it was banned because of a bunch prudish parents and school-board members
Which was my fucking point all along: The campaign to ban Maus was possibly (and quite likely) one borne out of the same thinking that led to other similar book bans happening around the country, and those are outcroppings of the concerted and organized efforts (most often led by conservative groups) to ban books and teachings such as Critical Race Theory that “hurt” conservative feelings. Whether the McMinn County School Board itself was part of that campaign or simply gave in to parents who were is largely irrelevant when the end result is exactly what the book banners wanted.
You think this is about one book? You think this is really about eight swear words and a naked tit? No, this is about a campaign to whitewash the teaching of history—American or otherwise—to “protect the children” from things that might make them feel bad. Teaching the truth of slavery? White kids might feel bad about that; gotta clean that up so slaves were happy about their lot in life! Teaching the truth of queer history? Straight kids might think queer people deserve better treatment; that ain’t gonna fly with conservative parents and right-wing religious communities.
And ultimately, these campaigns are about devaluing and tearing down public schools. They’re about tearing down a “socialist” institution in favor of private or religious schools—you know, schools that’ll teach kids “the right things” about America, like performative patriotism and praising God and “there’s no need to talk about race because MLK died to solve all racism”.
It starts with a book. One book. One controversial, transgressive, unflinchingly honest book that doesn’t present the aftermath of the Holocaust as one where the survivors lived happily ever after and the Allies crushed all evil everywhere and the world was redeemed. Ban that book because of swear words and a naked breast, and what else becomes “unpalatable” even without the profanity and nudity? What else becomes “age inappropriate” because it presents some harsh truths or shines a light on the experiences of marginalized people?
This isn’t about a single book being banned. This is about that book being another step towards both a sanitizing of what we teach children and a tearing down of public education. The banning of Maus in this situation, then, is a warning sign—a sign that people need to fight against these bans before we start seeing book burnings held outside public libraries instead of fundamentalist churches.
And yet, your spiel about information control and your willingness to fine or jail people to the point of death for violating your “rules” says otherwise.
You’re a Nazi, tp. You might not like it, but you should learn to live with it.
See? You’re just proving my point: If people had to follow your “rules” to the absolute letter, they would never be able to create new works of art and culture.
copyrights need to be respected
And we all know what this means to you: “Nobody can violate any copyright for any reason under any circumstances.” (Let he who is without sin…) Under your idea of copyright, Fair Use/Dealing wouldn’t exist, which would leave no room for parodies of existing cultural works and would kill both memes and fan art almost immediately.
information flow is controlled
That sounds like some Nazi bullshit, bro. You gonna burn all the books you don’t want people to read?
coding conventions need to different from anyone else in the world
Unless you think everyone in the world should be coding in their own self-made programming language that every computer in the world should be able to automagically parse without issue or delay—and that seems to be what you’re suggesting here—coding is always going to be a field of creative endeavour where certain conventions will remain the same.
standard file format usage is restricted
Goodbye to JPEG, PNG, and GIF formats. Goodbye to plain text files. Goodbye to PDFs and EPUBs, to ZIPs and RARs, to MP3s and FLACs. All those formats, gone, like tears in rain…because you think that, like coding, everyone in the world should have to develop their own file format before they can store information of any kind.
And with all those formats gone, the devices that rely on them die with them. I hope you don’t have a digital camera of some kind—under your “rules”, it wouldn’t be able to work because it uses standardized file formats.
google search cannot be used
My assumption is that this would apply to all other search engines. In which case: This ties into your second rule, which now seems far more Nazi-like than you probably thought it would.
your output needs to be free of copyright problems
No one but God can guarantee that a new cultural work will be free from any and all copyright problems. Despite your demented delusions of deification, you are not God. Neither is anyone else.
deadlines must be met without exception
Tell me, tp, do you believe in the idea of “work will set you free”? 🤔
(Besides, this has nothing to do with copyright.)
even a single pixel cannot be broken on customer release
No one can guarantee that…and besides, like the previous “rule”, this has nothing to do with copyright.
you must never click scam site adverticement banner
Awww, did someone do a clicky-wicky and get a nasty ol’ virus because he thought hot MILFs really were in his area? And again, this has nothing to do with copyright, and neither do your next two rules.
For someone who wants people to use a program that was intentionally designed to help them create new cultural works, you seem hell-bent on making sure they can’t actually make anything with it—or at least live in a world where any deviation from your personalized copyright maximalist norm will be punished with unpayable fines, excessive prison sentences, and possibly even torture or execution.
You have claimed in the past that Meshpage can and will be able to prevent any and all copyright infringement. It couldn’t even stop you from doing that. For someone who thinks they’re God’s gift to copyright law, you are not without sin.
If you don't allow removal of some legal activities, then you'll end up violating copyright.
The only way to fully, wholly, 100% no-bullshit guarantee that no one can violate copyright even by accident is to prevent any- and everyone on the planet from doing any and every conceivable activity that would even remotely infringe on any and every copyright from any- and everywhere in the world. No typing, no painting, no 3D modeling, no singing, no playing instruments, no dancing, no photography, no passing down stories via oral tradition—and that doesn’t even get into experiences like watching movies or listening to music with friends, taking notes on books you’re reading, quoting any sort of cultural work that can be quoted…basically, what you want is for the world to be silenced from here on out.
That is copyright maximalism—or your form of it, at least—taken to its only logical end point: Not even the corporations would dare make new cultural works because even they would fear stepping on each other’s toes. If you want a world like that for yourself, go live in a monastery. Leave the rest of us who yearn to experience and create new works of art to our own creative devices.
Your program couldn’t stop you from violating Scott Cawthon’s copyrights despite your claims that it could do exactly that. If you can’t prevent yourself from infringing upon copyrights even by accident, how can you reasonably and realistically expect anyone else living in actual reality to do the same without having access to the power of God?
You’ve made it clear in the past that you think any computer application that can allow any kind of infringement to occur should kneecap its own primary functionality to prevent that infringement, no matter how miniscule. Don’t be a hypocrite now that your closely held opinion is inconvenient to your argument.
If I can afford to pay 2 billion worth of damage awards for willful infringement, the infringement is just ok
Like I said: You’re not legally allowed to infringe on other people’s copyrights because you made a piece of software. You can’t afford to pay a copyright fine any more than could the average person (that you want to see wiped off the face of the Earth).
Copyright infringement cons[e]quences are just monetary damage awards.
Only if you look at it in the vacuum of the punishment in and of itself. There’s also the scarlet letter of having that fine put on a potential criminal record with authorities, not to mention the potential of being fined such a large amount of money that you end up financially destitute.
And to think, that’s the kind of punishment you want for yourself. After all, you did infringe upon Scott Cawthon’s copyrights. Is he not entitled to sue you into oblivion (both metaphorical and literal) as you believe any copyright holder should be able to do to an infringer, or do his copyrights not matter to you because you’d never heard of him before you were told you explicitly (and maybe knowingly) violated his copyrights on the Five Nights at Freddy’s game franchise?
Then demonstrate it. Name twenty instances of it happening exactly as your rule lays out. Be specific and cite credible sources. And to help you better focus your search, you can only name examples that happened after the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States.
According to meeting records, the curriculum centers around Maus, using supplementary material to further teach on the Holocaust. Due to the book’s importance for instruction, Maus could not be replaced “without redoing this whole module,” Brady said. (Source)
According to Reuters, the McMinn County school board has yet to suggest an alternative text for their Holocaust curriculum. (Source)
If the school has a whole curriculum about the Holocaust that was dependent on this book, and the school board both banned the book from being used and hasn’t replaced it yet, that curriculum likely won’t get taught when the time comes. At the bare minimum, it won’t be taught to the same degree of effectiveness—especially if the school board replaces Maus with a much more “sanitized” look at the Holocaust and its effects on the world in general (and the survivors in particular).
why is it that those in charge of a country like the USA, a country that is supposed to be so big on freedom and privacy (but gives all security forces whatever access they want, to whomsoever they want, other than those in high places) do whatever they can to fuck things up, as much as possible, just so they can say 'i was responsible for getting yet another fucked up law enacted that screws the people over, but assists the bad element in our society as much as possible?
It’s the “I must be seen doing something” mindset. Doing something, even something potentially harmful, is better to a politician than doing nothing.
Then Meshpage can never stop all infringement. You’re not legally allowed to infringe on other people’s copyrights because you made a piece of software.
When Meshpage can stop you from infringing on any and all copyrights everywhere in the world in any and every context and instance, you let me know.
On the post: EARN ITs Big Knowledge 1st Amendment Problem
And yet, you come off as if you think it is.
On the post: Penguin Random House Demands Removal Of Maus From Digital Library Because The Book Is Popular Again
Which was my fucking point all along: The campaign to ban Maus was possibly (and quite likely) one borne out of the same thinking that led to other similar book bans happening around the country, and those are outcroppings of the concerted and organized efforts (most often led by conservative groups) to ban books and teachings such as Critical Race Theory that “hurt” conservative feelings. Whether the McMinn County School Board itself was part of that campaign or simply gave in to parents who were is largely irrelevant when the end result is exactly what the book banners wanted.
You think this is about one book? You think this is really about eight swear words and a naked tit? No, this is about a campaign to whitewash the teaching of history—American or otherwise—to “protect the children” from things that might make them feel bad. Teaching the truth of slavery? White kids might feel bad about that; gotta clean that up so slaves were happy about their lot in life! Teaching the truth of queer history? Straight kids might think queer people deserve better treatment; that ain’t gonna fly with conservative parents and right-wing religious communities.
And ultimately, these campaigns are about devaluing and tearing down public schools. They’re about tearing down a “socialist” institution in favor of private or religious schools—you know, schools that’ll teach kids “the right things” about America, like performative patriotism and praising God and “there’s no need to talk about race because MLK died to solve all racism”.
It starts with a book. One book. One controversial, transgressive, unflinchingly honest book that doesn’t present the aftermath of the Holocaust as one where the survivors lived happily ever after and the Allies crushed all evil everywhere and the world was redeemed. Ban that book because of swear words and a naked breast, and what else becomes “unpalatable” even without the profanity and nudity? What else becomes “age inappropriate” because it presents some harsh truths or shines a light on the experiences of marginalized people?
This isn’t about a single book being banned. This is about that book being another step towards both a sanitizing of what we teach children and a tearing down of public education. The banning of Maus in this situation, then, is a warning sign—a sign that people need to fight against these bans before we start seeing book burnings held outside public libraries instead of fundamentalist churches.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
And yet, your spiel about information control and your willingness to fine or jail people to the point of death for violating your “rules” says otherwise.
You’re a Nazi, tp. You might not like it, but you should learn to live with it.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Again: Why do you want people to die for violating copyrights?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
How long should people be jailed in prisons/internment camps for the act of format shifting?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Why do you want people to die for violating copyright?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
See? You’re just proving my point: If people had to follow your “rules” to the absolute letter, they would never be able to create new works of art and culture.
And we all know what this means to you: “Nobody can violate any copyright for any reason under any circumstances.” (Let he who is without sin…) Under your idea of copyright, Fair Use/Dealing wouldn’t exist, which would leave no room for parodies of existing cultural works and would kill both memes and fan art almost immediately.
That sounds like some Nazi bullshit, bro. You gonna burn all the books you don’t want people to read?
Unless you think everyone in the world should be coding in their own self-made programming language that every computer in the world should be able to automagically parse without issue or delay—and that seems to be what you’re suggesting here—coding is always going to be a field of creative endeavour where certain conventions will remain the same.
Goodbye to JPEG, PNG, and GIF formats. Goodbye to plain text files. Goodbye to PDFs and EPUBs, to ZIPs and RARs, to MP3s and FLACs. All those formats, gone, like tears in rain…because you think that, like coding, everyone in the world should have to develop their own file format before they can store information of any kind.
And with all those formats gone, the devices that rely on them die with them. I hope you don’t have a digital camera of some kind—under your “rules”, it wouldn’t be able to work because it uses standardized file formats.
My assumption is that this would apply to all other search engines. In which case: This ties into your second rule, which now seems far more Nazi-like than you probably thought it would.
No one but God can guarantee that a new cultural work will be free from any and all copyright problems. Despite your demented delusions of deification, you are not God. Neither is anyone else.
Tell me, tp, do you believe in the idea of “work will set you free”? 🤔
(Besides, this has nothing to do with copyright.)
No one can guarantee that…and besides, like the previous “rule”, this has nothing to do with copyright.
Awww, did someone do a clicky-wicky and get a nasty ol’ virus because he thought hot MILFs really were in his area? And again, this has nothing to do with copyright, and neither do your next two rules.
For someone who wants people to use a program that was intentionally designed to help them create new cultural works, you seem hell-bent on making sure they can’t actually make anything with it—or at least live in a world where any deviation from your personalized copyright maximalist norm will be punished with unpayable fines, excessive prison sentences, and possibly even torture or execution.
Are you absolutely sure you’re not a Nazi, tp?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
You have claimed in the past that Meshpage can and will be able to prevent any and all copyright infringement. It couldn’t even stop you from doing that. For someone who thinks they’re God’s gift to copyright law, you are not without sin.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
The only way to fully, wholly, 100% no-bullshit guarantee that no one can violate copyright even by accident is to prevent any- and everyone on the planet from doing any and every conceivable activity that would even remotely infringe on any and every copyright from any- and everywhere in the world. No typing, no painting, no 3D modeling, no singing, no playing instruments, no dancing, no photography, no passing down stories via oral tradition—and that doesn’t even get into experiences like watching movies or listening to music with friends, taking notes on books you’re reading, quoting any sort of cultural work that can be quoted…basically, what you want is for the world to be silenced from here on out.
That is copyright maximalism—or your form of it, at least—taken to its only logical end point: Not even the corporations would dare make new cultural works because even they would fear stepping on each other’s toes. If you want a world like that for yourself, go live in a monastery. Leave the rest of us who yearn to experience and create new works of art to our own creative devices.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Your program couldn’t stop you from violating Scott Cawthon’s copyrights despite your claims that it could do exactly that. If you can’t prevent yourself from infringing upon copyrights even by accident, how can you reasonably and realistically expect anyone else living in actual reality to do the same without having access to the power of God?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
fucking what
you think google fucking makes me commit infringement when I voluntarily search for an image
you think they hold a fucking gun to my head or some shit
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha this would be even funnier if it weren't so fucking deranged and you weren't such a genocidal lunatic
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Crafting a 3D model of a phone in Meshpage doesn’t mean you’ve made an actual phone, toilet paper man.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
How do you expect anyone to do this without the power of God? Your program couldn’t even stop you from infringing on someone else’s copyright.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
You’ve made it clear in the past that you think any computer application that can allow any kind of infringement to occur should kneecap its own primary functionality to prevent that infringement, no matter how miniscule. Don’t be a hypocrite now that your closely held opinion is inconvenient to your argument.
Like I said: You’re not legally allowed to infringe on other people’s copyrights because you made a piece of software. You can’t afford to pay a copyright fine any more than could the average person (that you want to see wiped off the face of the Earth).
Only if you look at it in the vacuum of the punishment in and of itself. There’s also the scarlet letter of having that fine put on a potential criminal record with authorities, not to mention the potential of being fined such a large amount of money that you end up financially destitute.
And to think, that’s the kind of punishment you want for yourself. After all, you did infringe upon Scott Cawthon’s copyrights. Is he not entitled to sue you into oblivion (both metaphorical and literal) as you believe any copyright holder should be able to do to an infringer, or do his copyrights not matter to you because you’d never heard of him before you were told you explicitly (and maybe knowingly) violated his copyrights on the Five Nights at Freddy’s game franchise?
Go fuck yourself, you genocidal hypocrite.
On the post: Penguin Random House Demands Removal Of Maus From Digital Library Because The Book Is Popular Again
Then demonstrate it. Name twenty instances of it happening exactly as your rule lays out. Be specific and cite credible sources. And to help you better focus your search, you can only name examples that happened after the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States.
I’ll wait.
On the post: Penguin Random House Demands Removal Of Maus From Digital Library Because The Book Is Popular Again
If the school has a whole curriculum about the Holocaust that was dependent on this book, and the school board both banned the book from being used and hasn’t replaced it yet, that curriculum likely won’t get taught when the time comes. At the bare minimum, it won’t be taught to the same degree of effectiveness—especially if the school board replaces Maus with a much more “sanitized” look at the Holocaust and its effects on the world in general (and the survivors in particular).
On the post: How EARN IT Could Give Abusers A Get Out Of Jail Free Card: By Making Evidence Inadmissible
It’s the “I must be seen doing something” mindset. Doing something, even something potentially harmful, is better to a politician than doing nothing.
On the post: How EARN IT Could Give Abusers A Get Out Of Jail Free Card: By Making Evidence Inadmissible
Might be a carveout for a different group. Does anyone know how much input the Catholic Church had in putting this bill together?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Pot, kettle, black.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Then Meshpage can never stop all infringement. You’re not legally allowed to infringe on other people’s copyrights because you made a piece of software.
When Meshpage can stop you from infringing on any and all copyrights everywhere in the world in any and every context and instance, you let me know.
Next >>