Re: Re: Re: Fair Use?// but I find it unlikely that a judge would recognize the key points that you make.
Right, because only someone with a law degree has any experience with how judges typically respond to arguments. No one who's been following these issues for years, but doesn't have a law degree can know anything.
And there it is. Right on cue. Of course you don't care that the other parts of the music business have grown. You're just concerned with your precious RIAA revenues. Maybe if they had innovated instead of litigated their revenues would look better. But they focused more on takeing away value to stop piracy (DRM) than giving customers what they want, which is what every business should be focused on.
You just go ahead and keep throwing tantrums about "pirates" though. I'm sure that will put the genie back in the bottle. %-\
"Yes, Google's nefarious plan to gather wifi info, just like their nefarious plan to gather street addresses, must have been done with criminal intent. To what end? Who cares! The fact that they gathered publicly availiable information is proof enough that they're up to no good and must be brought to justice. Who was harmed? What laws did they break? Who cares! Where there's no motive and no crime, there must be criminal intent, and therefore we must sue them (not charge them with a crime as none was committed) before they can use this information against us all. Nevermind that THEY'RE the ones who came forward and revealed that they had this data, and that if they really wanted to be up to no good, they'd have kept it secret, and not publicized it. That just proves that they're guilty.
Oh, but I'm not attacking Google. I just want anyone who gathers public info to be brought to justice. And any ignorant American who can't see that shouldn't be allowed to comment, especially if they know someone who works for Google."
See TAM, that's what you sound like. You make as much sense as a poop flavored popsicle.
So you belive the WHO, who of course are denying they did anything below board. What did you expect them to say?
And headlines are designed to grab your attention. You actually need to read the post and related article to get the whole picture, which you always claim is still not there. If he were actually trying to be misleading, why would he link to the article?
Plus it doesn't help your cause that you say this about EVERY effing post! You're the boy who cried, "mike's wrong." So now, even if you were to be right one time (not that you are here), nobody will listen to you because you've proven yourself to be a contrarian in all things Techdirt.
Why do you think they're pushing digital download games now? Not to mention the new DRM that forces those who buy a game used to have to pay for a code to play it.
"How did these sick people get sick if no one was getting sick from being around sick people?"
They probably all had flu shots. I have never had a flu shot, and I haven't had the flu since I was a kid. Colds, on the other hand, I get all the time, so it's not like I've got a great immune system, but I avoid flu shots like the plague. Pun intended.
Why don't you just use a standard boilerplate comment on every posting and save yourself some time? Why bother typeing up a new comment each time since you just say the same crap over and over again anyway? Something like: "mike your wrong. your bootstrapping and have you're facts wrong. theres more to this story than your letting on [sic]."
Feel free to cut and paste that into each posting and use the time I've saved you to go troll other blogs.
"he doesnt want to work to be famous, but he would certainly sacrifice the book industry to be better known. the end results would be the same as in music."
The same as in music? You mean more artists making more music and more money than at any other time in human history? And you think that's "killing an industry?" You probably think bacon comes from trees too, if that's the way your mind works.
Mr. Jenney would have a good argument that since it was "heavy trafic" the flow of trafic was well below the posted speed limit and thus, by going the speed limit himself, he was overtaking trafic. That is what I would counter with in any case.
Of course if the officer was going with the flow of trafic as well and could see that trafic was close to the speed limit, that would shut that argument down. But if he was parked along the side of the highway then he's just assuming how fast the trafic was moving.
He should have just cited him for reckless driving and been done with it. Much harder to argue against.
Re: Re: Re: Is "For Ethinic Diversity" the new "For The Children" PR line?
So you're blaming Techdirt's lack of moderation for your innablity to properly use their comments. How about you take responsibility for your own issues? 99% of us seem to have figured out how to post comments just fine.
"My understanding (which I acknowledge is limited) is that images obtained in a public venue is fair-game for rebroadcasting.
If this is the case, then one can see why/how a league like the NFL can control the broadcast."
While some NFL stadiums are indeed privatly owned, many are built with a significant amount of public funds (Cowboys Stadium total cost $1.3B, public funds used: $325M). So why should the NFL get to put restrictions on what can be reported or recorded when the games are in stadiums funded by the tax payers?
"while copyright violation is not like selling crack, in legal terms it is pretty much the same thing, something that is illegal by the laws of the nation. just flaunting the laws isnt going to get the job done, especially when its done not for any noble cause, but rather for a profitable bottom line."
Good grief. Now you're comparing Silicon Valley companies, most of whom don't have anything to do with copyright infringement, with drug dealers. Way to go, TAM. You've truly outdone yourself with this rediculous stretch. Once again you've undermined your argument by making an absurd comparison. But you're right, I'm the one with the 3rd grade reasoning. %-\
Re: Is "For Ethinic Diversity" the new "For The Children" PR line?
"You're not a TV guy, nor do you seem to understand contractual implications."
And you're clearly not a computer guy, nor do you seem to understand how to make a comment without reposting it up to five times. Hit the "Submit" button ONCE, genius.
"But what about if we shared? I could give you fire and teach you to make fire and you could give me meat and teach me how to hunt."
Technically that's not sharing; it's barter, which is a form of payment. So while I understand what you're trying to say, you've done a poor job of making your point, and someone like TAM will use this argument against you. Sorry to put a turd in your punch bowl.
Only you TAM could call fact, "spin." Where in Mike's list of what has happened can you point out, with supporting evidence, what is factually wrong? I don't expect a reply, at least not one that actually answers my question, as you never do. If you respond to my questions posed to you at all it's with irrelevant questions of your own. Just like any common troll.
On the post: Didn't Take Long: Lots Of People Getting Sued By US Copyright Group Claim Innocence
Re: Re: Re: Fair Use?// but I find it unlikely that a judge would recognize the key points that you make.
How about you try a warm glass of STFU?
On the post: The Rise And Fall Of The RIAA
Re:
You just go ahead and keep throwing tantrums about "pirates" though. I'm sure that will put the genie back in the bottle. %-\
On the post: Group Claims Google Had 'Criminal Intent' In WiFi Data Collection
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, but I'm not attacking Google. I just want anyone who gathers public info to be brought to justice. And any ignorant American who can't see that shouldn't be allowed to comment, especially if they know someone who works for Google."
See TAM, that's what you sound like. You make as much sense as a poop flavored popsicle.
On the post: WHO Exaggerated H1N1 Flu Problems, After Consulting With Consultants Working For Pharmaceutical Firms
Re: Re: Re:
And headlines are designed to grab your attention. You actually need to read the post and related article to get the whole picture, which you always claim is still not there. If he were actually trying to be misleading, why would he link to the article?
Plus it doesn't help your cause that you say this about EVERY effing post! You're the boy who cried, "mike's wrong." So now, even if you were to be right one time (not that you are here), nobody will listen to you because you've proven yourself to be a contrarian in all things Techdirt.
On the post: Debunking The Ridiculous Claims That Unauthorized Copies Of Handheld Games Has 'Cost' The Economy $41.6 Billion
Re:
On the post: WHO Exaggerated H1N1 Flu Problems, After Consulting With Consultants Working For Pharmaceutical Firms
Re: Re: to all the people...
They probably all had flu shots. I have never had a flu shot, and I haven't had the flu since I was a kid. Colds, on the other hand, I get all the time, so it's not like I've got a great immune system, but I avoid flu shots like the plague. Pun intended.
On the post: WHO Exaggerated H1N1 Flu Problems, After Consulting With Consultants Working For Pharmaceutical Firms
Re:
Feel free to cut and paste that into each posting and use the time I've saved you to go troll other blogs.
On the post: An Open Letter To Scott Turow About Not Freaking Out About Book 'Piracy'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The same as in music? You mean more artists making more music and more money than at any other time in human history? And you think that's "killing an industry?" You probably think bacon comes from trees too, if that's the way your mind works.
On the post: Court Says Police In Ohio Can Just Guess How Fast You Were Going And Give You A Ticket
Re: Read the Case-- 82 mph in a 60 mph zone.
Of course if the officer was going with the flow of trafic as well and could see that trafic was close to the speed limit, that would shut that argument down. But if he was parked along the side of the highway then he's just assuming how fast the trafic was moving.
He should have just cited him for reckless driving and been done with it. Much harder to argue against.
On the post: Congresswoman Suggests That Comcast Tried To Bribe Her To Support Merger
Re: Re: Re: Is "For Ethinic Diversity" the new "For The Children" PR line?
On the post: Court Says Police In Ohio Can Just Guess How Fast You Were Going And Give You A Ticket
Re: Re:
On the post: Court Says Police In Ohio Can Just Guess How Fast You Were Going And Give You A Ticket
Re: Re:
On the post: Court Says Police In Ohio Can Just Guess How Fast You Were Going And Give You A Ticket
Re: Re: Not sure why this is noteworthy.
On the post: Judge Says Commerce Outweighs Free Speech Issues When It Comes To Reporting On High School Football
Re: Need more details
If this is the case, then one can see why/how a league like the NFL can control the broadcast."
While some NFL stadiums are indeed privatly owned, many are built with a significant amount of public funds (Cowboys Stadium total cost $1.3B, public funds used: $325M). So why should the NFL get to put restrictions on what can be reported or recorded when the games are in stadiums funded by the tax payers?
On the post: The Government And Silicon Valley: Lead, Follow Or Get Out Of The Way?
Re:
Good grief. Now you're comparing Silicon Valley companies, most of whom don't have anything to do with copyright infringement, with drug dealers. Way to go, TAM. You've truly outdone yourself with this rediculous stretch. Once again you've undermined your argument by making an absurd comparison. But you're right, I'm the one with the 3rd grade reasoning. %-\
On the post: Congresswoman Suggests That Comcast Tried To Bribe Her To Support Merger
Re: Is "For Ethinic Diversity" the new "For The Children" PR line?
And you're clearly not a computer guy, nor do you seem to understand how to make a comment without reposting it up to five times. Hit the "Submit" button ONCE, genius.
On the post: Yet Another Spanish Court Finds File Sharing Site Legal; Compares File Sharing To Book Lending
Re: Re: I like this line of reasoning
Technically that's not sharing; it's barter, which is a form of payment. So while I understand what you're trying to say, you've done a poor job of making your point, and someone like TAM will use this argument against you. Sorry to put a turd in your punch bowl.
On the post: Scott Adams: Ideas vs. Execution
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Scott Adams: Ideas vs. Execution
Re: Re: Re:
Obvious logic failure is obvious. Also, it's funny how often you contradict yourself. Keep going on this topic; your ignorance is hysterical!
On the post: Defining Success: Were The RIAA's Lawsuits A Success Or Not?
Re:
Only you TAM could call fact, "spin." Where in Mike's list of what has happened can you point out, with supporting evidence, what is factually wrong? I don't expect a reply, at least not one that actually answers my question, as you never do. If you respond to my questions posed to you at all it's with irrelevant questions of your own. Just like any common troll.
Next >>