Although we've disagreed on a few occasions, your willingness to at least hear the other side of an argument and remain adult and civil about it is most definitely appreciated.
Tell me, when exactly are you going to be willing to give up rights in your house or your car or any other property, real or personal, to the public domain?
Intellectual property is not the same as physical property. We can't have a serious discussion about the things you listed above until IP is more like physical property.
So, when you are willing to sell me the book you authored or the song you wrote and I am free to do what I please with it, like copy it, or publish it or rewrite portions and resell it, like I can change the fabric on a chair I purchase and sell it to someone else, this discussion it moot.
Re: Re: Re: Uh--- you're the one that's out of touch
What if carpenters were treated like the authors? Google would insist that it has "fair use" rights to slip into your house and hold parties sponsored by their advertisers. How much of their billions would it share with the home owners or carpenters? Nothing. And if the carpenters refused to go along, they would get Mike to call them luddites who fear the future.
Ummm. Don't know about you bob, but the carpenters who built my house can't tell me what to do or not with my house once I purchased it. I can kick all the walls in if I please.
Actually, your analogy is more akin to IP rights than anything else. If I purchase a movie on DVD, I'm told I can't legally do with it what I please, like view it on my Linux machine or save it to my hard drive for convenience.
It's you who is out of touch with the needs of the millions of creative people who work hard and just ask for the chance to control what happens to their work, just like every other worker in the economy.
Wait a minute, now. Name any occupation that's not IP related that gets to control what happens to their work after it's sold or exchanged for a paycheck.
My point? One sided articles as regularly appear here do nothing to educate your readers, and, if fact, may lead them down a path that results in them forming opinion on the basis of significantly incomplete information.
Putting aside that Techdirt is an "opinion" blog, your underestimation of the intelligence of the readership here is a bit arrogant.
Techdirt attracts readers who are highly educated and very intelligent. To imply that Techdirt readers blindly follow whatever Mike writes without investigating other sources and viewpoints is downright insulting.
Re: READ through just #12 of .pdf to see how the "Abuse" tool was phony.
Megaupload generated many URLs to same file. When copyright holders used its "Abuse" tool, only the specified URL was removed: the file remained intact to still be served out from other URLs. -- Shows knowledge of infringement and deliberate attempt to evade DMCA.
No. That just show you are a moron.
That type of system makes compete sense. For example, suppose Joe American uploads a movie and Jose Spainard uploads the same move. Mega saved one copy and had separate urls pointing to that file to save disk space. Joe American's upload was illegal, but Jose Spainard's was completely legal because personal filesharing was legal in Spain at the time. Why should Mega delete Jose Spainard's url when it received a DMCA notice for Joe American's upload?
Re: Mike grasping at legalisms again. Dotcom got milliions...
I'm sure, for instance, that if Mike's computer were taken over by the Cryptolocker criminals, then he'd be screaming for them to be brought to justice any way possible, wouldn't be at all worried about the due process rights of those he knows to be criminals.
I call bullshit on this one, Blue.
Based on the last fifteen years of Mike's writings you are dead wrong. I believe that, yes, Mike would want the criminals apprehended and brought to justice, but "justice" without due process for all sides isn't justice by any sane person's definition. It's a sham.
Your cognitive dissonance is amazing. You rail about "The Rich" and want to limit their power, yet in this instance where those in power are exceeding existing limits, you are all okie-dokie with it. Amazing.
Mike is a professional troll: he has no visible purpose other than to gin up controversy to draw eyeballs.
And what exactly do you think it is that YOU do here?
Hell, you've even admitted to "grifting" off of Mike's hard-earned viewership with this statement:
So what exactly is the draw to Techdirt? I like it because a small forum where I stand out, which leverages my rants without the bother of my own web-site... (Source)
I'd suggest a hard and fast part of the law should be that copyright should never last so much as a single day beyond the death of the creator.
How would that work for artistic endeavors that require a lot of different talents to achieve, like an epic film production or some other thing in the future we haven't thought of yet?
If you give the copyright to a single person, like the executive producer, and that person dies tomorrow, you could be screwed. I guess my question is: whose life would you base that on for things that require collaborative efforts.
On the post: Rep. Peter King Says NSA Should Spy On Congress, Because They Might Be Talking To Al Qaeda
Re:
Then what?
On the post: Techdirt 2013: The Numbers.
Huh.
Does that mean I'm growing more cynical as I age or was there less to laugh at last year?
On the post: New Year's Message: Optimism On The Cusp Of Big Changes
Re: Happy New Year
And the same to you LAB.
Although we've disagreed on a few occasions, your willingness to at least hear the other side of an argument and remain adult and civil about it is most definitely appreciated.
On the post: The Grinch Who Stole The Public Domain
Re: Rights in Property
Intellectual property is not the same as physical property. We can't have a serious discussion about the things you listed above until IP is more like physical property.
So, when you are willing to sell me the book you authored or the song you wrote and I am free to do what I please with it, like copy it, or publish it or rewrite portions and resell it, like I can change the fabric on a chair I purchase and sell it to someone else, this discussion it moot.
On the post: Traffic Safety Administration Takes Its Blood And Saliva 'Survey' To Pennsylvania, With Predictable Results
Re:
Maybe we should act like Gomer instead: "Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!"
On the post: Authors Guild Apparently Can't Avoid Throwing Away More Money: Appeals Google Books Fair Use Ruling
Re: Re: Re: Uh--- you're the one that's out of touch
Ummm. Don't know about you bob, but the carpenters who built my house can't tell me what to do or not with my house once I purchased it. I can kick all the walls in if I please.
Actually, your analogy is more akin to IP rights than anything else. If I purchase a movie on DVD, I'm told I can't legally do with it what I please, like view it on my Linux machine or save it to my hard drive for convenience.
On the post: Authors Guild Apparently Can't Avoid Throwing Away More Money: Appeals Google Books Fair Use Ruling
Re: Uh--- you're the one that's out of touch
Wait a minute, now. Name any occupation that's not IP related that gets to control what happens to their work after it's sold or exchanged for a paycheck.
On the post: Authors Guild Apparently Can't Avoid Throwing Away More Money: Appeals Google Books Fair Use Ruling
Re: Mike's gloating for Google gets real out_of_the_blue to pop in.
No you are not Blue. Not even close.
But, you have reminded me of a Plato quote:
Since you seem unnaturally obsessed with commenting on most every article (except around holidays), which group do you think you fall into?
On the post: District Court Tosses ACLU's Lawsuit Against NSA With Very Regrettable Decision That Props Up Agency Rhetoric
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Putting aside that Techdirt is an "opinion" blog, your underestimation of the intelligence of the readership here is a bit arrogant.
Techdirt attracts readers who are highly educated and very intelligent. To imply that Techdirt readers blindly follow whatever Mike writes without investigating other sources and viewpoints is downright insulting.
On the post: DOJ Releases Some Megaupload Evidence; Actually Shows Difficulty Of Running Cloud Service
Re: READ through just #12 of .pdf to see how the "Abuse" tool was phony.
No. That just show you are a moron.
That type of system makes compete sense. For example, suppose Joe American uploads a movie and Jose Spainard uploads the same move. Mega saved one copy and had separate urls pointing to that file to save disk space. Joe American's upload was illegal, but Jose Spainard's was completely legal because personal filesharing was legal in Spain at the time. Why should Mega delete Jose Spainard's url when it received a DMCA notice for Joe American's upload?
On the post: FBI Agent: Connection Logs Show Suspect's MAC Address, So Look For Apple Hardware
Re: Re: Re: Actually, a MAC can indicate a Mac...
I use macchanger in one of the init scripts (don't actually remember which one - I'm on a work computer right now).
Something like this:
sudo /etc/init.d/network-manager stop
sudo ifconfig wlan0 down
sudo macchanger -a wlan0
sudo ifconfig wlan0 up
sudo /etc/init.d/network-manager start
On the post: FBI Agent: Connection Logs Show Suspect's MAC Address, So Look For Apple Hardware
Re: Actually, a MAC can indicate a Mac...
On the post: FBI Agent Tries To Register Copyright On Top Secret Interrogation Manual... Making It Available To Anyone
Re: Re:
cogitative = cognitive
On the post: FBI Agent Tries To Register Copyright On Top Secret Interrogation Manual... Making It Available To Anyone
Re:
Read these statements together:
Are you trying to say that copyright works well millions of times a day as a technique of the police state?
Blue's paradox-absorbing crumple zone must be enormous. Perhaps it's taking too much space from actual brain cells or something.
On the post: FBI Agent Tries To Register Copyright On Top Secret Interrogation Manual... Making It Available To Anyone
Re: Why the surprise? You should know copyright is technique of the police state!
Copyright isn't based on common law (a fact you simply choose to ignore), but if it was and we went by your premise up there, wouldn't it actually be:
"I made it, therefore I own it, but as soon as I sell it to someone else, I no longer own it". Copyright doesn't even come close to that, does it?
On the post: When Vladimir Putin Is Envious Of Your Surveillance State, You've Gone Too Far
Re: Just as moral as...
Probably. You can get screwed by either.
On the post: NZ Customs Refuses To Answer Questions After Revelations Of Illegal Orders To Give FBI Info On Kim Dotcom For 'Brownie Points'
Re: Mike grasping at legalisms again. Dotcom got milliions...
I call bullshit on this one, Blue.
Based on the last fifteen years of Mike's writings you are dead wrong. I believe that, yes, Mike would want the criminals apprehended and brought to justice, but "justice" without due process for all sides isn't justice by any sane person's definition. It's a sham.
Your cognitive dissonance is amazing. You rail about "The Rich" and want to limit their power, yet in this instance where those in power are exceeding existing limits, you are all okie-dokie with it. Amazing.
On the post: ISP Blocks For Copyright And Porn Denying Access To All Sorts Of Important Information
Re:
And what exactly do you think it is that YOU do here?
Hell, you've even admitted to "grifting" off of Mike's hard-earned viewership with this statement:
On the post: Seven House Judiciary Members Demand DOJ Investigate James Clapper For Lying To Congress
Re:
Dude, based on your comments, maybe you really need to cut back on whatever it is you are putting into your body.
On the post: Santa Claus Is Coming To Town... And EMI Is Keeping The Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It adds to our culture.
How would that work for artistic endeavors that require a lot of different talents to achieve, like an epic film production or some other thing in the future we haven't thought of yet?
If you give the copyright to a single person, like the executive producer, and that person dies tomorrow, you could be screwed. I guess my question is: whose life would you base that on for things that require collaborative efforts.
Next >>