Re: First, Mike: Obama promising veto means the fix is in.
Wait. Are you really Mike's evil twin? Because I'm starting to go there. I've got conspiracy theories on my mind so you're either the evil twin, an omega reptilian cat alien, a mouse or a timed out troll that thinks it's found its bridge.
Ah, right, and the sig - perhaps make it, I don't know, shorter like.. The Loop Tour 99 mother fuckers!
No, they're reptilian shape shifting cats that pose as natives. You think our leaders lead? Which ones have cats? Hm? Makes you think twice about mice, doesn't it?
I think part of the point is that it's not truly done over the Internet just yet. It's still "The Internet" for some a vile and evil thing .. than be helpful sometimes. Gee, who would've thunk? For example where are the law enforcement groups source pages for pictures, stories, videos, descriptions etc. that enable the public to assist in much the way was done here? You know, Internet speed, something our leaders have yet to realize (and some certain conglomerates that thieve from the public and yet, somewhat successfully, manage to keep that story turned around). There are people on the Internet. Television channels and shopping malls and Google are simply side shows.
And perhaps the other buried point is that law enforcement treat people differently than their data. They should perhaps not do that quite like they do.
So it's not that nothing has changed so much but that the tools take shape quicker than their effective uptake. Uptake without adequate, if not abundant, knowledge has proved costly enough as it is. There are too few people speaking to people and usually those speaking to the leadership people are few and well financed. Business "people" voices should never be louder than the one standing next door and the one standing next door will prove much more effective when tracking down people that harm other people. We.
" This is about fears of internet-organized insurrection. "
As illustrated by the Occupy movement monitoring via corporate and government coordination?
It would seem the government is going after a financial transaction model for any/all Internet communications.
There is an undercurrent here that is not yet clear. It may be that the government does indeed fear the governed and as such getting at their electronic movements without any degree of culpability, for any party, is a leg up for "authority". The problem seems to me that that is not, nor could it ever be, truly, constitutional. This is a fairly clear corporate & government mesh that attempts to cleanly and irrevocably grant that combined authority a free pass. Question it.
If a patriot feels compelled to act are they not terrorists? Only the patriot knows for certain. The fearful ones contrive and manipulate the text but the story remains the same. It is not a shame as such as the inevitability of terrorism, from the perspective of history, breeds itself and when justice becomes a twisted manifestation of contrived law in the quest for a prescriptive order then there will be terror. And it's highly likely that initial violence will be instigated by your own FBI.
Senator Feinstein is a product of her constituency and a wholly inadequate two-party system. One of those things will ultimately be responsible and found at the root of a collapse of regime.
Complacency will eventually breed a brutal and oppressive existence. If our elected leaders do not wake up then who will fulfill their obligations? Terrorists and patriots.
The problem is not terminology. The solution will likely not be lawful. The tree will be refreshed.
Let's hope that this moves quickly through the consideration phase and into the implementation phases.
Copyright, in even causing the smallest of harms, should harm none. Harm is not the domain of privilege. Many would consider themselves and others harmed. South Korea, a country, seems to be willing to speak out against that harm. I wonder why that is.
No, dumbass, he was mentally harvesting ideas, that, alas, can not, today, come to fruition by illustrating the archaic impact of yesterday's copyright on today's possibilities.
Why do some of you feel the need to be so blatantly and willfully ignorant?
person: "We can BUILD IT."
lawyer: "Umm, no, sorry, no you can't. You need permission."
person: "From whom?"
lawyer: "Everyone, as well as the permission of those that represent everyone."
person: "God?"
lawyer: "No, I'm afraid that God has been forced to sign a non-compete agreement, in absentia mind you but signed nonetheless."
person: "How do I innovate."
lawyer: "Do you see that large box over there? If you get into that and shut the lid then I'm sure something will come to you."
The box will disintegrate in the rain. Bring the rain.
Those outliers are on a direct trajectory towards becoming the SOP of normal policing activities by the very organizations that exist to serve and protect, in the name of the Constitution, the very people that finance their existence.
His question stands.
Copyright, a privilege, as intended in Article 1, is rapidly creating conflict in direct confrontation to enumerated rights.
If only that were true as then we'd have a truly tangible issue. As it is copyright is stifling our children, potentially criminalizing their actions and continuing to limit and force their exposure to "entertainment" through "controllable" and "licensed" platforms whose primary purpose in existing is force feeding them advertising for profit and story lines manipulated for propaganda.
I'd venture that copyright is, in fact, harming our children, their futures and as such our potential as a race.
If we truly want progress we should limit the present reach and direction of copyrights in a meaningful and powerful way.
A bunch of folks gathering up all the copyrights they can combined with all they've acquired along the way in order to squeeze every last penny out of them for an eternity - that's what copyright maximalism represents, that's what it has become, that is what it strives for - self engorgement and self preservation.
Everyone here save the fringe duly and truly respects and appreciates an artist, however, a strong-armed, overly bearing "representative" body is something that has all but run its course and I will strike down upon thee with ... wait.. sorry, something about cats.
Ah. Well, then I guess if I were a woodchuck I would chuck the MPAA because I can't chuck wood anyway, which is good. A good chucking woodchuck that chucks good always chucks what sucks as any good chucker would, as they should, which is good.
Thanks for clarifying. It is no wonder they're so misunderstood. The MPAA that is, not woodchucks and not trees though it does seem the MPAA are good upchuckers. Their vomit is vile.
On the post: CISPA Sponsor Claims Opposition Is '14 Year Olds In Their Basement'
Re: First, Mike: Obama promising veto means the fix is in.
Ah, right, and the sig - perhaps make it, I don't know, shorter like.. The Loop Tour 99 mother fuckers!
On the post: CISPA Sponsor Claims Opposition Is '14 Year Olds In Their Basement'
Re: Re:
On the post: Police Search For Mugger For 3 Weeks, Internet Finds Him In An Hour
Re: Re: Re:
And perhaps the other buried point is that law enforcement treat people differently than their data. They should perhaps not do that quite like they do.
So it's not that nothing has changed so much but that the tools take shape quicker than their effective uptake. Uptake without adequate, if not abundant, knowledge has proved costly enough as it is. There are too few people speaking to people and usually those speaking to the leadership people are few and well financed. Business "people" voices should never be louder than the one standing next door and the one standing next door will prove much more effective when tracking down people that harm other people. We.
On the post: Broadcast Treaty Is Baaaaaack: Plan To Create Yet Another Copyright-Like Right For Hollywood
Re:
On the post: The Law Should Never Be Secret, So Why Will CISPA Debate Be Secret?
Re: Encryption now.
As illustrated by the Occupy movement monitoring via corporate and government coordination?
It would seem the government is going after a financial transaction model for any/all Internet communications.
There is an undercurrent here that is not yet clear. It may be that the government does indeed fear the governed and as such getting at their electronic movements without any degree of culpability, for any party, is a leg up for "authority". The problem seems to me that that is not, nor could it ever be, truly, constitutional. This is a fairly clear corporate & government mesh that attempts to cleanly and irrevocably grant that combined authority a free pass. Question it.
Encryption. +1
On the post: Sen. Feinstein Says Congress 'Ready To Take Action' To Rein In Violent Video Games
Re: Re: Re:
Senator Feinstein is a product of her constituency and a wholly inadequate two-party system. One of those things will ultimately be responsible and found at the root of a collapse of regime.
Complacency will eventually breed a brutal and oppressive existence. If our elected leaders do not wake up then who will fulfill their obligations? Terrorists and patriots.
The problem is not terminology. The solution will likely not be lawful. The tree will be refreshed.
On the post: Sen. Feinstein Says Congress 'Ready To Take Action' To Rein In Violent Video Games
Re: history repeating?
Legislators are eroding our society.
When war, security and protection supersedes health, liberty and integrity then anything goes.
On the post: Sen. Feinstein Says Congress 'Ready To Take Action' To Rein In Violent Video Games
Re:
^ right about then ^
On the post: Exploring Fair Use And Fair Dealing Around The Globe
On the post: If Your Cable Company Were Honest, This Is What Its Commercial Would Look Like
Re: very funny, fortunately doesn't fit my experience
"Happy" may or may not be the same thing as "knowledgeable consumer perceives good value and exceptional product at a reasonable and justified cost".
On the post: If Your Cable Company Were Honest, This Is What Its Commercial Would Look Like
Re: Funny, but not so true in my case
Then tell us how much you're paying and then compare that info to costs in other, and for some strange fucking reason, better connected countries.
Same provider and I have 5.7 download and 0.97 upload.. 5, 10, 20 and now 35 you say?
On the post: South Korea Considers Dumping Draconian Copyright Law Forced On It By The US
Copyright, in even causing the smallest of harms, should harm none. Harm is not the domain of privilege. Many would consider themselves and others harmed. South Korea, a country, seems to be willing to speak out against that harm. I wonder why that is.
On the post: Taiwan Supreme Court Says Porn Not Covered By Copyright
As small(ish) as the ruling is it is a kink in the armor.
Now we just need to work on a proper interpretation of "for a limited time".
And then "they" can get back to creatin' things. That cow's been milked, time to eat it.
On the post: What's Wrong With This Picture?
Re: Congratulations! FURTHEST stretch yet against copyright!
But, comprehension...? Fuck that.
On the post: What's Wrong With This Picture?
Re: picture matching
Why do some of you feel the need to be so blatantly and willfully ignorant?
person: "We can BUILD IT."
lawyer: "Umm, no, sorry, no you can't. You need permission."
person: "From whom?"
lawyer: "Everyone, as well as the permission of those that represent everyone."
person: "God?"
lawyer: "No, I'm afraid that God has been forced to sign a non-compete agreement, in absentia mind you but signed nonetheless."
person: "How do I innovate."
lawyer: "Do you see that large box over there? If you get into that and shut the lid then I'm sure something will come to you."
The box will disintegrate in the rain. Bring the rain.
On the post: What's Wrong With This Picture?
No cats?
On the post: Leaked! MPAA Talking Points On Copyright Reform: Copyright Is Awesome For Everyone!
Re: Re: .Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
His question stands.
Copyright, a privilege, as intended in Article 1, is rapidly creating conflict in direct confrontation to enumerated rights.
And I see that cunts can be idiots too. Pussy.
On the post: Leaked! MPAA Talking Points On Copyright Reform: Copyright Is Awesome For Everyone!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'd venture that copyright is, in fact, harming our children, their futures and as such our potential as a race.
If we truly want progress we should limit the present reach and direction of copyrights in a meaningful and powerful way.
A bunch of folks gathering up all the copyrights they can combined with all they've acquired along the way in order to squeeze every last penny out of them for an eternity - that's what copyright maximalism represents, that's what it has become, that is what it strives for - self engorgement and self preservation.
Everyone here save the fringe duly and truly respects and appreciates an artist, however, a strong-armed, overly bearing "representative" body is something that has all but run its course and I will strike down upon thee with ... wait.. sorry, something about cats.
On the post: Leaked! MPAA Talking Points On Copyright Reform: Copyright Is Awesome For Everyone!
Re: Re:
Thanks for clarifying. It is no wonder they're so misunderstood. The MPAA that is, not woodchucks and not trees though it does seem the MPAA are good upchuckers. Their vomit is vile.
On the post: Leaked! MPAA Talking Points On Copyright Reform: Copyright Is Awesome For Everyone!
Next >>