"Not sure myself, but I can tell you that a lot of the information released by him does infact endanger the lives of those who serve my country."
When the USG investigated this, even they admitted they could not find any evidence of anyone actually being harmed by the release of the info. If you have any evidence they missed, please share.
The USG have publicly made clear their desire to charge Assange with crimes under the Espionage Act, which raises the chance of spending decades in jail before release, or decades in jail before execution. Some government figures have even publicly suggested swifter and less legal punishment for him. He has every reason to fear going anywhere that might increase the chance of being hauled away to the US. He'd be stupid not to.
Why would you waste time and money suing over something so stupid? You simply put out a public statement saying that you don't like that a candidate's using one of your songs, even though you know they're allowed to. Point out what policies of theirs you disagree with, maybe throw in a few opposing personal beliefs, and (as in this case) point out the ironically inappropriate choice of song. Then, having undermined the PR value of using the song in the first place, move on with your life and find fun ways to spend the money you would've blown on a lawyer.
Care to share with us your knowledge of Romney's future musical career? I mean nobody would make a comment that stupid unless they knew something we all don't...
"...the US judiciary is regarded as the most impartial, fair and accessible judiciary in the world."
Methinks you watch too much Law & Order...
"The notion that a foreign court would hold that Dotcom wouldn't get a fair trial in the US is laughable."
Actually the NZ courts seem to be thinking just that thanks to the ongoing antics of the FBI and DoJ, but nobody's laughing.
"Evidence held by the US Attorney is subject to the discovery process, which is governed by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Again, there's no basis for a NZ judge to believe that Dotcom would't have full access once the criminal phase begins."
Have you forgotten that the FBI has specifically requested that the data that on MegaUpload's seized servers be deleted? The same data Dotcom's team want access to so they can prepare their defence? Does that sound like "full access" to you?
Translation: I don't like Techdirt even though I read it religiously, and had to made some negative comment even though I couldn't actually figure out anything to comment negatively on.
Is it too much to ask that you actually have a point when you comment?
"Umm, last time I checked, the labels finance videos and distribute them."
Wouldn't that strongly suggest they should also be responsible for ensuring the product they're financing and distributing doesn't include copyright infringing material? Hell, we're always being told you can just tell when something's infringing just be watching it. Don't they watch their own stuff before releasing it?
I am equally at a loss for a plausible explanation for why you'd be reading an opinion blog and complaining about bias or slant. Do you go swimming and complain you got wet?
The owner of said business is not free to market his product in a manner that every sane economist and technologist is telling them is a terrible long-term economic strategy, while at the same time bribing the government to write terrible laws to assist them with their failing strategy, and strong-arming private companies to change the way they run their very successful business because they actually offer their customers what they want.
This comment is proof that your argument has nothing to do with making money or being financially successful. To you it's all about the control and your obsessive need for it. Given the choice between receiving money (profit!) or making people wait (no profit!), you choose the path of stupidity. If the company I work for repeatedly made the same brainless choice it'd be dead in months.
"The widespread "acceptance" of piracy is in part built on ubiquity..."
I would strongly argue that the ubiquity of piracy is in part built on widespread "acceptance".
People have realised the artificial limitations are no longer in place, and have defaulted back to mankind's millennia-old position on sharing culture.
"...what those of us practicing law refer to as "assuming facts not in evidence"."
So I'll repeat the question you were unable to answer the first time around. If the footage might not be NASA's, whose could it be? I'm perfectly willing to concede it might not be theirs if you can give me even one plausible alternative.
Re: Re: Youtube commenter "techcafe" says it well.
"Don't just support piracy to cripple the existing industry..."
With more music and movies being made than ever before, most of us aren't terribly concerned about the state of "the industry". The fact that you think they're being "crippled" despite the evidence of healthy output means either you're completely wrong about the state of the industry or you're completely wrong about the effect of piracy.
"Yeah, well, SOPA disappears pretty much because of a twitmob, so welcome to being on the other side of things."
Let's compare:
A man makes a perfectly legitimate website, a few completely uninformed writers who can't read their own contracts leap to a completely wrong conclusion and gang together to successfully kill the website. All of the authors' assumptions were immediately proven to be wrong. Some hide in shame, some grovel for forgiveness.
A bunch of trade organisations get together to "assist" their bought-and-paid-for politicians to craft bills ostensibly with the aim to kill piracy but with the bonus effect of helping to retain old-school market power. Internet experts (i.e. the people that built it) express strong concerns that the functionality and security of the internet will be at risk, lawyers express strong concerns that basic free speech rights will be at risk, everyone points out how piracy will not be affected long-term, and massive worldwide online protests result. Politicians see the risks to their re-election campaigns and back away as quickly as possible, trade organisations berate late-comers Google for running a misinformation campaign and the politicians for not doing what they were 'paid' to do. No evidence is offered (then or now) than any of the concerns weren't completely valid, but nobody responsible apologises, and instead look forward to the next legislative attempt at controlling the internet.
On the post: Musician Chris Randall: Music Has No Monetary Value But The Connections It Forms Are Priceless
Re:
On the post: Musician Chris Randall: Music Has No Monetary Value But The Connections It Forms Are Priceless
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: The Same Day Russia Sentences Pussy Riot, It Condemns The UK Over Julian Assange
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
When the USG investigated this, even they admitted they could not find any evidence of anyone actually being harmed by the release of the info. If you have any evidence they missed, please share.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Germany Tells Facebook To Destroy Face Recognition Database
Re: Re: Re: What if
I imagine facial recognition software would struggle with that scenario...
On the post: Band Calls 1st Amendment A 'Buzzword' In (Plagiarized) C&D To Mitt Romney Over (Licensed) Use Of Song
Re:
On the post: Band Calls 1st Amendment A 'Buzzword' In (Plagiarized) C&D To Mitt Romney Over (Licensed) Use Of Song
Re:
On the post: New Zealand High Court: FBI Must Release Its Evidence Against Kim Dotcom
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Methinks you watch too much Law & Order...
"The notion that a foreign court would hold that Dotcom wouldn't get a fair trial in the US is laughable."
Actually the NZ courts seem to be thinking just that thanks to the ongoing antics of the FBI and DoJ, but nobody's laughing.
"Evidence held by the US Attorney is subject to the discovery process, which is governed by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Again, there's no basis for a NZ judge to believe that Dotcom would't have full access once the criminal phase begins."
Have you forgotten that the FBI has specifically requested that the data that on MegaUpload's seized servers be deleted? The same data Dotcom's team want access to so they can prepare their defence? Does that sound like "full access" to you?
On the post: US, UK Betray Basic Values To Get Assange At Any Cost
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Inexplicable: Jeff Price Pushed Out Of TuneCore, Despite Tremendous Success In Helping Artists
Re:
Is it too much to ask that you actually have a point when you comment?
On the post: Universal Music Sued Because 62% Of A Bow Wow Video Is Actually A French Porn Star's Music Video
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Universal Music Sued Because 62% Of A Bow Wow Video Is Actually A French Porn Star's Music Video
Re: Re: Re:
Wouldn't that strongly suggest they should also be responsible for ensuring the product they're financing and distributing doesn't include copyright infringing material? Hell, we're always being told you can just tell when something's infringing just be watching it. Don't they watch their own stuff before releasing it?
On the post: Universal Music Sued Because 62% Of A Bow Wow Video Is Actually A French Porn Star's Music Video
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: It's Never Enough: Both RIAA & MPAA Aren't Satisfied With Google Punishing 'Pirate' Sites
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Try this one
On the post: It's Never Enough: Both RIAA & MPAA Aren't Satisfied With Google Punishing 'Pirate' Sites
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hold on a minute
On the post: It's Never Enough: Both RIAA & MPAA Aren't Satisfied With Google Punishing 'Pirate' Sites
Re: Re:
I would strongly argue that the ubiquity of piracy is in part built on widespread "acceptance".
People have realised the artificial limitations are no longer in place, and have defaulted back to mankind's millennia-old position on sharing culture.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
So I'll repeat the question you were unable to answer the first time around. If the footage might not be NASA's, whose could it be? I'm perfectly willing to concede it might not be theirs if you can give me even one plausible alternative.
On the post: From SOPA To Cybersecurity: All About Trying To Control The Internet
Re: Re: Youtube commenter "techcafe" says it well.
With more music and movies being made than ever before, most of us aren't terribly concerned about the state of "the industry". The fact that you think they're being "crippled" despite the evidence of healthy output means either you're completely wrong about the state of the industry or you're completely wrong about the effect of piracy.
On the post: Baldaur Regis' Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re:
Let's compare:
A man makes a perfectly legitimate website, a few completely uninformed writers who can't read their own contracts leap to a completely wrong conclusion and gang together to successfully kill the website. All of the authors' assumptions were immediately proven to be wrong. Some hide in shame, some grovel for forgiveness.
A bunch of trade organisations get together to "assist" their bought-and-paid-for politicians to craft bills ostensibly with the aim to kill piracy but with the bonus effect of helping to retain old-school market power. Internet experts (i.e. the people that built it) express strong concerns that the functionality and security of the internet will be at risk, lawyers express strong concerns that basic free speech rights will be at risk, everyone points out how piracy will not be affected long-term, and massive worldwide online protests result. Politicians see the risks to their re-election campaigns and back away as quickly as possible, trade organisations berate late-comers Google for running a misinformation campaign and the politicians for not doing what they were 'paid' to do. No evidence is offered (then or now) than any of the concerns weren't completely valid, but nobody responsible apologises, and instead look forward to the next legislative attempt at controlling the internet.
Yeah, totally the same.
Next >>