If only the RIAA/MPAA could destroy the internet completely. Snip all the wires. Smash all the routers.
Then we'd all live in a content-utopia, awash with new Transformers movies, and the content industry fatcats could live the high life again on the backs of the artists, like they were meant to.
Re: Re: Re: Privacy does not need to be defined by victim status.
I'm not talking about the legal definition of "fact", I'm talking about the real definition of "fact". "Mr. Doe was accused of raping Mrs. Doe in a court of law" is a fact.
And what right of theirs is infringed upon by having their name said in public, and in a factual context? You think people have a right to use violence (or the threat thereof) to stop other people from speaking their name in public?
Someone's rights are being violated here, but it certainly isn't the victim's.
The war on drugs is a complete failure and takes a massive toll on the US, so according to you, the appropriate response is to stop talking about it and let it continue.
I award you a 5 out of 10 for effort. Including "Mikey" in your trolling is always good, but I just didn't feel the douchebaggery emanating from it that would be required to respond with anything other than apathy.
Not a bad attempt as far as some go, but you're going to have to do better; we expect a higher caliber of troll here.
1. Democracy does not guarantee a just and/or moral outcome.
2. My hard drive is mine. If I choose to arrange the bits on it in a similar fashion to the bits off of a random machine on the internet, I haven't violated anyone's freedoms.
Speaking just for myself, I can't wait until IP maximalists have completely destroyed everything the internet has made possible. Then, people will either wake up, grab their pitchforks, and string the Big Content fatcats up by their necks, or they'll remain cattle and always wonder why the class divide seems to get wider and wider.
Either way, we'll know what people are really made of.
"YouTube is not available in Germany due to GEMA's massive sense of entitlement and technological cluelessness. Please tell them what you think about their nonsense by contacting them at:"
What is does "reasonable" mean in "reasonable expectation of privacy"? Doesn't the answer change over time, and depend on societal norms? And when members of the Facebook generation grow up to be the next appeals courts justices, can't we expect the cultural norms they grew up with to influence what they find "reasonable"?
That was what I took away from his opinion, and it strikes me as a valid warning.
The copyright monopoly is a balance between the public's interest of having access to culture and knowledge, and the same public's interest of having new culture and knowledge created. That's it.
Copyright is a government-constructed redistribution scheme that acts as a drain on society in order to transfer wealth to large, monopolist corporations. This blending of state and corporate interests is known as fascism, by the by.
If you really want to defend free market capitalism, you'll go and learn something about economics and moral philosophy, and then come back here and argue to abolish so-called "intellectual property" entirely. Until such time, your comments remain nothing but confused ramblings.
On the post: Google's Fiber Makes MPAA Skittish. Why Does Hollywood See All Technology In Terms Of Piracy?
Big Content's Big Dream
Then we'd all live in a content-utopia, awash with new Transformers movies, and the content industry fatcats could live the high life again on the backs of the artists, like they were meant to.
On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Privacy does not need to be defined by victim status.
And I don't agree that freedoms are "given by the community". What a horrible standard for rights.
On the post: Social Reader Apps: Better Than Paywalls, But Still Walls
Dead On, As Usual
On the post: Yahoo Says Facebook's Countersuit Doesn't Count Since Facebook Bought Its Patents
Re:
On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim
Re: Re: Re: Privacy does not need to be defined by victim status.
And what right of theirs is infringed upon by having their name said in public, and in a factual context? You think people have a right to use violence (or the threat thereof) to stop other people from speaking their name in public?
Someone's rights are being violated here, but it certainly isn't the victim's.
On the post: Cultural Insanity: You Can't Show A Painting In A Movie Without Paying The Copyright Holder
Re:
On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim
Re: Re: Re: Privacy does not need to be defined by victim status.
On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim
Re: Privacy does not need to be defined by victim status.
On the post: Author Discovers Assassin's Creed Uses Same Cliche'd SciFi Trope As His Book... Sues For Infringement
Re:
On the post: RIAA Keeps Trying To Spin Hadopi's Clear Failure Into A Success Story
Re:
Insane troll logic strikes again.
On the post: Networks Go After Barry Diller Personally For The Insult Of Investing In Aereo
Re:
You need at least a couple more "nuances" in there to be compliant. Get to it!
On the post: Is Selling Your Ultraviolet Code Copyright Infringement?
Re:
Not a bad attempt as far as some go, but you're going to have to do better; we expect a higher caliber of troll here.
On the post: The Difference Between Nuanced Discussion And The Evil Underbelly Of The Internet Is Apparently A Fine Line Indeed
Re:
2. My hard drive is mine. If I choose to arrange the bits on it in a similar fashion to the bits off of a random machine on the internet, I haven't violated anyone's freedoms.
On the post: Huh? Totally Clueless German Court Says ContentID Isn't Good Enough, YouTube Must Block Infringement By Keywords
Re:
Speaking just for myself, I can't wait until IP maximalists have completely destroyed everything the internet has made possible. Then, people will either wake up, grab their pitchforks, and string the Big Content fatcats up by their necks, or they'll remain cattle and always wonder why the class divide seems to get wider and wider.
Either way, we'll know what people are really made of.
On the post: Huh? Totally Clueless German Court Says ContentID Isn't Good Enough, YouTube Must Block Infringement By Keywords
Re:
"YouTube is not available in Germany due to GEMA's massive sense of entitlement and technological cluelessness. Please tell them what you think about their nonsense by contacting them at:"
On the post: FBI Seized Anonymizer Server
Re:
Dial back the stupidity next time and add more vitriol if you want to win troll points.
On the post: Judge Alex Kozinski Fears That People Share Too Much Info Online; But Does That Mean We Give Up All Privacy Rights?
My Take
That was what I took away from his opinion, and it strikes me as a valid warning.
On the post: HBO Decides It Still Isn't Difficult Enough To Watch HBO Shows
Disparity
The Number of Times DRM Will Screw Over Legitimate Customers: Countless
Good job, idiot content companies.
On the post: Why Do Copyright Industry Profits Get To Be The Yardstick For Civil Liberties?
Love This
On the post: Why Do Copyright Industry Profits Get To Be The Yardstick For Civil Liberties?
Re:
If you really want to defend free market capitalism, you'll go and learn something about economics and moral philosophy, and then come back here and argue to abolish so-called "intellectual property" entirely. Until such time, your comments remain nothing but confused ramblings.
Next >>