Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Because it's not-- it's about stopping piracy
Copyright is in the constitution and it was put there long before the First Amendment.
People keep repeating this. It's a half-truth. The ability to enact copyright was granted to Congress in the Constitution, but Copyright itself is NOT granted in the Constitution. It's a fine distinction, but an important one. It means that copyright is not a Constitutional right.
Re: Re: Re: Because it's not-- it's about stopping piracy
But it is still censorship. That's the point you keep missing. Not all censorship is necessarily bad, but you cannot ignore that it is properly censorship.
I'd bet we could come up with MANY scenarios where censorship is a great idea. Want to give it a try?
Hiding the names of covert agents in the field.
Hiding the locations of sensitive military installations.
Hiding the names and locations of eye witnesses to violent crimes.
Yes, and at the same time you have people who wind up with this crap all over the place because people can't put it in the box. People who are physically disabled and unable to chase the trash all over the yard because some snooty asshat had to complain about a damn flyer they'd throw away even if it had postage on it.
I'll quote from a comment from the original article:
An interesting document from the Government Accountability Office: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/gg97085.pdf states "The Postal Service believes that this law, generally called the “mailbox restriction,” is needed to protect postal revenue, facilitate efficient and secure delivery of mail, and promote the privacy of postal customers." (primarially aimed at UPS & FedEx)
They also quoted the law in question:
18 USC § 1725. Postage unpaid on deposited mail matter
Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits any mailable matter such as statements of accounts, circulars, sale bills, or other like matter, on which no postage has been paid, in any letter box established, approved, or accepted by the Postal Service for the receipt or delivery of mail matter on any mail route with intent to avoid payment of lawful postage thereon, shall for each such offense be fined under this title.
Oh goodness!!!! Why this would mean that Mike's suggestion that there is a Constitutional issue is, is, ....... FUD??? Oh that couldn't be..... could it?
You do mean Senator Wyden, of course. You still fail at trolling.
How is this all FUD? Explain it in detail, and debunk it. Remember, FUD has 'and' in it, not 'or.' Fear, Uncertainty AND Doubt. We all Doubt that these laws do the general public the least bit of good. You should start there.
Just because you say it doesn't make it so. (Did I stoop to your age bracket enough to understand me?) Such continued allegations without any way to prove them in a succinct and irrefutable manner are childish at best.
Funny how Mike's detractors latch on to the minor points and completely miss the free speech and privacy issues that are the major points of the articles.
For the one hundredth time, the Protect IP Act is limited to foreign websites, current US law is sufficient to deal with domestic websites that infringe. Ebay and Youtube are still up, And no, it's also a federal judge under Protect IP.
No, no it is not. Read the damn thing, and stop your goddamn fear-mongering, you pathetic excuse for an individual. I've spend the last two hours reading all your garbage-spewing, FUD based commentary, and it's sickening. Go back to your masters and hide under the rock they have set aside just for you.
It seems like you don't get it. You certainly act like you never will. However, I think you DO get it, and it frightens you that so many around you get it, as well. Massive infringements against the peoples' free speech rights to try and protect the income of a few is going to have a major backlash.
Thanks for destroying the myth that the Protect IP Act will break the Internet. If these alternate DNS systems have been around for years, hard to see any damage will be done by their continued existence.
Alternate DNS systems are not the Internet. Nice try, though.
Let's put it another way: Always expect the worst from your government. Always. Just as those who need to be in physical control tend towards law enforcement, those with a powerful greed for power tend towards politics. It sounds like tin foil hat territory, but that's why there's an amendment to allow for revolution in the Constitution.
On the post: Teachers Union Thinks It Blocked Online Classes...But It Didn't
Re:
Sweet spirits, I hope that was sarcasm.
On the post: BMI Hurting Artists, Yet Again
Re:
On the post: Take Picture Of Your 4-Year-Old Daughter Eating Ice Cream... Get Investigated Under Terrorism Act [Updated]
Re: Re:
FTFY. This was in Scotland.
On the post: Why Can't PROTECT IP Supporters Just Admit That It's About Censorship?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Because it's not-- it's about stopping piracy
People keep repeating this. It's a half-truth. The ability to enact copyright was granted to Congress in the Constitution, but Copyright itself is NOT granted in the Constitution. It's a fine distinction, but an important one. It means that copyright is not a Constitutional right.
On the post: Why Can't PROTECT IP Supporters Just Admit That It's About Censorship?
Re: Re: Re: Because it's not-- it's about stopping piracy
On the post: Why Can't PROTECT IP Supporters Just Admit That It's About Censorship?
Re:
Hiding the names of covert agents in the field.
Hiding the locations of sensitive military installations.
Hiding the names and locations of eye witnesses to violent crimes.
Shall we go on?
On the post: Why Can't PROTECT IP Supporters Just Admit That It's About Censorship?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: US Postal Service Sends Postage Due Bill To Guy Who Put Block Party Invites Into Neighbors' Mailboxes
Re: Federal law
(No, I don't support this law.)
On the post: US Postal Service Sends Postage Due Bill To Guy Who Put Block Party Invites Into Neighbors' Mailboxes
Re: Re: Who owns mailboxes?
An interesting document from the Government Accountability Office:
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/gg97085.pdf states "The Postal Service believes that this law, generally called the “mailbox restriction,” is needed to protect postal revenue, facilitate efficient and secure delivery of mail, and promote the privacy of postal customers." (primarially aimed at UPS & FedEx)
They also quoted the law in question:
18 USC § 1725. Postage unpaid on deposited mail matter
Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits any mailable matter such as statements of accounts, circulars, sale bills, or other like matter, on which no postage has been paid, in any letter box established, approved, or accepted by the Postal Service for the receipt or delivery of mail matter on any mail route with intent to avoid payment of lawful postage thereon, shall for each such offense be fined under this title.
Thanks, Rachacha.
On the post: Universal Backs Away From Planned $60 VOD Release Of Tower Heist
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Senator Wyden Asks President Obama: Isn't Congress Required To Approve ACTA?
Re: Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
You do mean Senator Wyden, of course. You still fail at trolling.
On the post: Insanity: Judge Rules That Copyright Holder Of 10-Second Sample Deserves 84% Of The Royalties
Re: Re:
On the post: Insanity: Judge Rules That Copyright Holder Of 10-Second Sample Deserves 84% Of The Royalties
Re: Re:
On the post: New Patent Reform Law Already A Good Thing... For Patent Attorneys
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Pirate Party Building Up More And More Support: 9% Nationwide In Germany
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Pirate Party Building Up More And More Support: 9% Nationwide In Germany
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
FUD abounds, but it isn't from this blog.
On the post: As Expected, Alternative DNS Systems Sprouting Up To Ignore US Censorship
Re: Re: Re:
No, no it is not. Read the damn thing, and stop your goddamn fear-mongering, you pathetic excuse for an individual. I've spend the last two hours reading all your garbage-spewing, FUD based commentary, and it's sickening. Go back to your masters and hide under the rock they have set aside just for you.
On the post: As Expected, Alternative DNS Systems Sprouting Up To Ignore US Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: As Expected, Alternative DNS Systems Sprouting Up To Ignore US Censorship
Re: Re: Re:
Alternate DNS systems are not the Internet. Nice try, though.
On the post: As Expected, Alternative DNS Systems Sprouting Up To Ignore US Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>