Abolishing copyright entirely will hurt small artists actually looking to make money
Will it though? How much do they actually rely on copyright to make money? I know some are vigorous about enforcing their copyrights, but that doesn't mean that makes them any additional money (and it may cost them money).
The inflated death toll of the virus. The effectiveness (and need) of a vaccine. The usefulness of lockdowns.
Hm, I didn't re-read every comment, but I'm not seeing anything that I would say has aged poorly. I didn't see any wild overestimations of the death toll, and if there were any predictions that it would reach close to a million, they would be right. The vaccines are effective and very necessary. Lockdowns clearly work, though their practicality as a means to combat the virus could be debated.
Many of these comments from the Techdirt regulars did not age well
Like what?
Irrational certainty, villainization and propaganda are far greater dangers than the exaggerated, misused and manipulative concept of "misinformation".
What's the difference between propaganda and misinformation? Not being snarky, but clearly you have a difference in mind to put them in opposition like that.
'The term “public domain” refers to creative materials that are not protected by intellectual property laws such as copyright, trademark, or patent laws. The public owns these works, not an individual author or artist. Anyone can use a public domain work without obtaining permission, but no one can ever own it.'
Is that a perfect definition? Not sure. If a collection of facts, or a 3D scan of a sculpture, is not copyrightable because there's no element of creativity is it public domain? Or just not copyrightable?
Re: Re: Small creators don't have the leverage to put on pressur
That is, it wasn't simply "I've got 6 million subscribers and I'd like you to reconsider." It was 6 million subscribes DDOSing their phone bank ... er, twitter channel.
Right, so how does someone with 6,000 or 600 subscribers get a fair shake?
No, public domain is the state of something that isn't under copyright at all. If something is not copyrightable, or the copyright has expired, or was never copyrighted because it predates copyright law, it's in the public domain.
I don't know much about law, but it would appear that if you ever want to actually publicly accuse someone of a federal crime to hurt their business or reputation
ContentID isn't accusing anyone of committing a crime.
Georgia law forbids registered sex offenders from participating in Halloween
CNN reports:
"Georgia doesn’t have a law that specifically forbids registered sex offenders from participating in trick-or-treating. Instead, offenders are subject to the general Georgia Department of Community Supervision’s conditions.
The department forbids registered sex offenders from having contact with children under 18 years old."
Once again, there need not be an explicit legal prohibition. If the law doesn't say he can do it, then he cannot do it. And the law is, at the very most, ambiguous.
'If Pence had tried to overturn the election, “there really weren’t good, clear answers because there was no precedent,” said Schiff, who believes it is still an open question as to how Congress could prevent an illegal attempt to block a legitimate election in the future... One possible — and illegal — scenario was for Pence to try to unilaterally reject the electors from swing states '
That doesn't state that the VP has the power to object, but that Democrats were making plans in case Pence illegally attempted to do so. So do you have a reference that doesn't state the exact opposite of what you're claiming?
Again, the Vice President is not limited by what he can do.
He is limited by what he can not do. And anything not excluded is in theory not barred.
It's exactly the opposite of that. The Constitution specifies what the government (including the VP) can do. Anything not granted by that document is something they cannot do.
The Vice President, president of the senate, IS a member of the senate.
I'll repeat what I wrote before in hopes you will read it and understand it this time. Objections are from Representatives and Senators. The Vice President is neither.
It´s the code of the website that forces the user´s browser to concact google servers
"Instruct" would be a better word. While most people don't know how to do it, it is possible to have the browser refuse to follow those instructions, thus it is not being forced to do anything.
What's more important, teaching kids about the Holocaust or teaching kids about the Holocaust with swear-words?
The question is, what's more important, teaching kids about the Holocaust, or not exposing eighth graders to swear words and a boob? Eighth graders are exposed to swear words daily, and can get pictures of boobs more or less at will, so I'd go with the teaching, personally.
Calling for, or demanding, the initiation of a process codified into law is not insurrection.
If they had stayed outside the capitol, and waved signs and chanted, or sent letters and made phone calls with those demands, it would have been a protest. Forcibly breaking into the capitol to physically disrupt the election process (to say nothing of those who hoped to inflict bodily violence on elected officials) is an act of insurrection. It is overriding the legally codified process of the election by force. There is no law permitting this.
The vast vast majority there were there to say ‘we don’t like the results and we don’t trust them’.
If that's all they wanted to do - speak their mind - there was no reason to burst into the capitol building. There would also have been no reason to bring zip ties and have caches of firearms ready to bring into play.
On the post: How Our Convoluted Copyright Regime Explains Why Spotify Chose Joe Rogan Over Neil Young
Re: There might be a strawman there.
Will it though? How much do they actually rely on copyright to make money? I know some are vigorous about enforcing their copyrights, but that doesn't mean that makes them any additional money (and it may cost them money).
On the post: Thankfully, Jay Inslee's Unconstitutional Bill To Criminalize Political Speech Dies In The Washington Senate
Re: Ah yes...
OK. It's this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie#Trump's_false_claim_of_a_stolen_election
On the post: Anti-Vaxxer Sues Facebook, In The Middle Of A Pandemic, For 'In Excess' Of $5 Billion For Shutting Down His Account
Re: Re: Re: The Future
Hm, I didn't re-read every comment, but I'm not seeing anything that I would say has aged poorly. I didn't see any wild overestimations of the death toll, and if there were any predictions that it would reach close to a million, they would be right. The vaccines are effective and very necessary. Lockdowns clearly work, though their practicality as a means to combat the virus could be debated.
On the post: Anti-Vaxxer Sues Facebook, In The Middle Of A Pandemic, For 'In Excess' Of $5 Billion For Shutting Down His Account
Re: The Future
Like what?
What's the difference between propaganda and misinformation? Not being snarky, but clearly you have a difference in mind to put them in opposition like that.
On the post: Appeals Court Says The First Amendment Protects Minnesota Woman's Right To Be Super-Shitty About Nearby Islamic School
Re: A summary
Not exactly an unbiased source of information.
On the post: Auguste Rodin's Sculptures Are In The Public Domain; 3D Scans Of Them Should Be, Too
Re: Re: Re: Disagree with "Public Domain"
OK, if you want to be pedantic:
'The term “public domain” refers to creative materials that are not protected by intellectual property laws such as copyright, trademark, or patent laws. The public owns these works, not an individual author or artist. Anyone can use a public domain work without obtaining permission, but no one can ever own it.'
Is that a perfect definition? Not sure. If a collection of facts, or a 3D scan of a sculpture, is not copyrightable because there's no element of creativity is it public domain? Or just not copyrightable?
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: YouTube Doubles Down On Questionable 'graphic Content' Enforcement Before Reversing Course (2020)
Re: Re: Small creators don't have the leverage to put on pressur
Right, so how does someone with 6,000 or 600 subscribers get a fair shake?
On the post: Auguste Rodin's Sculptures Are In The Public Domain; 3D Scans Of Them Should Be, Too
Re: Disagree with "Public Domain"
No, public domain is the state of something that isn't under copyright at all. If something is not copyrightable, or the copyright has expired, or was never copyrighted because it predates copyright law, it's in the public domain.
On the post: YouTube's Content ID System Flags, Demonetizes Video Of Cat Purring
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Libel?
ContentID isn't accusing anyone of committing a crime.
On the post: Eleventh Circuit Smacks Georgia Sheriff Around For Posting 'Don't Trick Or Treat Here' Signs In Sex Offenders' Yards
Georgia law
CNN reports:
"Georgia doesn’t have a law that specifically forbids registered sex offenders from participating in trick-or-treating. Instead, offenders are subject to the general Georgia Department of Community Supervision’s conditions.
The department forbids registered sex offenders from having contact with children under 18 years old."
Perhaps that is what he is clumsily referring to?
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/24/us/sex-offenders-sue-sheriff-halloween-signs-georgia-trnd/index.h tml
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Once again, there need not be an explicit legal prohibition. If the law doesn't say he can do it, then he cannot do it. And the law is, at the very most, ambiguous.
On the post: YouTube's Content ID System Flags, Demonetizes Video Of Cat Purring
Re: Animal Creatiity?
If a cat took the video, yes. If a human took the video, then the human holds the copyright (if it's copyrightable).
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
'If Pence had tried to overturn the election, “there really weren’t good, clear answers because there was no precedent,” said Schiff, who believes it is still an open question as to how Congress could prevent an illegal attempt to block a legitimate election in the future... One possible — and illegal — scenario was for Pence to try to unilaterally reject the electors from swing states '
That doesn't state that the VP has the power to object, but that Democrats were making plans in case Pence illegally attempted to do so. So do you have a reference that doesn't state the exact opposite of what you're claiming?
It's exactly the opposite of that. The Constitution specifies what the government (including the VP) can do. Anything not granted by that document is something they cannot do.
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ftw
I'll repeat what I wrote before in hopes you will read it and understand it this time. Objections are from Representatives and Senators. The Vice President is neither.
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ftw
Not sure where you got that information, but it is out of date or inaccurate.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ftw
Objections are from Representatives and Senators. The Vice President is neither.
On the post: German Court Fines Site Owner For Sharing User Data With Google To Access Web Fonts
Re: Re:
"Instruct" would be a better word. While most people don't know how to do it, it is possible to have the browser refuse to follow those instructions, thus it is not being forced to do anything.
On the post: Penguin Random House Demands Removal Of Maus From Digital Library Because The Book Is Popular Again
Re: Re:
The question is, what's more important, teaching kids about the Holocaust, or not exposing eighth graders to swear words and a boob? Eighth graders are exposed to swear words daily, and can get pictures of boobs more or less at will, so I'd go with the teaching, personally.
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ftw
If they had stayed outside the capitol, and waved signs and chanted, or sent letters and made phone calls with those demands, it would have been a protest. Forcibly breaking into the capitol to physically disrupt the election process (to say nothing of those who hoped to inflict bodily violence on elected officials) is an act of insurrection. It is overriding the legally codified process of the election by force. There is no law permitting this.
If that's all they wanted to do - speak their mind - there was no reason to burst into the capitol building. There would also have been no reason to bring zip ties and have caches of firearms ready to bring into play.
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ftw
What do you think they were trying to accomplish that day?
Next >>