And, in practice, you are wrong. Facebook is not the only way to post your opinion. You could start your own website. Don't believe me? How do you think this vary site came into being? Mike Masnick decided to setup a web server and start putting his thoughts out there. Facebook isn't stopping you from doing the same thing.
Well, you're wrong. Good news though, you're allowed to be wrong. As long as the owners of techdirt don't mind it, you're even allowed to be wrong HERE!
There's one other reason it's different... the first argument mentioned in the article.
Attorney-client privilege is a legit reason to argue they are exempt. The second argument is... creative (which is my polite way to say it should be rejected, and those who support it should receive a stern talking-to).
maybe, but we're talking about a copyright claim, so as such let me ask you a question: Does seeing the five words "If I Only Had A Heart" substitute for actually hearing the song?
If not then it's hard to argue that it's actually violating the copyright. Five words are just not enough to qualify as copying a song, let alone an entire film.
Any company that would have such poor HIPPA compliance that they would let patient data out on Limewire should be closed.
That said, there is no point in continuing to go after them. figure out how to move the data their clients need to another company and purge everything this company has, and move on.
What the talking heads don't seem to understand is, while most people think congress is dysfunctional and needs replaced, most people ALSO think that THEIR congress-critters are the exceptions that prove the rule.
This is why congress changes so slowly, while the bum in the white house changes more dramatically.
I've heard a explanation of Comey that makes sense
*adjusts tin-foil hat*
It goes that investigators at the FBI have shown a propensity for revealing these types of things. Comey revealed the emails to give HRC a chance to rebuke them, and his own office enough time to plausibly say "they're nothing" before the election, preventing those in his office from getting the opportunity to use them to do real damage.
Is that what really happened? I don't know, but it's the only theory I've heard that makes any sense.
On the post: Court Dismisses Anti-Muslim Troll Pam Geller's Lawsuit Against The DOJ For Facebook's Moderating Actions
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Another Appropriation Artist Loses Copyright Lawsuit; Are We Nearing The End Of Appropriation Art?
Re:
On the post: Another Appropriation Artist Loses Copyright Lawsuit; Are We Nearing The End Of Appropriation Art?
Art
Art
On the post: One Fish Two Fish, We Will Sue Fish: Seuss Lawyers Hop On Pop Art
You can't really compare this to Weird Al
On the post: Court Dismisses Anti-Muslim Troll Pam Geller's Lawsuit Against The DOJ For Facebook's Moderating Actions
Re: anti-mulism
You're still wrong above, but I do appreciate archaic english.
On the post: Court Stays FTC's LabMD Injunction; No Deterrent In Punishing A Company It Helped Kill
Re: Here's another point that's been missed or ignored:
The fact that the (shady!) "security firm" downloaded it means it was downloaded by at least one person who wasn't supposed to have it.
On the post: Court Dismisses Anti-Muslim Troll Pam Geller's Lawsuit Against The DOJ For Facebook's Moderating Actions
Re: Re:
On the post: VP Elect Mike Pence Goes To Court To Keep His Emails Secret
Re:
Attorney-client privilege is a legit reason to argue they are exempt. The second argument is... creative (which is my polite way to say it should be rejected, and those who support it should receive a stern talking-to).
On the post: Toto, I Don't Think We're In The Public Domain Anymore
Re: I think you're missing something here.
If not then it's hard to argue that it's actually violating the copyright. Five words are just not enough to qualify as copying a song, let alone an entire film.
On the post: Court Stays FTC's LabMD Injunction; No Deterrent In Punishing A Company It Helped Kill
I'm glad LabMD is closed.
That said, there is no point in continuing to go after them. figure out how to move the data their clients need to another company and purge everything this company has, and move on.
On the post: IMDb Sues The State Of California Over New 'Ageism' Law
Re:
On the post: CNN Uses Copyright To Block Viral Clip Of Van Jones' Impassioned Statement
Re:
On the post: If You're Blaming Facebook For The Election Results, You're An Idiot
Re:
This is why congress changes so slowly, while the bum in the white house changes more dramatically.
On the post: Clinton Campaign Also Not A Fan Of Free Speech: Sends Legal Threat Letters Over Trump Ads
Re: Re:
On the post: Jury Balks At Trademark Claim Against Ex-Member Of Rock Group Boston
Re: Re: Clear Message
Frankly, Goudreau should have been awarded attorney's fees.
On the post: Actual Creators Of Email Not At All Happy The Fake Creator Of Email Got Paid For His Bogus Claim
On the post: Clinton Campaign Also Not A Fan Of Free Speech: Sends Legal Threat Letters Over Trump Ads
Wouldn't it be nice if one of the two people who will win tomorrow actually respected the damn First Amendment?
Remember, Gary Johnson is still on the ballot in every state...
On the post: Yet Another E-voting Machine Vulnerability Found
Re:
The major issue with end-to-end verification is doing in such a way that the voter is still not individually identifiable. We've all seen "anonymized" data become identifiable.
On the post: James Comey To Congress: About Those Hillary Clinton Emails I Mentioned Last Week? Meh, Forget About It, Nothing To See
I've heard a explanation of Comey that makes sense
It goes that investigators at the FBI have shown a propensity for revealing these types of things. Comey revealed the emails to give HRC a chance to rebuke them, and his own office enough time to plausibly say "they're nothing" before the election, preventing those in his office from getting the opportunity to use them to do real damage.
Is that what really happened? I don't know, but it's the only theory I've heard that makes any sense.
On the post: Wall Street Journal Error Filled Editorial Buys Into Ridiculous Copyright Office Conspiracy Theory
As a former periodic reader of WSJ, it pretty much hasn't been worth reading since they changed their format.
Next >>