He took $1.7M in bribes to pass SOPA and by God hes going to do it! Unfortunately this makes Texans and especially his constituents look like fools and crooks. This harks back to the old LBJ Mafia days.
The Lamestream media supports the as is socialists and don't want any one who has a chance of disrupting their monopoly and comfy relationship with the corrupt government to succeed. Purely partisan politics.
"By law, those who created, distributed and promoted software for the purpose of downloading copyright material, are responsible for any criminal use of that software.
If you want to sue someone for stealing your intellectual property, art works, music, stories and programs, start with the companies that made piracy possible, who created the means and the desire to download copyright material and started the entire process, just to screw everyone out of another freedom the corporate fascists disagree with. Freedom of content on the web."
Unfortunately or fortunately this is pure BS and ignorance. P2P software is used legitimately by most folks. There is no such thing as software designed for piracy. Ya these lockers have occasional copyright violations but so do YouTube, Yahoo et al. So MS sue MS for making explorer!?
The reality is that there is no piracy problem. The government wants the right to censor and the studios don't want anyone to make any money without their say so and them getting a cut.
While Megaupload undoubtedly had some infringing material at any given time, the indictment is most likely motivated by DOJ being influenced improperly by the MPAA and RIAA. I was foreman of a Grand Jury and the actions of the Grand Jury are often dictated by the US Attorney nor rationality. This stinks of improper influence and therefore malicious prosecution.
Lots of independent artists were making money on Megaupload without the studios being involved—this is just another example of restraint of trade by misusing the law. The studios can't stand any competition and react accordingly.
An interesting book America the Vulnerable by points out how the government will take over and limit access to general purpose computing. This will also follow with any deices on the 'net. So you may pay for a computer, but you will have no real access or control over either the computer or data.
This being the case why should I pay for something that the government (incompetent as it is) gets to use but I get no benefit from?
Generally the courts have taken the position that a melody is not copyrightable as there are only so many combinations of chord progressions/notes and so some will sound similar.
IANAL. But under current law the creation of a recording creates "Master Rights". Those only apply to the recording and include everyone contributing unless contract provides otherwise.
At the time of recording probably common law applied and I have no idea what that is/was.
On the post: According To Lamar Smith, Data Or Criticism From Anyone Who Doesn't Like SOPA Isn't Valid
Lamir Smith is an honest politician
On the post: NBC News Doesn't Understand Fair Use; Demands Mitt Romney Remove Ads That Use TV News Clips
More Lamestreammedia bias
On the post: Jonathan Coulton Destroys The Rationale Behind The Megaupload Seizure With A Single Tweet; Follows Up With Epic Blog Post
Re: Recovering lost incomes due to Piracy
If you want to sue someone for stealing your intellectual property, art works, music, stories and programs, start with the companies that made piracy possible, who created the means and the desire to download copyright material and started the entire process, just to screw everyone out of another freedom the corporate fascists disagree with. Freedom of content on the web."
Unfortunately or fortunately this is pure BS and ignorance. P2P software is used legitimately by most folks. There is no such thing as software designed for piracy. Ya these lockers have occasional copyright violations but so do YouTube, Yahoo et al. So MS sue MS for making explorer!?
The reality is that there is no piracy problem. The government wants the right to censor and the studios don't want anyone to make any money without their say so and them getting a cut.
On the post: Jonathan Coulton Destroys The Rationale Behind The Megaupload Seizure With A Single Tweet; Follows Up With Epic Blog Post
Illegal restraint of trade
Lots of independent artists were making money on Megaupload without the studios being involved—this is just another example of restraint of trade by misusing the law. The studios can't stand any competition and react accordingly.
On the post: Beyond The Internet Of Things Towards A Sensor Commons
The results will likly be dissasterious
This being the case why should I pay for something that the government (incompetent as it is) gets to use but I get no benefit from?
On the post: Big Time Music Producer Sues Artists For Defamation For Suggesting He Copies Their Songs
Melody
On the post: The Insane Chain Of Sampling Rights: How A Folk Song Collector Became A 'Co-Author' On A Jay-Z Song
Current law
At the time of recording probably common law applied and I have no idea what that is/was.
On the post: Chicago Politicians Say Mobile Phones Should Block Kids From Texting While Driving
Texting
"Honk if you love Jesus
Text while driving if you want to meet him soon!"
On the post: Is The Internet Enabling Bad Content... Or Killing Bad Content?
'net crap
Next >>