What I don't understand is, how can you sue someone for showing someone a public document? It is like Coke suing someone for taking a screenshot of an ad and sharing it to Facebook. This makes absolutely no sense... If that isn't the most cut-and-dried example of fair use, I don't know what is...
Unfortunately, even after a class action, they will still have made more off this scheme than they will pay out, and the taxpayers still won't have a free option provided by the IRS. This is still a win-win for Intuit. What hit they take in PR will have been lost by tax time next year, so even public shaming isn't even a good motivator for these crooks.
This is unfortunately just the 'cost of doing business' to them. Their gamble got found out and they lose a few pennies.
I use TaxAct and while its price has risen sharply over the last couple years, it is still a better option than Intuit
I think the point is, if Facebook, Microsoft, or any other company decides to sign up for this call, that is A-OK. If the US government backs it, potential First Amendment issues arise since they are able to curtail speech at a level an individual company cannot.
While the plan calls for "Ensure effective enforcement of applicable laws", what it would mean in reality if the government was involved is "Ensure SELECTIVE enforcement of applicable laws against our enemies". This could be just as bad as CFAA if our government decided to draft legislation.
I propose new legislation that will require the automatic dump of sender, recipient, timestamp, and subject to automatically be dumped to a searchable database for FOIA requestors.
That will stop the fishing expeditions and make everyone happy!
Three Strikes You're Out -- Unlimited Screw Ups, I'm still In!
What I don't understand is the three strikes rule on YouTube... If I get flagged 3 times posting 'copyrighted material', then I'm out. No monetization, no more uploads, lost fanbase, etc. etc. etc.
BUT If I send out fraudulent DMCA notices, I can do it with impunity. No 'strikes', no lost income, no repercussions.
You would think that since they can only LAWFULLY file a DMCA notice if they meet certain criteria, that them breaking the LAW would have some kind of repercussions...
Until parity happens and there are repercussions, we are screwed.
Too many people are just "well he hates trump, so he's awesome"... that is the problem with identity politics... too many people will glorify a horrible man just because he stuck it to an even more horrible man... It's like giving Stalin a Nobel Peace prize because he fought Hitler.
What i don't understand is you can issue a takedown request using an 'automated process' because 'it is too much work to verify something is actually infringing', but then they expect the receiver to do it AND do it within an hour? Straight. Up. Hypocrisy.
For all these people complaining that 'bad actors' are 'using the internet wrong', look at the real world and tell me any aspect of the real world that is bad actor proof.
Some Examples:
Vehicles -- Europe has had several high profile murders by vehicle. You don't see people blaming Mercedes and GM
Household Chemicals -- Tide Pod Challenges, etc. Need I say more
Prescription Drugs -- Some people need opioids, some people abuse them
Firearms -- Probably the closest analog to the internet in terms of people being up in arms about 'never let any bad thing ever happen with your product'.
Power Tools
I'd rather people understand the problem and just accept that anything we build, people will find a way to pervert it. Every weapon we have created over the course of human history is a testament to that.
Might as well sue the Hosting provider for allowing Backpage to show their content to the web, the Domain Registrar for allowing Backpage to be shown, the database provider (Oracle/Microsoft) for allowing them to hold that information, any contracting companies that did any work for them... and hell, why not just sue every individual employee at Backpage while we are at it!
... The problem with intermediate liability is that you can justify just about anyone but the person who ACTUALLY COMMITED THE CRIME is responsible... because... you know... they are poor and what is the fun in suing someone if they don't have money?
When the EU announced their stupid 'cookie notification' regime, I was sure that after just a year or two, the powers-that-be would see that their blunder didn't solve any problems and just annoyed users of websites. I expected it to die a quiet death and disappear.
Instead... we are still dealing with those stupid cookie notifications and now they are pushing through this ridiculous legislation.
This time I don't hold out hope that they will see the errors of their ways. Goodbye, European friends. I'll miss you on all of the message boards and discussion threads you will be geo-blocked from after this comes into law.
The thing I am upset about this deepfake controversy is how a couple bad actors did some bad things with it and now everyone is in a moral uproar over it. This is a new technology that has a lot of potential LEGITIMATE uses. For example: - A movie where you can cast yourself and friends in a role - Recast a movie with specific actors/actresses (who doesn't want to see Christopher Walken as Han Solo!) - Shooting pilots and pitching ideas using cheap talent and augmenting your preferred candidates instead - Instead of reshooting scenes after an actor either dies/does something stupid and gets fired, just use this technology in its place
TECHNICALLY... as it is worded any of the above would be for failure to take down deep fake or other manipulated audio/video content."
Quit demonizing a SPECIFIC technology just because a few people did something bad with it...
Behavior Interactive -- Learn to negotiate contracts!
So here's the thing... If a company pays you to build an game, and you build a game engine (let's be honest, its the game ENGINE we are talking about here...), you need to make sure YOU OWN THE RIGHTS TO THE ENGINE FOR REUSE FOR EXACTLY THIS PURPOSE...
This entire case would fall apart if you owned the engine source (separate from the 'game' source).
However, this could also come down to semantics. Behavior Interactive could say that they built an engine that they own (hopefully they have contracts to prove this is the case) and that the final product (Fallout: Shelter) was a game based on that engine.
However... if they structured the project as building a game with a one-off engine (or didn't consider what they were building was an engine) and didn't put in any distinction between engine version and game version... yeah... they're gonna get sued and lose badly. I doubt they clean room rebuilt that engine from scratch. Ain't no one got time for that!
I want a record of all my posts along with those that I posted as an Anonymous Coward. I also want you to delete them. I also want all sub-threads and other mentions of my avatar name, Anonymous Coward, and real name (which I will not give you) deleted as well because, GDPR
Par for the course for this administration. They want deterrence of sex work through fear; the same way they are handling the immigration at the southern border. A few more dead women trying to eek out a living is an acceptable trade-off in the eyes of the 'morality wing' of the Republican party...
Kind of disgusting when you think about the value these politicians put on these women's lives...
Seems to me that Santa Monica wants to yell, kick, and scream about AirBnB but you and I both know they will not lift a finger against the people that are illegally renting their homes. That would take time, energy, and pissing off your voting base is never a great look for politicians... But attacking this 'giant evil company that is destroying the neighborhood'... no political backlash there. Just slap a giant fine on them and make them take care of the problem for them!
I'd say that given the back and forth of that one, if the Booze Cruz was making statues up out of thin air, I'd probably have responded the same way as Zuckerberg. Even if I had CDA 230 memorized and prayed it like the rosary, that doesn't mean that the junk interpretation Cruz is citing isn't some stupid lower court precedent from Backwoods Alabama... Better to just say 'I'll have my lawyers call you on your bullshit later' and back away slowly... never losing eye contact.
Mac: I make a product that is easy to use and encourage a cult-like customer base. If you have problems, just come down to the Genius Bar and we'll help you out.
PC: And I sue to lock people up who make recovery CDs for my customer base; because the only thing worse than customers are customer's that are using my product without going through our non-existent support channel when things break.
Netflix's sitcom Disjointed has a commercial of ex-NFL players who are promoting the use of cannabis over pain killers for sports injuries. They 'had' to refer to the NFL as the 'North American, non-Canadian football league'...
At the end of the day, it is easier just not to say it so you don't get sued. No matter how stupid the lawsuit, you still have to pay lawyers to defend against it. So the NFL gets its pound of flesh one way or another...
I agree; Instead of legislating design, just legislate that if a COMPANY can repair a device, they make the equipment to do said repairs available. Apple has a device that can reauthorize the home button. Stores let you create new car keys. Auto manufacturers sell diagnostic tool kits...
It should be as simple as: if you make a device, and you have an in-house tool to repair it, you have to make it available to third parties as well.
Much simpler than telling companies they have to design things in a certain way...
So, if you have Comcast cable, you are paying anywhere from $8 to $16 for the privilege of having a cable box/DVR (more if you need a second receiver) to watch the content you paid for. So you can pay for an entire subscription of Netflix or HBO NOW for the same price. Local channels + Regional Sports, whether you like it or not, will cost anywhere from $8 - $12 as a below-the-line fee. That is almost another streaming service of your choice; again, for free. Want to watch anything in HD? Add $10 on top of that (at this point... really? but yeah... it is there).
So i'm not sure how $26-$38 in BASE FEES each month is cheaper than just streaming. HBO + Netflix + Hulu still come in cheaper! We haven't even talked about the ACTUAL CABLE BILL YET!
On the post: Federal Court Issues A Very Good Very Bad Decision Where Copyright And Free Speech Meet
A public advertisement being made public...
What I don't understand is, how can you sue someone for showing someone a public document? It is like Coke suing someone for taking a screenshot of an ad and sharing it to Facebook. This makes absolutely no sense... If that isn't the most cut-and-dried example of fair use, I don't know what is...
On the post: Getting Worse Part 2: Intuit's CEO Informs Employees That Free To File Was Hidden For The Public's Own Good
Lawyers get Rich, and Intuit is still Richer
Unfortunately, even after a class action, they will still have made more off this scheme than they will pay out, and the taxpayers still won't have a free option provided by the IRS. This is still a win-win for Intuit. What hit they take in PR will have been lost by tax time next year, so even public shaming isn't even a good motivator for these crooks.
This is unfortunately just the 'cost of doing business' to them. Their gamble got found out and they lose a few pennies.
I use TaxAct and while its price has risen sharply over the last couple years, it is still a better option than Intuit
On the post: Governments And Internet Companies Agree On Questionable Voluntary Pact On Extremist Content Online
Re: Re: What's "questionable" from YOUR view?
I think the point is, if Facebook, Microsoft, or any other company decides to sign up for this call, that is A-OK. If the US government backs it, potential First Amendment issues arise since they are able to curtail speech at a level an individual company cannot.
While the plan calls for "Ensure effective enforcement of applicable laws", what it would mean in reality if the government was involved is "Ensure SELECTIVE enforcement of applicable laws against our enemies". This could be just as bad as CFAA if our government decided to draft legislation.
On the post: DC Legislators Push FOIA Amendment That Would Shield Government Emails From FOIA Requesters [UPDATE]
Compromise
I propose new legislation that will require the automatic dump of sender, recipient, timestamp, and subject to automatically be dumped to a searchable database for FOIA requestors.
That will stop the fishing expeditions and make everyone happy!
On the post: Emilio Estevez Uses Some Public Domain Footage In Film, So Universal Studios Forces Original Public Domain Footage Offline
Three Strikes You're Out -- Unlimited Screw Ups, I'm still In!
What I don't understand is the three strikes rule on YouTube... If I get flagged 3 times posting 'copyrighted material', then I'm out. No monetization, no more uploads, lost fanbase, etc. etc. etc.
BUT If I send out fraudulent DMCA notices, I can do it with impunity. No 'strikes', no lost income, no repercussions.
You would think that since they can only LAWFULLY file a DMCA notice if they meet certain criteria, that them breaking the LAW would have some kind of repercussions...
Until parity happens and there are repercussions, we are screwed.
On the post: James Comey Offers Up Half-Assed Apology For Being Such An Asshole About Encryption
Thank You
Too many people are just "well he hates trump, so he's awesome"... that is the problem with identity politics... too many people will glorify a horrible man just because he stuck it to an even more horrible man... It's like giving Stalin a Nobel Peace prize because he fought Hitler.
On the post: EU Tells Internet Archive That Much Of Its Site Is 'Terrorist Content'
The hypocrisy of takedown requests
What i don't understand is you can issue a takedown request using an 'automated process' because 'it is too much work to verify something is actually infringing', but then they expect the receiver to do it AND do it within an hour? Straight. Up. Hypocrisy.
On the post: Three Lessons In Content Moderation From New Zealand And Other High-Profile Tragedies
Show me an idiot-proof realworld analog
For all these people complaining that 'bad actors' are 'using the internet wrong', look at the real world and tell me any aspect of the real world that is bad actor proof.
Some Examples:
Vehicles -- Europe has had several high profile murders by vehicle. You don't see people blaming Mercedes and GM
Household Chemicals -- Tide Pod Challenges, etc. Need I say more
Prescription Drugs -- Some people need opioids, some people abuse them
Firearms -- Probably the closest analog to the internet in terms of people being up in arms about 'never let any bad thing ever happen with your product'.
I'd rather people understand the problem and just accept that anything we build, people will find a way to pervert it. Every weapon we have created over the course of human history is a testament to that.
On the post: Salesforce Sued For Sex Trafficking... Because Backpage Used Salesforce's CRM
Recursive Intermediate Liability
Might as well sue the Hosting provider for allowing Backpage to show their content to the web, the Domain Registrar for allowing Backpage to be shown, the database provider (Oracle/Microsoft) for allowing them to hold that information, any contracting companies that did any work for them... and hell, why not just sue every individual employee at Backpage while we are at it!
... The problem with intermediate liability is that you can justify just about anyone but the person who ACTUALLY COMMITED THE CRIME is responsible... because... you know... they are poor and what is the fun in suing someone if they don't have money?
On the post: Disaster In The Making: Article 13 Puts User Rights At A Disadvantage To Corporate Greed
Rembember Evil Cookies?
When the EU announced their stupid 'cookie notification' regime, I was sure that after just a year or two, the powers-that-be would see that their blunder didn't solve any problems and just annoyed users of websites. I expected it to die a quiet death and disappear.
Instead... we are still dealing with those stupid cookie notifications and now they are pushing through this ridiculous legislation.
This time I don't hold out hope that they will see the errors of their ways. Goodbye, European friends. I'll miss you on all of the message boards and discussion threads you will be geo-blocked from after this comes into law.
On the post: Senator Mark Warner Lays Out Ideas For Regulating Internet Platforms
Deepfake today -- Dynamic Video Option Tomorrow
- A movie where you can cast yourself and friends in a role
- Recast a movie with specific actors/actresses (who doesn't want to see Christopher Walken as Han Solo!)
- Shooting pilots and pitching ideas using cheap talent and augmenting your preferred candidates instead
- Instead of reshooting scenes after an actor either dies/does something stupid and gets fired, just use this technology in its place
TECHNICALLY... as it is worded any of the above would be for failure to take down deep fake or other manipulated audio/video content."
Quit demonizing a SPECIFIC technology just because a few people did something bad with it...
On the post: In Contrast To PUBG's Silliness, Bethesda's Copyright Suit Against Warner Bros. Is All About Copyrightable Source Code
Behavior Interactive -- Learn to negotiate contracts!
This entire case would fall apart if you owned the engine source (separate from the 'game' source).
However, this could also come down to semantics. Behavior Interactive could say that they built an engine that they own (hopefully they have contracts to prove this is the case) and that the final product (Fallout: Shelter) was a game based on that engine.
However... if they structured the project as building a game with a one-off engine (or didn't consider what they were building was an engine) and didn't put in any distinction between engine version and game version... yeah... they're gonna get sued and lose badly. I doubt they clean room rebuilt that engine from scratch. Ain't no one got time for that!
On the post: Many Of Those Desperate GDPR Emails You've Been Getting Are Violating A Different EU Regulation
GDPR Nighmare Scenario #634
I want a record of all my posts along with those that I posted as an Anonymous Coward. I also want you to delete them. I also want all sub-threads and other mentions of my avatar name, Anonymous Coward, and real name (which I will not give you) deleted as well because, GDPR
Have fun complying!
K thx bye!
P.S. please don't really do that... i'd be sad.
On the post: Police Realizing That SESTA/FOSTA Made Their Jobs Harder; Sex Traffickers Realizing It's Made Their Job Easier
More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage
Kind of disgusting when you think about the value these politicians put on these women's lives...
On the post: Airbnb, Homeaway, And The Importance Of Holding The Line On Section 230
Fining Suburbanites is unpopular politically
Gotta love the world of perverse incentives...
On the post: Ted Cruz Gets Section 230 All Wrong, While Zuck Claims He's Not Familiar With It
Badluck Zuck
On the post: Microsoft Helps Get A Computer Recycler Sentenced To 15 Months In Prison For Offering Unapproved Recovery Disks
Bring back the commercials!
PC: And I'm a PC
Mac: I make a product that is easy to use and encourage a cult-like customer base. If you have problems, just come down to the Genius Bar and we'll help you out.
PC: And I sue to lock people up who make recovery CDs for my customer base; because the only thing worse than customers are customer's that are using my product without going through our non-existent support channel when things break.
On the post: Come Witness The Commentators That Help The NFL Fool The Public About Its 'Super Bowl' Trademark Rights
Disjointed PSA
At the end of the day, it is easier just not to say it so you don't get sued. No matter how stupid the lawsuit, you still have to pay lawyers to defend against it. So the NFL gets its pound of flesh one way or another...
'MERICA!
On the post: Apple, Verizon Continue to Lobby Against The Right To Repair Your Own Devices
Re:
It should be as simple as: if you make a device, and you have an in-house tool to repair it, you have to make it available to third parties as well.
Much simpler than telling companies they have to design things in a certain way...
On the post: Another Day, Another Flimsy Report Claiming TV Cord Cutting Won't Save You Money
Lets talk about fees...
So i'm not sure how $26-$38 in BASE FEES each month is cheaper than just streaming. HBO + Netflix + Hulu still come in cheaper! We haven't even talked about the ACTUAL CABLE BILL YET!
Next >>