I'm sorry if it seems personal, but I recognize your behavior as part of a larger problem with society. People who have been taught, incorrectly, that things can be owned, that a corporations rights can supersede those of an individual, and that the law is always correct, even if it's always changing.
You claim I don't know you and you are correct, I can only know what you've written. You have displayed an opinion (in these posts and others) which seems devoid of empathy, understanding, and critical thinking skills. You accept that something is legal and therefore is right. When that is challenged, you claim that people can defend their "rights." When that is challenged you stop responding in a meaningful way. And through all of this, you fail to grasp on any level the basic "wrongness" of a company which buys copyrights, registers them after the fact, and then sues people as a business model. You even have the audacity to refer to them as victims, as though they had been beaten, raped, or murdered ... and you try to call me out for using more direct language (genocide, etc.)
I'm going to wrap up with this (feel free to respond but I'm done so you can have the last word if you want.) I don't know you, I only know what you've written and reading what you've written fills me with mixed emotions. One part of me wants to have a meaningful discussion to see if we can come to some agreement. The other part, well, the other part sees you as someone who is so convinced that they are morally, intellectually, and socially superior that you can't imagine other people or their opinions matter. That part of me wonders how long before people with your attitude manage to destroy any chance humanity has of evolving.
Oh, well never mind about the being smart enough to understand then. Also, if you really and honestly think that this case is about a victim and an aggressor then I'm not really sure what to say to you. Neither the LVRJ or Rightshaven bothered to notify the defendant that they didn't want the material reposted and copyright is hardly a well understood and widely accepted concept.
You can't possibly be arguing that what the defendant did is generally accepted as morally wrong (possibly the only way she would have inherently understood that there is a high likelihood of consequences for reposting content). And I doubt you could successfully convince anyone that her actions where malicious. So whats left? A company that buys the rights to content only after they know that there is an opportunity to extort someone for money. I only see 1 victim here and it isn't Rightshaven.
Actually, I see 2 victims, the defendant, and you. You're the victim of a terrible education system and a culture that increasingly promotes the ideals of profit, ownership, and apathy.
On the post: Court Refuses To Dismiss Righthaven Lawsuit Just Because Righthaven Bought The Copyright After Infringement Happened
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You claim I don't know you and you are correct, I can only know what you've written. You have displayed an opinion (in these posts and others) which seems devoid of empathy, understanding, and critical thinking skills. You accept that something is legal and therefore is right. When that is challenged, you claim that people can defend their "rights." When that is challenged you stop responding in a meaningful way. And through all of this, you fail to grasp on any level the basic "wrongness" of a company which buys copyrights, registers them after the fact, and then sues people as a business model. You even have the audacity to refer to them as victims, as though they had been beaten, raped, or murdered ... and you try to call me out for using more direct language (genocide, etc.)
I'm going to wrap up with this (feel free to respond but I'm done so you can have the last word if you want.) I don't know you, I only know what you've written and reading what you've written fills me with mixed emotions. One part of me wants to have a meaningful discussion to see if we can come to some agreement. The other part, well, the other part sees you as someone who is so convinced that they are morally, intellectually, and socially superior that you can't imagine other people or their opinions matter. That part of me wonders how long before people with your attitude manage to destroy any chance humanity has of evolving.
On the post: Court Refuses To Dismiss Righthaven Lawsuit Just Because Righthaven Bought The Copyright After Infringement Happened
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Court Refuses To Dismiss Righthaven Lawsuit Just Because Righthaven Bought The Copyright After Infringement Happened
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can't possibly be arguing that what the defendant did is generally accepted as morally wrong (possibly the only way she would have inherently understood that there is a high likelihood of consequences for reposting content). And I doubt you could successfully convince anyone that her actions where malicious. So whats left? A company that buys the rights to content only after they know that there is an opportunity to extort someone for money. I only see 1 victim here and it isn't Rightshaven.
Actually, I see 2 victims, the defendant, and you. You're the victim of a terrible education system and a culture that increasingly promotes the ideals of profit, ownership, and apathy.
Next >>