You're missing the point here. Subpoenas are fought in court ALL THE TIME. And the reason they do so is to get the COURT to determine that there actually is enough REASONABLE CAUSE for the subpoena in the first place.
Lawsuits against John Doe's go to trial all the time. These subpoenas are not for the purpose of going to trial, they are for the purpose of sending the "pre-settlement (AKA Extortion)" letters. These guys absolutely do NOT want to go to trial. and if you think otherwise, you're as deluded as the IAA's that you're so staunchly defending.
THAT is what's happening in the real world.
In your idyllic little world, if you were served a subpoena for something, you just roll over and comply without even considering whether it's justified. Why bother with annoying things like trials?
I guess you just have to look at the big picture. Identity theft and missing persons only affect a few people at a time; copyright infringement damages the whole economy.
Well, exactly. I mean individual's really don't mean squat when there are shitty business models to protect.
That the site should just take this bank from their reviews. Don't mention them at all. The bank wanted a C&D, then let them have it. Make it a point to never let college students know of their existence so that when they graduate and need to choose a bank for their adult lifetime, they won't even consider this bank. That's what the bank wanted when they send the C&D, right?
Just to point out... wasn't the problem with the "fleeting explative" bit that the rules were unclear? And that uncertainty chilled speach, leading to the unconstitutional call? I don't think you have the same level of uncertainty in terms of nudity -- everyone "knows" what's considered nudity (nipples and genitals in the US, as I recal). So it wouldn't have the same "chilling" effect on expression.
Um, since when is the spoken word the only form of expression protected by the Constitution?
Re: "Most people are both creators and consumers at the same time" WRONG !!
You are a consumer, and a leach, why do you need to see others people's work to be able to do your own work.. Are you than bereft of idea's ???
OK, I'm going to give you the same pop quiz that I always give people who think that all content is 'original'. Here you go:
Name me 1 piece of music that is completely original. By completely, I mean that there is no part of it that could be identified as coming from any other piece of music. ANY.
when you can successfully do that, I will consider your comments about originality to be almost credible.
You think a movie producer watches lots of movies and says "wow, thats is a good idea, I will do that".
Um, yes, yes I do. and even if they don't get their 'inspiration' from other movies, they get them usually from someone else's creation (book, play, etc...).
A better question is why the NY Times is still considered a respected publication. Everything wrong with mainstream media today is epitomized in the NYT.
It's California's largest industry, of course the politicians are going to listen to them. That's what they're there for, to listen to their lobbyists..
On the post: Shameful News Industry Willing To Sacrifice Wikileaks To Get Shield Law
Re: Re:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Best thing I've read all month!!
On the post: Another ISP Fighting US Copyright Group Subpoenas; Why Aren't More ISPs Protecting Your Privacy?
Re: Well Said (not so) average_joe
It is NOT a crime, it is a CIVIL matter.
On the post: Another ISP Fighting US Copyright Group Subpoenas; Why Aren't More ISPs Protecting Your Privacy?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why?
Lawsuits against John Doe's go to trial all the time. These subpoenas are not for the purpose of going to trial, they are for the purpose of sending the "pre-settlement (AKA Extortion)" letters. These guys absolutely do NOT want to go to trial. and if you think otherwise, you're as deluded as the IAA's that you're so staunchly defending.
THAT is what's happening in the real world.
In your idyllic little world, if you were served a subpoena for something, you just roll over and comply without even considering whether it's justified. Why bother with annoying things like trials?
On the post: Another ISP Fighting US Copyright Group Subpoenas; Why Aren't More ISPs Protecting Your Privacy?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And I believe here that the 6th amendement would come into play: the right to confront your accuser?
On the post: AP Decides Not To Give LOLcats A License To Maintain 'Journalistic Integrity'
Well, I get my news
On the post: Rupert Murdoch, Pirate? Gave Away Jimi Hendrix CD Without Clearing The Rights
Re: This makes my head hurt.
And if that's the case, 'pre-settlement' (aka extortion) letters will be worthless as it would be considerably less expensive to go to court.
On the post: FBI Prioritizes Copyright Issues; Not So Concerned About Missing Persons
Re: Priorities
Well, exactly. I mean individual's really don't mean squat when there are shitty business models to protect.
/sarc
On the post: FBI Prioritizes Copyright Issues; Not So Concerned About Missing Persons
Priorities
Yeah, you know like by compiling dossiers on every American citizen like they were doing in the good old days?
Oh, wait...
On the post: NatWest Realizes It Screwed Up Sending Cease & Desist To Website Reviewing NatWest
Seems to me...
On the post: It's Back: Totally Unnecessary And Damaging Fashion Copyright Bill Reintroduced
Re: Re: Re: Where's the incentive?
On the post: Court Asks: If Fleeting Expletives Are Okay, How About Fleeting Nudity?
Re:
Um, since when is the spoken word the only form of expression protected by the Constitution?
On the post: Pentagon Demands Wikileaks 'Returns' Leaked Documents; Does It Not Know How Digital Documents Work?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Loose tongues
On the post: Can We Please Stop The False Dichotomy Of 'Creators' vs 'Consumers' When It Comes To Copyright?
Re: Re: well...
On the post: Can We Please Stop The False Dichotomy Of 'Creators' vs 'Consumers' When It Comes To Copyright?
Re: "Most people are both creators and consumers at the same time" WRONG !!
OK, I'm going to give you the same pop quiz that I always give people who think that all content is 'original'. Here you go:
Name me 1 piece of music that is completely original. By completely, I mean that there is no part of it that could be identified as coming from any other piece of music. ANY.
when you can successfully do that, I will consider your comments about originality to be almost credible.
You think a movie producer watches lots of movies and says "wow, thats is a good idea, I will do that".
Um, yes, yes I do. and even if they don't get their 'inspiration' from other movies, they get them usually from someone else's creation (book, play, etc...).
On the post: Connecting Authors To Tangible Goods They Can Sell?
Re: Re: Re: Relentless commercialization isn't *new*.
How about a hooded cloak? :) I can't wait for your next book to come out. If you need a proofreader, let me know!
On the post: Telcos Close To 'Deal' On Net Neutrality That Gives Them Everything They Want
Re: Metallica said it best...
On the post: Why World War I Recordings Won't Enter The Public Domain Until 2049
Ah, copyright
On the post: Telcos Close To 'Deal' On Net Neutrality That Gives Them Everything They Want
USA
On the post: Hey NY Times: Can You Back Up The Claim Of $200 Billion Lost To Counterfeiting?
Re: Better Question Is...
Is ANY mainstream publication respected anymore?
On the post: Hollywood Trying To Get A Special Anti-Party Crashing Law
Re:
FTFY
Next >>