Re: deliberate porn industry lies, they want a handout
Well, I'm a little stupefied...
This site always gets opinions from people going off half-cocked (pun intended), without offering well-thought-out arguments.
You've done the opposite here. You seem to be rather well-informed, and your arguments COULD be convincing; except for one small problem: I'm not sure which way you're arguing.
THANK YOU! I find it terribly ironic how several AC's tend to claim that this site does nothing but bash copyrights/patents/etc., and here they are bashing Mike for something that someone else said.
For you irony junkies out there, this whole comment string should be a veritable feast.
That's not completely true, either. If it were, re-broadcasting sports games wouldn't be copyrightable. Most news stories include some sort of interpretation by the reporter so they can legally copyright the whole story. F-ing loopholes....
You know, it truly is nice to have intelligent discourse with those who have an opposite opinion on topics.
Key word: intelligent.
Regardles of your opinion, when you start slinging mud, the only thing you accomplish is pissing people off (and yes I understand that sometimes that's the entire purpose).
The person who posts intelligent points/counterpoints, will get more respect. However, the person who starts slinging mud will get more ATTENTION. Children throw temper tantrums for a reason....
Just sayin....
Tell you what, if you think there's nothing wrong with this, then I have a challenge for you. Make an inventory of EVERYTHING in your house.
If you own anything that :::COULD::: be used to commit a crime, then by your own logic, you MUST be convicted of murder!!!! Why? because pretty much everything in your house :::COULD::: be used to kill someone.
Willful negligence is only if he knows that what he does :::WILL::: lead to others breaking the law, not if it's theoretically conceivable that someone might have the ability to do so.
If that were the case, then PAPER would be illegal because it's theoretically conceivable that someone could use a piece of paper to commit murder.
Q: When I buy something, who owns that thing?
A: I DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nobody else owns that item. If I buy a pair of pliers, take them apart and improve upon their efficiency, I am not committing a crime. If that particular improvement :::::COULD:::::: make it easier to break into someone's house, did I break the law? NO!!!!!
EVERY SINGLE AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURER MAKES CARS THAT :::CAN::: BREAK THE SPEED LIMIT!! Are they breaking the law? NO!!!!!
Noriega was a drug trafficker:
U.S. District Court Judge William Hoeveler upheld the government's right to prosecute Panama's military ruler, Gen. Manuel Antonio Noriega, on charges that he turned Panama into a way station for cocaine traffickers.
Cavallo was a mass-murderer:
Mexico's landmark decision to extradite former Argentine Navy Captain Ricardo Miguel Cavallo to Spain, where he faces charges of genocide and terrorism, reinforces the potential power of international law to end impunity around the world.
Couldn't find anything about the Netherlands thing. There are some differences here, though. Noriega was moving drugs INTO the US and other countries; therefore he's subject to US law. Cavallo committed a crime against humanity; therefore he's subject to international law.
On the post: The Porn Industry, Free And Basic Economics
Re: deliberate porn industry lies, they want a handout
This site always gets opinions from people going off half-cocked (pun intended), without offering well-thought-out arguments.
You've done the opposite here. You seem to be rather well-informed, and your arguments COULD be convincing; except for one small problem: I'm not sure which way you're arguing.
On the post: Copyright Length And The Life Of Mickey Mouse
Re:
On the post: Wired Reveals First Buyer Of The Techdirt Reviews Your Business Plan Offering
Re: Now, the real question ....
Lose: Whomever once had $100,000,000 to throw around, now no longer has it.
Win: Mike is now $100,000,000 richer.
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: Re: Re: Missing
B)what would the internet be without trollers?
On the post: Laptop Magazine Rescinds 'Best Of Show' Award For Zer01
Two words...
On the post: Author Using Questionable Copying Claim Against Twilight Author For Publicity
Re: Speaking of rhetorical...
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: Bait away...
Go back and read THE FIRST THREE WORDS OF THE ARTICLE again.
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: Missing
For you irony junkies out there, this whole comment string should be a veritable feast.
On the post: Author Using Questionable Copying Claim Against Twilight Author For Publicity
Rhetoric
Is that a rhetorical question?
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: Sad ramblings of a little boy looking for attention
Michial Thompson, I see that THE FIRST THREE WORDS OF THE ARTICLE, "Kevin Stapp writes", were completely lost upon you.
Again, if you can't see the details, don't argue the points.
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: Hmmm...
1) quote it ACCURATELY (i.e. in the same spirit as the original)
2) correctly cite the source
If you don't do BOTH of those things, it's infringement and/or plagiarism.
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: To AC
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: When did the Shills show up?
Key word: intelligent.
Regardles of your opinion, when you start slinging mud, the only thing you accomplish is pissing people off (and yes I understand that sometimes that's the entire purpose).
On the post: Rewriting An AP Story Just To Show We Can
Re: Re: Re:
If you can't see the details, don't argue the points.
On the post: Why Are RIAA Supporters So Scared Of What Actual Musicians Think?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Two on the money
Just sayin....
On the post: No Freedom To Tinker: Arrested For Modding Legally Purchased Game Consoles
Make an inventory
If you own anything that :::COULD::: be used to commit a crime, then by your own logic, you MUST be convicted of murder!!!! Why? because pretty much everything in your house :::COULD::: be used to kill someone.
MURDERER!!
On the post: No Freedom To Tinker: Arrested For Modding Legally Purchased Game Consoles
Re: Re: Re: talking head.
If that were the case, then PAPER would be illegal because it's theoretically conceivable that someone could use a piece of paper to commit murder.
On the post: No Freedom To Tinker: Arrested For Modding Legally Purchased Game Consoles
Apparently the law forgets...
A: I DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nobody else owns that item. If I buy a pair of pliers, take them apart and improve upon their efficiency, I am not committing a crime. If that particular improvement :::::COULD:::::: make it easier to break into someone's house, did I break the law? NO!!!!!
EVERY SINGLE AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURER MAKES CARS THAT :::CAN::: BREAK THE SPEED LIMIT!! Are they breaking the law? NO!!!!!
See the pattern yet, people?
On the post: The Borderless Internet And Jurisdictional Disputes: A Growing Problem
Re:
U.S. District Court Judge William Hoeveler upheld the government's right to prosecute Panama's military ruler, Gen. Manuel Antonio Noriega, on charges that he turned Panama into a way station for cocaine traffickers.
Cavallo was a mass-murderer:
Mexico's landmark decision to extradite former Argentine Navy Captain Ricardo Miguel Cavallo to Spain, where he faces charges of genocide and terrorism, reinforces the potential power of international law to end impunity around the world.
Couldn't find anything about the Netherlands thing. There are some differences here, though. Noriega was moving drugs INTO the US and other countries; therefore he's subject to US law. Cavallo committed a crime against humanity; therefore he's subject to international law.
On the post: The Borderless Internet And Jurisdictional Disputes: A Growing Problem
Re:
Next >>