Re: Only two people would ever know about this except that you DID make it a story!
Because what use is it to anyone else UNLESS YOU publicize it?
When reading this article my first thought was that you, Blue, where responsible for this.
It doesn't seem out of character that you would do this and then use it as some sort of ammo the next time an article on this subject came up. This would be right in line with your overwhelming obsession to discredit Techdirt at any cost.
its still pretty arrogant to assume your patterns will cover 90% of anything
Arrogant? Whatever. 90% of programmers are not writing code for applications that are as narrowly tailored as what you are doing. They are writing games, phone apps and Windows programs.
...and I guess its cause you're a windows guy?
Not really. I've programmed in quite a few languages over the years. BASIC, Lisp, Fortran, VB, Turbo Pascal, C/C++ and a bunch of others I don't really remember anymore. I used to code for a living back in the 90's, but now mainly as just a hobby to keep my skills sharp.
These days, if I need to target Windows, I usually compile with Pelles C running on Wine on my Linux laptop (brave, I know).
90% doesn't satisfy the requirements 100% of the time.
Who said otherwise? I was responding to this comment:
Man, it looks like a lot of you programmers can't imagine a world without pre-existing code. That's sad.
Let me put this a different way. If I want to write a "Hello World" GUI program in C to run under Windows I'm going to use the Windows API. I can write this program in about 2 minutes.
If you want to spend months writing new code to handle displaying the window and the common controls and everything else, go for it. No skin off my back. Still looks like a colossal waste of time to me.
Man, it looks like a lot of you programmers can't imagine a world without pre-existing code. That's sad.
Why is that sad? Building upon the work of predecessors is how human innovation has always worked. Early automobile inventors/innovators didn't re-invent the wheel or the chassis - they used existing trolley, buggy and wagon designs.
Rewriting all the code from scratch on every project would be a colossal waste of time and resources, not to mention the huge interconnectivity problems you would end up.
It seems obvious to me that resolving its domain names, speeding up the delivery of its content, etc. helped Grooveshark to do what it had been enjoined from doing.
I disagree. Using you logic, car manufacturers would be liable for supplying cars to bank robbers.
Congress specifically carved out the 512 and 230 safe harbors to protect service providers from the unlawful actions of their users. Groveshark was a Cloudflare user.
These third parties are not being enjoined under 502--the defendants are. 512 does not apply to these third parties since they're not being enjoined under 502 in the first place.
IANAL, but that doesn't seem right. They are enjoined under F.R.C.P 65, but the whole reason for enjoining them is because of a violation of 17 U.S.C. 501 in the first place. I'm not sure how you can just ignore that part when dealing with third parties. It's a copyright case to begin with.
The district court in the Cloudflare case said that it was in active concert with the Grooveshark websites, but there's not a lot of case law on this point.
I think that the court order in that case was wrong and was way overbroad. Cloudflare resisted up to a point, but still complied. I don't believe that the court order against Cloudflare would stand up under appeals.
And Mike's claim that 512 is "the part of the law that says this *isn't* allowed" is just silly.
It's not silly at all. 17 U.S.C. 512 enumerates the limitations of liability on service providers for copyright infringement. These limitations apply to the injunctive relief provided by 17 U.S.C. 502 as stated in the very first paragraph of 512:
A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright... (emphasis mine)
Re: Re: So here's PAID-FOR BY US PROPAGANDA: [Russia is] "pumping the internet full of toxic disinformation 24 hours a day"!
This is utterly hilarious.
I agree. It seems that Blue is edging closer into full blown whack-job territory every day. His aimless ramblings have now degenerated into incomprehensible gibberish.
Just imagine how NSA loves Google! Snowden says it gives NSA "direct access".
Care to back that up with some citations, Blue?
All I've ever heard was that, unbeknownst to Google, the NSA was performing man-in-the-middle attacks on Google traffic when it traveled between Google's data centers. Google has since encrypted that traffic.
According to this report he did attempt to apologize in person and ended up writing an apology a couple of days after the school first brought the issue up with him.
But as has been noted elsewhere, the right to free speech does not cover defamation.
You keep saying this and I know that it's correct, but my question to you is this: When does libelous speech become unprotected?
I'm not a lawyer, but my guess would be when that speech was declared libelous by a court of law. Prior to that moment occurring that speech would remain protected by the First Amendment. (Any lawyers out there please correct me if I'm wrong here).
So, if I am correct in this, the tweet in question would still be protected speech since a defamation ruling hasn't happened yet.
Yeah, our esteemed AC seems to think that this kid should be sent to the Group W Bench to sit with the mother-rapers, the father-stabbers and the father-rapers, all for what's most likely a stupid joke tweet about a teacher.
The next step is that you'll see parents suing school districts if their child is even suspended from school for ANY reason.
Are you saying that we should give schools absolute authority over our children? Either you work for a school district or you are a complete idiot, I can't figured out which, yet.
It was well after the Mary Kay Letourneau scandal. Van Halen's "Hot For Teacher" came out in 1984.
As an adult, I'm not saying that teacher-student romantic/sexual relationships are acceptable whatsoever. I'm saying that teenagers of both sexes, with their raging hormones do think about, talk about and joke about such things all the time.
If even a single kid at my high school had publicly claimed he was having inappropriate relations with one of the female teachers, even as a "joke", the rumors would have been flying and it would be all over the school in no time flat, but that never happened, because (among other reasons) we all knew that that was over the line.
Really? At my high school, jokes about "doing" the new, young, pretty English teacher were everywhere.
Heck, it was such prevalent theme at the time that Van Halen wrote a song about a year or so after I graduated, complete with a bikini-clad teacher in the music video.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "the goal of the U.S. Constitution's Progress Clause" -- it's the "Copyright Clause" in likely more common usage, but good try at biasing discussion.
I bring it up time and again on his own blog, challenging his intellectual honesty, and his continued refusal only proves my point.
Geez AJ, give it a rest. Mike has answered this question many times over. Most recently just a couple of weeks ago:
On the post: The Day Someone Signed Me Up For An Ashley Madison Account (That Day Would Be Yesterday)
Re: Only two people would ever know about this except that you DID make it a story!
When reading this article my first thought was that you, Blue, where responsible for this.
It doesn't seem out of character that you would do this and then use it as some sort of ammo the next time an article on this subject came up. This would be right in line with your overwhelming obsession to discredit Techdirt at any cost.
On the post: Legislators Send Letter To Treasury Department Demanding Release Of Funds Seized In Bogus Structuring Case
Re: Re: I'm a customer
CASH ACCEPTED
with proper I.D.
On the post: Yes, The Appeals Court Got Basically Everything Wrong In Deciding API's Are Covered By Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Arrogant? Whatever. 90% of programmers are not writing code for applications that are as narrowly tailored as what you are doing. They are writing games, phone apps and Windows programs.
...and I guess its cause you're a windows guy?
Not really. I've programmed in quite a few languages over the years. BASIC, Lisp, Fortran, VB, Turbo Pascal, C/C++ and a bunch of others I don't really remember anymore. I used to code for a living back in the 90's, but now mainly as just a hobby to keep my skills sharp.
These days, if I need to target Windows, I usually compile with Pelles C running on Wine on my Linux laptop (brave, I know).
On the post: Yes, The Appeals Court Got Basically Everything Wrong In Deciding API's Are Covered By Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Who said otherwise? I was responding to this comment:
Let me put this a different way. If I want to write a "Hello World" GUI program in C to run under Windows I'm going to use the Windows API. I can write this program in about 2 minutes.
If you want to spend months writing new code to handle displaying the window and the common controls and everything else, go for it. No skin off my back. Still looks like a colossal waste of time to me.
On the post: Yes, The Appeals Court Got Basically Everything Wrong In Deciding API's Are Covered By Copyright
Re: Re: Re:
That said, I also don't believe you would actually do this since it would leave you no time to be an asshole on the internet.
On the post: Yes, The Appeals Court Got Basically Everything Wrong In Deciding API's Are Covered By Copyright
Re:
Why is that sad? Building upon the work of predecessors is how human innovation has always worked. Early automobile inventors/innovators didn't re-invent the wheel or the chassis - they used existing trolley, buggy and wagon designs.
Rewriting all the code from scratch on every project would be a colossal waste of time and resources, not to mention the huge interconnectivity problems you would end up.
On the post: After Internet Companies Protest, MPAA Declares Victory And Walks Away From Attempt To Backdoor SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I disagree. Using you logic, car manufacturers would be liable for supplying cars to bank robbers.
Congress specifically carved out the 512 and 230 safe harbors to protect service providers from the unlawful actions of their users. Groveshark was a Cloudflare user.
On the post: After Internet Companies Protest, MPAA Declares Victory And Walks Away From Attempt To Backdoor SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
IANAL, but that doesn't seem right. They are enjoined under F.R.C.P 65, but the whole reason for enjoining them is because of a violation of 17 U.S.C. 501 in the first place. I'm not sure how you can just ignore that part when dealing with third parties. It's a copyright case to begin with.
On the post: After Internet Companies Protest, MPAA Declares Victory And Walks Away From Attempt To Backdoor SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think that the court order in that case was wrong and was way overbroad. Cloudflare resisted up to a point, but still complied. I don't believe that the court order against Cloudflare would stand up under appeals.
On the post: After Internet Companies Protest, MPAA Declares Victory And Walks Away From Attempt To Backdoor SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not silly at all. 17 U.S.C. 512 enumerates the limitations of liability on service providers for copyright infringement. These limitations apply to the injunctive relief provided by 17 U.S.C. 502 as stated in the very first paragraph of 512:
On the post: Ex-Kremlin Hired 'Troll' Wins One Ruble In Damages From Putin's Internet Propaganda Factory
Re: Re: So here's PAID-FOR BY US PROPAGANDA: [Russia is] "pumping the internet full of toxic disinformation 24 hours a day"!
I agree. It seems that Blue is edging closer into full blown whack-job territory every day. His aimless ramblings have now degenerated into incomprehensible gibberish.
On the post: AT&T's Long History Of Fraudulent And Abusive Behavior Apparently Of No Concern To The NSA
Re:
Care to back that up with some citations, Blue?
All I've ever heard was that, unbeknownst to Google, the NSA was performing man-in-the-middle attacks on Google traffic when it traveled between Google's data centers. Google has since encrypted that traffic.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re: Re:
According to this report he did attempt to apologize in person and ended up writing an apology a couple of days after the school first brought the issue up with him.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re: Re: "Don't see what fuss is about"
You keep saying this and I know that it's correct, but my question to you is this: When does libelous speech become unprotected?
I'm not a lawyer, but my guess would be when that speech was declared libelous by a court of law. Prior to that moment occurring that speech would remain protected by the First Amendment. (Any lawyers out there please correct me if I'm wrong here).
So, if I am correct in this, the tweet in question would still be protected speech since a defamation ruling hasn't happened yet.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re:
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
Umm...yes there is. It's called the statute of limitations. This comment explains it to you very succulently:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150812/10170331924/school-police-chief-must-face-law suit-brought-student-suspended-10-days-tweeting-actually-yes.shtml#c1449
The next step is that you'll see parents suing school districts if their child is even suspended from school for ANY reason.
Are you saying that we should give schools absolute authority over our children? Either you work for a school district or you are a complete idiot, I can't figured out which, yet.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As an adult, I'm not saying that teacher-student romantic/sexual relationships are acceptable whatsoever. I'm saying that teenagers of both sexes, with their raging hormones do think about, talk about and joke about such things all the time.
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re: Re: Re:
Really? At my high school, jokes about "doing" the new, young, pretty English teacher were everywhere.
Heck, it was such prevalent theme at the time that Van Halen wrote a song about a year or so after I graduated, complete with a bikini-clad teacher in the music video.
On the post: Split Works Debate Raises Thorny Issues For Music Companies (And For The Rest Of Us)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ "the goal of the U.S. Constitution's Progress Clause" -- it's the "Copyright Clause" in likely more common usage, but good try at biasing discussion.
Geez AJ, give it a rest. Mike has answered this question many times over. Most recently just a couple of weeks ago:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150723/17125231743/state-georgia-sues-carl-malamud-copyright -infringement-publishing-states-own-laws.shtml#c663
On the post: School, Police Chief Must Face Lawsuit Brought By Student Suspended For 10 Days For Tweeting 'Actually, Yes'
Re:
How do you know he wasn't punished by his parents?
Next >>