By opening this bottle of high quality dietary supplement, and in consideration of the discount price you were offered, you agree to the 80 page EULA (provided on microfilm, inside the bottle).
I'm not saying Kim is a nice person, but he would have to be a fool (and I don't believe he is) to not have thought this through to what would happen after the initial short term good publicity.
For the benefit of your immortal soul you must convert to using Comcast or Time Warner internet service for moral reasons.
With both Comcast and Time Warner, you can be assured that our internet service will never reach high enough speeds to be considered immoral or in violation of Sharia law.
And not only that, but there's more! With the merger of Comcast and Time Warner, our internet service will get even more moral! So please support the merger! In the name of morality*.
* and corporate profits, which are also a god and form the basis for some people's morals
If such a thing truly happened, you've got to remember the mentality of book burners.
They are not bright. They probably don't understand the intarwebs. And it might not occur to them in their haste that other copies of the dreaded books might exist.
Suppose someone discovered some earlier binding court precedent. Something horrible. Something so horrible that it cannot be allowed to stand! Something so terrible, I hesitate to mention it, but for example: a precedent that protects free speech or free expression, or protects people's constitutional rights, or even worse, a court precedent that frightens the RIAA or MPAA!
How would you 'disappear' such a horrible thing in plain view?
First, make it disappear from PACER, clouded by a large number of deleted documents. Now people have to physically go to the court to inspect documents. So make the original document disappear. Since there are no other records to compare to, the 'disappeared' document cannot be detected.
Remember: Snowden shold teach us that the actual state of things is worse than paranoid crazy ravings.
I can legally use large amounts of data quite easily. I pay for my data usage like everyone else. If I were a Comcast sufferer, and thus had a reason to bitch, then I would bitch about Comcast as I rightfully should.
Not being a Comcast user, I still have a reason to bitch because other ISPs would like to follow Comcast's example.
How I use my bandwidth is none of your, or Comcast's business.
Doesn't HTTPS actually conceal the hostname of the request?
It just doesn't conceal the IP address, nor the fact that a moment earlier you did a DNS request for a hostname that happened to be for that IP address.
And, you may be able to reverse DNS the hostname from the IP address after the fact.
We cannot create A public Internet space where the first amendment rules.
Not as long as there is Copyright. Copyright is fundamentally in conflict with freedom of speech and free expression. That is why the DMCA is so widely abused to silence free speech by people who have no copyright rights or claim over the material being silenced.
If you un-like something, or withdraw your 'like' of it, then who owns the intellectual property rights on that action?
Maybe the act of un-liking a commercial business should also create a cause of action for them to sue the person who un-liked them. But the lawsuit should be under a seal for the porpoise of keeping it a secret.
If I merely 'redirected' your browser requests to a different page, I would end up in jail.
If your ISP does this, then they are not delivering the service they promised. If they did this without any kind of due process, then there would seem to be some kind of liability they have opened themselves up to.
Try Mega ISP where you get fast* internet connections! **
* faster than our sister company Snail ISP and almost as fast as ComCrapst
** unless some third party accuses you of something and demands we stop your service with no due process
Intellectual Property -- (noun) The fantasy that ideas or actions are property, created by strictly avoiding anything intellectual, such as reason, facts or logic.
As you say, the "Like" is probably for the fan site, not for the thing the fan site is about.
But now we get into, is the "like" for the fan site, or for the author of the fan site?
If the fan site changes ownership, how do we know which likes were for the fan site (now under new ownership, but likes should be retained) or for the original author of the fan site (likes should be discarded)?
If the new owner of the fan site changes the site radically, then people who once liked the fan site my no longer like it. (This is assuming they picked "Like" because they liked the site, rather than liking its former author.)
On the post: 'Dietary Supplement' Company Tries Suing PissedConsumer, Citing Buyer's Agreement To Never Say Anything Negative
EULAs
On the post: Former Senator Scott Brown's Staff Sends Larry Lessig A Letter Demanding He Stop Referring To Brown As A 'Lobbyist'
Maybe we should call it what it is
Corruption.
On the post: New Orleans Cab Company Owner Calls Uber A 'Cyber-Terrorist Group'
Definition
On the post: Record Labels Issue Takedown To Take Kim Dotcom's Album Down From His Own Site
Re:
On the post: Ares Rights, Notorious DMCA Abusers For The Ecuadorian Gov't, Now Sending DMCA Notices On Stories About Ares Rights
Re:
On the post: Ferguson Debacle Results In Armored Vehicles Being Removed From Two California Police Departments
Re:
Police need serious military equipment because . . .
Piracy! Tar. Biterrent. The intarwebs.
On the post: Iranian Grand Ayatollah Issues Fatwa Against 'Immoral' High-Speed Internet Connections
Comcast and Time Warner -- the Moral ISPs !
With both Comcast and Time Warner, you can be assured that our internet service will never reach high enough speeds to be considered immoral or in violation of Sharia law.
And not only that, but there's more! With the merger of Comcast and Time Warner, our internet service will get even more moral! So please support the merger! In the name of morality*.
* and corporate profits, which are also a god and form the basis for some people's morals
On the post: PACER Officials Give Weak, Nonsensical Excuse For Why PACER Deleted Tons Of Public Court Records With No Notice
Re: Re: Imagine this paranoid lunitic raving
They are not bright. They probably don't understand the intarwebs. And it might not occur to them in their haste that other copies of the dreaded books might exist.
Yeah, the DoJ might fit the description.
On the post: PACER Officials Give Weak, Nonsensical Excuse For Why PACER Deleted Tons Of Public Court Records With No Notice
Imagine this paranoid lunitic raving
How would you 'disappear' such a horrible thing in plain view?
First, make it disappear from PACER, clouded by a large number of deleted documents. Now people have to physically go to the court to inspect documents. So make the original document disappear. Since there are no other records to compare to, the 'disappeared' document cannot be detected.
Remember: Snowden shold teach us that the actual state of things is worse than paranoid crazy ravings.
On the post: Comcast To Regulators: Data Caps? These? Nooo! These Are Just... Fuzzy Friendly Flexible Consumption Plans For Friends
Re:
Not being a Comcast user, I still have a reason to bitch because other ISPs would like to follow Comcast's example.
How I use my bandwidth is none of your, or Comcast's business.
On the post: Police Officers Facing Potential Felony Charges After Using Government Databases To Screen Potential Dates
I don't see what the problem is here
Are you suggesting that they should open themselves up to the risk of getting a date with a clean criminal history?
On the post: University Bans Social Media, Political Content and Wikipedia Pages On Dorm WiFi
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HTTPS
On the post: University Bans Social Media, Political Content and Wikipedia Pages On Dorm WiFi
Re: Re: Re:
Followup: why should they get first amendment rights in adult life if they didn't have them in college?
That line of thinking can also be extended in the other direction prior to high school, but that is left as an exercise for the reader.
Because terrorists!
On the post: University Bans Social Media, Political Content and Wikipedia Pages On Dorm WiFi
Re: Re: Re: HTTPS
Doesn't HTTPS actually conceal the hostname of the request?
It just doesn't conceal the IP address, nor the fact that a moment earlier you did a DNS request for a hostname that happened to be for that IP address.
And, you may be able to reverse DNS the hostname from the IP address after the fact.
On the post: University Bans Social Media, Political Content and Wikipedia Pages On Dorm WiFi
Re:
And terrorists!
And hax0rs!
And think of the children -- attending university!
Their young precious minds must be protected from encountering any controversial viewpoints. (Or things the university does not like.)
So it's all okay. Like chill. This is a post 9/11 world and it's okay to censor things that might be dangerous.
On the post: Can We Create A Public Internet Space Where The First Amendment, Not Private Terms Of Service, Rules?
Did you really have to ask that question?
We cannot create A public Internet space where the first amendment rules.
Not as long as there is Copyright. Copyright is fundamentally in conflict with freedom of speech and free expression. That is why the DMCA is so widely abused to silence free speech by people who have no copyright rights or claim over the material being silenced.
On the post: Judge Says You Don't 'Own' The Facebook 'Likes' On Your Page
Re: Re: Re:
Maybe the act of un-liking a commercial business should also create a cause of action for them to sue the person who un-liked them. But the lawsuit should be under a seal for the porpoise of keeping it a secret.
On the post: Rightscorp's New PR Plan: The More Ridiculous It Gets (Such As By Claiming To Hijack Browsers), The More Press It Will Get
Re: Re: Hijack my browser...
If your ISP does this, then they are not delivering the service they promised. If they did this without any kind of due process, then there would seem to be some kind of liability they have opened themselves up to.
Try Mega ISP where you get fast* internet connections! **
* faster than our sister company Snail ISP and almost as fast as ComCrapst
** unless some third party accuses you of something and demands we stop your service with no due process
On the post: Judge Says You Don't 'Own' The Facebook 'Likes' On Your Page
Definition
On the post: Judge Says You Don't 'Own' The Facebook 'Likes' On Your Page
Re:
As you say, the "Like" is probably for the fan site, not for the thing the fan site is about.
But now we get into, is the "like" for the fan site, or for the author of the fan site?
If the fan site changes ownership, how do we know which likes were for the fan site (now under new ownership, but likes should be retained) or for the original author of the fan site (likes should be discarded)?
If the new owner of the fan site changes the site radically, then people who once liked the fan site my no longer like it. (This is assuming they picked "Like" because they liked the site, rather than liking its former author.)
Next >>