He's giving you the opportunity to come clean and tell everyone that you are not an unbiased person insulting Dave. That you actually have a vested interest in this matter.
That is, if you indeed have a vested interest.
Your insults towards Dave have been nothing but ludicrous, and very telling indeed, without Mike's warning even. So you can stop acting like a damsel in distress, it'll give you no soap. It doesn't suit you.
Well I found one bug, apparently one can also click those buttons on your own comments. Not sure if it does anything, but it seems a bit weird to me. :)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing those behind the USCG
Erm, almost every site you visit logs your ip-address. And every webmaster has the chance to see where you come from.
I think Mike is just saying: "be aware, you are not as anonymous as you think."
Over there you have the people complaining that Google is biased... and here you have people who actually want Google to become biased...
Great. The world is just spiffy.
I'm starting to see the side of the copyright abologists
I see where their argument comes from, and I am starting to move in that direction. More and more we see copyright being abused, and I don't think it will be solved by softening the terms.
I'll continue my civil disobedience then. And only support acts/artists/writers/moviemakers, who embrace the new models, if I like their works.
Expect this ruling to be abused for the years to come.
Mike, somehow I'd like for you to appear on WNYC's On The Media... [sarcasm]they had such an interesting piece on how the Ipad will help save newspapers [/sarcasm]
My submission would be a stake on the right side of the t-shirt (which would not be a stake through the heart as your heart's on the left side of your body)
How can the act of me sending you a nasty letter ever be construed as mail fraud?
You: "Here it is a public comment , on a public posting board."
Yes, but the comments were between 2 individuals.
I think that the safe harbor provisions apply here. Mike has no influence over the comment-section.
Or would you say that Mike is responsible for your comments too? In that case, who owns the copyright over your posts? You? Or Mike?
Do you seriously hold Mike responsible for the opinions and words from his visitors? That's rich, sir.
So, by your statement, if I were to send you a letter filled with hate speech, you'd hold the post office accountable for delivering the nasty letter? Good luck with that one.
You are either dense, or incredibly delusional, or a very good actor trying to pass off as a copyright nitwit.
On the back they did... had the logo embroidered in white, if I'm not mistaken.
Sure no blue mark on the front, though it did have a small blue label.
But you're right, on the front it was completely logo free. FIFA doesn't have ANY leg to stand on.
On the post: US Copyright Group Willing To Reveal The Tech It Uses To Identify File Sharers... Sort Of
Re: Re: logging IP addresses
That is, if you indeed have a vested interest.
Your insults towards Dave have been nothing but ludicrous, and very telling indeed, without Mike's warning even. So you can stop acting like a damsel in distress, it'll give you no soap. It doesn't suit you.
On the post: US Copyright Group Willing To Reveal The Tech It Uses To Identify File Sharers... Sort Of
Re: Re: If you want freee legit music .....
On the post: New Zealand Politicians Convinced By Lobbyists To Bring Back Software Patents
Re: Re: Can someone explain
On the post: New Zealand Politicians Convinced By Lobbyists To Bring Back Software Patents
Re: Can someone explain
On the post: US Copyright Group Willing To Reveal The Tech It Uses To Identify File Sharers... Sort Of
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exposing those behind the USCG
I think Mike is just saying: "be aware, you are not as anonymous as you think."
On the post: New Zealand Politicians Convinced By Lobbyists To Bring Back Software Patents
Re:
Stay on topic.
On the post: IFPI Sends DMCA Notice To Google Demanding It Stop Linking To The Pirate Bay... Entirely
Great. The world is just spiffy.
On the post: Terrible News: Court Says It's Okay To Remove Content From The Public Domain And Put It Back Under Copyright
Re: They don't care about the Constitution
On the post: Terrible News: Court Says It's Okay To Remove Content From The Public Domain And Put It Back Under Copyright
Re: Re: I'm starting to see the side of the copyright abologists
On the post: Terrible News: Court Says It's Okay To Remove Content From The Public Domain And Put It Back Under Copyright
I'm starting to see the side of the copyright abologists
I'll continue my civil disobedience then. And only support acts/artists/writers/moviemakers, who embrace the new models, if I like their works.
Expect this ruling to be abused for the years to come.
On the post: No, We Didn't Save* Journalism, But We Did Generate A Lot Of Ideas
Re: Re:
On the post: No, We Didn't Save* Journalism, But We Did Generate A Lot Of Ideas
On the post: Official Twilight T-Shirt Contest Won't Let You Use Anything From Twilight
Re: My submission...
On the post: Official Twilight T-Shirt Contest Won't Let You Use Anything From Twilight
On the post: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Re: Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
On the post: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Re: Re: Re: Kari and not Karl.
You: "Here it is a public comment , on a public posting board."
Yes, but the comments were between 2 individuals.
I think that the safe harbor provisions apply here. Mike has no influence over the comment-section.
Or would you say that Mike is responsible for your comments too? In that case, who owns the copyright over your posts? You? Or Mike?
On the post: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Re: Kari and not Karl.
On the post: Copying Is Often Efficient And Smart
Re: Kari and not Karl.
So, by your statement, if I were to send you a letter filled with hate speech, you'd hold the post office accountable for delivering the nasty letter? Good luck with that one.
You are either dense, or incredibly delusional, or a very good actor trying to pass off as a copyright nitwit.
On the post: LimeWire Sued Again... How Many Times Does The Industry Want To Kill It?
Re: Re: YAARGH!
On the post: FIFA Threatens To Sue Brewery, Because Dutch World Cup Fans Wore Orange
Re: Re: It's actually more insidious than this
Sure no blue mark on the front, though it did have a small blue label.
But you're right, on the front it was completely logo free. FIFA doesn't have ANY leg to stand on.
Next >>