Regardless of the idea that Pixar may be a made up name the fact remains that you can't confuse Pixar animation with Pixar oil. They're in entirely different industries with entirely different products and markets.
I have to admit, though that it's amusing to think of someone doing that. "Can I get $50 of Pixar Supreme and a copy of Cars by paying at the pump?"
As for the Brave vs Braves silliness it's much the same thing. Just how do you confuse a movie title with a baseball team? Indeed one of the most successful teams in MLB.
At a really big stretch I can see the team believing that somehow the trade mark on the movie name could damage them should the movie tank. (Pixar might be due for one of those, after all.) Or that they're linked in some way. Maybe Disney needs to buck up for product placement or something!
Then go read up on the fact that none of that means much of anything when a bill is passed into law.
At that point it's what's in the Act itself, any regulations pursuant to that act, precedence, jurisprudence, evidence and then, maybe, just maybe "spirit and intent" and even than only at the highest levels of appeal courts as a rule.
Sorta like Indiana once tried to regulate the value of the constant pi just because some politican thought it was too darned complicated and wanted something similar. So he whipped off a bill that almost passed. So any fool can write a bill. But that doesn't make it reality.
The Indiana foolishness stopped when a math professor pointed out that the number was needed to measure and built round and circular things among other details. So they couldn't really change it.
SOPA/PIPA have wonderful(?) intentions and spirit though they won't stop piracy and counterfeiting. The RIAA and MPAA won't adapt fast enough, if at all, to stop the first and, at least in high fashion, that's been going on since high fashion was "invented" in the 19th Century and this won't stop it. Very sadly it won't stop the dangerous stuff either like fake pharmaceuticals until the price of the real stuff comes down from the stratosphere to where real people can afford it.
The downside of both bills, on the other hand, is somewhere between horrible and unthinkable if you believe in such things like the US Bill of Rights innovation, free speech and freedom and liberty.
There are times, however where I'm convinced there were too, too many spirits involved in the formulation of the intentions built into this legislation.
Despite what you say and want to imply about Mike and other opponents of SOPA/PIPA did you notice that what GoDaddy is talking about are done voluntarily by one or some members of what GoDaddy says is the internet ecosystem rather than a top down demand of the heavy hand of government? I guess not. And then it chides the rest of the internet ecosystem for its opposition to the heavy hand of government and, particularly, the call for DNS filtering.
As for the rest of GoDaddy's statements they seem more self congratulatory than anything else and more the sound of one hand clapping than anything else.
As one AC has pointed out already GoDaddy seems perfectly willing to host phishing sites (about 3/4 of my US originating spam/phishing messages a day for my sites and personal email come from sites hosted on GoDaddy, BTW).
You'll pardon me then for being skeptical about GoDaddy's statements and motivations here. And flat out ingenuousness.
Actually it's quite a rational and reasoned argument for exactly what Sanchez sees coming. That, and as it WON'T stop piracy or counterfeits in the short or long run what WILL in all likelihood happen.
Even if, as you say, it won't withstand a First Amendment challenge just what makes you think that in it's present form it will?
I used to read news for a living before I found out I could become wealthier doing real work. Today I use that skill as a lay reader, intercessor and reading the lessons in church. ;-) (Bass-baritone speaking voice by the way.)
Beyond that I'd suggest you need a better microphone not a better studio. You can have the most wonderfully acoustically perfect location in the world but if the mike sucks the sound sucks. ;-)
I've also been known to edit video from time to time, one of the reasons I bought Adobe Creative Suite to start with. NOTE: bought not pirated! (I did test it out first of a so called pirate site to see if it would do what I needed though. You bet I did for the kind of money Adobe wants for it.)
Pigs fly east in winter so they can enjoy the fine cooking in Beijing and Shanghai all winter long. ;-)
Obviously, given the trolls here, some people do think that "has been estimated" without citation is not only valuable but highly accurate information regardless of what others and the GAO in the US have to say on the same subject.
Another hint, speak a bit more slowly or cut back on the words and let the supporting pictures/video to the talking for you. And cut back on the pictures of Tepp. I mean 3/4 closed eyes is almost enough to convict him of lying in and of itself. He doesn't look at the camera or the interviewer and most of us, face to face, would come to the conclusion that this guy isn't to be trusted. That reaction will come very early in the video.
Between what Cowardly Anon suggests and my very few additions many mean another 30-60 seconds, if that, but it's time added that's well worth the end result. For the most part the evidence you present and your editing, so far, are good enough to draw a viewer in,
All I'm gonna say is that I'm not at all surprised and almost beyond outrage.
(Things aren't a hell of a lot better in Canada, mind you, though there are several more degrees of separation but it's here too.)
I doubt it would be any different under a Republican presidency in the United States than it is under Obama. Like as not most of the names wouldn't change either.
Welcome to the real world of realpolitik. It's not at all pretty is it?
He still needs to collect evidence that a crime did, in fact, occur not just take Hollywood's word for it that one did. And he has to collect sufficient evidence to to convince a judge or JP to issue the search warrants that led to the raids in order to collect more. None of which justifies the over the top raids with artillery drawn when there seems to be no evidence that they'd meet resistance much less armed resistance.
Then he turns over said evidence to the prosecution authorities who will attempt to prove a criminal case from what he's collected.
Sure, he can hope that what he's done will send someone off to the the the nearest overcrowded prison but he is NOT judge, jury and executioner which is the only way to read his statement. The logical end game to that attitude is tyranny, not cozy fascism but tyranny which is worse. Yes, he has laws to enforce. Yes he has a job to do but his job isn't to convict. That belongs to the courts and the courts alone.
Please enlighten me. Since when did the police become judge, jury and executioner? When did that happen?
The role of law enforement officers is to investigate alleged crimes, assemble evidence and then pass it on to the Crown (in Canada) or the prosecution in the United States to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal cases that such a crime (a) occurred and (b) this is the perp we gave you.
Sure, the cop may be utterly convinced he has the perp but that's his/her opinion and, often, not a very good one at that as to be a decent investigator there's some amount of tunnel vision required which often causes the investigator to miss evidence that would through their conclusion into question. It's not like this doesn't happen, Joe, and happen often.
And that's what we have courts for. To take the investigator's OPINION, educated as it is, and prove that in criminal cases BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT in an adversarial setting. And that's why many prosecutions never go ahead and why many fail.
One more time -- it is not the ICE agent's job to be judge, jury and executioner. Sorry, but you've been watching far too many tv shows which are fantasy, remember?
As far as it goes, I'm absolutely certain that I speak for most Canadians here when I say that we don't want your exports in this regard,
First off, no matter what Ms Beshara has done here which amounts to copyright infringement to be sure and making far too many assumptions about safe harbours without legal advice I have my doubts that she cost Hollywood a penny. In fact she probably could have done a better job in finding a legal firm that specializes in IP law that would have represented her better.
But you see, in Canada she probably wouldn't get custodial time at all for her "crime" as from beginning to end there was no violence and no, as yet, spelled out losses by the plaintiff and certainly none to the state outside of income tax. Generally speaking we don't send people to jail for that one either unless it's a massive amount and clearly fraudulent.
Yes, her site may have been forfeited AFTER a trail but she would have been given a non-custodial sentence, ordered to pay restitution (all of which would have forced Hollywood to come up with actual losses based on real, not imaginary, accounting practices which I'm sure they don't want cause there wouldn't be any as you can't actually lose a "possible" sale and call that a line item) and do some form of community work appropriate to the "crime" in question.
In short, we don't imprison the vast majority of non-violent "crimes". So if you handed her over to us the worst she'd get is one of those oh-so-fashionable ankle bracelet things.
All that said, we don't want your crooks. Unless, of course, the United States wants to pay the costs of the related custodial time. It don't come free, you know.
At a guess, I'd say that should she get a 5 year term, serve the entire thing and get out her imprisonment will have cost the American legal and penal systems far more than any damage she did to Hollywood while, at the same time, taking away aspects of the site that did good things.
And this makes sense to you? Even IF I agreed with the ICE agent's view of his job (and I don't because it's not his job to be judge, jury and executioner) spending more to keep her incarcerated than any REAL, not imaginary, damage she and her site may have cost.
Constitutional questions aside, it makes no sense at all.
No wonder American jails are filled to overflowing.
If they are foreign sites, as SOPA/PIPA supporters insist they will be they may not choose to defend themselves in an American court given that, in principle, that would mean they are willing to subject themselves to an attempt by the United States of to apply US laws extra-territorially even if what they're doing in their own country has been deemed legal. And extra-territorial application of one country's law in another country's jurisdiction is is illegal in international law.
So countries will start to warn the State Department, Ambassador's and other American agents that they will not tolerate this just as the United States would if the shoe was on the other foot.
Some may consider there's a violation of trade law and take the United States up in front of the GATT.
Others may simply retaliate. For example the largest consumer market in the world is currently China and that will probably continue. India will probably move into second spot ahead of the USA fairly shortly even if a vibrant recovery begins the the States soon. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that one or both would advise PayPal, Visa and MasterCard that if they continue to stop processing payments for sites in their country doing business legally under their laws due to SOPA/PIPA that they will forbid them from doing any on line payment processing at all. And that until these sites are proven to be violating the Berne Agreement on Copyright which covers copyright's application internationally in a Chinese or Indian court that the accused sites are within the law. India gets to add that they signed onto Berne long before the United States did. Both already have alternatives in place, by the way. At some point they may even threaten MasterCard and Visa that until they stop trying to apply US law in their countries in one sphere of trade (online) that their products are no longer welcome to to do other credit card business within their boundaries. Both also have other credit cards and credit card companies in them founded when Visa and Master Card weren't all that interested in them. I can't see any of the three continuing to support SOPA/PIPA, if they do now, should that happen. None of the three would be all that interested in losing a combined market of 2+ billion people where disposable income in increasing merely to keep US business in a consumer market where disposable income across the board is DEcreasing. Nightmare scenario, I know, but it does get the point across.
There is really no upside to this on the part of payment processors only downside. They lose out no matter what.
So the question is does the United States and do the supporters of PIPA/SOPA consider this an acceptable risk that should a trade war erupt that the United States would almost certainly lose. At this moment the USA doesn't have supporters for this anywhere in the developed world, remember.
Is it really worth this to lose one or more of the lynchpins of what it MEANS to be American just to provide protection to industries that provide barely 1% of American GDP and even less in employment. Then comes the fact that isn't about copyright at all, it's about Hollywood's continued rabid desire to regain control the consumer supply route and little else. Is this mess worth sacrificing all or part of the US Bill of Rights for either now or in the future? That increasingly is the view of opponents and supporters both in and out of Congress are left with he least trustworthy assurance of a politician there is: "trust us, we promise".
Well, you see, the RIAA is so hung up on restrictive copyright and control (as in total control freaks) that they have no idea what open source software is, what it means or that would mean there's more than one "app" "store" or that Android will run on a host of more devices than just a telephone. Just recomplile and go. Fix the inevitable bugs, then recompile and go again and you can jail break your smart meter the power company thrust on you complete with a nifty GUI!
That would, of course, make SourceForge a pirate site but I'm sure the RIAA and MPAA consider that it is or at least potentially is. Look at all the stuff there that might just possibly, maybe, could be or might be used for piracy if someone adds a few lines of code!!!
On the post: Pixar Trademark Lawyers Being Kept Busy: Fighting Pixar Petroleum, While Being Fought By The Atlanta Braves Over 'Brave'
Re:
I have to admit, though that it's amusing to think of someone doing that. "Can I get $50 of Pixar Supreme and a copy of Cars by paying at the pump?"
As for the Brave vs Braves silliness it's much the same thing. Just how do you confuse a movie title with a baseball team? Indeed one of the most successful teams in MLB.
At a really big stretch I can see the team believing that somehow the trade mark on the movie name could damage them should the movie tank. (Pixar might be due for one of those, after all.) Or that they're linked in some way. Maybe Disney needs to buck up for product placement or something!
On the post: Daft Idea Of The Week: Giving People Copyright In Their Faces
Geeze. This could be fun! I could copyright the mess in my house!
On the post: SOPA Supporters Learning (Slowly) That Pissing Off Reddit Is A Bad Idea
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Then go read up on the fact that none of that means much of anything when a bill is passed into law.
At that point it's what's in the Act itself, any regulations pursuant to that act, precedence, jurisprudence, evidence and then, maybe, just maybe "spirit and intent" and even than only at the highest levels of appeal courts as a rule.
Sorta like Indiana once tried to regulate the value of the constant pi just because some politican thought it was too darned complicated and wanted something similar. So he whipped off a bill that almost passed. So any fool can write a bill. But that doesn't make it reality.
The Indiana foolishness stopped when a math professor pointed out that the number was needed to measure and built round and circular things among other details. So they couldn't really change it.
SOPA/PIPA have wonderful(?) intentions and spirit though they won't stop piracy and counterfeiting. The RIAA and MPAA won't adapt fast enough, if at all, to stop the first and, at least in high fashion, that's been going on since high fashion was "invented" in the 19th Century and this won't stop it. Very sadly it won't stop the dangerous stuff either like fake pharmaceuticals until the price of the real stuff comes down from the stratosphere to where real people can afford it.
The downside of both bills, on the other hand, is somewhere between horrible and unthinkable if you believe in such things like the US Bill of Rights innovation, free speech and freedom and liberty.
There are times, however where I'm convinced there were too, too many spirits involved in the formulation of the intentions built into this legislation.
On the post: SOPA Supporters Learning (Slowly) That Pissing Off Reddit Is A Bad Idea
Re:
As for the rest of GoDaddy's statements they seem more self congratulatory than anything else and more the sound of one hand clapping than anything else.
As one AC has pointed out already GoDaddy seems perfectly willing to host phishing sites (about 3/4 of my US originating spam/phishing messages a day for my sites and personal email come from sites hosted on GoDaddy, BTW).
You'll pardon me then for being skeptical about GoDaddy's statements and motivations here. And flat out ingenuousness.
On the post: How SOPA Creates The Architecture For Much More Widespread Censorship
Re:
Even if, as you say, it won't withstand a First Amendment challenge just what makes you think that in it's present form it will?
On the post: Hollywood Star Ashton Kutcher Says 'SOPA Is The Problem, Not The Solution'
Re:
And hearing you, of all people, accuse ANYONE of lacking intellectual curiosity is hilarious!
Something must have hit home, though cause you sound a bit peeved. Are you starting to realize that Denial is not just a river in Africa?
On the post: Video Detailing How US Chamber Of Commerce Deceives The Public In Its Support Of SOPA & PROTECT IP
Re: Re:
Beyond that I'd suggest you need a better microphone not a better studio. You can have the most wonderfully acoustically perfect location in the world but if the mike sucks the sound sucks. ;-)
I've also been known to edit video from time to time, one of the reasons I bought Adobe Creative Suite to start with. NOTE: bought not pirated! (I did test it out first of a so called pirate site to see if it would do what I needed though. You bet I did for the kind of money Adobe wants for it.)
On the post: Video Detailing How US Chamber Of Commerce Deceives The Public In Its Support Of SOPA & PROTECT IP
Re:
Obviously, given the trolls here, some people do think that "has been estimated" without citation is not only valuable but highly accurate information regardless of what others and the GAO in the US have to say on the same subject.
On the post: Video Detailing How US Chamber Of Commerce Deceives The Public In Its Support Of SOPA & PROTECT IP
Re:
Between what Cowardly Anon suggests and my very few additions many mean another 30-60 seconds, if that, but it's time added that's well worth the end result. For the most part the evidence you present and your editing, so far, are good enough to draw a viewer in,
Great work!
On the post: Video Detailing How US Chamber Of Commerce Deceives The Public In Its Support Of SOPA & PROTECT IP
Re: Re:
On the post: Who Wants To Own Righthaven.com? Domain Seized, About To Be Auctioned
It might also make a good basis for an essay as he's not quite ready for dissertation writing yet!
On the post: Louis CK: Over $1 Million In Sales In Just 12 Days For DRM-Free Download
Re: Yay! Paywall!
On the post: Mapping Out The Revolving Door Between Gov't And Big Business In Venn Diagrams
(Things aren't a hell of a lot better in Canada, mind you, though there are several more degrees of separation but it's here too.)
I doubt it would be any different under a Republican presidency in the United States than it is under Obama. Like as not most of the names wouldn't change either.
Welcome to the real world of realpolitik. It's not at all pretty is it?
On the post: ICE Admits That It Just Wants To 'Put People In Jail' With Operation In Our Sites
Re: ICE's function
Then he turns over said evidence to the prosecution authorities who will attempt to prove a criminal case from what he's collected.
Sure, he can hope that what he's done will send someone off to the the the nearest overcrowded prison but he is NOT judge, jury and executioner which is the only way to read his statement. The logical end game to that attitude is tyranny, not cozy fascism but tyranny which is worse. Yes, he has laws to enforce. Yes he has a job to do but his job isn't to convict. That belongs to the courts and the courts alone.
At least for now.
On the post: ICE Admits That It Just Wants To 'Put People In Jail' With Operation In Our Sites
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The role of law enforement officers is to investigate alleged crimes, assemble evidence and then pass it on to the Crown (in Canada) or the prosecution in the United States to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal cases that such a crime (a) occurred and (b) this is the perp we gave you.
Sure, the cop may be utterly convinced he has the perp but that's his/her opinion and, often, not a very good one at that as to be a decent investigator there's some amount of tunnel vision required which often causes the investigator to miss evidence that would through their conclusion into question. It's not like this doesn't happen, Joe, and happen often.
And that's what we have courts for. To take the investigator's OPINION, educated as it is, and prove that in criminal cases BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT in an adversarial setting. And that's why many prosecutions never go ahead and why many fail.
One more time -- it is not the ICE agent's job to be judge, jury and executioner. Sorry, but you've been watching far too many tv shows which are fantasy, remember?
On the post: ICE Admits That It Just Wants To 'Put People In Jail' With Operation In Our Sites
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
First off, no matter what Ms Beshara has done here which amounts to copyright infringement to be sure and making far too many assumptions about safe harbours without legal advice I have my doubts that she cost Hollywood a penny. In fact she probably could have done a better job in finding a legal firm that specializes in IP law that would have represented her better.
But you see, in Canada she probably wouldn't get custodial time at all for her "crime" as from beginning to end there was no violence and no, as yet, spelled out losses by the plaintiff and certainly none to the state outside of income tax. Generally speaking we don't send people to jail for that one either unless it's a massive amount and clearly fraudulent.
Yes, her site may have been forfeited AFTER a trail but she would have been given a non-custodial sentence, ordered to pay restitution (all of which would have forced Hollywood to come up with actual losses based on real, not imaginary, accounting practices which I'm sure they don't want cause there wouldn't be any as you can't actually lose a "possible" sale and call that a line item) and do some form of community work appropriate to the "crime" in question.
In short, we don't imprison the vast majority of non-violent "crimes". So if you handed her over to us the worst she'd get is one of those oh-so-fashionable ankle bracelet things.
All that said, we don't want your crooks. Unless, of course, the United States wants to pay the costs of the related custodial time. It don't come free, you know.
At a guess, I'd say that should she get a 5 year term, serve the entire thing and get out her imprisonment will have cost the American legal and penal systems far more than any damage she did to Hollywood while, at the same time, taking away aspects of the site that did good things.
And this makes sense to you? Even IF I agreed with the ICE agent's view of his job (and I don't because it's not his job to be judge, jury and executioner) spending more to keep her incarcerated than any REAL, not imaginary, damage she and her site may have cost.
Constitutional questions aside, it makes no sense at all.
No wonder American jails are filled to overflowing.
On the post: MythBuster's Adam Savage: Why PROTECT IP & SOPA Could Destroy The Internet As We Know It
Re: Re:
So countries will start to warn the State Department, Ambassador's and other American agents that they will not tolerate this just as the United States would if the shoe was on the other foot.
Some may consider there's a violation of trade law and take the United States up in front of the GATT.
Others may simply retaliate. For example the largest consumer market in the world is currently China and that will probably continue. India will probably move into second spot ahead of the USA fairly shortly even if a vibrant recovery begins the the States soon. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that one or both would advise PayPal, Visa and MasterCard that if they continue to stop processing payments for sites in their country doing business legally under their laws due to SOPA/PIPA that they will forbid them from doing any on line payment processing at all. And that until these sites are proven to be violating the Berne Agreement on Copyright which covers copyright's application internationally in a Chinese or Indian court that the accused sites are within the law. India gets to add that they signed onto Berne long before the United States did. Both already have alternatives in place, by the way. At some point they may even threaten MasterCard and Visa that until they stop trying to apply US law in their countries in one sphere of trade (online) that their products are no longer welcome to to do other credit card business within their boundaries. Both also have other credit cards and credit card companies in them founded when Visa and Master Card weren't all that interested in them. I can't see any of the three continuing to support SOPA/PIPA, if they do now, should that happen. None of the three would be all that interested in losing a combined market of 2+ billion people where disposable income in increasing merely to keep US business in a consumer market where disposable income across the board is DEcreasing. Nightmare scenario, I know, but it does get the point across.
There is really no upside to this on the part of payment processors only downside. They lose out no matter what.
So the question is does the United States and do the supporters of PIPA/SOPA consider this an acceptable risk that should a trade war erupt that the United States would almost certainly lose. At this moment the USA doesn't have supporters for this anywhere in the developed world, remember.
Is it really worth this to lose one or more of the lynchpins of what it MEANS to be American just to provide protection to industries that provide barely 1% of American GDP and even less in employment. Then comes the fact that isn't about copyright at all, it's about Hollywood's continued rabid desire to regain control the consumer supply route and little else. Is this mess worth sacrificing all or part of the US Bill of Rights for either now or in the future? That increasingly is the view of opponents and supporters both in and out of Congress are left with he least trustworthy assurance of a politician there is: "trust us, we promise".
On the post: RIAA Whines That Google Won't Let It Program Google's Search Algorithm
Re: Android
That would, of course, make SourceForge a pirate site but I'm sure the RIAA and MPAA consider that it is or at least potentially is. Look at all the stuff there that might just possibly, maybe, could be or might be used for piracy if someone adds a few lines of code!!!
On the post: RIAA Whines That Google Won't Let It Program Google's Search Algorithm
Re:
Start at A and work your way to Z. Include all cross references to dead or archaic languages.
You'll ALMOST be there.
On the post: RIAA Whines That Google Won't Let It Program Google's Search Algorithm
Re: Re: Re: Let's be reasonable.
Next >>