Section 230 "reform" is censorship Koby likes because it silences lawful free speech he doesn't like.
Depends on who's doing the reform: Republicans, for websites that moderate too much; or Democrats, for websites that moderate too little. I'm going with Republicans for $400, Mayim.
Re: Re: Just a reminder of the original intent of the Copyright
Back then, as now, for the author was and is political spin for laws that protect the publishers rights and profits.
Which is interesting because the internet can route around that stuff. Independent filmmakers, musicians, game developers, artisans, etc. abound on the internet.
It gets worse once you consider how some musicians tend to be anti-copyright in one way or another. For example, Miley Cyrus once said on Jimmy Kimmel Live that she doesn't mind it if anyone downloads her music illegally, saying that they're just fans at the end of the day. Yet, you know who does mind very much? Miley's label! And unfortunately for the "pirate", it's the label and not Miley who has the copyright to the recording you've downloaded.
Fortunately, thanks to termination clauses, the rights to the masters eventually return to the artists themselves. That's why Peter Gabriel, Metallica, Bruce Springsteen, Elvis Costello, King Crimson (c/o Robert Fripp) etc. all own their own masters even though their works that they own were once on major labels. The same thing will eventually happen to Miley Cyrus (if Global Warming doesn't get us first) and we'll be in the clear if we download their music.
Suit yourself! Thanks to streaming, I'm watching a whole bunch of movies I haven't had a chance to watch before. Yes, disc-based Netflix existed, but Streaming allowed me to watch on the Subway with my iPhone. So yes, I prefer streaming.
The only obvious state-sponsored terrorism by the West that comes to mind would be Mossad against those allegedly responsible for the terror murder of civilians, and bin Laden himself.
Guess someone forgot the Al-Awlakis, whose alleged crimes pale in comparison with Bin Laden's (and Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki wasn't even accused of a crime (come to think of it, neither was Anwar)).
Kidnapping and/or killing a non-brown, non-Muslim so-called "enemy of the people" wouldn't have played well anywhere, possibly not even back home in one nation under Trump.
which raises a question as to how many brown and/or muslim "enemies of the people" we've killed, and the answer is "shitloads".
Re: Re: Re: Re: There is no penalty to not upholding the constit
Though technically, the last president to be shot was Ronald Reagan; he was shot by John Hinckley who claimed he did it to impress Jodie Foster (who at the time did not come out as a lesbian). Jim Brady, who was Ronald Reagan's press secretary, was also shot and became a gun control advocate due to his experience. Steve Scalise was also shot, but didn't have a similar conversion, which shows just how fanatical and fucking crazy the GOP has become.
Re: Re: There is no penalty to not upholding the constitution...
The last two presidents who were shot were Kennedy and McKinley, and before them Garfield and Lincoln.
Everybody knows that Kennedy and Lincoln were assassinated, but far too many people forget that William McKinley and James Abram Garfield were assassinated as well.
Doesn't surprise me that someone who sucks blood out of a mutilated baby penis is also in favor of doing medical experiments on people against their will.
Oh god, you really just quote mine, do you? Not that talking to you would do any good. You won't listen to logic or reason.
On the post: Right-Wing Commentator Dan Bongino Runs Into Florida Anti-SLAPP Law, Now Owes Daily Beast $32,000 In Legal Fees
I rarely say this, but it's warranted in this instance.
Good job, Florids!
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: You're missing out!
Also, don't forget https://sorryantivaxxer.com
On the post: Ken Popehat White (Again) Shows How To Respond To A Completely Thuggish Legal Threat Letter
Re:
It seems like the Lawyer's way of saying "Go Fuck Yourself".
On the post: The Rule Of Fences, And Why Congress Needs To Temper Its Appetite To Undermine Internet Service Provider Liability Protection
Re: Re: An incorrect assumption.
Depends on who's doing the reform: Republicans, for websites that moderate too much; or Democrats, for websites that moderate too little. I'm going with Republicans for $400, Mayim.
On the post: Yet Another Move To Funnel Money To Big Copyright Companies, Not Struggling Creators
Re: Re: Just a reminder of the original intent of the Copyright
Which is interesting because the internet can route around that stuff. Independent filmmakers, musicians, game developers, artisans, etc. abound on the internet.
On the post: Yet Another Move To Funnel Money To Big Copyright Companies, Not Struggling Creators
Re: Great minds think alike!
Fortunately, thanks to termination clauses, the rights to the masters eventually return to the artists themselves. That's why Peter Gabriel, Metallica, Bruce Springsteen, Elvis Costello, King Crimson (c/o Robert Fripp) etc. all own their own masters even though their works that they own were once on major labels. The same thing will eventually happen to Miley Cyrus (if Global Warming doesn't get us first) and we'll be in the clear if we download their music.
On the post: The Future Of Streaming TV Looks Increasingly Like Cable, But Free
Re: To me streaming is a failure.
Suit yourself! Thanks to streaming, I'm watching a whole bunch of movies I haven't had a chance to watch before. Yes, disc-based Netflix existed, but Streaming allowed me to watch on the Subway with my iPhone. So yes, I prefer streaming.
On the post: Area Free Market Proponent Sues Facebook For Defaming Him By Moderating His Personal Marketplace Of Climate Change Ideas
Re:
Also, Facebook is free to moderate–which includes fact-checking–under both §230 of the CDA as well as the first amendment.
On the post: CIA Director Mike Pompeo Touted Kidnapping, Killing Of Julian Assange In Response To Publication Of CIA Leaks
Re: But...
Guess someone forgot the Al-Awlakis, whose alleged crimes pale in comparison with Bin Laden's (and Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki wasn't even accused of a crime (come to think of it, neither was Anwar)).
On the post: CIA Director Mike Pompeo Touted Kidnapping, Killing Of Julian Assange In Response To Publication Of CIA Leaks
Questions raised…
which raises a question as to how many brown and/or muslim "enemies of the people" we've killed, and the answer is "shitloads".
On the post: Texas' Unconstitutional Social Media Censorship Bill Challenged In Court, Just As Texas Joins The Legal Fight For Florida's Unconstitutional Social Media Bill
Re: Re: Re: Re: There is no penalty to not upholding the constit
by "shot", I mean "assassinated". I didn't mean "wounded". I apologize for the misunderstanding.
On the post: Texas' Unconstitutional Social Media Censorship Bill Challenged In Court, Just As Texas Joins The Legal Fight For Florida's Unconstitutional Social Media Bill
Re: Re: Re: Re: There is no penalty to not upholding the constit
Though technically, the last president to be shot was Ronald Reagan; he was shot by John Hinckley who claimed he did it to impress Jodie Foster (who at the time did not come out as a lesbian). Jim Brady, who was Ronald Reagan's press secretary, was also shot and became a gun control advocate due to his experience. Steve Scalise was also shot, but didn't have a similar conversion, which shows just how fanatical and fucking crazy the GOP has become.
On the post: Texas' Unconstitutional Social Media Censorship Bill Challenged In Court, Just As Texas Joins The Legal Fight For Florida's Unconstitutional Social Media Bill
Re: Re: There is no penalty to not upholding the constitution...
The last two presidents who were shot were Kennedy and McKinley, and before them Garfield and Lincoln.
Everybody knows that Kennedy and Lincoln were assassinated, but far too many people forget that William McKinley and James Abram Garfield were assassinated as well.
On the post: Sony Pictures, Defenders Of The Creative Industry, Appears To Be Using Fan Art Without Giving Credit
Re:
So, reasonable considering the circumstances?
On the post: Sony Pictures, Defenders Of The Creative Industry, Appears To Be Using Fan Art Without Giving Credit
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ah copyright hypocrisy...
To TP [for my bunghole]:
Your argument is raising hypotheticals when our argument is facts. Get lost.
On the post: AT&T Quickly Ditches Pledge Not To Fund Congressional Insurrectionists
Re:
The big broadband ISPs, at least. There are great mom-and-pop broadband ISPs if you know where to look (like in Chattanooga, TN or Boise, ID).
On the post: The Night The United States Supreme Court Cancelled Law
Re: Re:
Not even chicken babies; chicken eggs that weren't even fertilized.
On the post: The Night The United States Supreme Court Cancelled Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'll let Mike Masnick and the other commenters be the ultimate arbiters of that.
On the post: The Night The United States Supreme Court Cancelled Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why? I'm having fun! He's a whiny little pathetic baby. He's not riling me up!
On the post: The Night The United States Supreme Court Cancelled Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh god, you really just quote mine, do you? Not that talking to you would do any good. You won't listen to logic or reason.
Next >>