Let me get this straight. The case here is against the assets right? Not against Dotcom. In which case the whereabouts of Dotcom, fugitive or otherwise, are irrelevant as he's not part of the case. For fugitive disentitlement to apply, surely it would require the assets to be the fugitive? That seems unlikely.
As someone who lives in the UK I can say it's stuff like this that has pretty much made me give up any hope of a future where people are more empowered by technology than oppressed by it. Which is why I've largely stopped swinging by here.
Re: Re: "all the technology is there" -- But the morality isn't.
"the right of professionals earn a livelihood." Sorry but this is just wrong. You have no right to earn a livelihood doing what you want to do. No-one does. You have the right to try, but there are no guarantees, never have been, never should be. As a creator you have two options to make a living: either find a way to get your work to the right audience and give them a reason to pay for it, or partner with someone else to do that so you can concentrate on creating. This hasn't changed either, it's just how you do it that's in such a state of flux at the moment.
Hmm, I remember arguing with one commenter about the meaning of "limited" in copyright a few months ago. They argued that there would be no further expansion of copyright and the last one was just to bring the US into line with the rest of the world.
Oh look, here's that same argument again, expanding individual rights against the public interest.
Glad that I was proved wrong so quickly...
I finally found a decent analogue / digital analogy the other week.
Our work place provides free coffee from vending machines - it's not very nice but it's hot and caffienated and that's what important.
But they also have vending machines that sell cold drinks and you can pay for coffee in the shop downstairs (but you can't compete with free! sorry, I'll move on).
The analogy comes into play on this story because the vending machines don't accept £2 coins. These have been in use for about 15 years. The other day I wanted a coke and the only cash I had with me was a £2 coin.
But because the vending machine company hadn't updated the machine to take £2 coins they didn't get their money and I went and got a free coffee instead.
I wanted to pay for something but their decision not to update their transaction system meant that I went and got a free alternative. I wasn't happy, they weren't happy.
Doesn't that sound familiar?
You know that people don't care what something costs to produce right? Either it's price is equal to or lower than its value (in which case they'll buy) or it isn't (in which case they won't).
If we're just talking about competing on price - which we were.
But again, 7 billion people on the planet, that's a long way towards infinity to me.
On the post: Quebec Decides It Needs ANOTHER Hate Speech Law, Only One That's Worse Than The Law It Already Has
Re: Face Coverings
On the post: Even If You Think Kim Dotcom Is Guilty As Sin, The US Government Stealing His Assets Should Concern You
dumb limey from across the pond asks...
In which case the whereabouts of Dotcom, fugitive or otherwise, are irrelevant as he's not part of the case. For fugitive disentitlement to apply, surely it would require the assets to be the fugitive?
That seems unlikely.
On the post: UK Police Carry Out Facial Scans Of 100,000 People Attending Music Festival
All a bit too depressing
Which is why I've largely stopped swinging by here.
On the post: UK Police Carry Out Facial Scans Of 100,000 People Attending Music Festival
Re: Re: This is awesome!
On the post: The Most Nefarious Part Of The TPP Proposal: Making Copyright Reform Impossible
Re: Re: Re:
And your supporting data please?
On the post: Copyright Extension Goes Into Effect In The UK: More Works Stolen From The Public Domain
Re: You pirates aren't paying and won't pay!
On the post: German Director Proposes 'One-Stop Shop' For Free, Instant, But Non-Exclusive Licenses To Offer Films Online
Re: Re: Re: Re: "all the technology is there" -- But the morality isn't.
On the post: German Director Proposes 'One-Stop Shop' For Free, Instant, But Non-Exclusive Licenses To Offer Films Online
Re:
On the post: German Director Proposes 'One-Stop Shop' For Free, Instant, But Non-Exclusive Licenses To Offer Films Online
Re: Re: "all the technology is there" -- But the morality isn't.
Sorry but this is just wrong. You have no right to earn a livelihood doing what you want to do. No-one does. You have the right to try, but there are no guarantees, never have been, never should be. As a creator you have two options to make a living: either find a way to get your work to the right audience and give them a reason to pay for it, or partner with someone else to do that so you can concentrate on creating.
This hasn't changed either, it's just how you do it that's in such a state of flux at the moment.
On the post: Arthur Conan Doyle Estate Sued To Show That Sherlock Holmes Is Public Domain
Re: Re:
Not that it was really trolling, just a bit of sarcasm.
6/10 must try harder.
On the post: Bringing Artists & Entrepreneurs Together To Help Each Other
Oh wait, you wanted smart people?
Sorry! As you were ;¬)
On the post: Bringing Artists & Entrepreneurs Together To Help Each Other
Re: Re: Rights database projects are already underway
On the post: US Copyright Office Seeking Comments On Resale Royalties For Visual Artists
bringing it into line with europe
Oh look, here's that same argument again, expanding individual rights against the public interest.
Glad that I was proved wrong so quickly...
... oh no, wait.
On the post: 'Amnesia' Is Selling So Well, The Developers Have Forgotten All About Piracy
Re: This article is irrelevant because ...
9/10
On the post: 'Amnesia' Is Selling So Well, The Developers Have Forgotten All About Piracy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or how much less?
On the post: 'Amnesia' Is Selling So Well, The Developers Have Forgotten All About Piracy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Finally!
On the post: Should Robots Get Rights?
Re:
On the post: Should Robots Get Rights?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: The Stupidity Of The 'Just Go Without' Argument
Re: Not the same
Our work place provides free coffee from vending machines - it's not very nice but it's hot and caffienated and that's what important.
But they also have vending machines that sell cold drinks and you can pay for coffee in the shop downstairs (but you can't compete with free! sorry, I'll move on).
The analogy comes into play on this story because the vending machines don't accept £2 coins. These have been in use for about 15 years. The other day I wanted a coke and the only cash I had with me was a £2 coin.
But because the vending machine company hadn't updated the machine to take £2 coins they didn't get their money and I went and got a free coffee instead.
I wanted to pay for something but their decision not to update their transaction system meant that I went and got a free alternative. I wasn't happy, they weren't happy.
Doesn't that sound familiar?
On the post: Apps Are Not Coffee
Re:
If we're just talking about competing on price - which we were.
But again, 7 billion people on the planet, that's a long way towards infinity to me.
Next >>