You know what? It is desperation. Desperation and anger.
Desperation and anger at a seriously fucked up legal system. Desperation and anger at a seriously disfunctional political system. Desperation and anger that these system are used by the rich and powerful to prey on those without power. Desperation and anger that those without power have no recourse.
And yet, the powerless aren't completely powerless. They have the numbers. And at some point, enough of them will realize that they aren't powerless. And when that desperation and anger bubble over, the results will not be pretty.
You think I'm some anarchist pirate. I don't want anarchy. I don't want society to break down and collapse. I don't want the inevitable chaos and destruction that revolution brings. But it will if we stay on this path. This country isn't immune to the same forces that have brought down other empires and civilizations.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Feb 2013 @ 12:22pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just wow...
No way this "ruins" his life. Sounds dramatic when you say it, though.
It is dramatic. Have you looked at how this country treats felons? Want to be employed by most companies? Not likely. Want to start a company and need funding - you don't think they'll be doing background checks?
And he was a political activist. Check out how many states don't let felons vote after they've "served their debt to society." How many political organizations would want to work with him after that? Meetings with lawmakers or policy wonks?
He dodged similar charges in 2008.
Dodged, as in - he did nothing wrong.
He knew what he was doing, and did it anyway.
Of course he knew what he was doing. He was doing nothing wrong. He knew he was allowed to connect to the MIT network (everyone is). He knew those on the MIT network could access the journals. Not seeing where he did anything wrong. I fail to see where he did anything wrong. Oh, he went into a wiring closet - yet he wasn't charged with trespassing, so I guess that wasn't wrong or enough for anyone to get worked up about, either.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Feb 2013 @ 11:53am
Re:
Just two hours ago, it was Google pulling Mike's strings. Now it's Fox News? You can't even keep your propaganda straight over the course of a day anymore. You're amazingly bad at this, ya know? Maybe find some different work.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Feb 2013 @ 8:04am
Re:
He's taking parts of the original comics and putting them in real life scenes. If he's not actaully taking the existing images, then he's recreating parts of the original images in exacting detail. The first is a classic (although I don't remember the umbrella in the various wagon scenes), and the second is directly off the cover of one of the books.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Feb 2013 @ 6:31am
Permission Culture
So again, we have a promising artist creating new content that tried to do the "right" thing and ask for permission. What did it get him? Shut down. Silenced. Censored. By copyright.
The lesson?
Don't ask for permission to create art. Don't apologize for creating something new and beautiful. Just do it.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Feb 2013 @ 6:08am
Re: Re:
How can they unilaterally change the conditions of my contract and force me to continue doing business with them if I don't want to pay to end my contract?
While they can unilaterally change the conditions of the contract (because they put a clause in the original contract that you agreed to that lets them), you may not be stuck doing business with them. If they have made a material (significant) change of the contract, you most likely will be able to get out of it without fees if you push back.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Feb 2013 @ 5:52am
Re:
is it not journalistically prudent to print both sides of a story?
It is prudent to critically analyze all sides of a story, to tell the truth as best as you can in a way your readers will understand.
By always printing both sides of a story, and giving them equal time, one thing you can run the risk of is giving a sense of false balance - that is, that there is an actual controversy, rather than one or more of the sides being completely flat out crazy, or as in this case "unambiguously delusional." Or in a story with more than 2 sides, or highly nuanced issues, if you lump everyone into 2 categories, pro/con or left/right or Republican/Democrat, you lose that nuance.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 Feb 2013 @ 12:33pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What difference does it make that individual reports were copyrighted make?
Google can index the entire web, even though many of the pages are copyrighted, and they can do whatever they want with their index. Google can digitize every book (copyrighted or not) they can get their scanner on, and use the data to spit out results showing how the overall use of language changes over the decades/centuries without having to worry an iota about copyright.
We don't know what Aaron ultimately was going to do with the data he downloaded and that is tragic.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 Feb 2013 @ 11:32am
Re: Re: Re:
So you are saying that a database cannot be protected by copyright if it only contains facts? Interesting. How about a math book?
I'm saying the facts in the database (or math book) cannot be copyrighted. There may be elements of either that are able to be copyrighted, perhaps the code used to generate a specific report from the database, or the layout of the math problems, but the facts cannot be.
For example, if Aaron was to have gotten access to a database, and used his own knowledge of coding to generate a report that the makers of the database did not perform or anticipate, he could've done whatever he wanted with that report.
If I have misunderstood some facet of why that would be illegal, please point it out to me.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 Feb 2013 @ 10:07am
Re:
I doubt he could "buy" (as in own the rights) to databases. What he was talking about was subscribing and then downloading and distributing which violate both the law and TOS.
You cannot copyright facts.
If the database contains facts, and he distributes the facts contained within it instead of the entire database, he would not have broken the law. And a TOS is not the law, either.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 22 Feb 2013 @ 6:48am
Re: Re:
In 1790 life expectancy was slightly over 35 years old, thus 28 year copyright was thought to cover the majority of a person's lifespan.
Even if that was the case (its not, as a previous poster brought up infant mortality), how does that idea line up with copyright now lasting the entire life of the author plus 70 years beyond that?
Life + 70 guarantees that a creator will be able to pass along the rewards of their creative endeavors to at least one heir, and for at least the length of an average lifetime.
My father is a teacher. He needs to be extremely creative to be effective at his job. If he dies, should the school be obligated to keep paying his estate (me and my sister) for 70 years? My father should be guaranteed to be able to pass along the rewards of his creative endeavors to his heirs, right?
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 21 Feb 2013 @ 12:25pm
Re: Re: Oh man...
Renewed your Insider Chat subscription? So, you can point to how you gladly pay for content and services that you value, while they hang around on TD for free. Bunch of free-riders, who only want things for free, I say.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 21 Feb 2013 @ 10:16am
Re: Re: Re:
In addition, why would Google spend money on dying companies that have repeatedly shown they cannot adapt and are inherently anti-customer? If they did want to be in the entertainment business, they could build something better and spend less doing so.
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just wow...
Desperation and anger at a seriously fucked up legal system. Desperation and anger at a seriously disfunctional political system. Desperation and anger that these system are used by the rich and powerful to prey on those without power. Desperation and anger that those without power have no recourse.
And yet, the powerless aren't completely powerless. They have the numbers. And at some point, enough of them will realize that they aren't powerless. And when that desperation and anger bubble over, the results will not be pretty.
You think I'm some anarchist pirate. I don't want anarchy. I don't want society to break down and collapse. I don't want the inevitable chaos and destruction that revolution brings. But it will if we stay on this path. This country isn't immune to the same forces that have brought down other empires and civilizations.
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just wow...
It is dramatic. Have you looked at how this country treats felons? Want to be employed by most companies? Not likely. Want to start a company and need funding - you don't think they'll be doing background checks?
And he was a political activist. Check out how many states don't let felons vote after they've "served their debt to society." How many political organizations would want to work with him after that? Meetings with lawmakers or policy wonks?
He dodged similar charges in 2008.
Dodged, as in - he did nothing wrong.
He knew what he was doing, and did it anyway.
Of course he knew what he was doing. He was doing nothing wrong. He knew he was allowed to connect to the MIT network (everyone is). He knew those on the MIT network could access the journals. Not seeing where he did anything wrong. I fail to see where he did anything wrong. Oh, he went into a wiring closet - yet he wasn't charged with trespassing, so I guess that wasn't wrong or enough for anyone to get worked up about, either.
On the post: Why Does The Entertainment Industry Insist That It Can Veto Any Innovation It Doesn't Like?
Re:
On the post: Indian Music Industry Exec Says The Unthinkable: 'Internet Piracy Is A Good Thing'
Re: Re: Re: You missed the "in some ways".
On the post: French Politicians Worry That Free Creative Commons Works Devalue 'Legal' Offers
Re: Re:
That's because you lack paradox absorbing crumple zones.
On the post: Copyright Strikes Again: 'Real Calvin And Hobbes' Shut Down By Copyright Claim
Re:
On the post: Copyright Strikes Again: 'Real Calvin And Hobbes' Shut Down By Copyright Claim
Re:
On the post: Copyright Strikes Again: 'Real Calvin And Hobbes' Shut Down By Copyright Claim
Permission Culture
The lesson?
Don't ask for permission to create art. Don't apologize for creating something new and beautiful. Just do it.
On the post: NJ Gubenatorial Candidate Speaks Out Against Six Strikes: ISP Shouldn't Decide What You Can Download
Re: Re:
While they can unilaterally change the conditions of the contract (because they put a clause in the original contract that you agreed to that lets them), you may not be stuck doing business with them. If they have made a material (significant) change of the contract, you most likely will be able to get out of it without fees if you push back.
On the post: Journalists Have No Obligation To Cover A Story About You The Way You Want Them To Cover It
Re:
It is prudent to critically analyze all sides of a story, to tell the truth as best as you can in a way your readers will understand.
By always printing both sides of a story, and giving them equal time, one thing you can run the risk of is giving a sense of false balance - that is, that there is an actual controversy, rather than one or more of the sides being completely flat out crazy, or as in this case "unambiguously delusional." Or in a story with more than 2 sides, or highly nuanced issues, if you lump everyone into 2 categories, pro/con or left/right or Republican/Democrat, you lose that nuance.
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Google can index the entire web, even though many of the pages are copyrighted, and they can do whatever they want with their index. Google can digitize every book (copyrighted or not) they can get their scanner on, and use the data to spit out results showing how the overall use of language changes over the decades/centuries without having to worry an iota about copyright.
We don't know what Aaron ultimately was going to do with the data he downloaded and that is tragic.
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Re:
I'm saying the facts in the database (or math book) cannot be copyrighted. There may be elements of either that are able to be copyrighted, perhaps the code used to generate a specific report from the database, or the layout of the math problems, but the facts cannot be.
For example, if Aaron was to have gotten access to a database, and used his own knowledge of coding to generate a report that the makers of the database did not perform or anticipate, he could've done whatever he wanted with that report.
If I have misunderstood some facet of why that would be illegal, please point it out to me.
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re:
You cannot copyright facts.
If the database contains facts, and he distributes the facts contained within it instead of the entire database, he would not have broken the law. And a TOS is not the law, either.
On the post: Satan Finally Reveals Himself As A Legal Employer
Re: Confused...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_demon
Then again, the Christian God (Jehovah) is pretty far from benevolent.
On the post: New Hampshire Politicians Want To Make 'Satellite View' On Maps A Criminal Offense
Re: Re: Man-made objects
Well, at least crop circles are ok, then.
:insert picture of crazy haired History channel alien guy:
On the post: To Argue That 'Copyright And The First Amendment Coexisted For 200 Years' Is To Ignore Reality
Re: Re:
Even if that was the case (its not, as a previous poster brought up infant mortality), how does that idea line up with copyright now lasting the entire life of the author plus 70 years beyond that?
Life + 70 guarantees that a creator will be able to pass along the rewards of their creative endeavors to at least one heir, and for at least the length of an average lifetime.
My father is a teacher. He needs to be extremely creative to be effective at his job. If he dies, should the school be obligated to keep paying his estate (me and my sister) for 70 years? My father should be guaranteed to be able to pass along the rewards of his creative endeavors to his heirs, right?
On the post: To Argue That 'Copyright And The First Amendment Coexisted For 200 Years' Is To Ignore Reality
I understand it, yet I'm still going to click the report button because your post is off topic and full of ineffective (and bizarre) trolling.
On the post: To Argue That 'Copyright And The First Amendment Coexisted For 200 Years' Is To Ignore Reality
Re: Re: Oh man...
On the post: To Argue That 'Copyright And The First Amendment Coexisted For 200 Years' Is To Ignore Reality
Re: Re: Oh man...
That no one seems to have one tells us quite a lot. Sure, there are still some gaps, but those shrink as more data comes in.
On the post: RIAA: Google Isn't Trying Hard Enough To Make Piracy Disappear From The Internet
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>