^This. And, as I commented before, "conservatives" have no desire to clean house and sweep out the idiots that make the rest of us look bad. If they kicked out the crazies and refused to let them use the label without being challenged for it, we'd see a difference. The people defending the indefensible need to have a word with themselves.
Flip this around; if it's okay to take photos of Prince Harry inside his house through the window because it's for money, I mean, freedom o' the press, then it's okay to do the same to you if you should catch the eye of some media bod for whatever reason. How would you feel?
There's a vital difference. European unification has been on the table quite a lot of times. In relatively modern times the Roman republic - and latter on, empire - was the first contender for the job. It failed magnificently, as did all other who attempted it, from Charlemagne through Barbarossa to Hitler.
You can't really effect one o' those via committee. Comparing the EU to conquering dictators doesn't work. The EU can't unify as a single superstate because the people can't be persuaded to get with the program. Result: lot o' talk, little movement.
This is why the EU is absolutely not a federation and never will become one. When we all share the same language, culture, and outlook, then it will be possible, i.e. not gonna happen because we can't agree on what any of those would be.
The EU won't collapse, it'll wobble on without the UK unless we come to our senses, agree to a second referendum, then opt to remain.
It's not a monolithic entity run by a swivel-eyed dictator with rabid followers, it's a committee in which the members are constantly being harangued by a range of special interest groups vying to get their pet projects made into law.
I don't know what prompted the refusal to block the trademark but I expect a walkback soon when the bosses find out that it's backfiring.
I've been wrestling with the notion of entitlement to privacy for public figures for a long time, Tim, and frankly I believe this is the wrong hill to die on.
Yes, the law may well be abused but it ain't being abused here. Celebrities live in a goldfish bowl as it is, constantly hounded and criticised. It's awful to find out from the media that your friends have been selling stories about you for money. Now you can't even sit at home in your own house without someone screaming "Freedom of the press!" while pointing cameras at the inside of your home and telling everybody and their dog where you live. Not okay.
The right of the individual to privacy must be balanced with the public interest and if the interest is mere curiosity they can get stuffed.
Full disclosure: siding with the underdog is an Anglo-Irish thing.
Yeah, that's the story that's been trickling down through the right wing press for decades.
There are indeed federalists in the EU, I know several people who also advocate for federalism. At one point some Europeans (mostly Germans) were convinced that one day we'd all merge into a superstate.
Funny story... we've always had skeptics and separatists. We have several movements here in the UK including Scotland, Wales, Cumbria, and Cornwall. Yes indeed, some of our counties would gladly cut the rest of the country off and let it float away.
In Italy there's the Padania movement and in Spain the Basques and Catalans want to secede. I'm sure there are parts of Germany, Poland, and France where people feel the same way.
While it's no secret that the EEC (as it was) was predicated on the idea of eventual federalism the UK has opt-outs from that as it wanted the best of both worlds. The EU can pass whatever directives it likes but ultimately they have to be ratified in Parliament and are not legally binding until they have been. The Daily Mail's mad stories of straight bananas, etc., are mostly made up. We still use the Imperial system over here: I can buy my fruit and veg in pounds and ounces if I want to.
While the decision to ban this trademark may well the result of some petty bureaucrats going on a power trip the mark only won't apply in the EU, the manufacturers can still get one over here in the UK. Well now it's gone global and the EU has been made to look stupid. Expect a walk-back in the next day or so.
Great quote, BTW.
Incidentally, my main source for EU law stuff, David Allen Green, who writes for the Financial Times, has stated that we could absolutely leave the EU on favourable terms and get along just fine... if we did it slowly, carefully unpicking the mesh of trade agreements and treaties that bind us to the EU. I'd be fine with that. It's the "Kick the country off a cliff and hope for the best" approach I have the problem with.
No, it's true. I live here and have spoken to people on both sides. The Brexit brigade trot out talking points while Remainers like me actually think about the consequences.
Re: Nothing ironic to see here... Keep moving along...
Yeah... they are accountable to the EU Parliament. The British press does little to inform the public about how things actually work. What they do is push political agendas, mostly for non-domiciled owners who don't pay tax here.
Those of us who take the time to find out more (usually while campaigning for change) have discovered that pressure works when correctly applied. Vague whining about petty bureaucrats doesn't make things change, contacting your MEP does. No directive or law can take effect without being ratified in the EU parliament and in our own.
So then, it's the lack of awareness and engagement with their MEPs that leads to the kind of stupidity we've been seeing lately. And it ain't going to change till people stop reading the right wing press and learn to think for themselves.
The BBC also needs to stop giving so much time to opinion-mongers and put facts and legal information front and centre.
Seconded. I've yet to meet a Brexiter who actually cares about Northern Ireland, access to drugs, the status of EU residents like myself, trade with EU countries and the rest of the world (they seem to think that WTO is a magic bullet because Rees-Mogg et al pretty much told them so) and a host of other things that would be impacted by it.
Confirmed correct. Banning All The Things! doesn't make them go away, just underground. We need to address the attitudes behind the expression instead of sweeping them under the ban carpet.
Seriously, that's the tired old line that gets trotted out every time. Stop it, already. An American NHS is the only way forward; you can run private healthcare provision alongside it like we do over here in the UK.
On the post: EFF Highlights Stories Of Bad Content Moderation With New TOSsed Out Site
Re:
^This. And, as I commented before, "conservatives" have no desire to clean house and sweep out the idiots that make the rest of us look bad. If they kicked out the crazies and refused to let them use the label without being challenged for it, we'd see a difference. The people defending the indefensible need to have a word with themselves.
On the post: Prince Harry Uses GDPR To Obtain Payout From Photographer Who Shot Photos Of His Rental Home
Re:
Ostensibly, everyone.
Flip this around; if it's okay to take photos of Prince Harry inside his house through the window because it's for money, I mean, freedom o' the press, then it's okay to do the same to you if you should catch the eye of some media bod for whatever reason. How would you feel?
On the post: Prince Harry Uses GDPR To Obtain Payout From Photographer Who Shot Photos Of His Rental Home
Re: Re:
Who made my comment First Word?
Thank you!
On the post: Prince Harry Uses GDPR To Obtain Payout From Photographer Who Shot Photos Of His Rental Home
Re:
"Screw him, he's rich" is not a valid argument. Either everyone has the right to privacy or none of us do.
If intrusive surveillance by the state is not okay, why is it okay if it's being done in the name of the press?
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re: Re: Re:
There's a vital difference. European unification has been on the table quite a lot of times. In relatively modern times the Roman republic - and latter on, empire - was the first contender for the job. It failed magnificently, as did all other who attempted it, from Charlemagne through Barbarossa to Hitler.
You can't really effect one o' those via committee. Comparing the EU to conquering dictators doesn't work. The EU can't unify as a single superstate because the people can't be persuaded to get with the program. Result: lot o' talk, little movement.
This is why the EU is absolutely not a federation and never will become one. When we all share the same language, culture, and outlook, then it will be possible, i.e. not gonna happen because we can't agree on what any of those would be.
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re: Re: Re:
Eh? Calm down, dear!
The EU won't collapse, it'll wobble on without the UK unless we come to our senses, agree to a second referendum, then opt to remain.
It's not a monolithic entity run by a swivel-eyed dictator with rabid followers, it's a committee in which the members are constantly being harangued by a range of special interest groups vying to get their pet projects made into law.
I don't know what prompted the refusal to block the trademark but I expect a walkback soon when the bosses find out that it's backfiring.
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re: Re: Re: Re: If and/or when...
Confirmed correct. [Sad but True]
On the post: Prince Harry Uses GDPR To Obtain Payout From Photographer Who Shot Photos Of His Rental Home
Right to privacy
I've been wrestling with the notion of entitlement to privacy for public figures for a long time, Tim, and frankly I believe this is the wrong hill to die on.
Yes, the law may well be abused but it ain't being abused here. Celebrities live in a goldfish bowl as it is, constantly hounded and criticised. It's awful to find out from the media that your friends have been selling stories about you for money. Now you can't even sit at home in your own house without someone screaming "Freedom of the press!" while pointing cameras at the inside of your home and telling everybody and their dog where you live. Not okay.
The right of the individual to privacy must be balanced with the public interest and if the interest is mere curiosity they can get stuffed.
Full disclosure: siding with the underdog is an Anglo-Irish thing.
On the post: Kazakhstan Cops Protect Citizens' Free Speech Rights By Arresting A Protester Holding A Blank Sign
Re: The rest of the story
Citation?
On the post: Kazakhstan Cops Protect Citizens' Free Speech Rights By Arresting A Protester Holding A Blank Sign
Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
...not!
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re:
Yeah, that's the story that's been trickling down through the right wing press for decades.
There are indeed federalists in the EU, I know several people who also advocate for federalism. At one point some Europeans (mostly Germans) were convinced that one day we'd all merge into a superstate.
Funny story... we've always had skeptics and separatists. We have several movements here in the UK including Scotland, Wales, Cumbria, and Cornwall. Yes indeed, some of our counties would gladly cut the rest of the country off and let it float away.
In Italy there's the Padania movement and in Spain the Basques and Catalans want to secede. I'm sure there are parts of Germany, Poland, and France where people feel the same way.
While it's no secret that the EEC (as it was) was predicated on the idea of eventual federalism the UK has opt-outs from that as it wanted the best of both worlds. The EU can pass whatever directives it likes but ultimately they have to be ratified in Parliament and are not legally binding until they have been. The Daily Mail's mad stories of straight bananas, etc., are mostly made up. We still use the Imperial system over here: I can buy my fruit and veg in pounds and ounces if I want to.
While the decision to ban this trademark may well the result of some petty bureaucrats going on a power trip the mark only won't apply in the EU, the manufacturers can still get one over here in the UK. Well now it's gone global and the EU has been made to look stupid. Expect a walk-back in the next day or so.
Great quote, BTW.
Incidentally, my main source for EU law stuff, David Allen Green, who writes for the Financial Times, has stated that we could absolutely leave the EU on favourable terms and get along just fine... if we did it slowly, carefully unpicking the mesh of trade agreements and treaties that bind us to the EU. I'd be fine with that. It's the "Kick the country off a cliff and hope for the best" approach I have the problem with.
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re:
No, it's true. I live here and have spoken to people on both sides. The Brexit brigade trot out talking points while Remainers like me actually think about the consequences.
Brexiters hope to muddle through.
Remainers want a detailed plan of action.
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re: Nothing ironic to see here... Keep moving along...
Yeah... they are accountable to the EU Parliament. The British press does little to inform the public about how things actually work. What they do is push political agendas, mostly for non-domiciled owners who don't pay tax here.
Those of us who take the time to find out more (usually while campaigning for change) have discovered that pressure works when correctly applied. Vague whining about petty bureaucrats doesn't make things change, contacting your MEP does. No directive or law can take effect without being ratified in the EU parliament and in our own.
So then, it's the lack of awareness and engagement with their MEPs that leads to the kind of stupidity we've been seeing lately. And it ain't going to change till people stop reading the right wing press and learn to think for themselves.
The BBC also needs to stop giving so much time to opinion-mongers and put facts and legal information front and centre.
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re:
Jingoism.
On the post: EU Blocks 'Brexit Beer' Trademark, First As 'Offensive', Then As Non-Distinctive
Re: Re: If and/or when...
Seconded. I've yet to meet a Brexiter who actually cares about Northern Ireland, access to drugs, the status of EU residents like myself, trade with EU countries and the rest of the world (they seem to think that WTO is a magic bullet because Rees-Mogg et al pretty much told them so) and a host of other things that would be impacted by it.
On the post: Getting Worse Part 1: Intuit Routinely Lies To Customers To Avoid Paying Refunds For Tax Prep Work
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Confirmed correct.
On the post: Flip Side To 'Stopping' Terrorist Content Online: Facebook Is Deleting Evidence Of War Crimes
Re:
Confirmed correct. Banning All The Things! doesn't make them go away, just underground. We need to address the attitudes behind the expression instead of sweeping them under the ban carpet.
On the post: Big Pharma Companies Accused Of Conspiring To Inflate Prices Of Over 100 Generic Drugs By Up To 1000%
Re: Re: Re: Re:
^This. As a wise TD commenter once wrote, until you can choose which accidents and illness to suffer from, there will be no free market in healthcare.
On the post: Big Pharma Companies Accused Of Conspiring To Inflate Prices Of Over 100 Generic Drugs By Up To 1000%
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Bu-b-but socialism!
Seriously, that's the tired old line that gets trotted out every time. Stop it, already. An American NHS is the only way forward; you can run private healthcare provision alongside it like we do over here in the UK.
On the post: Independent Forensic Investigation Undermines Houston Cops' Narrative About Fatal Drug Raid
Re: Brazil
Actually, no, it's worse. The film "Idiocracy" is a documentary, not fiction.
Next >>