The Incoherent One (profile), 25 Aug 2011 @ 11:40am
Re: Re:
"Piracy is piracy, plain and simple. Get use to it, Pirate."
What are you, twelve?
Logician is technically correct. You wanting to keep the window dressing that has negative connotation is your decision, but your argument is illogical.
A pirate steals a physical object, thereby depriving its previous owner of its enjoyment/value. If I could simply make a copy of what the pirate took then what did I actually loose?
The Incoherent One (profile), 25 Aug 2011 @ 11:26am
Re: Re: Re: Answer to "Costs? Really?" -- Yes. If expenses aren't recovered...
That is not suppressing anything. Suppressing would mean that he has the power to stop out_of_the_blue from posting further, or permanently removing the comment from this thread.
He can't
All we as a community can do is flag his posting so that it does not appear openly in the thread, but it can still be clicked on and viewed with out issue.
This one actually has a direct author showing his side of the story. The link you have which contains a link to the guardian article was an Editorial so I can understand your point.
My point would be that the editorial from the guardian was far more objective than the rant which Tim is commenting on here. If you read the language used it is extremely one sided, and places all the fault on consumers and how they are stealing from these wonderful content companies.
Some of the facts were already debunked by Tim, and yet again I will go ahead and say that my problem is not with "Big Content" (Thanks Bob) trying to make money. My problem is that the Protect IP Act will not do what they want, and is so broadly worded that it could be used for other reasons should a lawyer see fit to do so. Beyond that its measures for dealing with "theft" is inherently dangerous to the structure of the internet that simply trying to get rid of downloadallmovies.ads may have serious ramifications for other sites which have done nothing wrong.
The Incoherent One (profile), 18 Aug 2011 @ 4:17pm
Not looking for the smoking gun
Perhaps they are not looking for an agency or a person to pin this too. The fact that S&P (among others) rated the mortgage securities as AAA for so long which was a contributing factor to the "adjustment" is rather questionable. The timing of this is suspicous, but as is stated in the report this started before the US debt downgrade.
Taking the teeth away from some of these ratings agencies may bring about some useful reform. Basing these kinds of decisions on more fact that emotion, or political followings.
The Incoherent One (profile), 18 Aug 2011 @ 12:12pm
Re: Re:
That would be assuming that the DMCA is not regularly abused by those that do not really have the right to file one in the first place. We know that this is regularly abused by a variety of entities. We also know that much of the Youtube DMCA system is automated and does not involve any actual person.
The Incoherent One (profile), 18 Aug 2011 @ 11:45am
Re: Mike, the F reading student upset a B student is not perfect
ROFLMAO!!!!! I like this particular comment as it feels new and fresh. Not the same old regurgitated filth that we usually deal with. **see out_of_the_blue
The Incoherent One (profile), 17 Aug 2011 @ 9:27pm
"So, we can now add the NY Times to the list of mainstream publications highlighting the problem. Why is Congress still focused on a patent reform bill that does nothing to address this problem?"
Cause the members of congress have a reelection to win. Elections cost money, and lobbyists have small fortune of it to give away for just these reasons.
The Incoherent One (profile), 17 Aug 2011 @ 1:31pm
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well to that there is the minor detail of sharing and idea vs. sharing a physical object. The latter may actually involve some kind sacrifice. i.e. I only got half a piece of cake.
The Incoherent One (profile), 16 Aug 2011 @ 2:09pm
Re: Re: Re: Hardware Patents
I really don't think they are laughing. I think the lawyers over at Apple are busy pouring over the patent library to see where they may be vulnerable.
On the post: Washington Post Editorial Claims Piracy 'Costs' Companies Millions; Believes PROTECT IP Won't Be 'More Sweeping Than Necessary'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Answer to "Costs? Really?" -- Yes. If expenses aren't recovered...
On the post: Washington Post Editorial Claims Piracy 'Costs' Companies Millions; Believes PROTECT IP Won't Be 'More Sweeping Than Necessary'
Re: Re:
What are you, twelve?
Logician is technically correct. You wanting to keep the window dressing that has negative connotation is your decision, but your argument is illogical.
A pirate steals a physical object, thereby depriving its previous owner of its enjoyment/value. If I could simply make a copy of what the pirate took then what did I actually loose?
On the post: Washington Post Editorial Claims Piracy 'Costs' Companies Millions; Believes PROTECT IP Won't Be 'More Sweeping Than Necessary'
Re: Re: Re: Answer to "Costs? Really?" -- Yes. If expenses aren't recovered...
He can't
All we as a community can do is flag his posting so that it does not appear openly in the thread, but it can still be clicked on and viewed with out issue.
On the post: Washington Post Editorial Claims Piracy 'Costs' Companies Millions; Believes PROTECT IP Won't Be 'More Sweeping Than Necessary'
Re: Answer to "Costs? Really?" -- Yes. If expenses aren't recovered...
On the post: Washington Post Editorial Claims Piracy 'Costs' Companies Millions; Believes PROTECT IP Won't Be 'More Sweeping Than Necessary'
Re:
SCOTTY - I need more power!
On the post: Washington Post Editorial Claims Piracy 'Costs' Companies Millions; Believes PROTECT IP Won't Be 'More Sweeping Than Necessary'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This one actually has a direct author showing his side of the story. The link you have which contains a link to the guardian article was an Editorial so I can understand your point.
My point would be that the editorial from the guardian was far more objective than the rant which Tim is commenting on here. If you read the language used it is extremely one sided, and places all the fault on consumers and how they are stealing from these wonderful content companies.
Some of the facts were already debunked by Tim, and yet again I will go ahead and say that my problem is not with "Big Content" (Thanks Bob) trying to make money. My problem is that the Protect IP Act will not do what they want, and is so broadly worded that it could be used for other reasons should a lawyer see fit to do so. Beyond that its measures for dealing with "theft" is inherently dangerous to the structure of the internet that simply trying to get rid of downloadallmovies.ads may have serious ramifications for other sites which have done nothing wrong.
On the post: Samsung Cites 2001: A Space Odyssey As Prior Art For Tablet Design
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Interesting Timing: News Leaks That Justice Dept Is Investigating S&P Just After It Downgrades US?
Not looking for the smoking gun
Taking the teeth away from some of these ratings agencies may bring about some useful reform. Basing these kinds of decisions on more fact that emotion, or political followings.
On the post: Yet Another 'Rogue Site' List Proposed, This Time With YouTube Right On Top
Re: Re:
On the post: MPAA Calls MPAA Intellectually Dishonest For Claiming That Infringement Is Inevitable
Re: Mike, the F reading student upset a B student is not perfect
On the post: MPAA Calls MPAA Intellectually Dishonest For Claiming That Infringement Is Inevitable
Re: Re: It's merely that out_of_the_blue doesn't care for the prediction.
On the post: What Else Can We Patent?
Re: What Else Can We Patent
"An electronic method by which one exerts an artificial construct over both tangible and non-tangible inventions"
I actually think that is less vague than some of Apples recent patents.
On the post: Motorola Deal Showing Massive Loss To Innovation Caused By Patents
Cause the members of congress have a reelection to win. Elections cost money, and lobbyists have small fortune of it to give away for just these reasons.
On the post: Dear MPAA: Stomp Your Feet And Repeat It As Many Times As You Want, But Infringement Is Not Theft
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Dear MPAA: Stomp Your Feet And Repeat It As Many Times As You Want, But Infringement Is Not Theft
Re: Who say's who's a pirate?
On the post: Can't Stop Social Media-Driven UK Riots? Go After Social Media-Driven Water Gun Fights
Re: Re: Re: end of times
On the post: Google Spends $12.5 Billion To Buy Motorola Mobility... And Its Patents
Re: Re: Re: Hardware Patents
On the post: Police Say They Can Detain Photographers If Their Photographs Have 'No Apparent Esthetic Value'
Re:
On the post: Police Say They Can Detain Photographers If Their Photographs Have 'No Apparent Esthetic Value'
Re: I have literally taken thousands of photos with no esthetic value
On the post: Police Say They Can Detain Photographers If Their Photographs Have 'No Apparent Esthetic Value'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>