If you have a portrait done, you do not own the copyright to it unless the photographer has specifically signed the copyright over to you -- which nearly no portrait studios do without a substantial additional fee.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The DMCA filing was not valid.
"forced to use male-sounding usernames"
About 2/3 of the women I personally know who are active on the internet have been using male names for years. Originally, it was to get rid of the incessant sexual propositions -- but now it's more to avoid more hostile forms of harassment. The problem is very, very real.
This has also been a problem for a very long time -- even longer than some people on the net have been alive.
Conceptually, I agree. The optics are simply terrible, though. The NSA is engaging in practices that, at a minimum, a lot of citizens consider to be despicable -- and documents like this make it appear that the NSA considers the whole thing to be a big joke.
I have been vocal and active on the internet from before the internet was open to the public. And while I certainly have received very, very angry comments from time to time, I have never (or rarely enough that I've forgotten) received any death threats that seemed serious.
However, it's a fact that certain groups of people, such as female gamers, experience this sort of thing regularly. To claim that this is in some way normal or acceptable and that it's somehow the fault or responsibility of the abused group is itself an example of the problem.
That editorial is amazing. I wonder if the lawyer really believes the nonsense he said, or if he's just hoping that the developer community is filled with idiots.
Re: Re: Techies are selective about crippling things.
"but JavaScript (specifically) is actually essential for certain approaches"
This is true, but in practice (in my experience), 90% of the time that those approaches are used are in situations where they are not necessary.
I will continue with my current practice: disable Javascript by default. If a site doesn't work that way, and the site is not in some way critical to me, then I just won't go there anymore. If the site is critical to me, I'll take the time to determine which pieces of Javascript I will allow to run and which I won't. Usually, there's only one or two really critical bits.
Yes, it matters. Most people will never be billionaires simply because they aren't willing to be the sort of person you have to be to accumulate a billion dollars.
So you can't say that most people would behave badly if they got that money, because their principles would prevent them from getting that money in the first place.
I can't think of an antitrust law that this would be violating, but I'm no lawyer. Generally speaking, antitrust laws only come into effect when it looks like someone is abusing a monopoly. I don't see how that's what is happening here.
And once again, we see the misuse of the word "counterfeit". A counterfeit is copy of another product. Those panties were not counterfeits -- they were original articles that infringed on copyright.
Those are two entirely different things and shouldn't be confused, but the cops and IP radicals intentionally muddy that distinction, because "counterfeit" sounds scary and dangerous.
Re: Re: Now that the FBI is operating as an espionage agency
Plus, there's a couple more fundamental human tendencies in play here. People tend to become what they hate, people tend to think that their personal experiences are representative of the greater reality, and people tend to resemble the folks that they spend a lot of time with, even when that time is spent in opposition to them.
On the post: The DMCA Should Not Be An All Purpose Tool For Taking Down Content; And It's Espeically Bad For Harassment
Re: Re: Re:
If you have a portrait done, you do not own the copyright to it unless the photographer has specifically signed the copyright over to you -- which nearly no portrait studios do without a substantial additional fee.
On the post: The DMCA Should Not Be An All Purpose Tool For Taking Down Content; And It's Espeically Bad For Harassment
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The DMCA filing was not valid.
About 2/3 of the women I personally know who are active on the internet have been using male names for years. Originally, it was to get rid of the incessant sexual propositions -- but now it's more to avoid more hostile forms of harassment. The problem is very, very real.
This has also been a problem for a very long time -- even longer than some people on the net have been alive.
On the post: The NSA's Guide To The Internet Is The Weirdest Thing You'll Read Today
Re:
On the post: The DMCA Should Not Be An All Purpose Tool For Taking Down Content; And It's Espeically Bad For Harassment
Re: Re: Let me guess...
However, it's a fact that certain groups of people, such as female gamers, experience this sort of thing regularly. To claim that this is in some way normal or acceptable and that it's somehow the fault or responsibility of the abused group is itself an example of the problem.
On the post: Apple, Arbiters Of Art, Say Game About Surviving The Gaza Strip Isn't A Game, Even Though It Is
Apple's "curating"
On the post: House Budget Bill Guts Net Neutrality, Kills FCC Authority -- All Because The FCC Dared To Stand Up To Comcast & AT&T
Par for the course
On the post: Big Win For Fair Use: Jury Says Google's Use Of Java API's Was Fair Use... On To The Appeal
Re:
On the post: 'Smart Grid' Company Demands MuckRock Turn Over Info On Anyone Who Might Have Seen Public Records Docs Involving It
It makes me wonder
On the post: Congrats, FBI, You've Now Convinced Silicon Valley To Encrypt And Dump Log Files
Re: Re: Techies are selective about crippling things.
This is true, but in practice (in my experience), 90% of the time that those approaches are used are in situations where they are not necessary.
I will continue with my current practice: disable Javascript by default. If a site doesn't work that way, and the site is not in some way critical to me, then I just won't go there anymore. If the site is critical to me, I'll take the time to determine which pieces of Javascript I will allow to run and which I won't. Usually, there's only one or two really critical bits.
On the post: DHS/ICE Knew Its World Series 'Panty Raid' Was A Bad Idea; Pressured To Do So Anyway
Re: Re: Call out the intentional misuse of terminology
On the post: Silicon Valley Billionaire Peter Thiel Accused Of Financing Hulk Hogan's Ridiculous Lawsuits Against Gawker
Re: Re: Re: Wealth is Truth
So you can't say that most people would behave badly if they got that money, because their principles would prevent them from getting that money in the first place.
On the post: Silicon Valley Billionaire Peter Thiel Accused Of Financing Hulk Hogan's Ridiculous Lawsuits Against Gawker
Re: Re: Tired blather...
On the post: Silicon Valley Billionaire Peter Thiel Accused Of Financing Hulk Hogan's Ridiculous Lawsuits Against Gawker
Re: Re: Re: Tired blather...
Umm, what?
If the lawsuit is ridiculous, then it has no merit. If the lawsuit has merit, it isn't ridiculous.
On the post: As Netflix Locks Down Exclusive Disney Rights, The New Walled Gardens Emerge
Re: Antitrust?
On the post: DHS/ICE Knew Its World Series 'Panty Raid' Was A Bad Idea; Pressured To Do So Anyway
Call out the intentional misuse of terminology
Those are two entirely different things and shouldn't be confused, but the cops and IP radicals intentionally muddy that distinction, because "counterfeit" sounds scary and dangerous.
On the post: As Netflix Locks Down Exclusive Disney Rights, The New Walled Gardens Emerge
I got out just in time!
On the post: Congrats, FBI, You've Now Convinced Silicon Valley To Encrypt And Dump Log Files
Re: Re: Now that the FBI is operating as an espionage agency
On the post: Hollywood Writers & Copyright Scholars Point Out That Piracy Fears Over Open Set Top Boxes Are Complete FUD
Re: Re: Good Ole Days
On the post: DHS/ICE Knew Its World Series 'Panty Raid' Was A Bad Idea; Pressured To Do So Anyway
Re:
On the post: Congrats, FBI, You've Now Convinced Silicon Valley To Encrypt And Dump Log Files
Re: Re: Mispelling
Next >>