> You don't make those kinds of jokes in that kind of situation
One wonders what the justification for repressing this type of joke actually is. The widespread belief is that the situation is similar to the classic "yelling 'Fire' in a crowded theater", i.e., the danger which is averted by suppressing these jokes is the danger of having the passengers panic.
Do you actually believe that there was any likelihood whatsoever of this esoteric tweet, in and of itself, causing panic on a flight? Anyone knowledgeable enough to understand the tweet is unlikely to panic. And the particular "threat" in the tweet would seem to be "I can cause the oxygen masks to deploy", which doesn't seen to be very dangerous by itself.
so someone needs to mirror all of the CC content and make sure a free repository for it continues to exist
Actually, your previous sarcastic post is very on-topic, here. It should be perfectly legal for someone at an academic institution which pays Elsevier's blackmail money for this journal to run an automated process which downloads the articles of the journal (which were published by Wiley under a CC license) and puts them up for free on a competing website.
This whole thing smells of complicity between academic publishers to try to undermine the open access trend via "journal swapping". Or maybe... "journal evergreening"?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Probably not a "right" in the US (but should be!)
Similarly, you have the right to the fair use of copyrighted materials. You can fairly use copyrighted materials all you like. That's the point of your fair use rights.
How does this jive with the legality of DRM and the DMCA? Seems to me that either DRM would be illegal as violating my fair use "rights", or fair use isn't really a right.
Or is my fair use right the right to use the copyrighted material even if for all practical purposes it is impossible for me to do so --- kind of like Eldred where indefinite extension, even if it for all practical purposes contradicts "for a limited time", since it doesn't literally then it's OK?
Personally I like actual rights, not fictions thereof.
> doesn't change the nature of that very thing's molecules, or the law.
My reading of the post you are replying to is that FedEx is not refusing to ship it because it is illegal. This is merely a business decision: FedEx is refusing to ship it in order to reduce its chance it will be sued (or be hurt by negative PR) over a subsequent shooting incident.
If the other AC is correct, however, that FedEx has no problem with shipping actual firearms and ammunition, then this looks like a really strange business decision...
Re: Re: Probably not a "right" in the US (but should be!)
The duty associated with the fair use right would, like the duty to not trespass, be the duty to not sue, seek injunctions, or demand payment or takedown of any work that falls under fair use.
The sticker in this is "that falls under fair use". Since copyright law did not deign to explictly define what uses are "fair use", only a court can decide that, in which case either the copyright holder is being denied "due process" since he is effectively denied the possibility of taking the actions you have listed, or the "right" of fair use has been effectively castrated.
It stinks that I have to agree with antidirt on this one, but according to the most widely used definition of "right", fair use probably doesn't qualify as a right in the US.
The only countries I know of where courts have ruled that some aspects of fair use are rights are Canada and Israel.
Right... from Intel, Bosch, and Panasonic... we certainly can trust them to both not actively cooperate with national intelligence agencies, and be competent to defend themselves against active attack by said agencies (like Sony!)...
Did that 16 kg. of meth somehow make its way to you?
Last time I checked, the Freenet protocol wasn't disguised. I see no reason it couldn't be blocked just as easily as VPNs. To get around this kind of censorship, you need something like a proxy which accepts HTTPS which is just disguised VPN traffic. I remember reading sometime in the last few years about a different protocol which used the HTTPS headers somehow to enable a kind of transparent redirection, but I cannot find it now.
Eventually if that falls through, there's always steganography. But the data rate for that sucks.
I'll have to add myself in as old and distrusting, but I have to also add that in this new day and age, I have the constant fear that as my own information source curator, I will eventually get stuck in a self-made bubble world.
I suppose that's better than being stuck in an externally imposed bubble world, though.
The product that is being stolen, the movies that are produced by Hollywood, is the exact same one that is in theaters.
Well, you've just shown that business savvy isn't exactly your strong point. Time and time again, I've witnessed arguments on the net concerning the "cinema experience" vs. the "personal viewing experience".
I also have to jump on the "disappointed by Techdirt using exaggerated headline" bandwagon.
OTOH, if the headline had been true, one could only conjecture that the reason was that European privacy laws were to blame, which of course would mean those photos were chock full of ETs. /sarc
Google's power of delisting is strong only against someone with competition/replacements which haven't also been delisted. In any other case, delisting only drives users to other alternatives.
So no, delisting all EU sites probably wouldn't exactly do what you think it would do. Besides, what is an "EU site"? A site from a company based in the EU? A site hosted on a server in the EU?
On the post: FBI And United Airlines Shoot The Messenger After Security Researcher Discovers Vulnerabilities In Airplane Computer System
Why not?
One wonders what the justification for repressing this type of joke actually is. The widespread belief is that the situation is similar to the classic "yelling 'Fire' in a crowded theater", i.e., the danger which is averted by suppressing these jokes is the danger of having the passengers panic.
Do you actually believe that there was any likelihood whatsoever of this esoteric tweet, in and of itself, causing panic on a flight? Anyone knowledgeable enough to understand the tweet is unlikely to panic. And the particular "threat" in the tweet would seem to be "I can cause the oxygen masks to deploy", which doesn't seen to be very dangerous by itself.
On the post: FBI And United Airlines Shoot The Messenger After Security Researcher Discovers Vulnerabilities In Airplane Computer System
Re:
Yeah, sure...
On the post: YouTuber Angry Joe Swears Off Nintendo Videos After The Company Claimed His Mario Party 10 Take
Re: Re: Re: Can someone please explain...
On the post: Elsevier Appears To Be Slurping Up Open Access Research, And Charging People To Access It
Who will step up to be the next Aaron Swartz?
This whole thing smells of complicity between academic publishers to try to undermine the open access trend via "journal swapping". Or maybe... "journal evergreening"?
On the post: Reminder: Fair Use Is A Right -- And Not 'An Exception' Or 'A Defense'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Probably not a "right" in the US (but should be!)
Or is my fair use right the right to use the copyrighted material even if for all practical purposes it is impossible for me to do so --- kind of like Eldred where indefinite extension, even if it for all practical purposes contradicts "for a limited time", since it doesn't literally then it's OK?
Personally I like actual rights, not fictions thereof.
On the post: FedEx Refuses To Ship Perfectly Legal Milling Machine (Which Can Also Craft Gun Parts), Can't Provide A Coherent Reason Why
Re: Re: FedEx has a point.
My reading of the post you are replying to is that FedEx is not refusing to ship it because it is illegal. This is merely a business decision: FedEx is refusing to ship it in order to reduce its chance it will be sued (or be hurt by negative PR) over a subsequent shooting incident.
If the other AC is correct, however, that FedEx has no problem with shipping actual firearms and ammunition, then this looks like a really strange business decision...
On the post: Reminder: Fair Use Is A Right -- And Not 'An Exception' Or 'A Defense'
Re: Re: Probably not a "right" in the US (but should be!)
But I am curious.
On the post: Reminder: Fair Use Is A Right -- And Not 'An Exception' Or 'A Defense'
Re: Re: Probably not a "right" in the US (but should be!)
On the post: Reminder: Fair Use Is A Right -- And Not 'An Exception' Or 'A Defense'
Probably not a "right" in the US (but should be!)
The only countries I know of where courts have ruled that some aspects of fair use are rights are Canada and Israel.
On the post: Apparently The Best Way To Decrease Movie Piracy Is To Get Rid Of The Oscars
Re: Re:
On the post: Is Arduino Heading Towards The First Open Hardware Fork?
Re:
Did that 16 kg. of meth somehow make its way to you?
On the post: Russia Reaches The Censorship Endgame: Banning VPNs, Tor And Web Proxies
Re: Re: Net community reaches censorship endgame
On the post: Russia Reaches The Censorship Endgame: Banning VPNs, Tor And Web Proxies
Re: Net community reaches censorship endgame
Eventually if that falls through, there's always steganography. But the data rate for that sucks.
On the post: Blurred Lines Copyright Lawsuit Gets Funky As Judge Delves Into The Blurred Lines Of What's Really Copyrighted
To paraphrase a troll
On the post: YouTubers Got To Interview The President Because They're More Legitimate Than Traditional News
Re: One missing point
I suppose that's better than being stuck in an externally imposed bubble world, though.
On the post: The MPAA Isn't About Helping Hollywood. It's About Preserving Its Own Need To Exist.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
IHBT&IAFFT
On the post: European Space Scientists Unwilling To Release High-Quality Images From Publicly-Funded Rosetta Mission
Re:
OTOH, if the headline had been true, one could only conjecture that the reason was that European privacy laws were to blame, which of course would mean those photos were chock full of ETs. /sarc
On the post: Free Our Paywalled Court Documents: The Aaron Swartz Memorial PACER Cup Contest Announced
Re: Re: Has anyone tried this?
I uploaded http://ia601404.us.archive.org/17/items/gov.uscourts.nysd.273913/gov.uscourts.nysd.273913.1035.1.pdf
and the other exhibits ...[1-8].pdf
many months ago, but RECAP doesn't show them...
Somehow I don't believe you meant that long a queue.
On the post: New Zealand Supreme Court Says Raid On Dotcom's Home Legal Enough To Get A Pass
Re: Re: Um, what?
On the post: EU Parliament Wants To Break Up Google... Because It's Big & American Or Something
Not obvious
So no, delisting all EU sites probably wouldn't exactly do what you think it would do. Besides, what is an "EU site"? A site from a company based in the EU? A site hosted on a server in the EU?
Next >>