Everything on the net, from now on, will be free. They want the internet to be some kind of 60s utopia where everything and everyone is free. But we still live in capitalism, and if you make culture free, you make it a ghetto. The internet is not free. It is about as free as the free market.
Mike, you missed a key point: This guy doesn't know the meaning of the word 'free'. He is interchanging 'free as in beer' for 'free as in freedom' all throughout his rant. If you substitute libre for gratis:
Everything on the net, from now on, will be libre.
Excellent! Basically, only dictatorships and heavy-handed constitutional republics would have a problem with this.
They want the internet to be some kind of 60s utopia where everything and everyone is libre. But we still live in capitalism, and if you make culture libre, you make it a ghetto.
Well, using the correct words makes this statement even more insane than it already was, if that's possible.
The internet is not libre. It is about as libre as the free market.
He's right about this, unfortunately, but we're trying to get it back there, inch by inch.
I hate to say it, but he could very well be right, inasmuch as verbiage forbidding 'sharing'. However, no ISP would try to directly enforce this: I think they put that in there so that they can refuse to do tech support if you admit you have a router somewhere on the line.
Regardless, an ISP's contractual issues with a customer would not give a third party (like Liberty) any standing to sue. That's just Carreon-thinking right there.
Given that this is still a highly fluid situation, if you're represented by any of the members of the House Judiciary Committee, you might want to give them a call and let them know that you opposed SOPA and you're shocked that the HJC might push through a piece of SOPA in a process that was even more secretive than the one for SOPA itself.
Shocked! Shocked I am that the House Judiciary Committee, of which 20% are representatives from California, which of course is where Hollywood lives, would try to secretly pass more Imaginary Property legislation! Ahh, wait, the shock is quickly passing... Yep, it's gone.
That's a good point. We all know that this is extortion, but obviously it's couched in a 'civilized' way, as a lawsuit. But if a company could somehow prove that the patent troll knew about the supposed 'infringement' long before they filed a lawsuit (say, once the company has become profitable), it seems to me there could be real grounds to press charges for extortion and racketeering.
The idea that he/she/it is actually a bot has been floated around a few times, and the more I read the more I feel it would be a damn easy bot to program.
Yeah, gonna agree with Danny on this one, the money laundering charge will never stick. It's actually kind of embarassing that they even tried it. Kind of like charging a dog with indecent exposure for not wearing pants.
Why do you keep thinking the case is being tried in NZ?
Nobody is saying this, except you. What we *are* saying, and you are continually missing, is that the extradition itself looks fishy, and the NZ judge realizes this.
US: Kim Dotcom committed a crime, give him to us!
NZ: We'd like to take a look at the evidence to determine if extradition is really the right thing to do.
US: OMGWTF? We JUST told you he committed a crime! Why do you need to see the evidence? Don't you understand that we TOLD YOU he committed a crime? Now give him to us!
NZ: ...
Ahh, Ross Perot... Even though I knew he didn't have a snowball's chance in Hell, after backing out and then re-entering the race, I still voted for him, for no other reason than even back then I was already sick of our ridiculous two party system. The intervening years have seen that feeling evolve to disgust and shame.
Charles Carreon had his wife Tara lyn Carreon with him and she also told me that i must pay $ 50,000 dollars for her breast enlargements, her tummy tuck, and a years supply of anti aging cream. I told both defendants " no way" " this is complete blackmail" and I told Carreon that I'm reporting him to the Bar association for attorney ethic violations, and to the local police, and Charles Carreon went biserk and irate on me and took my bowl of oatmeal and threw it in m face, Tara lyn Carreon was originally using her feet under the table and secretly massaging my groin with her toes while mr. Carreon was trying to black mail me, so after oatmeal splattered my face, then Tara Carreon kicked me in the groin under the table, everything swelled. Mr. Carreon also poured hot mrs. butterworth maple syrup on my head to humiliate me, the defendants then got up , and Carreons left with a stern warning that they will see me in court, Mr. Carreon told me to enjoy my oat meal.
I sincerely hope whoever filed this doesn't get into any real trouble, because that's some seriously funny shit right there! I especially like the repeated mentions of oatmeal, gives it that touch of class.
It's pharmacy's version of taking a common idea and adding "on the internet" to get a patent approved.
"Oh crap, Viagra is coming off patent protection! What are we going to do?"
"Quick, form up a test group of kids, we'll be able to get six more months!"
Anyone who thinks this is just "competition" is fooling themselves: This is brand/design piracy.
No, you're wrong, it's competition.
Think about it: If I start a car company, and make a "Hot, New Retro Muscle Car" and make it look *almost exactly* like the new redesigned Dodge Challenger, would you say that Dodge was just being "fearful" that they couldn't compete if they sought an injunction?
Yes, if Dodge went all law-suity, I would say they were afraid of the competition.
Hell no, you'd say I should get sued.
Nope, I wouldn't.
What people have to realize is that knock-offs do more than just cannibalize sales: they create confusion in the market and allow inferior products to masquerade as industry front-runners.
Don't agree on cannabalizing sales: in point of fact, there is often an increase in sales as people who can afford the knockoff buy it who would never have been able to afford the "real thing" in the first place. Also, those knock-offs force prices downward, which is good for consumers, especially on ultra-high margin items. Furthermore, I truly doubt anyone has been confused into thinking an Android phone is an iPhone.
p.s. In future posts, you might want to provide some actual facts to back up your positions. Here you just come off sounding like an Apple fanboi.
He's incapable of honesty. If you back him into a corner with enough facts, he just decides he didn't say what you thought (and read) but in fact said something else, although it is usually equally absurd.
Wat? Are you saying there is a fixed number of doctors that are allowed to graduate in a given year? How can that possibly be controlled among all the different medical schools?
Third, the very nature of the internet is that this guy offered his services to everyone, including Americans. If he didn't want to be subject to US law, perhaps he shouldn't have offered his service there. There are plenty of things that he could have done to limit the exposure of his site to the US marketplace.
Zimbabwe just made trolling on the internet illegal, and the punishment is death. Please report to Zimbabwe for summary execution at your earliest convenience.
On the post: Dear Lamar Smith & House Judiciary: Have You Learned Nothing From SOPA?
In agreement
You know what, that's just fine, because the feeling is fucking mutual.
On the post: ACTA Failure Inspires The Most Clueless Column Ever
Re:
On the post: ACTA Failure Inspires The Most Clueless Column Ever
Beer
They want the internet to be some kind of 60s utopia where everything and everyone is free. But we still live in capitalism, and if you make culture free, you make it a ghetto.
The internet is not free. It is about as free as the free market.
Mike, you missed a key point: This guy doesn't know the meaning of the word 'free'. He is interchanging 'free as in beer' for 'free as in freedom' all throughout his rant. If you substitute libre for gratis:
Everything on the net, from now on, will be libre.
Excellent! Basically, only dictatorships and heavy-handed constitutional republics would have a problem with this.
They want the internet to be some kind of 60s utopia where everything and everyone is libre. But we still live in capitalism, and if you make culture libre, you make it a ghetto.
Well, using the correct words makes this statement even more insane than it already was, if that's possible.
The internet is not libre. It is about as libre as the free market.
He's right about this, unfortunately, but we're trying to get it back there, inch by inch.
On the post: Court Says Negligence Claim For Allowing Downloading On Your WiFi Is 'Untenable'
Re: Re:
Regardless, an ISP's contractual issues with a customer would not give a third party (like Liberty) any standing to sue. That's just Carreon-thinking right there.
On the post: Let The Judiciary Committee Know That Creating A Mini-SOPA Without Public Participation Is Unacceptable
On the post: Hipmunk Raises Money... And Is Immediately Threatened By Patent Troll
Re: Re:
On the post: Hipmunk Raises Money... And Is Immediately Threatened By Patent Troll
Re: Why?
1. lolwut?
2. Ouch, my head.
3. Are you fucking kidding me? Is he trying to patent AJAX?
p.s. System and Method patents are totally bullshit. All of them. Show me a damn circuit or GTFO.
On the post: Megaupload Extradition Hearing Postponed Until At Least Spring Of 2013
Re: Re:
On the post: FBI Continues To Insist There's No Reason For Kim Dotcom To Be Able To See The Evidence Against Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: FBI Continues To Insist There's No Reason For Kim Dotcom To Be Able To See The Evidence Against Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nobody is saying this, except you. What we *are* saying, and you are continually missing, is that the extradition itself looks fishy, and the NZ judge realizes this.
US: Kim Dotcom committed a crime, give him to us!
NZ: We'd like to take a look at the evidence to determine if extradition is really the right thing to do.
US: OMGWTF? We JUST told you he committed a crime! Why do you need to see the evidence? Don't you understand that we TOLD YOU he committed a crime? Now give him to us!
NZ: ...
On the post: Judge Posner: Do Most Industries Even Need Patents?
Re:
On the post: Ron And Rand Paul: Net Neutrality And The Public Domain Are Really Evil Collectivist Plots
Re:
On the post: Charles Carreon Saga Takes A Turn For The Bizarre, With Apparently Fake Matthew Inman Lawsuit Filed Against Carreon
By Odin's missing eye!
On the post: OxyContin Being Tested On Kids... So Drugmaker Can Get 6 More Months Of Patent Protection
On the kids!
"Oh crap, Viagra is coming off patent protection! What are we going to do?"
"Quick, form up a test group of kids, we'll be able to get six more months!"
On the post: USTR's Surprise Turnaround: Now Advocating Limitations & Exceptions To Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Dear Judge Koh: Competition Is No Reason To Ban A Phone
Re: H8ers Need to Eat Some Apple Pi
No, you're wrong, it's competition.
Think about it: If I start a car company, and make a "Hot, New Retro Muscle Car" and make it look *almost exactly* like the new redesigned Dodge Challenger, would you say that Dodge was just being "fearful" that they couldn't compete if they sought an injunction?
Yes, if Dodge went all law-suity, I would say they were afraid of the competition.
Hell no, you'd say I should get sued.
Nope, I wouldn't.
What people have to realize is that knock-offs do more than just cannibalize sales: they create confusion in the market and allow inferior products to masquerade as industry front-runners.
Don't agree on cannabalizing sales: in point of fact, there is often an increase in sales as people who can afford the knockoff buy it who would never have been able to afford the "real thing" in the first place. Also, those knock-offs force prices downward, which is good for consumers, especially on ultra-high margin items. Furthermore, I truly doubt anyone has been confused into thinking an Android phone is an iPhone.
p.s. In future posts, you might want to provide some actual facts to back up your positions. Here you just come off sounding like an Apple fanboi.
On the post: Yet Another (Yes Another) Error In Megaupload Case: Search Warrants Ruled Illegal
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why You Can't Braid Someone's Hair In Utah For Money Without First Paying $16k
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why You Can't Braid Someone's Hair In Utah For Money Without First Paying $16k
Re: While we're playing this game.....
On the post: UK Politician Speaks Out Against The Travesty Of Trying To Deport Richard O'Dwyer To Feed Hollywood's Anger
Re:
Next >>