Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the words-with-friends dept
This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is That One Guy who uncovered and expanded on an idea for how to watch the EU's world-without-copyright propaganda film:
Using your enemy's weapons against them
(Should have checked the first link before posting, almost missed a gem.)
I read the film as an example of what you get when all IP is locked down and everything looks the same because nobody can create anything new without getting sued. The title for my version is "DisneyTopia." -Kris Joseph @krisjoseph
That... is brilliant. As a pro-imaginary property film it's absurd and grossly dishonest, as anyone with an even passing knowledge of history and/or awareness of the explosion of creativity these days(much of it in spite of copyright law, rather than because of it) knows just how unrealistic the premise of 'there can be no creativity without IP law' is.
On the other hand as an anti-imaginary property film it's all too believable. Everything is the same and nothing new comes out because no-one dares create anything that might get them sued or otherwise face a penalty, something that is all too realistic, all the more so with the constant push to always ratchet the law up so it covers more things with harsher penalties.
In an attempt to create a propaganda piece to push the idea of 'IP law = creativity' they have instead, entirely by accident, created a work about how damaging the very laws and ideas they push can be to creativity.
In second place, we've got a widely-applicable anonymous comment that pretty much explains itself:
“Vagueness in legal threats is the hallmark of meritless thuggery.”
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start out with Jeremy Lyman and another reaction to the EU's copyright film:
A world WITH copyright?
Oh, see I was confused. I thought there was only one song because someone wrote a song, copyrighted it, and now making any other songs would be copyright infringement. That seems more plausible than no one writing songs because there's no way to get paid without preventing someone else from looking/touching/using your stuff.
Next, we've got Baron von Robber reiterating the simple distinction that undermines attempts to conflate political social media moderation with a bakery refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding:
One discriminates against a protected class..the other....doesn't.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is an anonymous commenter responding to one particular critic who bizarrely struggles with Markdown comment formatting:
There are a few horizontal rules for you. You're free to reproduce them, no license required!
See? I created without IP protection!
Next, we've got TFG sarcastically taking sides in another comment debate about Trump:
But Gary. Orange man good. Google bad. Masnick bad. Can rebut?
For editor's choice on the funny side, we start out by heading back to last week's comment post, where one commenter mused on possible reasons that 2019 seems to be moving faster than 2018. Pixelation had a theory of their own:
I'm not certain but I think Huawei is behind it.
Finally, we've got That Anonymous Coward with a dire warning for Facebook helping France to punish stupid people:
They should be very afraid, if they start punishing being stupid the government will collapse.
That's all for this week, folks!
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
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What’s Your Opinion? #2
When you think of earthquakes, most would consider places that are most vulnerable would be located near certain faults. Los Angeles for example is near the San Andreas fault line. Even countries like Japan are vulnerable, as evidenced by the devastating earthquake in 2011. However, recently states like Ohio received a 3.4 earthquake, yet the area wasn’t near a fault line or anything that could cause a natural earthquake. What would your opinion about earthquakes be? How could states like Ohio and certain parts of Pennsylvania receive earthquakes even if they aren’t near a known fault line? Should the U.S. and other countries update their building requirements to prevent damage from further unexpected tremors?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looked it up..
https://www.youtube.com/user/OAMItubes/videos
the company that Did the video...
1.2k subscribe?? WHO?
Also, they have NOT allowed ANY comments..
I loved that video, and it explains THEIR problem..
Anyone Listen to RADIO?? Must know the problem..every 2-4 hours the music starts over again.. LOVE YOUTUBE, I get to find music that is Different, Alternatives, Not repetitive..
Iv always loved the Gay Cake problem..
I would mention to the woman, that 'That guy over there MAY RAPE you, but the Odds are, I WILL NOT'..
Social media..
Iv said before...
Showing proof of opinion is really fun. And Economics Isnt a proven science.
Have fun guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You get on the top list just by quoting Popehat?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Pretty sure context matters.
On the other hand, unless you're correcting his idiocy you're not likely to be considered insightful for quoting out_of_the_blue or John Herrick Smith.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Discrimination
“One discriminates against a protected class..the other....doesn't.”
I’ve always had a problem understanding the insight other people seem to see being conveyed here, and I’m hoping people can help me understand it.
I can see a few things it might mean, but none of them seem very insightful to me:
“One is a protected class, the other isn’t” is almost tautological: political affiliation is not in any of the protected class statutes, so it’s not a protected class (duh). If the point is that it ought to be a protected class, then I don’t understand how that’s insightful - obviously the people complaining about viewpoints discrimination think it should be protected (plus a few that think it shouldn’t be protected by the government but my social pressure).
If the point is about inherent attributes versus choice, then I don’t understand it in this context: even if homosexuality is inherent and “conservatism” isn’t (and social science suggests that it’s not actually a choice to a large extent), then the analogy doesn’t fit. The baker was happy to bake cakes for gay couples, had knowingly done so on numerous occasions and intended to do so again, but would only refuse in the specific case of a homosexual wedding - a voluntary act, since no one can inherently get married. The analogy here fits with the act, not the status - he wouldn’t have made a cake for Adam Sandler in Chuck and Larry, for instance.
I don’t find either of these particularly insightful, so is there something I’m missing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And therein lies the issue. A wedding is a voluntary act, yes. But only gay people have same-sex weddings. A refusal to even bake a cake for a gay couple’s wedding equals a discrminatory act on the basis of sexual orientation.
Masterpiece Cakeshop refused to bake even a bare-bones cake for a gay couple. It lost the anti-discrimination case brought against it.¹ Meanwhile, Azucar Bakery won an anti-discrimination case brought against it. Why? Because it offered to bake cross-shaped cakes for a Christian customer, but refused to decorate said cakes with anti-gay messages.² Masterpiece lost because it refused to sell an item on its menu to gay customers. Azucar won because it refused to sell a specific message as a decoration — the government cannot compel speech/expression, after all.
“But if the government can’t compel speech,” you may be asking, “why did Masterpiece lose?” Good question! Masterpiece refused to sell a gay couple the same kind of wedding cake it sold to straight couples. The baker never discussed decorations or messaging of any kind. The cake itself, minus any decorations, doesn’t count as an “expressive work”. Thus, a refusal to sell something from the standard “menu” of items based only on the potential customer’s sexual orientation is an act of anti-gay discrimination.
¹ — Well, until the Supreme Court kicked the case back to the lower courts based on procedural fuck-ups.
² — Azucar offered to sell the customer everything he needed to decorate the cake himself. That attempt to accomodate his wishes is another reason Azucar won the case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: on the menu
I see where you’re going with this, but I don’t think the analogy holds (or maybe, I misunderstood the facts of the case).
The baker was willing to (and had) sold anything on the menu, he was ostensibly sued because he wouldn’t make a custom cake - he would sell a standard cake, which anyone was of course free to use in any way they like. The attempted positioning of the complainants was that he wouldn’t sell them a standard wedding cake - which he wouldn’t sell to anyone, since the only kind of wedding cake he made were custom ones.
But the reason he won in the Supreme Court was precisely because it was a sham prosecution - the prosecuting agency had pre-judges the case, and it was this animus that caused his win, regardless of the underlying issue. With that as the background with the agency, I don’t think we can use its actions in a case with a different ideological alignment to tell us anything - because if the real rule is “my guys win” it looks exactly the same as the rule you described.
That may be the real reason I don’t find these insightful, they undifferentiable from “my guy wins.” And I hope we all agree that’s a terrible principle.
In case you find it useful, my background is libertarian, so I’m pro gay marriage (to the extent the government should be in the business), and pro bigots showing us who they are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I haven’t heard anything about the baker only selling “custom” wedding cakes. Even then, the discussion never got to decorations and messaging. The baker refused to even sell an undecorated wedding cake based on the sexual orientation of the customer.
Like I said: Procedural fuck-ups. No appeals court sided with the bakery on the merits of its case. The Supreme Court avoided that altogether.
Go look up the case Hands On Originals and its refusal to print a rainbow-design T-shirt with the words “Lexington Pride”. Refusing to print T-shirts with pro-LGBT messaging does not make them “my guys”. But the precedent set by their case puts me on their side of the issue.
The issue with Masterpiece lies in whether it broke the law by refusing service based on sexual orientation. Colorado courts consistently ruled against the bakery. I don’t expect the courts to overturn that ruling, even after a new “unbiased” hearing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Taking “Markdown” To A Whole New Level
¹ — Well, until the Supreme Court kicked the case back to the lower courts based on procedural fuck-ups.
² — Azucar offered to sell the customer everything he needed to decorate the cake himself. That attempt to accomodate his wishes is another reason Azucar won the case.
...
Stephen, I have to say I’m impressed. Never would I have imagined using markdown techniques to add reference notes in a comment/reply. Have an Insightful Vote, my friend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
yes you are right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i agree with you.
https://cashhomebuyers.pro/washington/we-buy-houses-Vancouver/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NO one can create anything without copyright law,? wtf,
so according to the EU, All art created before 1900 is of no value .
podcasts ,streaming lets plays of games do not exist,folk music does not exist
fanfic storys and art do not exist.
Most of the videos i watch on youtube did not need copyright ,
they exist cos people watch them.
100,S OF 1000,S of people make a living playing games on twitch.
they dont need copyright, game companys are happy to see people play games because its free advertising .
The lack of copyright probably helped the music ,in the 60s, many pop songs were based on the melody,s from old folk songs .
The internet is a platform, new forms of art and media are emerging.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fantastic Orlando Vacation with United Flight Booking
Do united airlines reservations on unitedairlines-reservation.com today. Find Orlando special deals online from united airlines official site on flights ticket Bookings or Make A call +1-800-689-1364.
https://unitedflights.wixsite.com/website/post/fantastic-orlando-vacation-with-unit ed-flight-booking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fantastic Orlando Vacation with United Flight Booking
Rick,
Thanks so much for your link. Please try re-posting over at Reason.com, where they don't moderate. I'm sure they will love your free-market approach to unregulated (and unwanted) advertising!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fantastic Orlando Vacation with United Flight Booking
Take your Trivago and Triva GO out of here lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait a minute, you can make <hr> in Markdown?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
as often
as you like
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Or not. Apparently there are rules for rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Horizontal Line Conundrum
I was honestly having trouble with the horizontal line with markdown. It doesn’t seem to be working for me no matter how many times I tried.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]