"With so many big name publishers offering up their own versions in a rush, some probably used their standard processes to alert Scribd to the text it publishes to prevent uploads of actually pirated books."
... I was born early in the morning, but it wasn't this morning.
Of course the big name publishers Copyrighted their work - annotations, typeface, etc. And made sure that the actual PD text was included, for this exact reason.
What goes around comes around. They've been unable to understand the word "infringed" for what, fifty years now?
The Second Amendment is definitively clear when compared to the First. The First is more nebulous in it's exclusions - hence we get "protection of sources" laws under it when it makes no such statement.
Worse yet, "emanations from a penumbra". Note to the hysterics: I'm not talking about abortion, but a SCOTUS inventing things out of thin air to support a political platform.
You really, REALLY don't want a SCOTUS, ANY SCOTUS reading too much into what the document actually says.
If you disagree, think about your "Unlimited" cell phone plan...
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
So many expecting the report to be damning, and when it was revealed to have ... nothing... the Usual Suspects went and posted a zillion items on it, so the hit counter side of the algorithm pushed them to the top.
This kind of stuff is automated. You'll see the most viewed sites at the top, and if you're not anonymous to the search engine, sites you frequent will eclipse those.
Throwing a fit about it is just venting. There's no conspiracy involved.
Ranting about how the gays are going to outbreed the straights on a Computer Repair site is likely to be a bit off the main topic, which does nothing but annoy the hell out of the regular attendees.
Hmm... I should go back to school and get a Doctorate in Medicine so I don't have to "subcontract" my health, Join the Electricians, Plumbers, Carpenters, and Mason's Unions so I don't have to subcontract that work either...
I hire the best person for the price. It's called "commerce".
...a platform should be held to any different standard of "hate speech" than individuals are.
So long as you don't incite violence or support violence against any "protected group", you should be able to post any damned foolishness you want.
If I start a blog with a comments section for People Who Hate Elbonians, monitor the comments for the above "violence", who really cares?
For every white "supremacist" site you can find a similar site for just about any non-white group you can think of.
So what? It comes down to the Nuke the Gay Whales argument. If YOU find something objectionable, what gives YOUR opinion higher status than that of the person who posted the objectionable (to YOU) content?
The narrow minded should be as free to congregate and discuss non-mainstream ideas and ideals as the broader minded.
Hell, the guy who runs the crew I use to paint my apartments between tenants is the most racist person I've ever met. He's black and only hires black laborers because he claims you can't get any REAL work out of white guys.
I shake my head and pay his invoices because he runs the best small paint crew for miles around. His opinion of white workers doesn't effect the quality of his work (hell, maybe he's RIGHT), and doesn't impact me in any other way.
I don't base who I rent to on race, religion, or anything other than their ability to pay the rent and they pass both a criminal and a financial background check. Why WOULD I? Pick a group, any group, and explain to me why their money isn't as good as that of those outside of that group.
Re: Why did you take 1/2 step and not the beginning?
Right of ownership would be in the court filing. 230 basically expedites a court ruling - while you read about SC 1st rulings, you rarely see anything about the 30,000,000 cases a day SCOTUS never hears about because of Standing things like ownership.
And Ownership would only apply in a Copyright case, which is only a fraction of the tip of the iceberg that 230 covers.
Agreed. It's a cash cow that has WORKED in the recent past.
Like every government, the moment they get a cent from someone they declare it their entitlement until the end of time.
We've got toll bridges in NY where the tolls are STILL supposed to go to funding the Spanish/American War.
They're exercising CONTROL. A week without Facebook alone in the EU would probably result in the pols who voted the law in hanging from random lamp posts.
On the post: Scribd's Takedown Of The Public Domain Mueller Report Is A Preview Of The EU's Future Under The Copyright Directive
Gotta laugh...
Ironic new catchphrase for the left:
"BUILD THE (geo)FENCE!"
/s
On the post: Scribd's Takedown Of The Public Domain Mueller Report Is A Preview Of The EU's Future Under The Copyright Directive
C'mon, now...
"With so many big name publishers offering up their own versions in a rush, some probably used their standard processes to alert Scribd to the text it publishes to prevent uploads of actually pirated books."
... I was born early in the morning, but it wasn't this morning.
Of course the big name publishers Copyrighted their work - annotations, typeface, etc. And made sure that the actual PD text was included, for this exact reason.
On the post: Judge Tells Research Center To Give Back Facial Recognition Documents The NYPD Forgot To Redact
I'm wondering...
...what those 20 pages out of almost 4,000 contained.
They can't reference them in court, but they could release them to the media.
What are the chances that they simply should have been redacted? Home addresses, names, etc. that have little or no bearing on the request?
If that's the case, the Judge's Order makes sense.
If they're pertinent and contain no "automatic redaction" information, it's a farce.
On the post: Supreme Court Again Ducks A Chance To Clarify First Amendment Protections
Re:
What goes around comes around. They've been unable to understand the word "infringed" for what, fifty years now?
The Second Amendment is definitively clear when compared to the First. The First is more nebulous in it's exclusions - hence we get "protection of sources" laws under it when it makes no such statement.
Worse yet, "emanations from a penumbra". Note to the hysterics: I'm not talking about abortion, but a SCOTUS inventing things out of thin air to support a political platform.
You really, REALLY don't want a SCOTUS, ANY SCOTUS reading too much into what the document actually says.
If you disagree, think about your "Unlimited" cell phone plan...
On the post: James Comey Offers Up Half-Assed Apology For Being Such An Asshole About Encryption
Re:
No, can't recall where I first read it. Sounds like Pratchett, though.
On the post: New Paper: Why Section 230 Is Better Than The First Amendment
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
So many expecting the report to be damning, and when it was revealed to have ... nothing... the Usual Suspects went and posted a zillion items on it, so the hit counter side of the algorithm pushed them to the top.
This kind of stuff is automated. You'll see the most viewed sites at the top, and if you're not anonymous to the search engine, sites you frequent will eclipse those.
Throwing a fit about it is just venting. There's no conspiracy involved.
That we know about... (/s)
On the post: The UK's Dubious Plan For Age-Based Porn Filters Begins On July 15
Re: Re: utterly useless filtering palsonic flusterbox
D: You can't spell anorectic.
/s
On the post: Don't Force Web Platforms To Silence Innocent People
Re:
That's where it gets tricky.
Shutting down ANY group because their views are "unpopular".
What if they decide YOUR group is "unpopular"?
On the post: Don't Force Web Platforms To Silence Innocent People
Re:
We're in agreement on that.
And I'll add the caveat of "in context".
Ranting about how the gays are going to outbreed the straights on a Computer Repair site is likely to be a bit off the main topic, which does nothing but annoy the hell out of the regular attendees.
On the post: Don't Force Web Platforms To Silence Innocent People
Re: Re: I don't see why...
Hmm... I should go back to school and get a Doctorate in Medicine so I don't have to "subcontract" my health, Join the Electricians, Plumbers, Carpenters, and Mason's Unions so I don't have to subcontract that work either...
I hire the best person for the price. It's called "commerce".
On the post: Don't Force Web Platforms To Silence Innocent People
Re:
The Diety is the same in both religions. Basic Thunderer, heavy on the Smite, low on the compassion.
Christians invented an intercessor to compensate for that.
But the post you're replying to wasn't about Allah, but Mohammed, His Prophet.
Same as any genocidal Pope from back then - "Kill the Infidel!"
But, in line with the OP, you can't mention that in Church or "polite company".
On the post: Don't Force Web Platforms To Silence Innocent People
I don't see why...
...a platform should be held to any different standard of "hate speech" than individuals are.
So long as you don't incite violence or support violence against any "protected group", you should be able to post any damned foolishness you want.
If I start a blog with a comments section for People Who Hate Elbonians, monitor the comments for the above "violence", who really cares?
For every white "supremacist" site you can find a similar site for just about any non-white group you can think of.
So what? It comes down to the Nuke the Gay Whales argument. If YOU find something objectionable, what gives YOUR opinion higher status than that of the person who posted the objectionable (to YOU) content?
The narrow minded should be as free to congregate and discuss non-mainstream ideas and ideals as the broader minded.
Hell, the guy who runs the crew I use to paint my apartments between tenants is the most racist person I've ever met. He's black and only hires black laborers because he claims you can't get any REAL work out of white guys.
I shake my head and pay his invoices because he runs the best small paint crew for miles around. His opinion of white workers doesn't effect the quality of his work (hell, maybe he's RIGHT), and doesn't impact me in any other way.
I don't base who I rent to on race, religion, or anything other than their ability to pay the rent and they pass both a criminal and a financial background check. Why WOULD I? Pick a group, any group, and explain to me why their money isn't as good as that of those outside of that group.
On the post: That Was Quick: Thomas Goolnik Already Gets Google To Forget Our Latest Story About Thomas Goolnik Getting Google To Forget Stories About Thomas Goolnik
Re: Oh the schadenfreude...
Maybe. The speed at which it happened this last time has me thinking Google just put his name and techdirt in a filter.
Fully automated exclusionary rule.
On the post: James Comey Offers Up Half-Assed Apology For Being Such An Asshole About Encryption
Re: Re: Re: Thank You
The enemy of my enemy is my economic opportunity,
On the post: New Paper: Why Section 230 Is Better Than The First Amendment
Re: Why did you take 1/2 step and not the beginning?
Right of ownership would be in the court filing. 230 basically expedites a court ruling - while you read about SC 1st rulings, you rarely see anything about the 30,000,000 cases a day SCOTUS never hears about because of Standing things like ownership.
And Ownership would only apply in a Copyright case, which is only a fraction of the tip of the iceberg that 230 covers.
On the post: James Comey Offers Up Half-Assed Apology For Being Such An Asshole About Encryption
Re:
Nah, that's most of the sub-plot to Neuromancer.
Encryption will simply switch to Encoding for items that actually REQUIRE secrecy. PITA, but compared to current steganography use, it's easy.
On the post: EU Parliament Votes To Require Internet Sites To Delete 'Terrorist Content' In One Hour (By 3 Votes)
Re:
Agreed. It's a cash cow that has WORKED in the recent past.
Like every government, the moment they get a cent from someone they declare it their entitlement until the end of time.
We've got toll bridges in NY where the tolls are STILL supposed to go to funding the Spanish/American War.
They're exercising CONTROL. A week without Facebook alone in the EU would probably result in the pols who voted the law in hanging from random lamp posts.
On the post: John Oliver Has Famous Actors Act Out The Deposition Richard Sackler Is Trying To Hide
Re: Re: Re:
I use offshore VPNs, the "Not available in your location" on youtube isn't uncommon. I just change servers and it plays fine.
On the post: That Was Quick: Thomas Goolnik Already Gets Google To Forget Our Latest Story About Thomas Goolnik Getting Google To Forget Stories About Thomas Goolnik
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(fnord)Thomas Goolnik(fnord).....
On the post: James Comey Offers Up Half-Assed Apology For Being Such An Asshole About Encryption
Re:
The key(s) would be up for sale on the dark net about two weeks before the government got theirs.
The day before the government got their set, the complete set would be all over every bit torrent site out there.
Human nature.
Next >>