The NDAA now hampers that process. By your logic, those people were only released because of a technicality. Never mind that most of them didn't commit a crime, were willing to cooperate until the CIA began to use torture techniques, and were never given much in the forms of due process under Bush and Obama's administrations.
As for Environmental activists, many of whom have been smoking weed, might be suffering from delusions of persecution, have you considered that?
Bullshit. Read more, learn more. They weren't the perceived stereotype that you imply. Maybe you need to read more before responding with bad and flawed logic.
Why the hell are we outsourcing prisons to other countries?
And I'm the one that said "what planet are you on", not planespotter.
Looking at what you believe (people should be locked up for nonviolent crimes) it's just not worth it to actually take you seriously.
The evidence suggests that those locked up don't actually reform and that they are worse off in the long run with a criminal record that limits the jobs they get when they're out.
Your positivity towards this negative factual data is beyond ignorant. You can't lock up all of the people in your nation without looking like a fascist society in some regards.
This is a really huge distinction, and Mike, I think you (especially) would be attentive to it. Assuming the allegations against NV are true (and they appear to be based on what the operators themselves said and the articel you link to, but you may disagree), the operators of NV were not only operating the site, but also were, themselves, uploading much of the infringing content. And that's not what the DMCA safe harbor was meant to cover.
That's entirely true. I may have misunderstood the writeup. I thought it implied that since users were uploading the videos, the DMCA doesn't apply. But if it's the operators, then it is a different story. And you're right, that they would not be protected then.
I'm reading this a little differently.
From what I read, it seems there were teams dedicated to content. I have no idea of how large or small the teams were. I believe the best way to think about this is with the US library of Congress.
Imagine we have the administrators who know how many books are coming in per month and how many are being loaned. They see the number, but don't know how many books might be bad copies. The curators, the ones that handle the books, know of a few books that might get them in trouble. Every now and then, the administrators put a new book in the list to be loaned out. The system works and people donate money to continue the archive and make the archive larger.
Now imagine that the ICE wants to take down 5 specific books. They arrest the administrators who are known to put new books on the shelf. The curators have to find a new library to work for. And suddenly, the library is shut down and the donations seized, even though they have nothing to do with archiving the work, merely making a better service than what is offered in the market at the time.
So I have to ask, why should we allow the admins to be arrested for a civil crime? I don't believe that they were not protected, but the exception to their charges is through fair use. The purpose of their works (as the article seems to insinuate) is archiving works and making it easier to access.
From what I see, they did not have Red Flag knowledge per se. They did not know which movies were "illicit", nor did they know which ones they were to avoid. There is no list of copyrighted materials which are off limits to look at. Yes, they "ate their own dog food" and uploaded documentaries and videos that were benefitting that community. I would like to think the DMCA as well as the Fair Use Doctrine allows for their archival purposes, but they were steered into a different direction through faulty advice at greedy lawyers.
The crime of ignorance isn't an arrestable offense, so you're free to go.
The point is that most of those who 'unjustly imprisoned' are there because they probably got off before on some technicality and probably should have been there anyway.
I guess the Guantanamo prisoners are only there because they are all convicted terrorists, eh? Or how about the environmental activists that are bullied by the FBI? Have you even looked at the Latinos who are imprisoned through the Secure Communities program (which ICE runs?)
Not only are you ignorant of the problems here, but you're believing that the government provides when all research (hint: not your article) suggests otherwise.
We have systems in place whereby if you are truly innocent and in jail, you get food and television and free medical care and for most people who don't do anything all day anyhow but watch TV and eat junk food, jail CAN be a positive experience overall.
Then by all means, go live in one for a year. But don't expect everyone to jump at the chance to be a part of a perpetual underclass which has limited jobs upon release and succeeds in disenfranchising minorities disproportionately.
He has this idea that he needs copyright when it makes no sense.
Look at the thread and come to your own conclusions. I still believe the CC-NC license does pretty poorly at advertising him and the fact is, he still has that Dragonball cover exposing the poor understanding of copyright debates. But hey, what do I know? He can't find a platform to upload his songs because Universal might take it from him.
They are already granted immunity based on the Constitution. They don't have to worry about it applying to them. At least until they stop getting elected.
No one has to defend piracy to understand it's inevitable.
Seeing as how copyright is abused by those that want control should at least expose the lie that infringement is the issue here. It's not.
Odds are, Jamendo or the Internet Archive, who have nothing to do with piracy of the angry copyright holders like Universal and Sony, would be some of the first sites attacked with SOPA litigation. Even the DMCA is used and abused for no reason other than to eliminate competition.
That's the problem here. No one is really going for piracy, merely to eliminate platforms for artists so they rely on inefficient alternatives.
What does this do for Veoh? Can no one upload new content on that platform? Have they had a new investor? What happens to the content already on the site?
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: Re: Re:
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:
Damn engineering logic...
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: Re: Re: Re: Re:
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:
The NDAA now hampers that process. By your logic, those people were only released because of a technicality. Never mind that most of them didn't commit a crime, were willing to cooperate until the CIA began to use torture techniques, and were never given much in the forms of due process under Bush and Obama's administrations.
As for Environmental activists, many of whom have been smoking weed, might be suffering from delusions of persecution, have you considered that?
Bullshit. Read more, learn more. They weren't the perceived stereotype that you imply. Maybe you need to read more before responding with bad and flawed logic.
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: Re: Re:
And I'm the one that said "what planet are you on", not planespotter.
Looking at what you believe (people should be locked up for nonviolent crimes) it's just not worth it to actually take you seriously.
The evidence suggests that those locked up don't actually reform and that they are worse off in the long run with a criminal record that limits the jobs they get when they're out.
Your positivity towards this negative factual data is beyond ignorant. You can't lock up all of the people in your nation without looking like a fascist society in some regards.
On the post: ICE Admits That It Just Wants To 'Put People In Jail' With Operation In Our Sites
Re: Re:
I'm reading this a little differently.
From what I read, it seems there were teams dedicated to content. I have no idea of how large or small the teams were. I believe the best way to think about this is with the US library of Congress.
Imagine we have the administrators who know how many books are coming in per month and how many are being loaned. They see the number, but don't know how many books might be bad copies. The curators, the ones that handle the books, know of a few books that might get them in trouble. Every now and then, the administrators put a new book in the list to be loaned out. The system works and people donate money to continue the archive and make the archive larger.
Now imagine that the ICE wants to take down 5 specific books. They arrest the administrators who are known to put new books on the shelf. The curators have to find a new library to work for. And suddenly, the library is shut down and the donations seized, even though they have nothing to do with archiving the work, merely making a better service than what is offered in the market at the time.
So I have to ask, why should we allow the admins to be arrested for a civil crime? I don't believe that they were not protected, but the exception to their charges is through fair use. The purpose of their works (as the article seems to insinuate) is archiving works and making it easier to access.
From what I see, they did not have Red Flag knowledge per se. They did not know which movies were "illicit", nor did they know which ones they were to avoid. There is no list of copyrighted materials which are off limits to look at. Yes, they "ate their own dog food" and uploaded documentaries and videos that were benefitting that community. I would like to think the DMCA as well as the Fair Use Doctrine allows for their archival purposes, but they were steered into a different direction through faulty advice at greedy lawyers.
On the post: ICE Admits That It Just Wants To 'Put People In Jail' With Operation In Our Sites
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The crime of ignorance isn't an arrestable offense, so you're free to go.
The point is that most of those who 'unjustly imprisoned' are there because they probably got off before on some technicality and probably should have been there anyway.
I guess the Guantanamo prisoners are only there because they are all convicted terrorists, eh? Or how about the environmental activists that are bullied by the FBI? Have you even looked at the Latinos who are imprisoned through the Secure Communities program (which ICE runs?)
Not only are you ignorant of the problems here, but you're believing that the government provides when all research (hint: not your article) suggests otherwise.
On the post: ICE Admits That It Just Wants To 'Put People In Jail' With Operation In Our Sites
Re: Re:
Then by all means, go live in one for a year. But don't expect everyone to jump at the chance to be a part of a perpetual underclass which has limited jobs upon release and succeeds in disenfranchising minorities disproportionately.
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:
What planet are you on?
The US system is overcrowded with drug offenses. Moreso than the rest of the world combined. Where the heck did you get your statistics?
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: Re:
On the post: MythBuster's Adam Savage: Why PROTECT IP & SOPA Could Destroy The Internet As We Know It
Re: Re:
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:
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:
On the post: Top Photographer On Why He Doesn't Care If His Stuff Is Pirated
Re: Re: Techdirt is full of shit
He has this idea that he needs copyright when it makes no sense.
Look at the thread and come to your own conclusions. I still believe the CC-NC license does pretty poorly at advertising him and the fact is, he still has that Dragonball cover exposing the poor understanding of copyright debates. But hey, what do I know? He can't find a platform to upload his songs because Universal might take it from him.
On the post: Senate Approves Intelligence Bill, But Extension Of Secret Law Allowing Spying On Americans Cut Back
Re:
On the post: Top Photographer On Why He Doesn't Care If His Stuff Is Pirated
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Otherwise, make a mountain out of a molehill. The choice is yours.
On the post: Top Photographer On Why He Doesn't Care If His Stuff Is Pirated
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seeing as how copyright is abused by those that want control should at least expose the lie that infringement is the issue here. It's not.
Odds are, Jamendo or the Internet Archive, who have nothing to do with piracy of the angry copyright holders like Universal and Sony, would be some of the first sites attacked with SOPA litigation. Even the DMCA is used and abused for no reason other than to eliminate competition.
That's the problem here. No one is really going for piracy, merely to eliminate platforms for artists so they rely on inefficient alternatives.
On the post: Veoh Still Perfectly Legal... But Also Still Dead Due To Bogus Copyright Lawsuit
A question
On the post: Veoh Still Perfectly Legal... But Also Still Dead Due To Bogus Copyright Lawsuit
Re: Re: Re:
Come on, they can cut themselves off the internet. They don't need anyone but Anonymous to do that.
On the post: Lamar Smith Says 'Just Joking...' About Tomorrow; SOPA Markup Postponed
Re: Re: +1K
Here's an entire documentary on the subject
:)
Next >>