Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 9 Mar 2013 @ 5:51pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Dotcom did not initiate the legal proceedings.
Perhaps if Prenda and related entities did not want to be subject to appear before a California court when given 4 business days plus a weekend notice, they shouldn't have started suing people in California.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 9 Mar 2013 @ 5:45pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Has it ever occurred to you that just maybe those arguing against property ownership over infinitely reproduceable (at little to no cost) ideas have a higher sense of morality than you?
As proof, I'll just point out that you're the one defending extortionate lying scumbags abusing a legal system for profit.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 9 Mar 2013 @ 5:40pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There is only general jurisdiction if the contacts with the state are "continuous and systematic."
Continuous and systematic are two words that can easily describe the large numbers of people Prenda and related entities are suing in California.
For example, if Hansemeier and I are in a fender bender in Chicago, I can't sue him in California claiming that his deposition there made him amenable to suit there in an unrelated manner.
Of course you couldn't - because the fender bender occurred in Chicago. However, if he then travels to California and starts putting out statements that you're a horrible driver, I bet you could sue him there for his statements. And since the above mentioned Prenda and related entities have been suing many people in California for years, then the court has jurisdiction over them.
And how is that 2-3 business days notice is reasonable? If you found out on Thursday that you had to be in court several states away on Monday, would you think that was reasonable notice?
The order was issued on March 5, giving them 4 business days plus a weekend, to appear before the court in a case they were all intimately involved with. Any excuse or other hand waving is utter bullshit.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 8 Mar 2013 @ 11:51am
Re:
I'm quite sure that even when/if 100% completely irrefutable black and white evidence shows all of the above to be true, you would still be defending the DOJ and US Attorney. Either that or be completely silent and looking for the next poor schmoe to persecute.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 7 Mar 2013 @ 12:38pm
Re:
As someone who grew up before the internet absorbed the full attention of all the country's youth, I'm offended by the notion that cutting them back off from it is a bad thing.
The internet is communication and socialization with others. Did your parents have the power to completely prevent you from talking with your friends? Did your parents have the ability to monitor nearly everything you did and said to them?
As someone who grew up just as this internet thing was catching on, who was shy and somewhat of an outcast in high school, and found good lifelong friends online when I had few to relate to me in "real life", I am horrified that you cannot see how this can be a very bad thing to some children that may need the ability to socialize with others that understand them the most.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 6 Mar 2013 @ 11:12am
Re: Again, if hampers duplicating crap, what's the down side?
copyright tends to force innovation because duplicating old crap is too complex.
A key concept in innovation is doing something new, better, or more efficiently.
Having graphic artists redoing a dwarf's hair is not efficient. They could be working on some awesome special effects shot or working on a better movie.
Having lawyers sit around a movie set to nix director decisions is not efficient. The lawyers could be more efficient by, oh, dying at the bottom of the ocean or something.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 4 Mar 2013 @ 12:27pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
CwF+RtB won't stop piracy either.
Nothing will completely stop piracy without the kind of collateral damage that western democracies will tolerate.
Yet CwF+RtB and providing useful goods and services that people want to pay for will greatly lessen any negative impact piracy can have. We only need to look at a service like Spotify to see how easy it can be. We could've had Spotify ten years ago, yet the music labels were trying to push services that sucked (PressPlay? MusicNet?).
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 4 Mar 2013 @ 12:13pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You'd like to paint all studios and labels the same way, but that's only because you're trying to rationalize behavior.
You'd like to paint all people-who-aren't-paying-the-studios-all-their-money the same way, but that's only because you're trying to rationalize behavior.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 4 Mar 2013 @ 12:03pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
how much of the record labels disappearing revenue since 1999 was from piracy.
Even if we can agree what portion of decline in revenue for the major labels is due to piracy, it still doesn't tell the whole story.
Less revenue is not necessarily a bad thing. If costs to produce/market/distribute are far lower (thanks to the internet), then the return on investment may be greater even with less revenue.
And there is the slice-of-the-pie discussion we've had so many times, yet you have never acknowledged. If you narrowly define where the decline in revenue is occurring (the major labels, responsible for "recorded music"), you miss the tremendous growth of the pie and where all the rest of the money is going.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 28 Feb 2013 @ 12:53pm
Re: Why isn't TechDirt supporting this?
These guys are just glomming on to others hard work and making a buck, just like your heroes at MegaUpload and Big Search.
Actually, they're more like the leeches known as the big legacy record labels. Don't do anything useful, but use lawyers and accountant to take money from the hard work of the artists.
Why aren't you coming up with sophistic arguments to claim that it isn't plagiarism or infringement?
Because what it clearly is, is fraud. And TD doesn't support fraud, nor would most of the regularly commenters... well, except you, maybe. You're the one that likes to spin falsehoods as facts, with monetary gain for you or your pals as a result.
The bigger question is why the copyright cartels aren't going apeship over this. This is an organized group claiming copyright over someone else's stuff and directly taking money out of the cartel's pockets from Youtube's monetization system (which was built for them!).
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 28 Feb 2013 @ 8:44am
Re: So... To all pirates who think 6 Strikes can't work...
a VPN will NOT help you: they're monitoring by both amount and TYPE of traffic, and as I've said torrenting is easily detected.
You have no understanding of how VPNs function. An ISP cannot tell anything about the type or content of data within the encrypted VPN. They cannot tell if it is a WOW patch, a piece of public domain content, or the latest episode of Game of Thrones.
By analyzing the traffic flow, as in the amount, frequency and direction of traffic, they might be able to tell that it is filesharing traffic, but that would be the limit. They cannot tell what file you were sharing, they cannot tell who you are talking to (other than the VPN service).
And there are some things you or the VPN service can do to thwart traffic analysis. One way is to have a constant flow of junk data as padding between you and the VPN to maintain a level flow of traffic in both directions - so instead of the signature of filesharing traffic flow, it looks entirely different. Now, only very few VPNs (for the particularly paranoid) have anything like this, but you can do something similar yourself easily enough. Route both your torrent traffic through it and stream something from Netflix via the VPN at the same time, and you'll change the signature of encrypted filesharing to something unrecognizable.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 28 Feb 2013 @ 8:01am
Re:
Isn't this a voluntary agreement, and not the law?
If it was the law, it would require due process, which this obviously lacks. If it was the law, it would need to be applied uniformly (not just against residential internet accounts).
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 28 Feb 2013 @ 6:57am
Re: Re: Typos and stuff
he insisted that "terrorists" and "foreign governments" were causing "havoc" on the internet, which requires the need for CISPA.
There have ben a number of long running denial of service attacks on mostly US banking sites originated by Iranian groups, which are thought to be funded by the Iranian government. Now, I don't automatically associate Iranian with terrorist, but it is easy for many people to ignore the distinction. And they're pretty standard DDoS attacks, nothing particularly out of the ordinary.
Of course, the point about CISPA stands - there's no need for it even in those cases.
On the post: As Expected, Team Prenda Trying Desperately To Get Out Of Appearing On Monday
Re: arrest warrant
That would resolve the issue of who gets to pay for the transportation and lodging to get them there.
On the post: As Expected, Team Prenda Trying Desperately To Get Out Of Appearing On Monday
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps if Prenda and related entities did not want to be subject to appear before a California court when given 4 business days plus a weekend notice, they shouldn't have started suing people in California.
On the post: As Expected, Team Prenda Trying Desperately To Get Out Of Appearing On Monday
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As proof, I'll just point out that you're the one defending extortionate lying scumbags abusing a legal system for profit.
On the post: As Expected, Team Prenda Trying Desperately To Get Out Of Appearing On Monday
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Continuous and systematic are two words that can easily describe the large numbers of people Prenda and related entities are suing in California.
For example, if Hansemeier and I are in a fender bender in Chicago, I can't sue him in California claiming that his deposition there made him amenable to suit there in an unrelated manner.
Of course you couldn't - because the fender bender occurred in Chicago. However, if he then travels to California and starts putting out statements that you're a horrible driver, I bet you could sue him there for his statements. And since the above mentioned Prenda and related entities have been suing many people in California for years, then the court has jurisdiction over them.
And how is that 2-3 business days notice is reasonable? If you found out on Thursday that you had to be in court several states away on Monday, would you think that was reasonable notice?
The order was issued on March 5, giving them 4 business days plus a weekend, to appear before the court in a case they were all intimately involved with. Any excuse or other hand waving is utter bullshit.
On the post: Aaron Swartz's Partner Accuses DOJ Of Lying, Seizing Evidence Without A Warrant & Withholding Exculpatory Evidence
Re:
On the post: Proposed California Bill Would Require Sites To Hand Over Private Info On Kids To Their Parents
Re:
The internet is communication and socialization with others. Did your parents have the power to completely prevent you from talking with your friends? Did your parents have the ability to monitor nearly everything you did and said to them?
As someone who grew up just as this internet thing was catching on, who was shy and somewhat of an outcast in high school, and found good lifelong friends online when I had few to relate to me in "real life", I am horrified that you cannot see how this can be a very bad thing to some children that may need the ability to socialize with others that understand them the most.
On the post: Prenda Law Issues Subpoena For IP Addresses Of Every Visitor To Critic Blogs For The Past Two Years
Re:
It's not a good way to identify people they want to sue, but it would be an excellent way to figure out what IPs to try to intimidate.
As far as intimidating random people based only on the flimsiest of IP address information, they are quite experienced.
On the post: Latest Prenda Filing: John Steele Knows Who Alan Cooper Is, But Won't Say, Plus Almost 300 Pages Of Tap Dancing Around Important Questions
Re:
You'd need the Mongol Horde to cut through it.
On the post: Our Turn To Get Bizarre Legal Threats From Global Wildlife Foundation
Oh boy. That sounds familiar.
On the post: The Insanity Of Making A 'Wizard Of Oz' Film In Today's IP Climate
Re: Again, if hampers duplicating crap, what's the down side?
A key concept in innovation is doing something new, better, or more efficiently.
Having graphic artists redoing a dwarf's hair is not efficient. They could be working on some awesome special effects shot or working on a better movie.
Having lawyers sit around a movie set to nix director decisions is not efficient. The lawyers could be more efficient by, oh, dying at the bottom of the ocean or something.
On the post: Prenda Law Showdown Happening Monday: Judge Orders Everyone To Show Up In Court
Re: Re: Judge Otis Wright is merely giving guidance
That seems ever more unlikely for Gibbs, probably Steele, and the rest.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nothing will completely stop piracy without the kind of collateral damage that western democracies will tolerate.
Yet CwF+RtB and providing useful goods and services that people want to pay for will greatly lessen any negative impact piracy can have. We only need to look at a service like Spotify to see how easy it can be. We could've had Spotify ten years ago, yet the music labels were trying to push services that sucked (PressPlay? MusicNet?).
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You'd like to paint all people-who-aren't-paying-the-studios-all-their-money the same way, but that's only because you're trying to rationalize behavior.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Even if we can agree what portion of decline in revenue for the major labels is due to piracy, it still doesn't tell the whole story.
Less revenue is not necessarily a bad thing. If costs to produce/market/distribute are far lower (thanks to the internet), then the return on investment may be greater even with less revenue.
And there is the slice-of-the-pie discussion we've had so many times, yet you have never acknowledged. If you narrowly define where the decline in revenue is occurring (the major labels, responsible for "recorded music"), you miss the tremendous growth of the pie and where all the rest of the money is going.
On the post: Prenda Law Sues Critics For Defamation
Re:
The whole point of their "business" model is that they never have to win in court.
They only have to threaten someone enough to get them to send money.
And they have done this quite well, at least until people started speaking out and fighting.
On the post: YouTube's ContentID Trolls: Claim Copyright On Lots Of Gameplay Videos, Hope No One Complains, Collect Free Money [Updated]
Re: Why isn't TechDirt supporting this?
Actually, they're more like the leeches known as the big legacy record labels. Don't do anything useful, but use lawyers and accountant to take money from the hard work of the artists.
Why aren't you coming up with sophistic arguments to claim that it isn't plagiarism or infringement?
Because what it clearly is, is fraud. And TD doesn't support fraud, nor would most of the regularly commenters... well, except you, maybe. You're the one that likes to spin falsehoods as facts, with monetary gain for you or your pals as a result.
The bigger question is why the copyright cartels aren't going apeship over this. This is an organized group claiming copyright over someone else's stuff and directly taking money out of the cartel's pockets from Youtube's monetization system (which was built for them!).
On the post: Comcast: We Won't Terminate Your Account Under Six Strikes; We'll Just Block Every Single Website
Re: Re: Re:
I bounce between optimism, pessimism, and abject cynicism faster than it takes AJ to throw out another ad hom.
On the post: Comcast: We Won't Terminate Your Account Under Six Strikes; We'll Just Block Every Single Website
Re: So... To all pirates who think 6 Strikes can't work...
You have no understanding of how VPNs function. An ISP cannot tell anything about the type or content of data within the encrypted VPN. They cannot tell if it is a WOW patch, a piece of public domain content, or the latest episode of Game of Thrones.
By analyzing the traffic flow, as in the amount, frequency and direction of traffic, they might be able to tell that it is filesharing traffic, but that would be the limit. They cannot tell what file you were sharing, they cannot tell who you are talking to (other than the VPN service).
And there are some things you or the VPN service can do to thwart traffic analysis. One way is to have a constant flow of junk data as padding between you and the VPN to maintain a level flow of traffic in both directions - so instead of the signature of filesharing traffic flow, it looks entirely different. Now, only very few VPNs (for the particularly paranoid) have anything like this, but you can do something similar yourself easily enough. Route both your torrent traffic through it and stream something from Netflix via the VPN at the same time, and you'll change the signature of encrypted filesharing to something unrecognizable.
On the post: Comcast: We Won't Terminate Your Account Under Six Strikes; We'll Just Block Every Single Website
Re:
If it was the law, it would require due process, which this obviously lacks. If it was the law, it would need to be applied uniformly (not just against residential internet accounts).
On the post: The Worst Article You Might Ever Read About 'Cybersecurity'
Re: Re: Typos and stuff
There have ben a number of long running denial of service attacks on mostly US banking sites originated by Iranian groups, which are thought to be funded by the Iranian government. Now, I don't automatically associate Iranian with terrorist, but it is easy for many people to ignore the distinction. And they're pretty standard DDoS attacks, nothing particularly out of the ordinary.
Of course, the point about CISPA stands - there's no need for it even in those cases.
Next >>