So you're saying that because an idea can survive a miserable existence in dark alleys, desperate whispers in the night, in websites of foreign lands, and crushing opression; with thousands punished or threatened punishment for all of those: you think that's just a fine system to emulate here?
I might be more inclined to agree if censorship wasn't such an effective mechanism for eliminating "undesirable" ideas. No matter how you implement such laws, the potential for abuse far outweighs the potential for benefit.
Question: Since you're concerned about the oligarchs, don't you think there is a likelihood they will use the censorship laws to censor everything that isn't "their" fake news?
Let's put it this way. Suppose the First Amendment said:
Congress shall make no law abridging free speech except for the purpose of preventing disruption of the country.
Would you think we would be able to say anything the government didn't like? Of course not, because everything the government doesn't like would be obviously disruptive.
So the Supreme Court authorized schools to ban any student speech the administrators don't like, equals no free speech Right for students.
I must apologize for the accusation of hypocrisy above. Because I just realized...
You are a crisis actor.
You expect us to believe your statements are spontaneous and organic, but they obviously aren't. It's obvious that you are being controlled by people in the shadows. You are always waiting for an event like this protest march to swoop in like a vulture and take advantage of the media circus that results.
OMG, I can't BELIEVE a large, well-funded, activist, uncompromising, politically connected lobbying organization would try to influence our government by funding a high-profile public event!
>"There is a California Education Code that affirms the First Amendment rights of student newspapers," Carl Coles, the interim superintendent of the Bonita School District, said in the statement. "The student journalist's article does not represent the views of Bonita High School or the District."
But what the hell does that mean in this context?
I read it to mean that the student newspaper, which is owned by the Bonita School District, has First Amendment rights; but the students do not.
That might seem incorrect (and it is) but that's the view the Supreme Court holds as well. After all, we must protect the little kiddies from having "wrong" thoughts.
As I am sure RIAA will explain any moment now, their profits would have gone up at least 9000% instead of a measly 9%, if it just weren't for all this piracy.
about 1337 Iranian government haxxors trying to undermine the US university system with a "massive cyber theft"
This was not a well-chosen phrase. About 90% of readers are going to read that as "one thousand three hundred thirty-one" instead of "leet". Expect to see that number reported in other media as "thousands".
Can't you just hear Cannes whine, in the not so far distant future, about how they've become irrelevant because all the movies are streamed and there are no traditional movies anymore? Poor babies.
...fact that the accused did something which they had no reason to believe was not infringing would mean that attempted infringement did occur.
Not exactly. This would be recklessness, if it was willfully risked, or else negligence. Intent requires specifically that the person have formulated a plan to commit the crime.
Attempted infringement is an ugly concept, as someone noted, akin to thoughtcrime. At least if someone points a useless gun at someone else, not knowing it is useless, and pulls the trigger the intent is clear. Not so clear when someone downloads something recklessly.
And, of course, this gun culture with its emphasis on thinking about guns every minute, got to have a better assault weapon than the liberal next door, shooting every bunny that moves, "Do you feel lucky punk?", got to save ourselves from the commies, etc., would never influence behavior of the individual.
As opposed to those evil violent video games, which instantly turn players into the raging insane, right?
Oh, I like that. So an operator, being human by definition, lets the automatic car out, as there is no operator. So let's see, how much is one death divided by zero operator hours?
Re: You believe police when exculpates Uber. -- WAIT FOR THE TRIAL.
Whereas, apparently, you would only believe the police if they crucified Uber. I don't think you have much grounds to accuse anybody else of being partisan.
Intent can matter under the law. I don't know that there is actually such a thing as "attempted piracy" but there certainly could be. If there were, the legality of this work would not be an issue, only whether or not those people who downloaded it believed that they were acquiring it illegally.
People who download things illegally should think about that.
On the post: More Governments Granting Themselves Extra Censorship Powers With 'Fake News' Laws
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: More Governments Granting Themselves Extra Censorship Powers With 'Fake News' Laws
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: FCC Commissioner Says Her Agency Is Now Just A Giant Rubber Stamp For Sinclair Broadcasting
Former Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel
On the post: More Governments Granting Themselves Extra Censorship Powers With 'Fake News' Laws
Re:
On the post: Not Everything Needs Copyright: Lawyers Flip Out That Photos Taken By AI May Be Public Domain
I understand the lawyers' perspective exactly: I must be able to profit from the efforts of all of my slaves, including my AI slaves.
Consider Black Mirror: White Christmas: if my slave self in the little pod takes a picture, I must not be denied my right to profit from it.
On the post: School Sells Out Students' First Amendment Rights, Apologizes And Deletes Article Containing Controversial Images
Re: Re:
Which means the students do not have free speech.
Let's put it this way. Suppose the First Amendment said:
Would you think we would be able to say anything the government didn't like? Of course not, because everything the government doesn't like would be obviously disruptive.
So the Supreme Court authorized schools to ban any student speech the administrators don't like, equals no free speech Right for students.
On the post: Congressman's Office Gets High School Student Suspended For Expressing His Displeasure With Congress
Re: Re: Activism is commonly paid and organized.
You are a crisis actor.
You expect us to believe your statements are spontaneous and organic, but they obviously aren't. It's obvious that you are being controlled by people in the shadows. You are always waiting for an event like this protest march to swoop in like a vulture and take advantage of the media circus that results.
Who writes your paycheck?
On the post: Congressman's Office Gets High School Student Suspended For Expressing His Displeasure With Congress
Re: Re: Re: "led by students"
Oh, wait, NRA does that.
You hypocrisy is stupefying.
On the post: School Sells Out Students' First Amendment Rights, Apologizes And Deletes Article Containing Controversial Images
I read it to mean that the student newspaper, which is owned by the Bonita School District, has First Amendment rights; but the students do not.
That might seem incorrect (and it is) but that's the view the Supreme Court holds as well. After all, we must protect the little kiddies from having "wrong" thoughts.
On the post: RIAA Reports Music Industry Is Making All The Money Just As New Study Says Piracy Has Never Been More Widespread
RIAA will say there is no inconsistency
Never underestimate their duplicity.
On the post: US Might Start A Nuclear War... Because Iranians Wanted Access To Academic Papers Locked Behind A Paywall?
Not well chosen
This was not a well-chosen phrase. About 90% of readers are going to read that as "one thousand three hundred thirty-one" instead of "leet". Expect to see that number reported in other media as "thousands".
On the post: Trump's Lawyer's Lawyer Threatens Defamation Over Claims Stormy Daniels Did Not Make
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what pisses leftists off most...
"Trump is unlucky enough to be president of a country full of liberal morons."
...and this would require that you immediately be crushed for disrespecting Trump.
On the post: Cannes Bans Netflix Films From Competition Because The Internet Is Bad (Or Something)
Planned irrelevancy
On the post: Photographer Tutorial Company Reacts To Pirates By Screwing With Them Hilariously
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not exactly. This would be recklessness, if it was willfully risked, or else negligence. Intent requires specifically that the person have formulated a plan to commit the crime.
Attempted infringement is an ugly concept, as someone noted, akin to thoughtcrime. At least if someone points a useless gun at someone else, not knowing it is useless, and pulls the trigger the intent is clear. Not so clear when someone downloads something recklessly.
On the post: As Video Games Are In Presidential Crosshairs, New Study Again Shows They Don't Affect Behavior
Re: Re: Gun Culture
As opposed to those evil violent video games, which instantly turn players into the raging insane, right?
On the post: Tempe Police Chief Indicates The Uber Self-Driving Car Probably Isn't At Fault In Pedestrian Death
Re: It's also a wrong thing to say
On the post: Tempe Police Chief Indicates The Uber Self-Driving Car Probably Isn't At Fault In Pedestrian Death
Re: You believe police when exculpates Uber. -- WAIT FOR THE TRIAL.
Whereas, apparently, you would only believe the police if they crucified Uber. I don't think you have much grounds to accuse anybody else of being partisan.
On the post: Photographer Tutorial Company Reacts To Pirates By Screwing With Them Hilariously
Re:
People who download things illegally should think about that.
On the post: Leaked Documents Expose NYPD's Long-Running Lack Of Officer Discipline
That's because New York's Finest is advertising, not a promise.
On the post: US Navy Accused Of Massive Amounts Of Piracy By German Software Company
Sounds like Bitmanagement has been eminent domain'd. Not that anyone bothered to tell them.
Next >>