"You must also remember that there are a lot of good honest cops out there that do serve and protect people."
Probably true, so it's a shame all these good cops appear to be completely silent on the actions of bad cops. Considering how the actions of bad cops indirectly puts all cops at risk, you'd think they'd be the loudest critics. But they aren't, so it gets harder and harder to give them the benefit of the doubt.
"But the answer rather than abandoning the idea is to build in both legal and technological safe guards against its abuse."
At this point it's pretty clear that governments and law enforcement could not by trusted with this power, no matter what safeguards appear to have been put in place. Based on recent history, the benefits, however legitimate they may be, simply do not outweigh the almost guaranteed downsides.
First, her statement are not "grounded in basic moral principles", they're grounded in the wishes of her paymasters to regain their control of the film industry, control they've been steadily loosing for years.
And second, she was being mocked for the content of her statements, not any temerity she may or may not have.
"Well that was fun and you all confirmed my suspicions that the vast majority of you don't know what you're talking about."
Well you certainly confirmed that you're a bit of a blowhard who makes unsubstantiated claims and then deflects when called out on it.
"My favorite part was when everyone started asking for sources and then got all mad when I provided one that didn't fit their personal views."
My favorite part was when you were asked repeatedly to point out exactly where in the Copyright Act it says what you claimed, but you were completely unable to do so. It's pretty hard to read that any way other than you knowing you're wrong.
"Here's a hint, if you're going to debate Copyright Law, the source is the current copyright law - not some random blogger."
And we should instead take the word of a random anonymous commenter who provides absolutely zero credible support for their claims? I must have missed the bit where you demonstrated how or why we should trust you more than this particular blogger.
You are completely wrong on all points. The public domain does not mean "owned by everyone", it simply means it's not restricted by anyone. And there is no copyright on martial in the public domain, it is be definition free of copyright.
"I think that everyone needs to remember that things like the Rodney King tape show that "what you saw on camera" isn't always exactly what happens. Too often, the videos show what happened at the end, and not the reasons why it was happening."
Actually what you see on camera is exactly what happens (assuming no tampering takes place afterwards). Other evidence will often be needed to put what's seen into context, but it's pretty clear that if the video shows a cop stomping on someone's head, or striking someone in handcuffs, or racially abusing someone, then that is what happened. These sorts of abhorrent actions should not be excused or minimized by context.
"It's important to consider that recent story about reports of police brutality being way down after cops started wearing personal camcorders."
Let's not rush to give credit to someone who starts behaving only when there's a camera recording their every public interaction. It's sad to that that was what was necessary to make cops behave.
Re: Re: Re: Anti-cop website Techdirt flies same flag, as usual.
"They are public employees, but they are specifically paid to serve the public in the sense of protecting them from crime, not giving them a free pass and backing down when someone takes a swing at them or otherwise is abusive with them."
You never strengthen your argument my making up other peoples' arguments for them, you only weaken it.
Nobody is saying police should give them a free pass or back down when someone gets violent, only that cops not beat them to a bloody pulp or KILL them! And it's it just verbal abuse, harden up FFS.
So you're happy for society to be policed by LEO's that you consider to be as dangerous a provoked bear, a hive of angry bees, or (oh jeez...) a sleeping dragon? What the hell is wrong with you?!
"Don't always assume that decisions like this are 100% wrong."
In what possible way can the article above be considered an "assumption". Or is that just your word for somebody else's opinion that you don't agree with?
"The argument content is not important to a internet music provider is strange at best."
That would be strange, that's why absolutely nobody is making it. It's what's called a strawman argument, and it's the hallmark of people who are struggling to honestly support their own position.
You're awfully close to implying propeller-driven aircraft are uncommon or even obsolete. You may want to clarify what you meant in case you end up looking extraordinarily ignorant about the aircraft flying today...
On the post: As New York Officials Unite Behind Police Body Camera Plans, Union Head Just Wants To Talk About 'Baseless' Lawsuits
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Probably true, so it's a shame all these good cops appear to be completely silent on the actions of bad cops. Considering how the actions of bad cops indirectly puts all cops at risk, you'd think they'd be the loudest critics. But they aren't, so it gets harder and harder to give them the benefit of the doubt.
On the post: Los Angeles Police Develop Sudden Privacy Concerns When Someone Flies A Drone Over Their Parking Lot
Re:
Oh the irony...
"...and tries to make the excuse that police property is the public."
Well it's government property so it's certainly not private property even if there are some access restrictions.
On the post: Bad Idea: California Legislature Passes Bill To Mandate Mobile Phone Kill Switches
Re: It could be good with propert protections.
At this point it's pretty clear that governments and law enforcement could not by trusted with this power, no matter what safeguards appear to have been put in place. Based on recent history, the benefits, however legitimate they may be, simply do not outweigh the almost guaranteed downsides.
On the post: Hollywood Funded Group Demands BitTorrent Inc. 'Take Responsibility' For Piracy
Re:
And second, she was being mocked for the content of her statements, not any temerity she may or may not have.
On the post: Reagan Biographer Claims 'Copyright Infringement' Because Another Biographer Used The Same Facts
Re: Re:
On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'
Re: Re: Premise is faulty...
On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'
Re: Track Record (Later Guys)
Well you certainly confirmed that you're a bit of a blowhard who makes unsubstantiated claims and then deflects when called out on it.
"My favorite part was when everyone started asking for sources and then got all mad when I provided one that didn't fit their personal views."
My favorite part was when you were asked repeatedly to point out exactly where in the Copyright Act it says what you claimed, but you were completely unable to do so. It's pretty hard to read that any way other than you knowing you're wrong.
"Here's a hint, if you're going to debate Copyright Law, the source is the current copyright law - not some random blogger."
And we should instead take the word of a random anonymous commenter who provides absolutely zero credible support for their claims? I must have missed the bit where you demonstrated how or why we should trust you more than this particular blogger.
On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'
Re: Premise is faulty...
On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Track Record
Now you're just being a trollish idiot. Either quote the actual relevant text of the law, or admit you don't know what you're talking about.
On the post: Internal Affairs Departments, District Attorneys' Offices Helping Keep Bad Cops From Being Held Accountable
Re:
Actually what you see on camera is exactly what happens (assuming no tampering takes place afterwards). Other evidence will often be needed to put what's seen into context, but it's pretty clear that if the video shows a cop stomping on someone's head, or striking someone in handcuffs, or racially abusing someone, then that is what happened. These sorts of abhorrent actions should not be excused or minimized by context.
"It's important to consider that recent story about reports of police brutality being way down after cops started wearing personal camcorders."
Let's not rush to give credit to someone who starts behaving only when there's a camera recording their every public interaction. It's sad to that that was what was necessary to make cops behave.
On the post: Internal Affairs Departments, District Attorneys' Offices Helping Keep Bad Cops From Being Held Accountable
Re: Re: Re: Anti-cop website Techdirt flies same flag, as usual.
You never strengthen your argument my making up other peoples' arguments for them, you only weaken it.
Nobody is saying police should give them a free pass or back down when someone gets violent, only that cops not beat them to a bloody pulp or KILL them! And it's it just verbal abuse, harden up FFS.
On the post: Connecticut Supreme Court Says State Cops Can Detain You Simply For Being In The Vicinity Of Someone They're Arresting
Re:
Yes, we know you can't do this, and we know why you can't do this.
On the post: Connecticut Supreme Court Says State Cops Can Detain You Simply For Being In The Vicinity Of Someone They're Arresting
Re:
On the post: Connecticut Supreme Court Says State Cops Can Detain You Simply For Being In The Vicinity Of Someone They're Arresting
Re:
In what possible way can the article above be considered an "assumption". Or is that just your word for somebody else's opinion that you don't agree with?
On the post: NY Port Authority Claims To Own The NYC Skyline: Tells Store To Destroy Skyline-Themed Plates
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Killing The Golden Goose: Copyright Holders Demand More Cash Even As Streaming Music Services Struggle To Be Profitable
Re:
That would be strange, that's why absolutely nobody is making it. It's what's called a strawman argument, and it's the hallmark of people who are struggling to honestly support their own position.
On the post: Federal Prosecutor Claims That Copyright Infringement 'Discourages Smart People From Doing Innovative Things'
Re: You're out of your element, Mike
- Theft
- Slut
I bet you don't see the irony in your "stolen" user name either.
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Want To Make Sure The Internet Stays Open And Free For Innovation?
Re: Re: Re:
IOW...
"I can't come up with any original criticism so I'll just regurgitate the oldest and lamest of the anti-Techdirt tropes."
Or... is that really you AJ!
On the post: Warner Brothers Pulls Plug On Viral Greenpeace Ad Utilizing 'The Lego Movie' Theme Song (And Legos)
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're awfully close to implying propeller-driven aircraft are uncommon or even obsolete. You may want to clarify what you meant in case you end up looking extraordinarily ignorant about the aircraft flying today...
On the post: Warner Brothers Pulls Plug On Viral Greenpeace Ad Utilizing 'The Lego Movie' Theme Song (And Legos)
Re: Re:
Next >>