I really question the "cost" of keeping this anyways. The site is not getting used and all they want is to keep the data. How does it come to $9,000 a day to have a server siting turned off? It is taking up space but should not really be using any power or other resources. The only costs I see are in the space.
You then have limited argument on how much they "could" be making if they could use the servers but arguing that is much like the movie industries arguing losses to piracy. It is impossible to really know how much is or isn't lost.
Point is Government is SUPPOSED to pass laws most people want. As for your tax example, No most people do not want higher taxes BUT if they see a LEGITIMATE need like improving a road then most would agree to a higher tax. The issue is that most of our tax money is being wasted.
"I wasn't aware that society as we know it was on the verge of collapse."
How did you not notice that it is on the verge of collapse? These fools and their unneeded laws are pushing hard to try and collapse our society and replace it with their utopia where they get to collect money from everyone while doing nothing in return.
There is just one big issue with your whole "Comcast funnel" thing. Comcast is selling bandwidth to customers and the end customer is paying according to how much they are supposed to be allowed. So if suddenly everyone starts watching netflix and Comcast cant handle that traffic that would mean they oversold their network. That is on Comcast not anyone else.
Also a bit stupid to say it in terms of "If you pour more traffic into the top of the Comcast funnel," anyways. You do realize the internet works by people requesting things right? Unless Comcast customers REQUEST the extra traffic then there is no extra traffic. No one is dumping anything anywhere. Comcast customers are requesting it.
Thank you! It is good to know I'm not the only one who finds this stupid. My phone or GPS is a lot less distracting than some woman's 2 year old screaming and throwing cereal. So unless they want to tackle that then they need to stay the hell out of my business.
If a cop sees me swerving all over then he can ticket me for reckless driving. If I hit something then I can be charged for that. Banning this stuff will not reduce wrecks it will likely just increase them. What you think will happen when someone is constantly cursing and having to do U-turns? He is very likely to cause a wreck when frustrated that he is always told about the turn 2 seconds too late.
The MPAA ratings have been a joke for a long time. They change from time to time so what is R today is not necessarily R tomorrow.
I have a VHS of a western rated R that does not show any blood or anything. Today that would probably only get a PG.
On the other hand I have the Smokey and the bandit movies. The first one is rated G and is full of profanity. The later ones go to PG and have nudity as well as the profanity.
You are taking the term "peers" in a much narrower view than what the legal system thinks of "peers". His peers are just regular citizens not involved in government. If you are a computer geek they don't go out to comicon to find a jury.
You sir have sadly made a great error in assuming that the United States population actually pays any attention to the news. It will not be hard to find a jury full of people that live with their heads buried in the sand. Of course the trouble is that the people who have not heard of this case are the people who don't know what a computer even is.
I love seeing how their are still some people out there who seem clueless about technology. One of the wonderful things about torrents is that they have to be seeded. Now when someone downloads a torrent and gets a virus they will delete the files and not seed it. This causes the "virus filled torrent files" to have relatively few seeds.
Anyone who uses torrents often also takes the little extra time to read comments where people tell you if it is worth getting or not. Torrents are more social than the old P2P methods. With torrents the trash tends to die off pretty quick because only a few assholes bother seeding viruses.
Well I can't offer really offer "evidence" in this case. I can tell you though that I have had a company that I paid money to later start process of trying to sue. Pretty much same kind of thing. I had paid for their product before and was likely to buy again. Soon as I saw their name on a legal document the chance of me giving them any more business dropped to zero. Attacking fans will not help you gain any friends. It will instead turn fans into enemies.
There is actually a lot of good that can come from this homeless guy analogy of yours. You see you say they are like homeless guy using your restaurant restroom. Well if you let that homeless guy in and make him a friend then odds are good he will later when he has money be a customer.
On the other hand if you take this homeless guy grab him as he is headed for the rest room and toss him out face first into a mud puddle then what you think he will do? Likely you will start finding him pissing on your building, taking shits side of the restaurant ect. Before long that one bum you attacked will run you out of business.
Really this whole argument brings up another very stupid point. Who the hell cares if you have a scan of a dollar? What you going to do try to pass your monitor tot he lady at the check out and hope she is too dumb to know it is not a dollar bill?
So I guess this is their idea of punishment fitting the crime. Someone used the internet to steal our stuff so we shall take their internet. Who cares that in this day in age taking away the internet is crippling to most people.
The internet is not some simple commodity anymore. It is needed if you are to function in society.
Another really interesting question. What they hell they think will happen when they do this? You think if you take away my home connection you will keep me off the internet? If so you are a bigger idiot than I thought possible.
Go ahead and take my internet. I know where McDonnalds is as well as about 100 other hot spots and that is out here in middle of nowhere farming country. So what you going to shut them down too? Hell why not just pull the plug on the whole internet. That is the only way to stop it.
I was trying to make a simple point. That is that these two things are different in a few ways and because of this the two crimes have different names.
If I go steal your bike you have now lost your bike. This is stealing. I have taken something from you.
If I infringe upon your IP then I have not taken anything from you. Instead I have illegally gained a copy.
So stealing has caused direct physical harm just like me walking up and hitting you with a bat. Infringement has caused a perceived injury to you much like me threatening with a bat but not actually hitting you.
They are different with different names. Both are illegal and both are wrong. They are not the same and calling them the same thing just confuses the issue.
It is not word games to use words correctly. Copying is not stealing. Copying is different and has it's very own name when done illegally. This is called infringement. See my other post for more detailed explanation on this concept.
I must say, Well done, you actually stated a valid argument instead of being like most and just saying "but but but, stealing!!"
The problem with what your saying though is that copying is still not stealing. It is infringement and infringement is wrong and it is illegal. We are not trying to say that infringing on copyright is ok, we are saying that calling it stealing and trying to compare it to physical objects is just stupid.
It is kind of like trying to compare communicating a threat and physical assault. They are both crimes and are kind of similar on some levels but one does not really hurt you while one puts you into the hospital. While similar crimes you cannot interchange the terms for them. The same is true of theft and infringement. They are similar in some ways but in other ways nothing at all alike.
“The nerds are more powerful than anyone thought, and the tech industry flexed its muscle like never before.”
Got to love the whole jock mentality all these guys seem to have. Constantly throwing around "the nerds" as if this is still high school. It is about time for these guys to wake the hell up and realize us "nerds" do a hell of a lot more in the real world than the quarterback jocks do.
Looking all fashionable and being able to throw a ball around does not in any way help society. That does not lead to innovation or new ideas. Sure there are some jocks that do add to society but it is their hidden "nerdyness" that helps society not their ability to throw a football.
Well, he can't legally search your car unless he has probable cause or you say he can. So locking the door does not really help that much. If he has enough probable cause to search without your permission then he has enough to just arrest you and get a warrant.
Or why not write a story or song. Make something, just about anything and copyright it. Then setup your own "automated system" that is set to look for anything matching your copyrighted content, but only search the sites belonging to big media. Then when you spit out tons of totally bogus take down requests you can point and say, "I didn't know it wasn't infringing, my system was checking them"
On the post: Megaupload User Asks Court To Return The Legitimate Files He Uploaded To Megaupload
Re: Re:
You then have limited argument on how much they "could" be making if they could use the servers but arguing that is much like the movie industries arguing losses to piracy. It is impossible to really know how much is or isn't lost.
On the post: Megaupload User Asks Court To Return The Legitimate Files He Uploaded To Megaupload
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: If ACTA Is So Great, Where Are All The Supporters Extolling Its Virtues?
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: If ACTA Is So Great, Where Are All The Supporters Extolling Its Virtues?
Re: Re:
How did you not notice that it is on the verge of collapse? These fools and their unneeded laws are pushing hard to try and collapse our society and replace it with their utopia where they get to collect money from everyone while doing nothing in return.
On the post: Is Comcast A Threat To The Internet?
Re:
Also a bit stupid to say it in terms of "If you pour more traffic into the top of the Comcast funnel," anyways. You do realize the internet works by people requesting things right? Unless Comcast customers REQUEST the extra traffic then there is no extra traffic. No one is dumping anything anywhere. Comcast customers are requesting it.
On the post: National Highway Transportation Safety Agency Says You Can Keep Your GPS -- As Long As It's Completely Useless
Re: Re:
If a cop sees me swerving all over then he can ticket me for reckless driving. If I hit something then I can be charged for that. Banning this stuff will not reduce wrecks it will likely just increase them. What you think will happen when someone is constantly cursing and having to do U-turns? He is very likely to cause a wreck when frustrated that he is always told about the turn 2 seconds too late.
On the post: AMC Defies MPAA Bullies: Will Show Unrated Documentary To Kids With Permission Slips
Re:
I have a VHS of a western rated R that does not show any blood or anything. Today that would probably only get a PG.
On the other hand I have the Smokey and the bandit movies. The first one is rated G and is full of profanity. The later ones go to PG and have nudity as well as the profanity.
On the post: Kim Dotcom Fires Back: Raises Questions About US's Evidence, Shows Studios Were Eager To Work With Megaupload
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Kim Dotcom Fires Back: Raises Questions About US's Evidence, Shows Studios Were Eager To Work With Megaupload
Re:
On the post: Microsoft Spying On Live Messenger Messages, Censoring Any Pirate Bay Links
Re: Re: Re: Pirate Bay has viruses?
Anyone who uses torrents often also takes the little extra time to read comments where people tell you if it is worth getting or not. Torrents are more social than the old P2P methods. With torrents the trash tends to die off pretty quick because only a few assholes bother seeding viruses.
On the post: UFC Makes The Awful Decision To Sue Some Of Its Biggest Fans
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UFC Makes The Awful Decision To Sue Some Of Its Biggest Fans
Re:
On the other hand if you take this homeless guy grab him as he is headed for the rest room and toss him out face first into a mud puddle then what you think he will do? Likely you will start finding him pissing on your building, taking shits side of the restaurant ect. Before long that one bum you attacked will run you out of business.
On the post: Since The RIAA & MPAA Say That A Copy Is Just As Valuable As The Original, Send Them A Copy Of Money
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: ISPs Will Start Acting As Hollywood's Private Online Security Guards By July
The internet is not some simple commodity anymore. It is needed if you are to function in society.
Another really interesting question. What they hell they think will happen when they do this? You think if you take away my home connection you will keep me off the internet? If so you are a bigger idiot than I thought possible.
Go ahead and take my internet. I know where McDonnalds is as well as about 100 other hot spots and that is out here in middle of nowhere farming country. So what you going to shut them down too? Hell why not just pull the plug on the whole internet. That is the only way to stop it.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: Re: It can be.
If I go steal your bike you have now lost your bike. This is stealing. I have taken something from you.
If I infringe upon your IP then I have not taken anything from you. Instead I have illegally gained a copy.
So stealing has caused direct physical harm just like me walking up and hitting you with a bat. Infringement has caused a perceived injury to you much like me threatening with a bat but not actually hitting you.
They are different with different names. Both are illegal and both are wrong. They are not the same and calling them the same thing just confuses the issue.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: It can be.
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: It can be.
The problem with what your saying though is that copying is still not stealing. It is infringement and infringement is wrong and it is illegal. We are not trying to say that infringing on copyright is ok, we are saying that calling it stealing and trying to compare it to physical objects is just stupid.
It is kind of like trying to compare communicating a threat and physical assault. They are both crimes and are kind of similar on some levels but one does not really hurt you while one puts you into the hospital. While similar crimes you cannot interchange the terms for them. The same is true of theft and infringement. They are similar in some ways but in other ways nothing at all alike.
On the post: 'Don't Get SOPA'd' Is The New Mantra On Capitol Hill
Got to love the whole jock mentality all these guys seem to have. Constantly throwing around "the nerds" as if this is still high school. It is about time for these guys to wake the hell up and realize us "nerds" do a hell of a lot more in the real world than the quarterback jocks do.
Looking all fashionable and being able to throw a ball around does not in any way help society. That does not lead to innovation or new ideas. Sure there are some jocks that do add to society but it is their hidden "nerdyness" that helps society not their ability to throw a football.
On the post: Court Confirms Police Don't Need A Warrant To Do A Limited Search Of A Mobile Phone
Re: Moral of the story...
On the post: EFF Argues That Automated Bogus DMCA Takedowns Violate The Law And Are Subject To Sanctions
Re: Automated upload
Next >>