It's funny that you're constantly seeking evidence for my claims but you're unwilling to accept anything but PK's own words. That's not how this game is played.
"Perhaps the starkest evidence of cultural capture can be found in statements by the current Register of Copyrights, Maria Pallante. She has, at various times during her tenure, commented that:
• “Copyright is for the author first and the nation second.”23 • “I think the problem we have today in terms of imbalance that we might feel in the copyright statute is that we have gotten away from that equation that puts the authors as the primary beneficiaries, followed by the public good.”24 • “Unfortunately, I start with enforcement because, if you don’t have exclusive rights in the first place, you can’t get to other questions.”25 • “The primary policy issue for us, in large part because of digital communication, has got to be enforcement.”26
OK, I understand you want to make a big deal over the tiny details that editorials always get wrong. But the WSJ is correct that Google saw Pallante as a threat, which is why Google puppet Public Knowledge attacked her by name in its ridiculous defense of the FCC's proposed STB regulations.
Google was gunning for Pallante and was out to get her fired. Hayden may have beat them to it by firing her for her own reasons - that's logically possible even if unlikely - but one way or another she was in the cross hairs.
And yes, making "all the world's information accessible" includes "profiting from other people's creations."
Who do you think you're fooling with that kind of hair-splitting?
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: Computerworld gives PK a D on transparency
Have fun.
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Computerworld gives PK a D on transparency
None of the documents you reference disclose the size of Google's payoffs. That's the information in question.
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Computerworld gives PK a D on transparency
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2838367/the-ratings-most-net-neutrality-groups-get-poor-gra des-on-transparency.html
PK gets a D from a friendly reporter. Any questions?
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Not Even Your Light Bulbs Are Safe From Shitty Internet Of Things Security
Re: Maybe this could end up being a good thing
On the post: Not Even Your Light Bulbs Are Safe From Shitty Internet Of Things Security
Fruits of your labor
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
P ardon me for citing a source that doesn't echo PK's press releases.
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
• “Copyright is for the author first and the nation second.”23
• “I think the problem we have today in terms of imbalance that we might feel in the copyright statute is that we have gotten away from that equation that puts the
authors as the primary beneficiaries, followed by the public good.”24
• “Unfortunately, I start with enforcement because, if you don’t have exclusive rights in the first place, you can’t get to other questions.”25
• “The primary policy issue for us, in large part because of digital communication,
has got to be enforcement.”26
"These statements reflect the many specific examples, detailed in Section II, in which the Copyright Office has acted more as an advocate for rightsholder interests than an objective referee of copyright debates." - Public Knowledge attack on Copyright Office, https://www.publicknowledge.org/assets/uploads/blog/Final_Captured_Systemic_Bias_at_the_US_Copyright _Office.pdf
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
Re: Re: WSJ is largely correct
On the post: Here's The Truth: Shiva Ayyadurai Didn't Invent Email
Re: I invented Tech Dirt
On the post: Here's The Truth: Shiva Ayyadurai Didn't Invent Email
Finally!
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
WSJ is largely correct
Google was gunning for Pallante and was out to get her fired. Hayden may have beat them to it by firing her for her own reasons - that's logically possible even if unlikely - but one way or another she was in the cross hairs.
And yes, making "all the world's information accessible" includes "profiting from other people's creations."
Who do you think you're fooling with that kind of hair-splitting?
On the post: Senate Comes To Its Senses: Does NOT Support Ted Cruz's Plan To Block Internet Governance Transition
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mistake or Nut case?
On the post: Senate Comes To Its Senses: Does NOT Support Ted Cruz's Plan To Block Internet Governance Transition
Re: Re: Re: Mistake or Nut case?
On the post: Senate Comes To Its Senses: Does NOT Support Ted Cruz's Plan To Block Internet Governance Transition
Re: Re: Mistake or Nut case?
Or are they just trolling. Hmm...hard to know.
Next >>