The question which supposedly is answered by inspection of the name isn't whether it's porn, it's whether its improperly licensed porn. I have no idea how the judge thought that argument was "well-plead"...
CISPA might be OK if those agencies get my data only if all of them ask for it at the same time (and each agency only has a fixed quota of requests per month, so they actually have to convince each other it's worthwhile).
Well, it is in Canada and Israel. So now we just have to wait for the CIFURAA (Canadian-Israel Fair Use Rights Activists Association) to lobby for secret negotiations on an international trade agreement "harmonizing" this with other, less enlightened countries, like the US.
The fundamental problem of the music market place remains as true as ever: why pay for music when you can get it illegally free?
What they really should be worried about (in the longer term):
The fundamental problem of the music market place remains as true as ever: why pay for music when you can get it legally free (or at least, without paying us)?
There is so much legal, free music available nowadays (Jamendo, Soundcloud), I don't think I'll ever be interested again in "the latest hot label act"...
Even just looking at the docket, I get the impression that Meltwater's legal team wasn't at the same level as AP's. Haven't read the filings yet, so I could be wrong.
Anyway, that's the weakness and the strength of the legal system: it's run by humans. If a judge doesn't have his own strong opinions about (or other familiarity with) the subject of the case, the arguments of the legal teams have much more weight.
You've got it backwards. CNET's pockets were obviously shunned by the big commercial players, here; tauting open-source is its way of tweaking their nose in return.
Looks like those hundreds-year old pieces of paper are going to need replacement by new technology: cryptography, steganography, 3-D printing.
Funny how the advancement of technology both enables the government to infringe on the rights of the citizens on a previously unknown enormous scale, and also (could) enable the citizens themselves to take back the initiative.
Yeah, anyone who actually checks facts is a useless journalist who can't be trusted to push out what we famous people make up out of whole cloth (while ignoring our dirty laundry)...
> we are indeed having some weird site issues this morning...
Truly indeed. No trolls show up on a post which just begs for someone to claim that Mike is being a "pirate apologist" (when, actually, he's merely being critical of how copyright law defines infringement).
> This is the definition of your favorite tactic: FUD!
Wait a second, I'm confused? You're claiming Mike is a copyright maximalist? You know, like the ones claiming that without copyright/SOPA/DRM/DCMA/extension/harmonization/N-strikes/... (or instead that with VCR/P2P/proxies/encryption/...) the fundamental forces binding the universe/economy together would suddenly cease in an apocalyptic finale?
Unfortunately for your theory, "the spammer's computer" is in reality, often 10's of thousands of other peoples' computers (i.e., botnet).
Ah, the nostalgia for the "why your idea to prevent spam won't work" form letter (the one with the checkboxes)...
As Mike points out repeatedly, the real (and mostly only) way to solve problems is economics --- i.e., spam will not disappear until user education/cultural evolution has made it unprofitable.
On the post: Wikipedia Editor Threatened With Lawsuit For Participating In Discussion Leading To Deletion Of Entry
Re:
On the post: Crazy: Judge Grants Copyright Troll Maximum Statutory Damages In Default Case
"Well-plead" ? give me a break...
The question which supposedly is answered by inspection of the name isn't whether it's porn, it's whether its improperly licensed porn. I have no idea how the judge thought that argument was "well-plead"...
On the post: Now That Paul Ceglia's Been Arrested For Fraud, Court Says It Can Probably Drop His Lawsuit Against Facebook
Re: Good News Everyone
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
I have an idea how to fix this
On the post: Appeals Court Wants More Copyright Defendants To Stand Up For Their Fair Use Rights
CIFURAA to the rescue!
</sarc>
On the post: A Tale Of Two Studies: Can File Sharing Both Harm And Help Sales?
Missing the forest for the trees
On the post: Sorry Fair Use, Court Says News Clipping Service Infringes On AP Copyrights
Perhaps AP just had better lawyers?
Anyway, that's the weakness and the strength of the legal system: it's run by humans. If a judge doesn't have his own strong opinions about (or other familiarity with) the subject of the case, the arguments of the legal teams have much more weight.
On the post: Supreme Court Gets It Right In Kirtsaeng: You Can Resell Things You Bought Abroad Without Infringing
Re: Re:
On the post: Transcripts Of John Steele's Phone Calls To Alan Cooper
Re: Re:
On the post: News.com Picks Best Of Mobile World Congress, But Leaves You Wondering Which CBS Lawsuit Partner They Didn't Review
Re: How much of a kick back did they get?
On the post: Supreme Court Effectively Says There's No Way To Challenge Warrantless Wiretapping
"Cryptoparty" --- it's the new "Constitution"!
Funny how the advancement of technology both enables the government to infringe on the rights of the citizens on a previously unknown enormous scale, and also (could) enable the citizens themselves to take back the initiative.
On the post: Facebook Apparently Doesn't Believe Anyone Over 100 Could Use The Service, 104 Year Old Has To Lie
Re: Re: Run for the Hills!
On the post: Jealous Of Copyright Trolls, Entertainment Industry Looks To Move Three Strikes From 'Disconnect' To 'Fines'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Uh.... isn't this what you wanted?
You seem to be missing an important difference between legal systems
On the post: Why Hasn't The Washington Post Admitted That It Totally Screwed Up Its 'Free Super WiFi' Report?
Re: Stop whining
#MTeo_5
On the post: Broken Copyright: Jonathan Coulton Is Actually Infringing Copyright, But Glee Is Not
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Truly indeed. No trolls show up on a post which just begs for someone to claim that Mike is being a "pirate apologist" (when, actually, he's merely being critical of how copyright law defines infringement).
On the post: Some Thoughts On Aaron Swartz
Re: Wrong to share mankind's knowledge
On the post: Details Of Various Six Strikes Plans Revealed; May Create Serious Problems For Free WiFi
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Expect to see...
On the post: To Avoid Controversy, 'Realtime' Microblogging In China Now Delayed By 7 Days
So passe
On the post: Copyfraud: Copyright Claims On CDs Say It's Infringement To Loan Your CD To A Friend
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wait a second, I'm confused? You're claiming Mike is a copyright maximalist? You know, like the ones claiming that without copyright/SOPA/DRM/DCMA/extension/harmonization/N-strikes/... (or instead that with VCR/P2P/proxies/encryption/...) the fundamental forces binding the universe/economy together would suddenly cease in an apocalyptic finale?
On the post: Why Google Should Encrypt Our Email
Re: Encrypted spam prevention
Unfortunately for your theory, "the spammer's computer" is in reality, often 10's of thousands of other peoples' computers (i.e., botnet).
Ah, the nostalgia for the "why your idea to prevent spam won't work" form letter (the one with the checkboxes)...
As Mike points out repeatedly, the real (and mostly only) way to solve problems is economics --- i.e., spam will not disappear until user education/cultural evolution has made it unprofitable.
Next >>