E. Zachary Knight (profile), 23 Feb 2012 @ 10:27am
Re:
There you go again on your whole "Godaddy's free speech rights were violated" crap. Their rights were not violated. They were free to continue supporting SOPA if they wanted. They would have just lost some business over it as their customers disagreed with them. They weighed the options and made their choice. They were not forced to do anything. No one is entitled to customers. No one is required to do business with a company they disagree with.
You have a really misguided view of what it means to ask for less regulation. While many of those people asking for it also look at Nationalized education and EPA guidelines as outside the Federal government's Constitutional bounds, those positions are not due to their deregulation philosophy.
May I ask you something, it might be a bit personal? Are you still on dialup? That is the only reason why I can figure that you are having such a hard time rendering this site.
A 0.12 Megabyte image is causing you problems? It takes you nearly a minute to fender the page? What the crap are your pages like? Are they all plain text with gif images?
If the problem is that "content creators" are spending too much time and money on the content and that prevents them from developing good working customer experiences, then that is a problem with the content creator. They are the ones that have their priorities backwards.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:31am
Re: Re: Re: what does jotform do?
They are down for all intents and purposes. Most of the people and businesses using the site legitimately have linked to the .com. Now all those links are broken causing massive user issues that would not have occurred had the site not been seized.
This is a censorship issue. Just because you refuse to see it that way does not mean it is not true.
No, that is a bad example. Any one of the guests could be responsible. Are you truly that dumb?
I think it was a great example. Why? Because it forced you to contradict your original point.
Your original point was that because law enforcement couldn't identify the form creators, it was the site owner's who were guilty. Now you claim that any of the users could have been responsible. Which is it?
No, Public Knowledge did it right. If they only used back up copies as justification, that would be all that the Copyright Office would grant. You would still not be legally able to format shift the movie.
That is a legal grey area. As long as the site does not advocate piracy, they can usually skate by. I know Lifehacker has had a number of posts giving step by step instructions for ripping DVDs, Blurays and jailbreaking electronics.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 15 Feb 2012 @ 11:36am
Re:
A small subset of the populace will. Sure. However, the vast majority of people are more than willing to pay for a product they love from people they love.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 15 Feb 2012 @ 10:20am
Re: Wow....It's just like high school
Figures that you would completely miss the point of the article.
So not liking someone is all it takes to excuse infringement.
Nope. However, not being liked is a sure fire way to fail in business. If people don't like you they won't do business with you. Some people will pirate, that is unfortunate, but that is easy to stop if you would just stop treating your customers/fans as trash.
Mike is more than happy to celebrate the paywalls of people he likes (Louis CK, Kevin Smith) and denigrate the paywalls of people he doesn't.
So you are saying that the iPhone is not a "legitimate services [or] tool"? That is the only conclusion I can come up with based on your comment.
Now the question remains, if those people stopped infringing music copyright as a result of the notices, did that create an equal increase in legitimate sales? That is the true success of HADOPI and similar laws.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 14 Feb 2012 @ 12:02pm
Odd...
I took a look at the site and whatever tech they use to pull the IP address and other information cannot recognize Google Chrome and Mac OS. Can't wait to see how it handles my Linux machine at home.
As for the issue of the seizure, I would really like to see what evidence they had to not only seize the website but also arrest the owners of the site.
On the post: Chris Dodd Extends SOPA 'Olive Branch' To Silicon Valley... And Proceeds To Bash Them Over The Head With It
Re:
On the post: ICE Considered One Of The Worst Places To Work In The Federal Government
On the post: Economist Notices That The US Is Getting Buried Under Costly, Useless Over-Regulation
Re: Too much ideology.
On the post: If You're Going To Compare The Old Music Biz Model With The New Music Biz Model, At Least Make Some Sense
Re:
A 0.12 Megabyte image is causing you problems? It takes you nearly a minute to fender the page? What the crap are your pages like? Are they all plain text with gif images?
On the post: La La La La La: The Internet Routes Around Copyright Censorship To Restore Daria
Re:
On the post: If You're Going To Compare The Old Music Biz Model With The New Music Biz Model, At Least Make Some Sense
Re: Re:
On the post: If You're Going To Compare The Old Music Biz Model With The New Music Biz Model, At Least Make Some Sense
Re:
On the post: DMCA Takedown Service Tells Copyright Companies: 'Adapt Your Business To The New Digital World'
Re:
On the post: Directors Guild Boss Insists That Everyone Against SOPA/PIPA Was Duped
Re:
On the post: US Government 'Suspends' JotForm.com Over User Generated Forms; Censorship Regime Expands
Re: Re: Re: what does jotform do?
This is a censorship issue. Just because you refuse to see it that way does not mean it is not true.
On the post: US Government 'Suspends' JotForm.com Over User Generated Forms; Censorship Regime Expands
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: US Government 'Suspends' JotForm.com Over User Generated Forms; Censorship Regime Expands
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: US Government 'Suspends' JotForm.com Over User Generated Forms; Censorship Regime Expands
Re: Re: Re:
I think it was a great example. Why? Because it forced you to contradict your original point.
Your original point was that because law enforcement couldn't identify the form creators, it was the site owner's who were guilty. Now you claim that any of the users could have been responsible. Which is it?
Think about it. I know it is hard, but THINK.
On the post: MPAA: Ripping DVDs Shouldn't Be Allowed Because It Takes Away Our Ability To Charge You Multiple Times For The Same Content
Re:
On the post: MPAA: Ripping DVDs Shouldn't Be Allowed Because It Takes Away Our Ability To Charge You Multiple Times For The Same Content
Re:
On the post: If People Like You And Your Work They'll Pay; If They Like Your Work, But Don't Like You, They'll Infringe
Re:
On the post: If People Like You And Your Work They'll Pay; If They Like Your Work, But Don't Like You, They'll Infringe
Re: Wow....It's just like high school
So not liking someone is all it takes to excuse infringement.
Nope. However, not being liked is a sure fire way to fail in business. If people don't like you they won't do business with you. Some people will pirate, that is unfortunate, but that is easy to stop if you would just stop treating your customers/fans as trash.
Mike is more than happy to celebrate the paywalls of people he likes (Louis CK, Kevin Smith) and denigrate the paywalls of people he doesn't.
Sure, if you have no idea what a paywall is.
On the post: Hadopi Sends Info On Those Accused (Not Convicted) Of Repeat Infringement On To Prosecutors
Re:
Now the question remains, if those people stopped infringing music copyright as a result of the notices, did that create an equal increase in legitimate sales? That is the true success of HADOPI and similar laws.
On the post: UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
Odd...
As for the issue of the seizure, I would really like to see what evidence they had to not only seize the website but also arrest the owners of the site.
On the post: UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
Re:
Next >>