The law REQUESTS you be able to provide valid ID AT ALL TIMES. Either on the street, in a restaurant, or in your own home. If an officer of the law requests ID, you have to provide it; otherwise be detained while they verify your identify.
No, the law requires you to identify yourself. This is not the same thing as owning and carrying a government-issued ID.
Average Joe didn't use the word 'knowingly'. By his logic, the mailman did aid the bomber, and that someone can be liable for something that they didn't do is the entire point of this sub-thread.
To recap, Hephaestus said: "This "n" level liability turns everyone into agents of the police and is the start of a police state."
average_joe replied: "...a person who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another person to commit a crime is just as guilty as if they had committed the crime themselves."
After which I pointed out that Hephaestus is right, and his argument makes the innocent mailman just as guilty as the guy who planted a bomb in a box and mailed it.
I found were blog posts pointing to copyright violating material on other servers...
By your logic, news sites were guilty of copyright infringement every time they talked about Napster or The Pirate Bay.
...such as mash ups...
Who says that mashups are illegal? As derivative works, they're still stuck in a grey area.
The five domains in question do not appear to be all that innocent.
All that innocent? That's like a woman who's 'a little bit pregnant'. In other words, it's a concept that doesn't exist in reality. These people are either guilty or not guilty. There are no shades of grey here.
They seem more to have been playing loose and fast with that old "it isn't hosted with us, so it's legal for us" trick that doesn't hold much water.
Umm... You're ignoring the fact that if it isn't hosted with them, it is legal. That's not a trick, any more than it's a trick to drive the speed limit to avoid getting a ticket.
Doesn't that kind of undermine the purpose of anonymity?
Late to the party, but here's my take on it.
You've come to a costume party at Mike's place. Some of us are wearing costumes that show who we are, and some of us are not. Regardless, Mike certainly knows who's here.
That TD as a whole plays the "piracy is bad, but work with it" mentality on almost everything says enough.
Yeah, God forbid that content creators like Mike think realistically about their content. Or did you forget that Mike's a content creator as well?
To quote Cory Doctorow, another content creator:
"As a practical matter, we live in the 21st century and anything anybody wants to copy they will be able to copy. If you are building a business model that says that people can only copy things with your permission, your business is going to fail because whether or not you like it, people will be able to copy your product without your permission. The question is: what are you going to do about that? Are you going call them thieves or are you going to find a way to make money from them?"
Mike isn't discussing the ethical aspects of file-sharing. He writes about the economic reality of a world with file-sharing. Your repeated attempts to wish away reality are sad, and ultimately futile.
He's saying it shouldn't be presumed that they automatically must make money -- or that if they are to make money, that it needs to come from the film directly.
On the post: Man Acquitted In Lawsuit Over Filming The TSA And Not Showing ID
Re: Really
So? It's the truth, so what's the difference? Are private citizens required to be meek sheep nowadays?
On the post: Man Acquitted In Lawsuit Over Filming The TSA And Not Showing ID
Re:
No, the law requires you to identify yourself. This is not the same thing as owning and carrying a government-issued ID.
On the post: Karl's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
To recap, Hephaestus said: "This "n" level liability turns everyone into agents of the police and is the start of a police state."
average_joe replied: "...a person who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another person to commit a crime is just as guilty as if they had committed the crime themselves."
After which I pointed out that Hephaestus is right, and his argument makes the innocent mailman just as guilty as the guy who planted a bomb in a box and mailed it.
Oh, wait, you were just being an asshole.
On the post: Francis Ford Coppola On Art, Copying And File Sharing: We Want You To Take From Us
Re: Re: Re:
1. Who says that he hasn't?
2. They're already available, so why waste time and energy adding them again?
On the post: Francis Ford Coppola On Art, Copying And File Sharing: We Want You To Take From Us
Re:
Because they're already available for free without any work on his part.
On the post: Francis Ford Coppola On Art, Copying And File Sharing: We Want You To Take From Us
Re: Re: Re:
"Because taking a physical good, such as a bottle of wine, is the same thing as taking a digital good, such as a file."
Can you understand now or do I need to explain further?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week
Re: Re:
On the post: Karl's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Karl's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because an American law is going to affect a foreign problem how?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week
Re: Re:
On the post: Karl's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re:
By your logic, news sites were guilty of copyright infringement every time they talked about Napster or The Pirate Bay.
...such as mash ups...
Who says that mashups are illegal? As derivative works, they're still stuck in a grey area.
The five domains in question do not appear to be all that innocent.
All that innocent? That's like a woman who's 'a little bit pregnant'. In other words, it's a concept that doesn't exist in reality. These people are either guilty or not guilty. There are no shades of grey here.
They seem more to have been playing loose and fast with that old "it isn't hosted with us, so it's legal for us" trick that doesn't hold much water.
Umm... You're ignoring the fact that if it isn't hosted with them, it is legal. That's not a trick, any more than it's a trick to drive the speed limit to avoid getting a ticket.
On the post: Francis Ford Coppola On Art, Copying And File Sharing: We Want You To Take From Us
Re:
/sarcasm
On the post: Francis Ford Coppola On Art, Copying And File Sharing: We Want You To Take From Us
Re: Re:
On the post: Time To Live In Reality: People Are Going To Copy; So Build A Better Business Model
Re:
Late to the party, but here's my take on it.
You've come to a costume party at Mike's place. Some of us are wearing costumes that show who we are, and some of us are not. Regardless, Mike certainly knows who's here.
On the post: IFPI's Annual Attack On Piracy Once Again Riddled With Errors And Bogus Claims
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, God forbid that content creators like Mike think realistically about their content. Or did you forget that Mike's a content creator as well?
To quote Cory Doctorow, another content creator:
"As a practical matter, we live in the 21st century and anything anybody wants to copy they will be able to copy. If you are building a business model that says that people can only copy things with your permission, your business is going to fail because whether or not you like it, people will be able to copy your product without your permission. The question is: what are you going to do about that? Are you going call them thieves or are you going to find a way to make money from them?"
Mike isn't discussing the ethical aspects of file-sharing. He writes about the economic reality of a world with file-sharing. Your repeated attempts to wish away reality are sad, and ultimately futile.
On the post: IFPI's Annual Attack On Piracy Once Again Riddled With Errors And Bogus Claims
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's a fairly silly statement. It's not based in reality, has no source, and isn't true. Nice try, though.
I see you're like Masnick and so many others here: a non-creative ...
How do you know if I'm 'creative' or not? Or do you assume that I'm not creative because I'm not whining about being paid?
...opining on things you know nothing about.
What makes you think that I know nothing about this? Also, what are your qualifications on the topic?
On the post: Karl's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Very funny.
On the post: Francis Ford Coppola On Art, Copying And File Sharing: We Want You To Take From Us
YES!
On the post: Let's Try This Again: Even If There's No Corruption, The Appearance Of Corruption Hurts Representative Government
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As I Said In The Other Thread
Yikes. That's not a solution to government corruption, it's an invite!
You obviously don't realize that your taxes already funds elections and that our Congress is already corrupt.
On the post: Upload 18 Songs In Russia... Face Six Years In Prison
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>