Danish University And Industry Work Together On Open Science Platform Whose Results Will All Be Patent-Free
from the they-said-it-couldn't-be-done dept
Here on Techdirt, we write a lot about patents. Mostly, it's about their huge downsides -- the stupid patents that should never have been awarded, or the parasitic patent trolls that feed off companies doing innovative work. The obvious solution is to get rid of patents, but the idea is always met with howls of derision, as if the entire system of today's research and development would collapse, and a new dark age would be upon us. It's hard to refute that claim with evidence to the contrary because most people -- other than a few brave souls like Elon Musk -- are reluctant to find out what happens if they don't cling to patents. Against that background, it's great to see Aarhus University in Denmark announce a new open science initiative that will eschew patents on researchers' work completely:
The platform has been established with funds from the Danish Industry Foundation and it combines basic research with industrial innovation in a completely new way, ensuring that industry and the universities get greater benefit from each other's knowledge and technology.
University researchers and companies collaborate across the board to create fundamental new knowledge that is constantly made available to everyone -- and which nobody may patent. On the contrary, everyone is subsequently freely able to use the knowledge to develop and patent their own unique products.
According to Aarhus University, Danish industry loves it:
The idea of collaborating in such a patent-free zone has aroused enormous interest in industry and among companies that otherwise use considerable resources on protecting their intellectual property rights.
The attraction seems to be that an open platform will make it easier for companies -- particularly smaller ones -- to gain access to innovative technologies at an early stage, without needing to worry about patents and licensing. Aarhus University hopes that the approach will also allow researchers to take greater risks with their work, rather than sticking with safer, less ambitious projects, as has happened in the past. The first example is already up and running. It is called SPOMAN (Smart Polymer Materials and Nano-Composites), and has a project page hosted on the Open Science Framework site:
In this project, you will find minutes from the Open Science meetings, current status of the initiative, general presentations etc. More importantly, this project has links to the individual activities and research projects under Open Science. In these projects, the research progress, lab journals and more are found.
Combined with the no-patent promise, you don't get much more open than that.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+
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: denmark, open access, open science, patent free, research
Companies: aarhus university, danish industry foundation
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No patents, but where? How to stop other countries?
Given the recent history of the USPTO granting patents to things will lots of obviousness and plenty of prior art, do the Dane's actually think their no patent pledge can stop them? Then the 'prior art' comes out and ten years later, and possibly lots of lawsuits, someone tries to invalidated the patents and lots of lawyers are richer.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea, I just don't see it as enforceable, without international agreements. I can just imagine the USTR's response when asked.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
American History
And how many major inventions are American? That's what I just can't fathom about this site - the reason America leads the world and has lead the world since nearly it's inception in inventions is the patent system. Don't you get that? That's why inventors come to the US. It's not a good thing, it's a GREAT thing that we all benefit from.
Wasn't it Google who used their influence to appoint the last Patent commissioner that did her level best to weaken patent protection? Didn't the whole "Patent Troll" thing get promoted by Google? The argument just seems moronic to me. For example, let's get rid of protection against battery because some people fake battery. So, let's all beat each other into oblivion because there are a few fakers. Let's get rid of criminal penalties for rape because some people fake being raped. What?
Patents are one of the most American things about America, and a great deal of American Wealth is created by American Inventors and American Patents. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. You multiply wealth by incentivizing wealth creators. That's the point. Your view would cripple America.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How is this not impossible?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: American History
Patents have been around since ancient Greece. The English patent system, evolving from early medieval times, was the legal foundation for the Industrial Revolution.
One more time: NO-ONE HERE IS OPPOSING PATENTS. THEY'RE OPPOSING PATENT ABUSE.
THAT is what America leads the world in. THAT is what's driving efforts for an open platform. Any good thing implemented in bloody awful way is going to lead to opposition.
It's not like you - as an inventor - can invent something and reap the rewards any more. Trolls will patent every conceivable use of your invention - ESPECIALLY the obvious ones - and then charge YOU to use it. There are tens of thousands of patents on image compression alone. Create something truly new in the camera or smartphone or web browsing field, and image compression is just one of the things you'll be sued over.
And so patents are trading cards for large corporations. You need a massive portfolio of patents to play. When Samsung tosses BS patent claims at Apple, Apple has wealth of BS patent claims that they can toss at Samsung products.
That doesn't even cover the endless overbroad patents, where someone obtains a patent on something very specific, and declares it to be a patent on ALL internet commerce.
THAT is why America has so many patents. And now China has been taught how to play the game.
The folks boarding the Titanic's lifeboats weren't anti-ship. They weren't making a statement about row boats being better than ocean liners. But then no-one was standing up on the deck screaming straw-man arguments that this was the case.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: American History
2) You know absolutely nothing about patent law, right?
3) You are not American, right?
1) I have patented a lot of things
2) I have made money from my patents and my products
3) I am a provably American American
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What was the question again?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
But never mistake that's all you get - just the price, and it probably has strings you aren't aware of. And it moves at a snail's space. Like, a millionth of a millionth the pace of stuff that is not free. Linux version xx.xx.xx that has, like, nothing new, again, ever. That kind of thing. So great, old, worn out stuff for free, and someone will actually make it work for money. All good.
But never believe this crap about the patent system being bad. This is just the "free software" companies being lazy, and try to to sell what they have, because they can't innovate anything. They want to cripple the real innovators so they can sell what they have. LIke any big business.
But in America, we still have the patent system. If you open source weenies want to play with the big boys, invent something, write it down, patent it, and have it. Cut the crap with these foreigner idiots spouting off about something they (and you) know nothing about. Not gonna happen. MAGA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: American History
You can also count the first commercially sold typewriter (Rasmus Malling-Hansen) and the dry cell battery (Wilhelm Hellesen), among a few I found during some quick research. I'm sure there's a lot more if you carried on looking.
But, such honesty about what you're referring to would undermine your mindless nationalism, wouldn't it?
It's amazing what lies you'll tell yourself to support the corporations who are screwing you, nay, demand that they screw you harder.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: American History
Citation needed
"2) I have made money from my patents and my products"
Citation needed
"3) I am a provably American American"
Meh, your American heritage doesn't go as far back as some of the Danish inventions you had to pretend don't exist. Your country hasn't been around as long as my Mum's house, FFS. Who cares?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The wilful ignorance is always amusing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: American History
Who is screwing who? You have a foreigner ready to defend inventions and patents outside the US. I am a US Citizen defending inventions and patents inside the US. I make money with them, actually, and I think I do a lot of good in the world. In think inventors in general do a lot of good, and the patent system helps them. And, I would guess no know nothing at all about the US patent system, or actual US history, you just have your foreigner agenda that you are promoting, right? Just tell the truth, for once.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: American History
Who is screwing who? You have a foreigner ready to defend inventions and patents outside the US. I am a US Citizen defending inventions and patents inside the US. I make money with them, actually, and I think I do a lot of good in the world. In think inventors in general do a lot of good, and the patent system helps them. And, I would guess no know nothing at all about the US patent system, or actual US history, you just have your foreigner agenda that you are promoting, right? Just tell the truth, for once.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: American History
Since the subject is Denmark, and the only country whose inventors is being attacked is Denmark... yes?
"I make money with them, actually"
I call bullshit. No way a mental case like you can have made anything useful.
It is amusing how you're doing your usual rambling attacks on "foreigners", on an article about Denmark. This conversation didn't involve the US at all until you started getting defensive.
"Just tell the truth, for once."
Every word I've typed is verifiably true. What is your lunatic mind telling you isn't?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
This, I suppose is true. I hope you're getting the help you need and you remember to take your meds soon.
"everything you pointed out is old and trivial"
So, something has to be new to count now? That goalpost moving must be tiring, have a sit down and relax.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
But, fortunately or unfortunately, you are able to see this article and we are able to see and reply to your insane ramblings due directly to international collaboration between open source and free software developers - all without demanding a penny from you that is better spent on your mental health care.
You're welcome.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
Still waiting for that citation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
This is standard Techdirt/Google bullshit, written by a foreigner, defended by a foreigner, and without any merit at all. MAGA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pretty sure that one goes to our current POTUS.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
This is Techdirt, not Stormfront. Please stop trying to spread an irrational and unfounded hatred for anyone outside of the United States.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
To be fair, we all need fifty-foot poles to reach down far enough into the black pit that is your mind so that we can even understand what the hell you are trying to say.
I wonder: Does anyone has a patent on that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
Is he waiting for Godot? Magic? Guffman? Love? The 1989 Denver Broncos?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
The browser? Not free. It's "without payment up front" but it's never free. If you use IE or the Apple equivalent on a PC, you paid for it when you bought the OS. If you use Chrome or Firefox, they don't charge you but they profit from you in other ways. Firefox profits off your searches (they get paid per search) and Chrome, well, let's just say Google never does anything for free that doesn't contribute in the long run to their data mining and ad click business models.
The only things truly "free" is on the server side, where things like Apache and mysql are pretty much actually free (and without hooks).
Protocols? Well, every time you buy a device you pay a little for the time it took to create and maintain them. Most protocols are created by industry groups, and they never work for free - just without apparent cost. When you buy a device, a little bit of that cost is written into it.
So yeah, free. Sort of.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
How does what you complain about change the fact that this is a story about Denmark?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
I'm just waiting for you to justify your own rambling words and why they matter, while everyone else dismisses them as the ravings of a lunatic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, like I said "free as in beer". If I get a free beer, the beer is never free, either someone else has gifted to me or someone's making money on the back end. But, it doesn't matter how much you whine about those other things, it's still free for me to drink. The AC is whining that nothing useful has been provided to him for free, but he clearly uses such things to make his comment. Your nitpicking doesn't change that.
You also forget the "free as in speech" part, where people literally give things away in order for others to reuse. Idiot boy above was whining that open source doesn't allow this without a profit motive, which is clearly untrue.
For what it's worth, I use none of the browsers you named as my primary browser. That's one of the great things about FOSS, competitors always exist and the next big innovation may come from these browsers instead of the big names.
"The only things truly "free" is on the server side, where things like Apache and mysql are pretty much actually free (and without hooks)."
I'd look into the business models of those companies too, and the costs of hosting them. If you're going to claim that browsers aren't really free because some of the people providing them dare to recoup their costs, why are you pretending that the Apache Foundation and Oracle don't make money and hosting providers/websites don't have costs of their own when they provide things for free? Seems deliberately dishonest to me, as usual.
So, you pretend you're right but as ever you're either just rewording the facts I've already referred to or twisting in a vain attempt to pretend you're somehow better than everyone else - and failing miserably, as usual.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Please offer proof that Google promotes Techdirt. A link to a Techdirt article sitting at the top of a given set of search results from Google does not count—unless you can prove direct collusion between Google and Techdirt to make Techdirt sit atop said search results.
Show your work or piss off, you vulgar troll.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wait a minute—wasn’t email basically a giant open source project?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Asking a whole bunch of questions in that way does nothing but obfuscate your lack of evidence. I need not answer any or all of them when you cannot and will not answer one.
Show me direct evidence of any kind of collusion between Google and Techdirt or piss off, you vulgar troll.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Lack of evidence? What better evidence than search results? Say, for example, someone transplanted Techdirt's content somewhere else, and it never showed up on a Google search. How to explain that? How did the actual Techdirt.com site get so "special" from Google's point of view?
What would you consider evidence, could you spell out what you mean, please? I mean, other than the MOST OBVIOUS evidence - search results - what else would satisfy you?
Oh, wait, questions are bad, right? And you told me to piss off twice, right? I'm about done here, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oi.
A search engine returns relevant results based on a number of different algorithms—one of which is a person’s given search history, including which results they click on.
Unless you can prove direct collusion between Google and Techdirt to cheat those algorithms and put the site, your claim is inaccurate at best, an outright and knowing lie at worst. Prove the collusion or piss off, you vulgar troll.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Say, for example, someone transplanted Techdirt's content somewhere else, and it never showed up on a Google search. How to explain that?"
Google's software hasn't indexed the new location yet. That's evidence of a conspiracy?
Wow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
Please return to your village, they miss you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sure does.
Every time you use Chrome, you are "paying" for it. Like it or not, you are being tracked, noted, and packages for resale. Like a cow in the pasture, you seem to think the lunch is free - until you are slaughters and sold for weight.
"You also forget the "free as in speech" part, where people literally give things away in order for others to reuse. Idiot boy above was whining that open source doesn't allow this without a profit motive, which is clearly untrue."
There are always those who give things away for free. That is their choice. Those who choose to put effort into truly open source stuff are special people.
"I'd look into the business models of those companies too, and the costs of hosting them. If you're going to claim that browsers aren't really free because some of the people providing them dare to recoup their costs, why are you pretending that the Apache Foundation and Oracle don't make money and hosting providers/websites don't have costs of their own when they provide things for free? Seems deliberately dishonest to me, as usual."
I think you are trying to intentionally misunderstand. Apache and MySQL are both absolutely free without hindrance or hidden costs. You don't receive a diminished product, it is not ad supported. It's free. You can fire up your home compute, put *nix, apache, mysql, and serve webpages to your hearts content without any cost (aside from the computer, which you already have, clearly).
Apache Foundation runs entirely on grants and donations. There is no hidden "costs" being pulled back by hosting companies after the fact.
Oracle is a big company, but mysql is free and without charge. Is it a marketing choice? Perhaps. But it is absolutely free without charge, cost, or "future considerations" - the perfect example of your free beer.
Hosting companies are a profit model business. They are not paying for mysql or apache (or most of the OS options they generally have).
"So, you pretend you're right but as ever you're either just rewording the facts I've already referred to or twisting in a vain attempt to pretend you're somehow better than everyone else - and failing miserably, as usual."
Hey, I didn't spend 20 minutes trying to twist someone's valid points into a pretzel because I can't allow them to be right. Back to your village!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
It seems you are a more pathetic troll that I realised.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
Next you are going to suggest that I am every anonymous person on here.
I merely answered a standard, rhetorical question from you generally aimed at me. Nice to see you have the same high standard of discourse with others. Gotta wonder why you aren't banned.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
Sorry, your ego is distorting your view of reality again.
I did not ask anything of your pathetic ass, I specifically directed a direct question to the AC I was conversing with (in reply to 15 Aug 2017 @ 12:50am). Which you then answered, despite me not having posed any question to you.
At least you admit that you don't read these threads closely enough to follow the conversation before diving in with your inanity. It is *interesting* that the same AC answered my actual comment to you earlier and that you answered my comment to the AC. But, that might just be a consequence of your arrogant need to respond to facts with distortion and lies than you deliberately trying to hide your identity in order to derail threads.
"Gotta wonder why you aren't banned."
Because a) this site doesn't ban people and b) even if they did I don't get reported enough to justify such a thing. You, on the other hand...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LOLwut.
Provide the supposed evidence of collusion between Google and Techdirt or piss off, you vulgar troll.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The current system is irreversibly broken.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not inexplicable at all.
First off, Techdirt was here before Google even existed.
Second, Techdirt doesn't "disappear" old articles, so everyday new content is added to their huge repository, which in and of itself, will increase the odds of being relevant to what people are searching for.
Third, (and I am guessing here), is that a lot of people click through to Techdirt because it actually discusses the issues they happen to be searching for. Being relevant to what is being searched goes a long way to increasing rankings, I'm sure.
There are probably many more perfectly reasonable reasons for Techdirt's rankings too. You do realize that Techdirt is pretty popular don't you? They get somewhere between 1.5 million to 2 million page hits a month and somewhere around 15% of those are from Google searches.
This is not the conspiracy you are looking for.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The 15% of traffic originating from Google comes from here:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/techdirt.com
And the total traffic numbers are from here:
https://www.similarweb.com/website/techdirt.com
I have no idea how accurate these numbers may be, but it certainly will give you a rough idea of Techdirt's popularity and amount of traffic coming from Google.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No patents, but where? How to stop other countries?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: American History
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How is this not impossible?
How can anyone guarantee that something is not already patented, short of filing a patent themselves?
All patents and applications (whether approved or not) are publicly available. In principle, it is straightforward to simply search the database to determine whether your invention is already included, and then search relevant literature to determine if it is novel and non-obvious, or covered by other prior art. This is actually exactly what the patent office does when it receives an application.
In practice, of course, it's more complicated than this, because patents are written by humans, read by humans, and approved by humans, and so everything tends to be variable. Some things which probably should be patentable are rejected, and inevitably some things which should not be are approved. But in general, patent lawyers exist who are very well trained (often having worked in the patent office themselves), and will be able to tell you if your invention can be patented. They are almost always right, and the rest of the process is just a matter of fine-tuning the claims in your application.
Declaring something "patent free" means nothing, unless you have a patent to back it up.
Receiving a patent requires that the invention be novel and non-obvious. This collaboration intends to publish their inventions openly without applying for a patent, so that anyone who later attempts to receive a patent will be rejected based on the existence of prior art (the publication), or alternatively that the patent can be challenged later and rendered invalid based on such. In theory, this works fine. How well it works in practice will depend on the patent office, and the legal system in each respective country. In particular, how much effort the patent office puts into looking for prior art outside of existing patents, and how easy it is to challenge a patent's validity in court, which obviously vary by both country and individual patent examiners.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Techdirt is a popular site. The more popular the site, the higher it will list in Google's results. I am also on Reddit a lot and occasionally I see them on the front page of Reddit. Are they now colluding with Reddit? Or could it be that a lot of people go to Techdirt and that is causing them to have a high ranking.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: American History
For someone who claims provable things you seem to go out of your way, as much as possible, to avoid proving them. It's almost like you can't prove them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So what we have here is Shiva's lap/attack dog claiming that Google is funding a website that is dying, which somehow poses enough of a threat that Shiva absolutely has to salvage his reputation - from a website that, according to anti-piracy supporters that regularly denigrate the website, has no effective political, social or online presence, clout or influence.
So either the website is more significant than the trolls are making it out to be, or Shiva is throwing lots of money to swat a mosquito. At least one group of trolls is bullshitting. (Of course, it's could very easily be both.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
...and if I don't use Chrome, as I've already stated?
Your usual attempt to ignore the actual words people are saying don't change the facts. Nor does it change the fact that Chromium and its derivative and all other FOSS is free in both sense of the word, even if the companies in charge of the projects have dared to make some money for their efforts.
"There are always those who give things away for free."
Yes there are, Google being one of them. But they suddenly don't give it away for free if they dare make some money back in other ways. I'm sure it makes sense in that strange mind of your, but in the real world, you're full of it.
"Apache Foundation runs entirely on grants and donations. There is no hidden "costs" being pulled back by hosting companies after the fact."
Wait... so making money on the product is OK as long as they do it before and not after release?
"Oracle is a big company, but mysql is free and without charge"
So are all the other projects you're attacking.
"Is it a marketing choice? Perhaps."
So, again, you're OK with oracle making money on the product, and that makes the project free. But Google make money on their product and it's suddenly not free.
This appears to be Schrodinger's Business Model - software is either free or not free depending on whether some random asshole on the internet approves of the way a company uses it to make money.
"Hosting companies are a profit model business. They are not paying for mysql or apache (or most of the OS options they generally have)."
Nor are end users paying money for the browsers they use. But, that doesn't count because someone has to randomly twist reality to pretend not to be a contrarian dickhead.
"Hey, I didn't spend 20 minutes trying to twist someone's valid points into a pretzel because I can't allow them to be right."
No, from the rambling nonsense you've created here, you spent a lot longer than 20 minutes. What a sad life you lead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
He apparently has to invent his own reality to cope with the world, it's very sad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
All I see is one mild instance of vulgarity; I don't see any terms relating to contempt for sacred things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
These other guys, not so much. You remember when I asked the rhetorical question "Who are the giants behind the thumbs that are squeezing this pimple?". That was a real question, posed to make people think. Obviously the Techdirt pimple is just an irritation to polite society, so why invest resources at the Trump level to burst such an insignificant and unsightly blemish? Because it's not Techdirt, this is law and order (the elected Trumps) against lawlessness, mob rule and anarchy (Techdirt and Google).
I think that has become more publicly exposed recently over the last few days, just look at the articles about Doxxing and "Free Speech". I'm sure you read them, Gwiz, what did you think of the actual Americans posting on this site?
Free Speech absolutely DOES mean free from consequences, except within the framework of the law, that's an important point. About doxxing, Techdirt is ready to out ANYONE but itself for it's hateful and public rhetoric. Pretty clear, right? One standard for the goofballs here, another for "white supremacists" or anyone standing anywhere near them. Mob rule is un-American, don't you think?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja outed as Techdirt Supremacist
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'd look at their history if I were you. Start with them being prosecuted for illegal racial discrimination on property rental, maybe end with ongoing lawsuits against them for not paying the small suppliers they hired for their businesses (including the bankrupted ones). There's plenty of lawbreaking in the Trump family. Not justice for their crimes necessarily, since the US never truly prosecutes its rich, but plenty of lawbreaking,.
"Free Speech absolutely DOES mean free from consequences"
No, it really doesn't. There's literally laws in the US that state that. Perhaps instead of your mindless jingoism, you should start looking at how your country works in the real world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Ninja outed as Techdirt Supremacist
Chucklefuck here started the "Ninja's hyperbolic mocking of the Thai king to protest laughably stupid Thai laws is wrong because the voices in my ass said so" screed a couple stories after this one, the @YesYoureRacist story.
[ link to this | view in thread ]