I just don't understand why this is so confusing for people. Fact #1: The internet is a COMMUNICATION platform, just like the telephone.
Fact#2 Google is NOT the internet, it's a search engine. It indexes websites like the card catalogue in a library.
Is that so hard to comprehend?
If you wouldn't sue your phone company for the misconduct of its users then you shouldn't sue internet service providers for the same thing. If you wouldn't sue your library because someone left misleading advertising on display in public, then you shouldn't sue Google for the same thing.
NB: The internet is not some magical thing that turns shit that we already know how to do into new patents.
Re: In other words: What is great is making things worse and thus drawing attention to the problem!
I agree with her. It's great that we are all learning more about copyright law.
The last time copyright was made so accessible and public was in late 2001, and then on January 18th, 2012 all those public voices brought an end to SOPA.
On the surface your comparison of shoplifting to piracy does feel like it makes sense, but as pointed out to you, shoplifting does actually deprive the store owner of product which has to be paid for, so there is a definite loss incurred.
As for combating piracy, it's more complex than just a gut reaction. If you look at it by industry, the music industry has dealt with piracy the longest and now its not really an issue any more. Now that music is readily available through many different channels for free, there isn't much need or desire to pirate it. The industry evolved and is still evolving.
You posit that the proliferation of piracy undermines the expansion of legitimate distribution, but I counter it has the exact OPPOSITE effect. It would seem that the proliferation of piracy actually forces the expansion of legitimate distribution channels, as the legacy players are forced to actually compete.
"How many people would subscribe to Netflix of $8/mo. if they could get the identical (or better) service for free?"
Good question, but what if that free service was legal? If that free service is legal then the pirates will still be out there, but there will be less or no incentive to use their service, unless its just more convenient.
3 strikes laws are just unreasonable. If you are using the shoplifting analogy, then that would mean that the punishment for shoplifting would be banning the offender from buying things at stores. How does that help?
You interwebs bloggers are all the same. You want facts and truths. You don't know what a really good story is all about. Leave journalism to the professionals.
I've even heard that you guys are pissing off some reputable jurnos out there with your lack of professional ethics.
Stephen Hess is the embodiment of the old saying... Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought an idiot, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
I was only mildly interested in this article AND THEN, I followed the links back to this little gem:
Reading is fundamental. IF Teri had a shred of common sense and ANY ability to comprehend what she reads, THEN all she would have to do is click back ONE single article.
IF she is really that upset, THEN all she has to do is add to the bogus DMCA takedown database. Isn't that the first step in dealing with copyright infringement online?
Or is she just looking for $150k in statutory damages?
I just don't get it. I read the lawsuit and I cannot figure out the infringement.
If someone invents something and gets a patent then they get a monopoly on selling it. That makes sense to me, whether it is right or wrong. If I then recreate their invention and use it, but don't sell it, then I am not in any way infringing upon their monopoly, I am just using something that I made and I don't believe there is any law against that.
I'm not sure how you can sue content creators for their use of technology which is at their disposal. They are not actively selling an apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available. Even under the doctrine of equivalents, the content creators are selling content, not the apparatus for distribution.
I think this is the first trolling case that I have seen on TD where there is no actual infringement of the patent in question, since patents merely protect the right to sell the patented product, not the right to use it.
So could someone please explain the infringement to me?
Keep in mind that natural selection does not favor the most intelligent or useful of the species. The process of evolution favors the individuals that breed most.
The comments are especially hilarious on this one. At first I thought it was just me, but there are a few other comments here that picked up on the irony. She is allegedly an investigative journalist. Really?
If she took more than a cursory glance at this site she would have quickly seen that there are loads of articles about copyright, IP law, and 1st Amendment issues and how abuses are occurring in the digital age.
Rather than comment about her behavior, I think its better to advise her to search through the techdirt archives for stories related to journalism in the digital age. If she did that, she might learn that newspapers are becoming irrelevant because they don't understand how to service a community. Perhaps she will even take note of how the techdirt community reacted to her "elite journalist" posture.
Legacy Journalists - 0
Intewebs - 1
Surprise alternate ending:
Just maybe Teri Buhl is not as idiotic as we are assuming. She may just be trying to draw as much attention to herself as she possibly can. She is going to trial over her dicey internet behavior and may be trying to get as much strength as possible behind her claim that she cannot get a fair trial because of the publicity on the net about her alleged misconduct.
Basically she may be trying to leverage the Streisand Effect for use as a defense in court.
Guess they never heard of crowdsourcing. I know that's a relatively new term to expect old librarians to know. And it comes way after bribery in the dictionary.
I don't know if AT&T is trying to abandon their fixed service or not, but it does seem plausible.
They have had the hardest time trying to convince the public to accept data caps on fixed service (copper and fiber), but they have had phenomenal success in training the public to pay for minutes on mobile and data caps over mobile. That is back to the way it used to be on fixed service. A cash cow.
They don't want the public aware that they've already merged their fixed and mobile networks and their costs of service are the same for either. Migrating to completely mobile service is not moving into the future for the telcos, but rather going back to the old days of charging per minute and even better charging for huge overage fees on small data caps. Well done, AT&T. Enjoy it until you're dismantled again.
All this shows is how powerful communication is to humanity. As far as most governments around the world are concerned, the internet is the worst thing ever.
It's difficult to shape the thoughts of the population when they can just go online and communicate with people from around the world and make up their minds based on experience rather than propaganda. Copyright is just one of the best tools to attack freedom to communicate and share. I'm just tired of the piracy and theft being used to describe sharing.
Quick tangent. If our governments were really concerned for "the children" why aren't there free online textbooks for every public school. The tech is certainly there. But...but...but... what about the textbook publishers' income. Ummm who the hell cares? Textbooks are supposed to be facts that are meant to be shared for the betterment of society as a whole, not the profit of the publishers.
Actually you made a very fair point Ninja. The iPhone was really cool when it arrived. Now its just another smartphone, that doesn't really do anything much different from the rest. Ooooh rounded corners!!!
If mobile phones were Apple's core market then I would say they are in trouble, but that's not their core market at all.
Personally, I like OSX more than Windows, which is the only reason I'm still an Apple fan, but I'm not interested in the iPad or iPhone at all. As you pointed out, they do everything the others do, except escape the walled garden.
The other tablet makers are pushing out tablets with full OS now, not just Android and iOS, which should make things very interesting. Unless iPads start coming with OSX, they will quickly lose relevance.
The response that is really infuriating is as follows:
"We know that the termination was suggested by the Worcester Detective Bureau on the grounds that if Officer Shea had not at that point made “any offers, or broken any law, and that he had not crossed the line, then we should just move on to other more promising subjects.”
That would mean that if the SAME thing happened with someone who wasn't a cop, then the sting should move on to more promising subjects. Seems like the standard for "promising" is someone who logs on with the screen name ImaPedophilePleaseArrestme
On the post: Aussie Court Realizes That Google Is Not Responsible For Content In Google Ads
Why is this so confusing?
Fact#2 Google is NOT the internet, it's a search engine. It indexes websites like the card catalogue in a library.
Is that so hard to comprehend?
If you wouldn't sue your phone company for the misconduct of its users then you shouldn't sue internet service providers for the same thing. If you wouldn't sue your library because someone left misleading advertising on display in public, then you shouldn't sue Google for the same thing.
NB: The internet is not some magical thing that turns shit that we already know how to do into new patents.
On the post: Copyright Boss: 'It's Great Mechanics Now Need To Know About Copyright'
Re: In other words: What is great is making things worse and thus drawing attention to the problem!
The last time copyright was made so accessible and public was in late 2001, and then on January 18th, 2012 all those public voices brought an end to SOPA.
On the post: Homeland Security: Not Searching Your Laptop Doesn't Benefit Your Civil Liberties, So We Can Do It
Ummmmm
It would give us civil rights/liberties.
On the post: Three Strikes May Decrease File Sharing, But If Sales Keep Dropping, Who Cares?
Re: Re: Re:
As for combating piracy, it's more complex than just a gut reaction. If you look at it by industry, the music industry has dealt with piracy the longest and now its not really an issue any more. Now that music is readily available through many different channels for free, there isn't much need or desire to pirate it. The industry evolved and is still evolving.
You posit that the proliferation of piracy undermines the expansion of legitimate distribution, but I counter it has the exact OPPOSITE effect. It would seem that the proliferation of piracy actually forces the expansion of legitimate distribution channels, as the legacy players are forced to actually compete.
"How many people would subscribe to Netflix of $8/mo. if they could get the identical (or better) service for free?"
Good question, but what if that free service was legal? If that free service is legal then the pirates will still be out there, but there will be less or no incentive to use their service, unless its just more convenient.
3 strikes laws are just unreasonable. If you are using the shoplifting analogy, then that would mean that the punishment for shoplifting would be banning the offender from buying things at stores. How does that help?
On the post: Why Hasn't The Washington Post Admitted That It Totally Screwed Up Its 'Free Super WiFi' Report?
Stop whining
I've even heard that you guys are pissing off some reputable jurnos out there with your lack of professional ethics.
#teribuhl
On the post: HOA President Receives Public Criticism; Responds With Baseless Claims And Empty Legal Threats
Re: LMAO
I was only mildly interested in this article AND THEN, I followed the links back to this little gem:
http://www.courierpress.com/videos/detail/a-conversation-with-stonecreek-hoa-president-steph /
My favorite quote is at 5:08
"You're in legal, legal.... legal violation here."
- Stephen Hess
On the post: Teri Buhl Threatens To Sue Us And Others; Still Seems Confused About The Law
R I F
IF she is really that upset, THEN all she has to do is add to the bogus DMCA takedown database. Isn't that the first step in dealing with copyright infringement online?
Or is she just looking for $150k in statutory damages?
On the post: Patent Troll Says It Owns Podcasting; Sues Adam Carolla, HowStuffWorks
I'm still unclear
If someone invents something and gets a patent then they get a monopoly on selling it. That makes sense to me, whether it is right or wrong. If I then recreate their invention and use it, but don't sell it, then I am not in any way infringing upon their monopoly, I am just using something that I made and I don't believe there is any law against that.
I'm not sure how you can sue content creators for their use of technology which is at their disposal. They are not actively selling an apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available. Even under the doctrine of equivalents, the content creators are selling content, not the apparatus for distribution.
I think this is the first trolling case that I have seen on TD where there is no actual infringement of the patent in question, since patents merely protect the right to sell the patented product, not the right to use it.
So could someone please explain the infringement to me?
On the post: Here's A Taste Of What Publishers Will Do If First Sale Rights For Foreign Goods Disappear
Trust us
OR
Just type in your credit card details. It's free (trust us). We just need your cc# to verify your age.
On the post: Arizona Politician Parodied By Fake Twitter Accounts Pushes Bill To Make Online Impersonation A Felony
hmmm
Basically Rep. Ugenti would rather be punched in the face (misdemeanor assault)than made fun of on a fake twitter account.
On the post: Canadian Schools Ban WiFi Based On Bad Science
Evolution of the species
We are watching the birth of the Idiocracy.
On the post: Teri Buhl Responds To Our Story; Still Confused About The Internet And The Law
Re: Good Advice for Teri
If she took more than a cursory glance at this site she would have quickly seen that there are loads of articles about copyright, IP law, and 1st Amendment issues and how abuses are occurring in the digital age.
Rather than comment about her behavior, I think its better to advise her to search through the techdirt archives for stories related to journalism in the digital age. If she did that, she might learn that newspapers are becoming irrelevant because they don't understand how to service a community. Perhaps she will even take note of how the techdirt community reacted to her "elite journalist" posture.
Legacy Journalists - 0
Intewebs - 1
Surprise alternate ending:
Just maybe Teri Buhl is not as idiotic as we are assuming. She may just be trying to draw as much attention to herself as she possibly can. She is going to trial over her dicey internet behavior and may be trying to get as much strength as possible behind her claim that she cannot get a fair trial because of the publicity on the net about her alleged misconduct.
Basically she may be trying to leverage the Streisand Effect for use as a defense in court.
On the post: CBS Bans Commercial That Disparages Coke & Pepsi, But Lets Them Disparage Each Other
Re: I doubt this is the real reason
On the post: French National Library Privatizes Public Domain Materials
Re: No way to pay for digitization, huh?
On the post: Former RIAA VP Named 2nd In Command Of Copyright Office
Re: scary
They have had the hardest time trying to convince the public to accept data caps on fixed service (copper and fiber), but they have had phenomenal success in training the public to pay for minutes on mobile and data caps over mobile. That is back to the way it used to be on fixed service. A cash cow.
They don't want the public aware that they've already merged their fixed and mobile networks and their costs of service are the same for either. Migrating to completely mobile service is not moving into the future for the telcos, but rather going back to the old days of charging per minute and even better charging for huge overage fees on small data caps. Well done, AT&T. Enjoy it until you're dismantled again.
On the post: Russian Ministry Of Culture Publishes Draft Anti-Piracy Law; Requires Takedowns Within 24 Hours
Worst thing ever
It's difficult to shape the thoughts of the population when they can just go online and communicate with people from around the world and make up their minds based on experience rather than propaganda. Copyright is just one of the best tools to attack freedom to communicate and share. I'm just tired of the piracy and theft being used to describe sharing.
Quick tangent. If our governments were really concerned for "the children" why aren't there free online textbooks for every public school. The tech is certainly there. But...but...but... what about the textbook publishers' income. Ummm who the hell cares? Textbooks are supposed to be facts that are meant to be shared for the betterment of society as a whole, not the profit of the publishers.
On the post: On To The Appeal... As Judge Basically Keeps Everything As Is In Apple/Samsung Patent Dispute
Re:
If mobile phones were Apple's core market then I would say they are in trouble, but that's not their core market at all.
Personally, I like OSX more than Windows, which is the only reason I'm still an Apple fan, but I'm not interested in the iPad or iPhone at all. As you pointed out, they do everything the others do, except escape the walled garden.
The other tablet makers are pushing out tablets with full OS now, not just Android and iOS, which should make things very interesting. Unless iPads start coming with OSX, they will quickly lose relevance.
On the post: Ericsson Sells 2,185 Mobile Tech Patents To Newly Minted Troll, Unwired Planet
It's a modern fairy tale
On the post: Police Department Rewards Officer Caught By An Online Pedophile Sting With Full Retirement Benefits
WTF? Oh I get it. It was his screenname
"We know that the termination was suggested by the Worcester Detective Bureau on the grounds that if Officer Shea had not at that point made “any offers, or broken any law, and that he had not crossed the line, then we should just move on to other more promising subjects.”
That would mean that if the SAME thing happened with someone who wasn't a cop, then the sting should move on to more promising subjects. Seems like the standard for "promising" is someone who logs on with the screen name ImaPedophilePleaseArrestme
On the post: Human Rights Lawyer Explains Why He's Working For Kim Dotcom: Exposing American Corruption
I couldn't resist.
Next >>