whether it's called pirate party or internet party, I'd actually suggest they stick with pirate party to deliberately force the issue to be acknowledged.
I think trying to come up with a polite name lets us distract ourselves from the gravity of the situation. Pirate Party already exists, this is just the sign that it needs to be globalized and needs way more support.
At this stage in the game, making such a comment would be political suicide. That's why this is the perfect time to request the question to be answered.
Please, good sir. I believe you just doublespoke your own doublespeak, and therefore are in complete denial, acknowledging that what was stated was true.
That's two posts, almost in a row. First paragraph 24, now 25?
Since when did DMCA become a criminal statute, and since when did DMCA become a criminal statue outside the US? This would have to be tried *in* the US to determine that.
"piracy is indeed a problem" is the "do what we say because we own you" speech line.
Even in a speech acknowledging PIPA and SOPA being a political disaster they still say "piracy is still a problem" or "online theft is a problem". This is short for "I am still owned by the MPAA/RIAA"
It's only that they're the majority that they are responding. Whichever party is the majority always has to respond to gigantic public outcry in some way or they're destined to become the minority - simple, cut and dry.
the parties are all bought and owned by the same people.
So it is not that the $politicalgroup responded more strongly.
It is that the group which is currently the majority power actually responded. If this had been democrats in power they would have changed faster than republicans. Since it is republicans in power who want to stay in power, it is republicans. It's entirely a scorched earth concept.
every letter sent to any part of congress gets a boilerplate reply
every situation involving overwhelming opposition by the public is downplayed
if you're not important to them (read: $$ affecting directly and immediately), they don't care about you
nothing will change this, because if you elect someone other than the incumbent, what happens? The new person gets right back in the pocket with big content all over again.
In reality, in private, probably 50-75% of these folks do understand all of this. However, they're paid well, so in public and in congress they support what pays them.
And people wonder why our country has problems.
We need to raise a "corporation" of US citizens, aka another political party, or this is just going to continue as it has for the last 40 years.
just make sure you don't cord cut merely to create another (google tv, apple tv, tivo, roku).
All of the above products can be replaced merely by actually using a computer (as it is already capable of doing), and all of the above support drastic DRM/give you far less control over everything, for about 1/5th the cost of the above products.
plus she's cute, so what the hell happened to her common sense?
Honestly if you age well you age well, and she certainly does. Instead of being an attractive up and coming actress (or at least seeking an acting career)5, she ends up looking like a total biatch.
it's been stated plenty from other sources RF. At best, you can slow it down, but you can never prevent it. It's the generational gap/fear of change that has plagued the planet for thousands of years. It goes far further back than the last few hundred.
The first time we ever have a worldwide understanding of change and embracing it would be significant, but I don't see that happening in anyone's lifetime who's alive right now.
wikipedia's so public, and politics within pages are so blatant (see microsoft pages vs google pages, look at the lack of a controversy section on micrsoft pages), and so easily abused, that people end up needing to make local wikis. This is kind of a good thing, except now how are you going to know if a wiki exists for a single area or not? Not everyone's going to think to look for them.
Thus we have solutions that already exist for part of the problem: google, yelp, grubhub, foursquare, etc, but none are perfect.
Well, I kinda agree with Falkvinge based on interpretation too
I think the point is - why should we have to have these safe harbors in the first place? What made things suddenly questionable just because they are online?
The problem is what we have enabled that has required us to need safe harbors.
Why should there even be a question of "is this protected speech?" It ultimately boils down to the lower end of the legal system being the cause and the solution being the appeals courts/etc.
I think more power to review validity of claims needs to be given to lower courts to ensure thus stuff never even reaches a trial.
On the post: The Internet Begins Discussing What To Do With Its New Found Powers
internet party
I think trying to come up with a polite name lets us distract ourselves from the gravity of the situation. Pirate Party already exists, this is just the sign that it needs to be globalized and needs way more support.
On the post: Ownership Mentality: Art Gallery Prohibits Sketching
Re: Re:
After all, these paintings you are creating are stealing the original paintings via my misguided feelings of entitlement and ownership!
On the post: Public Petitions The White House To Investigate Chris Dodd & The MPAA For Possible Bribery
Re: Re:
On the post: Public Petitions The White House To Investigate Chris Dodd & The MPAA For Possible Bribery
Re: Re: This could be fun...
On the post: DOJ Gives Its Opinion On SOPA By Unilaterally Shutting Down 'Foreign Rogue Site' Megaupload... Without SOPA/PIPA
Re:
Let's start simple: paragraphs 24-25 were already proven to be a lie in court.
On the post: DOJ Gives Its Opinion On SOPA By Unilaterally Shutting Down 'Foreign Rogue Site' Megaupload... Without SOPA/PIPA
Re:
That's two posts, almost in a row. First paragraph 24, now 25?
Since when did DMCA become a criminal statute, and since when did DMCA become a criminal statue outside the US? This would have to be tried *in* the US to determine that.
On the post: DOJ Gives Its Opinion On SOPA By Unilaterally Shutting Down 'Foreign Rogue Site' Megaupload... Without SOPA/PIPA
Re:
This is disgusting to occur, frankly.
On the post: Are Democrats About To Lose An Entire Generation Of Voters By Pushing PIPA/SOPA Forward?
Re:
As I said it in my comments below, and even Larry Lessig agrees - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ik1AK56FtVc (go to the part about is it republicans/democrats).
On the post: Are Democrats About To Lose An Entire Generation Of Voters By Pushing PIPA/SOPA Forward?
Re:
Even in a speech acknowledging PIPA and SOPA being a political disaster they still say "piracy is still a problem" or "online theft is a problem". This is short for "I am still owned by the MPAA/RIAA"
On the post: Are Democrats About To Lose An Entire Generation Of Voters By Pushing PIPA/SOPA Forward?
Re:
It's only that they're the majority that they are responding. Whichever party is the majority always has to respond to gigantic public outcry in some way or they're destined to become the minority - simple, cut and dry.
On the post: Are Democrats About To Lose An Entire Generation Of Voters By Pushing PIPA/SOPA Forward?
totally wrong, wrong focus, wrong understanding
So it is not that the $politicalgroup responded more strongly.
It is that the group which is currently the majority power actually responded. If this had been democrats in power they would have changed faster than republicans. Since it is republicans in power who want to stay in power, it is republicans. It's entirely a scorched earth concept.
On the post: Microsoft Finally Makes It Official That It Opposes SOPA.... As Written
Re:
In comparison to google, where's *anything* on bing's homepage about SOPA?
Nowhere, because they're dinosaurs of technology.
On the post: Indian Judge Tells Google And Facebook To 'Check And Remove Objectionable Material' Or Be Blocked
Re:
On the post: Website Censored By Feds Takes Up Lamar Smith's Challenge: Here's Your 'Hypothetical'
Re: Not so clueless
It's sad, but this is the exact reason why:
every letter sent to any part of congress gets a boilerplate reply
every situation involving overwhelming opposition by the public is downplayed
if you're not important to them (read: $$ affecting directly and immediately), they don't care about you
nothing will change this, because if you elect someone other than the incumbent, what happens? The new person gets right back in the pocket with big content all over again.
In reality, in private, probably 50-75% of these folks do understand all of this. However, they're paid well, so in public and in congress they support what pays them.
And people wonder why our country has problems.
We need to raise a "corporation" of US citizens, aka another political party, or this is just going to continue as it has for the last 40 years.
On the post: Lamar Smith's Head-In-Sand Approach To SOPA Critics Inspires 'Lamar Smith Can't Hear You' Anti-Campaign Poster
Re: Re: Re:
All of the above products can be replaced merely by actually using a computer (as it is already capable of doing), and all of the above support drastic DRM/give you far less control over everything, for about 1/5th the cost of the above products.
On the post: Lamar Smith's Head-In-Sand Approach To SOPA Critics Inspires 'Lamar Smith Can't Hear You' Anti-Campaign Poster
photo forgot 1 group
democrats
republicans
On the post: Actress Who Wished To Remain Anonymous And Under 40 Is Now Officially Neither
absolutely
Honestly if you age well you age well, and she certainly does. Instead of being an attractive up and coming actress (or at least seeking an acting career)5, she ends up looking like a total biatch.
On the post: It Is Time To Stop Pretending To Endorse The Copyright Monopoly
Re: Re: Re: Re: Actually
The first time we ever have a worldwide understanding of change and embracing it would be significant, but I don't see that happening in anyone's lifetime who's alive right now.
On the post: Is Monmouthpedia The Future Of Wikipedia?
and it shows wikipedia's shortcomings
Thus we have solutions that already exist for part of the problem: google, yelp, grubhub, foursquare, etc, but none are perfect.
On the post: Don't Confuse All Safe Harbors With Poorly Written Ones
Well, I kinda agree with Falkvinge based on interpretation too
The problem is what we have enabled that has required us to need safe harbors.
Why should there even be a question of "is this protected speech?" It ultimately boils down to the lower end of the legal system being the cause and the solution being the appeals courts/etc.
I think more power to review validity of claims needs to be given to lower courts to ensure thus stuff never even reaches a trial.
Next >>