Sadly, they could probably twist wiretapping laws to make that an offense. Even if they made sure to do it in a state where both parties didn't have to consent, it would be streamed to states where both do, which I'm sure would be claimed as good enough for prosecution.
Wow, talk about "Damned if you do, damned if you don't".
Let me make sure I've got this straight:
If EFF does nothing, that proves they are Google's lapdogs. If EFF does react, that proves they are trying to hide the fact they are Google's lapdogs.
And you expect us to take you seriously? This is not rational discussion, this is you being so thoroughly convinced you're right that literally nothing will persuade you otherwise.
It is his business, let him conduct it as he sees fit. If you feel he isn't giving you value for your money, don't buy his product.
How hard is that?
Rather than bitching about every bad move that you feel Masnick makes, why not work on something positive instead? Why is there so much negative and so little positive here?
If you present your viewpoints respectfully, we (at least most of us) will respond with respect. Will we agree? Not necessarily, but that's not the same as not taking you seriously. When half of your post is ad hominem attacks, it doesn't sound like you're interested in civilized discussion.
... fat fuck... 350lb career criminal... Lord High Apologist Masnick... fat dope...
Seriously, does every single point you try to make have to include personal attacks? We might be better able to take you seriously if you would just leave them out.
Re: Response to: Androgynous Cowherd on Feb 5th, 2012 @ 12:21pm
If I'm not mistaken, this is an answer to why the 12:00 post wasn't there at 2:15, not a problem with the idea. Just to clarify for those who might be confused.
We know full well that this is how the system works. We just don't like it.
Anyway, this doesn't seem to be an "I won't vote for A unless B happens" scenario. This seems, at least to my non-professional eye, to be more like "A is almost guaranteed to pass, so let's put in B that probably wouldn't pass on its own merits so that it can get pushed through regardless of whether people like it or not."
I would say that the secondary copy work may actually hurt the public's view of the original piece, taking away in some manner from it's uniqueness and such... The second work would be much better if the artist took the time to find a similar subject, to locate a suitable location, to dress the person up with perhaps funny cardboard cutout blue glasses, and then taken the image home to "add" the guitar... Instead, their work says to me "I am too lazy to be a real artist", and they are no better than Perez Hilton drawing cocks and cum drops on celeb faces.
No, it really isn't. KYTV is not keeping whoever produced the ads from speaking at all. KYTV is simply not broadcasting a viewpoint it does not agree with.
If I offered to pay you to tell your friends about my political viewpoints, would you be censoring me by not doing it?
NBC has no clue whether or not my TV is tuned into the broadcast or not. I could watch it on my TV, "illegally" stream it over the internet or not watch it at all, and they would never know the difference.
On the post: Chris Dodd Extends SOPA 'Olive Branch' To Silicon Valley... And Proceeds To Bash Them Over The Head With It
Re: "Private" Backroom Meeting
On the post: EFF Condemns Google For Circumventing Safari Privacy Protections
Re: Re: Re:
Let me make sure I've got this straight:
If EFF does nothing, that proves they are Google's lapdogs. If EFF does react, that proves they are trying to hide the fact they are Google's lapdogs.
And you expect us to take you seriously? This is not rational discussion, this is you being so thoroughly convinced you're right that literally nothing will persuade you otherwise.
On the post: EFF Condemns Google For Circumventing Safari Privacy Protections
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm really not getting the confusion here.
On the post: Pro Tip: Even If Someone Has Faked A Damaging Memo About Your Organization, Don't Threaten To Sue Anyone Who 'Comments' On It
Re: Lies
Then I read the rest of Poptech's comments and realized it's probably serious...
On the post: Directors Guild Boss Insists That Everyone Against SOPA/PIPA Was Duped
Re: Re:
On the post: Directors Guild Boss Insists That Everyone Against SOPA/PIPA Was Duped
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: IFPI & Other Lobbyists Tell Parliament That ACTA Protests Silence The Democratic Process
Re:
He's just a little confused as to which 1% is doing the dictating.
On the post: IFPI & Other Lobbyists Tell Parliament That ACTA Protests Silence The Democratic Process
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Sky News Tells Reporters Not To Use Twitter To Break News Without Permission
Re:
How hard is that?
Rather than bitching about every bad move that you feel Masnick makes, why not work on something positive instead? Why is there so much negative and so little positive here?
On the post: Park Ranger Tases Guy Walking Dogs Without A Leash
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Evidence Shows That Megaupload Shutdown Had No Real Impact On Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: RIAA Totally Out Of Touch: Lashes Out At Google, Wikipedia And Everyone Who Protested SOPA/PIPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Evidence Shows That Megaupload Shutdown Had No Real Impact On Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seriously, does every single point you try to make have to include personal attacks? We might be better able to take you seriously if you would just leave them out.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Response to: Androgynous Cowherd on Feb 5th, 2012 @ 12:21pm
On the post: Congress Trying To Regulate Certain Wireless Spectrum Issues... In A Payroll Tax Bill?
Re:
Anyway, this doesn't seem to be an "I won't vote for A unless B happens" scenario. This seems, at least to my non-professional eye, to be more like "A is almost guaranteed to pass, so let's put in B that probably wouldn't pass on its own merits so that it can get pushed through regardless of whether people like it or not."
On the post: When Judges Are Determining Whether Or Not Art Should Exist... We Have A Problem
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
On the post: Beach Boys Lyricist Goes After Artist Who Dared To Paint Works Inspired By Beach Boy Songs
Re: Re: Re: Lawyers like to support...
On the post: ICE Seizes 300 More Sites; Can't Have People Watching Super Bowl Ads Without Permission
Re: KY-3 is the place to be...for censorship.
If I offered to pay you to tell your friends about my political viewpoints, would you be censoring me by not doing it?
On the post: ICE Seizes 300 More Sites; Can't Have People Watching Super Bowl Ads Without Permission
Re:
On the post: ICE Seizes 300 More Sites; Can't Have People Watching Super Bowl Ads Without Permission
Re: OTA is Stealing
How can watching the Super Bowl without a television be legal?
Next >>