4

Both show roundtable discussions while not letting the internet join in via the comments.

"Yeah, because they don't announce right on the site that they have a subreddit" Really? "Right on the site" yeah at the bottom of the page:
Targets

We'll keep in close touch with groups like the EFF and Public Knowledge to identify threats and opportunities. We've also got a subreddit. This will get formalized more soon, but for now we're definitely targeting ACTA in June and CISPA as it re-emerges in the Senate.

Have a nice go fuck yourself fuckingbra.(probably a useless a-cup.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keii (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:34am

Re: Re: Re: it can shine a "cat signal"
Nyancat signal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keii (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:36am

Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
You just obtained something of value from me: My time. My time in reading your responses. Please compensate me. I demand it, nay, deserve it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:36am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
you have the right to comminicate, in most country's, but no where is that "right" mean to communicate on the internet, you can still talk to the people around you
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:50am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I take it you are ok with full time surveillance on your phone lines then? After all you can always have a private talk with people if they are around you eh? Nothing a plane trip can't solve, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 10:53am

Re: It's a shame that it needs to exist
he never envisioned obama as a president
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:09am

Re: Re:
And I'm smiling at your cute ignorance. The collapse of all SOPA efforts should have taught you something. If you check the member list you'll see some serious heavyweights there like Mozilla, EFF, Public Knowledge, Reddit and others. Does that ring a bell? I bet not.

Keep laughing sweetie. Just don't be too mad when the Internet flexes its muscles again against your kind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:16am

Re:
Well, he has some heavy artillery with him if that's the case. I can see fully loaded battleships called Mozilla, EFF, Public knowledge and... *dramatic drums background* the flag monumental aircraft carrier called "THE PEOPLE".

Ah the fireworks it provided with SOPA...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:21am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Hi bob,

I guess what you're trying to say is that the IDL is the Ultimate Paywall.

We know, we know. Hey, we should call it Big IDL.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:38am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
No one believes you, and no one ever will.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:39am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Bob, when you have to blatantly lie in order to support your incorrect argument, you've already lost.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Torg (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 12:13pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can always talk to the people around me, but do you have any idea how limiting it feels to even think about having that as the only good option? If what you seem to be getting at came to pass, I'd be cut off from almost all of our culture and have to make do with whatever the people who happen to live in the same geographical area as me come up with. Why would I ever want to be restricted to talking to whoever happened to buy a house near my parents or go to the same college I am? How could segregating society in such a manner possibly be acceptable?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EdB, 19 Jul 2012 @ 12:36pm

meh
Why are they playing in javascript-land only? Sorry, but not gonna play till they come up with server-side code.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
zippy, 19 Jul 2012 @ 12:37pm

So when can we get the IDL to organize a massive, sustained, worldwide boycott of all legacy media content for as long as it takes to inflict multi-billion dollar damages upon Hollywood and the major labels?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:06pm

Re:
... Also the Game.

You bastard! I had been winning for MONTHS!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
drew (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:09pm

Re: It's a sad day
where's that sad but true button when you need it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:13pm

Re: Re: It's a sad day
Right next to the true but sad button.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
yourrealname (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:22pm

I like the idea, I really do, but there's no way in hell I'm putting a fucking cat head on my website. That might be fine for goofy sites like Cheezeburger but it isn't something that makes it seem like this is a serious issue and instead makes it look about as important as stupid pictures of cats with misspelled text.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:22pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So freedom of speech, in your view, is limited to what I can relate verbally to those within earshot? Is that your position?

Are you also one of those who think that freedom of travel means nothing more than that you are allowed to walk wherever you want?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PopeyeLePoteaux, 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:22pm

"If we can't protect the Internet, you can be damn sure we'll avenge it."

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:36pm

Re: Re:
You think everyone believes it's just pirates and "big search" that are concerned, or think the world can be sucked into believing as much if enough money is thrown at the problem, but you know this group is not going to help that kind of propaganda be accepted.

Your lines are easy to read between.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:40pm

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Somehow I think that the IDL has a very narrow definition of what needs to be protected.

Well, of course you do. You believe the entire Internet is just a front for Google.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 19 Jul 2012 @ 1:51pm

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
OK, lets hear your plan to secure against piracy? THERE IS NO WAY TO SECURE AGAINST IT. SO your argument is really pointless. If it is on the net, it will be pirated if we choose to do so. You can spy on and catch the ones who aren't savvy, but if I choose to be anonymous, I am anonymous. I can be invisible on the net any time I choose. The only way to not have your "property" copied on the net is to not have it on the net. Period.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 3:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nobody is trying to control your ability to communicate on the internet. Why would you think that?

Good joke, I didn't know your side had any of those left.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 19 Jul 2012 @ 3:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but unless you are only watching free over the air broadcasts, you pay your cable company to watch television. That money is used to pay for programming.

As far as the radio goes. Music artists have agreed to allow their songs to be played over the radio, as well as the various other radio like programs. Music artists haven't given permission to have their songs freely copied and shared by anyone for any purpose. (I'm speaking generally, obviously some artists have given such permission)

Perhaps a better definition for piracy is "the act of obtaining, without permission, something that was the result of the work of somebody else."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 3:23pm

Re:
Crack Cat to the rescue!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 3:28pm

Re:
'Least we have REAL basements, not wannabe-basement Copyright Cults dug under churches where we dance around dressed up like Mr Krabs holding severed pig heads while rolling in hookers, cocaine and money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 3:38pm

Re: Re: It's a shame that it needs to exist
This, and particularly every single war we've been in since World War 2, and most of the wars before that.

In the final analysis, there are only two reasons that nations engage in war: to steal the resources of another people, or to defend against aggression. The US, in particular, has only very rarely engaged in war in defense.

The aggressors are never honest with their populace about the reason for going to war: they always give some "higher purpose," such as religion or patriotism, but really, it's always about the cash.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 19 Jul 2012 @ 3:58pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
I'm not going to correct you one way or another, because at the end of the day, I was replying to the AC who gave this definition of piracy, "obtaining something of value from another without compensating the rightful owner". End of story as far as I'm concerned. Am I, even if paying for cable or listening to advertisements (and I notice you left out free samples) COMPENSATING THE RIGHTFUL OWNER? Answer, a most affirmative no.

Which ends that bit as it relates to the original AC's point.

As for your definition, guess what I do for a living? Or better said one of the things I do for a living. I work in IT. Know what I do on a routine basis? I obtain WITHOUT PERMISSION something that was the result of the work of somebody else. Either firsthand knowledge or software of one sort of another. I do not ask permission to use Microsoft Windows/Office, but we do have licenses for it. But I am not directly asking permission to use it. Nor am I directly asking permission from anyone for any information related to problems that arise in the IT field and information on how to solve them.

Now, you may say my license to use Windows/Office is enough. But note, you said obtaining something WITHOUT PERMISSION that is the result of somebody else's work. Who'd you ask for permission to use the internet? Was it any of the guys who helped build the internet? Because it is very much a result of their work. In which case, way to go you pirate. And did you ask Tesla for permission to use alternating current? Because it's as a result of his work that you even have the electricity you need to power the computer you're using to respond to me. Want me to go on? I'm more than happy to.

See how this works? Bad definitions are bad. Piracy has a definition. Suffice it to say it involves water. Copyright infringement can also be directly defined and has. There's no need for any of this BS, beyond the AC trying to make a point, which I quite obviously showed to be both erroneous and stupid, much like the AC.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:10pm

Re: Re: Re: It's a shame that it needs to exist
Proof or GTFO.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:13pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Nobody is trying to control your ability to communicate on the internet. Why would you think that?"

Because SOPA, ACTA, TPP expand copyright control and that's used to stifle speech?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:15pm

Re: Re:
Superman would either be Apple or Microsoft then...

Wonder Woman would be facebook, because EVERYONE (sarcasm) wants to be on Facebook.

Flash would be Skype.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:36pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
If that's the end of the story for you, then that's cool. Since this is an open discussion though, I was simply contributing to the topic.

As far as not compensating the rightful owners, that's not true at all. You may not be directly giving them your money, but by paying for your cable subscription, you are in effect compensating the creators. Free samples fall under permissions that are granted by content creators. They agree to allow the cable companies (or whoever) to distribute free samples.

You don't have to ask permission for something in order to receive it. Your argument is total nonsense. If I create a piece of music, and stipulate that anybody can download it whenever they want, it's not necessary for every single person to then come back and ask me if they can download the music whenever they want.

So, the licenses are in fact enough because they are permissions granted by Microsoft that dictate how the software can be used. I'm granted permission to use the internet by way of paying my Internet Service Provider. The rest of your examples fall under my same argument. Asking for permission to do something is not necessary to be given permission to do that same something.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:43pm

Re: Re: Re:
Flash would be Adobe
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:47pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
You may have paid for the electricty itself, but no one pays tesla or his estate monopoly rents for AC power.

YOU ARE A PIRATE!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 19 Jul 2012 @ 4:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Does that make the electrical company a proxy pirate? (Just as bad definitions are bad, bad jokes are also bad.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cory of PC (profile), 19 Jul 2012 @ 5:09pm

Re: Re:
It's OK! You're free!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 5:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Apparently "communicate" somehow includes the right to illegally download someone else's creative output without paying for it. I hardly think that is what the Founding Father's had in mind. Yet somehow the entitled generation seems to believe they should get everything for free.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward With A Unique Writing Style, 19 Jul 2012 @ 5:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
How is the argument nonsense? You said without asking permission. License or not, I have not directly asked permission per your own definition. Thus, I'm committing piracy per your definition.

Also, even if I pay a cable company, I am not directly compensating the rightful owner. This is how that AC usually means things. If you aren't giving your money directly to them then you're stealing.

The rest is the same. You stated a definition that by default is quite easily not met in almost every single situation. Thus, piracy has been committed by everyone not asking permission PER YOUR DEFINITION. Now, it might be nonsensical the manner in which I've explained things, but that's only to show how I'm not keeping with your definition. If you see fit to revise your definition of "piracy" then I'll see fit to revise my examples. In the ones you stated, which were revisions of mine, you are getting or asking permission from someone in control of something, be it a software or internet service, but they are a mere proxy or are allowing you to do so in a proxy-like manner. Ala licenses or agreements, but you at no point directly ask permission of the person who created said things. Again, I'm just keeping in line with your very specific definition.

Which is why I said, "bad definitions are bad". And regardless, piracy has been defined. Ditto copyright infringement. So there's no real need to even go down this line beyond the AC starting it. But, suffice it to say, his definition of piracy is not even remotely correct. And luckily for the rest of us, the Supreme Court has ruled what is considered copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 5:21pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
In this case the electric company is like those guys who do DVDrips of hollywood movies and then sell the burded disks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 5:21pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
*burned
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 19 Jul 2012 @ 6:43pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
I did not say without asking permission. Look at the original response again. What I said was "the act of obtaining, without permission, something that was the result of the work of somebody else." The word asking wasn't in there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 19 Jul 2012 @ 6:52pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
I agree with you that piracy has been legally defined. However, isn't the major issue that many people have that they no longer believe the legal definition coincides with the realities of how content is produced and distributed?

If that's the case, then shouldn't be we attempting to come up with a new definition?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 7:42pm

Re: It's a sad day
Just a heads up, The Internet Defense League was mentioned on Slashdot on 27 May 2012. Slashdot comments are usually pretty good.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 9:11pm

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Hello, bob! I almost thought for a moment that you had died or something. Where were you when BREIN failed to pay an artist for music they asked him to compose for your pro-collection society propaganda, or when Evan Stone was slammed by courts for trying to overstep his protection of "independent producers"? Or did you shit your pants when you realised that your side was not infallible and had to run to Big IP to have them change your diaper? Don't worry, I swear that the trolls have been breeding under the bridge. You can get them to help soothe your butthurt (or add some more, if you know what I mean, you John-Steele-defending "independent producer").
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
And he has no permission granted to him by anyone does he?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2012 @ 11:56pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Why not?

Studios and labels keep coming up with new definitions of property and piracy all the time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 2:04am

Re: Re:
I didn't know who Alex Jones was so I googled it and surprise he too appears to have an issue with Warner Bros DMCA's.

http://www.infowars.com/warner-bros-censors-critical-review-of-dark-knight-rises/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 3:57am

Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
how about the concept of value /= price

btw, pirates do compensate the creator...they pay it with their time pirating the work
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 4:24am

Re: Re: Re:
I don't there is anyone Alex Wackadoodle Nutscracked Jones doesn't have a problem with. He probably has one with you too, but you should not be bothered by that. It won't make any difference to anything important.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 5:31am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Because SOPA, ACTA, TPP expand copyright control and that's used to stifle speech?"

You just highlighted the problem: You think that your free speech should include the ability to freely distribute someone else's protected speech. You want to pull the blanket of free speech onto your side of the bed, leaving everyone else without any covers, and you think this is fine. Any attempt to balance it in your mind is an unfair blocking of your cover use.

Basically, you are a free speech monopolist. You want all the free speech with none of the obligations, obligations are for little people and those who follow the law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 6:18am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Free speech isn't free if you have to worry about whether or not someone else said it first.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 6:20am

Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
More importantly, pirates are free andvertising. I've bought a ton things because pirating friends told me how good it was.

That's a pretty good compensation if you ask me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 6:41am

Re: Re: It's a sad day
Slashdot once was great. Now it is a Microsoft fanboy site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 7:27am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I shouldn't have to give up MY rights to free speech simply because someone goes "I own that!"

Let me ask you something?

Is it fair to shut down whole websites simply because someone drew a picture of a show they liked (fanart) or wrote a story based on those shows (fanfiction) and they weren't expecting anything more than simply having people look at their stuff?

You forget, the way to expand culture is to build on stuff that's already there.

Hip Hop and that style of music already does that.

But, hey, I'm sure that SOPA, ACTA and TPP would NEVER shut down a legitimate genre of music simply because it uses unauthorized samples and remixes music, right?

"Basically, you are a free speech monopolist. You want all the free speech with none of the obligations, obligations are for little people and those who follow the law."

What obligations?

So long as what I say or do does NOT endanger the freedoms or lives of others, then I can say or do whatever I want.

But, so long as laws and treaties keep getting made to curtail those freedoms and rights that we enjoy, respect for the law will continue to go down by the public at large.

"There is NEVER any need to sacrifice liberty for the sake of security." - Ron Paul
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 7:31am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The Founding Fathers of the United States fought the Revolutionary War to get AWAY from monopolistic businesses that threatened to take everything away from them just to make money.

Also, you seem to forget, until not too long ago, the United States was one of the BIGGEST Copyright Infringers in the world.

Stop trying to put your revisionist B.S. history into the modern world.

You'll do everyone a favor.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 7:36am

Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Hey, bob, did you lose another argument?

Yes you did! Yes you did!

Who's a good little troll? You are! Yes you are!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Jul 2012 @ 8:02am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wrong! Copyright is an artificial monopoly granted by the state, thus the united states wasn't infringing because they didn't grant them to foreign works.

But that kind of works in your favor because to the founders viewed copyright from a utilitarian perspective and rejected the idea that you had a moral right to the copyright monopoly and understood that perpetual copyrigth was bad.

It's why the compyright clause is written as a power granted to congress rather than a mandate in the constitution yet granting a copyright without an expiration date is unconstitutional.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gerald Robinson (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 8:36am

Good for the IDL!!
Its unfortunate that this is needed, but the ITU has plans to censor the 'net to suit Russia, Ethopia and other repressive regimes like the EU.

Not to mention that some congressmen from Wyouming are forwarding a plan to tax the 'net.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 9:34am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You just highlighted the problem: You think that your free speech should include the ability to freely distribute someone else's protected speech.

The free speech problems that are a part of that legislation have nothing to do with distributing someone else's protected speech.

Also, the free speech problems are not the only freedom-related problems with the legislation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 20 Jul 2012 @ 9:58am

Re: Re: Re: Re: It's a shame that it needs to exist
Proof of which assertion?

Everything I've said is well-supported and generally accepted by sociologists and historians generally, and military historians in particular. Proof is easily found. If you have a specific question, I'll be happy to address it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 20 Jul 2012 @ 11:43am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
Yes he does. A software license is the developing company giving the licensee permission to use the software in a specific manner.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 20 Jul 2012 @ 11:45am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What about my freedom to create without being pirated?
I don't understand your question. Why not what?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 22 Jul 2012 @ 4:37pm

Re: Re: Re: It's a shame that it needs to exist
always?
no.
entirely?
no.

usually and mostly? sure.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 May 2013 @ 5:11am

Hmmm... when I clicked on the "Donate" button on the site, I got "You have asked Firefox to connect
securely to donate.internetdefenseleague.org, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure."

WTF is going on? Firefox is all but throwing its body in front of me to get me to stop going to the donate page!

"What Should I Do?

If you usually connect to this site without problems, this error could mean that someone is trying to impersonate the site, and you shouldn't continue."

Oookay, is someone causing problems for the site to stop people donating?
[ link to this | view in thread ]