I am not convinced that they do know how to read. The blind, deaf, and dumb approach seems to be their only counter to the backlash they are receiving. Their responses are nothing more that regurgitated word vomit from the MAFIAA types. They are no better than those critters we pay to represent us at the federal level.
Well that is silly. This Super Bowl was a regurgitated vomit of 2008. The only reason the TV was on was to watch the commercials while I made sweet potato fries in the oven. I fast forwarded through the game.
Re: Response to: Androgynous Cowherd on Feb 5th, 2012 @ 12:21pm
Since the game is live timezones are un-important. Just send them an e-mail 30 minutes prior to the start of said "Super Bowl". Thats right I said it. The NFL is not Voldemort....... oh shit.
Parents both Lawyers at two different firms. One had 10 lawyers the other had about 50. Ive talked to them, and I have over heard things that I wasn't supposed to. I don't trust lawyers at all. (including my parents)
This is why we need Wikileaks and other services like them. I want every communication between Washington DC and Embassies abroad that have to do with ACTA in any way shape or form. I want to know what was said, and who said it. The only way to end this kind of public usurping is to bring these backdoor deals into the light and let the people see what they are doing. If its casts a bad light on us then so be it. We shouldn't have been doing it in the first place.
When forcing a law on your people uou need to make sure that you have a good majority of them in agreement with you, or that can be subdued with double talk and politicking. Otherwise (and more importantly) you need to remember that the public outnumbers you.
Always go the Nazi route and burn them all in large bonfires. At least with an e-book its synced to some underground server so I can download the book later after the fireman torch my kindle.
Here is a letter from another one: From Mark Amodei (R)-NC
Thank you for contacting me about your opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act (H.R. 3261), commonly known as SOPA. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Internet piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods amount to the pick-pocketing of American businesses, to the tune of $100 billion annually. This translates to millions of American jobs lost or threatened at a time of double-digit unemployment. Nevada-based IGT, the industry's leading manufacturer of gaming machines, sees its technology routinely looted by Chinese criminals. Such theft endangers the livelihood of thousands of our neighbors. While I am not inclined to turn to regulation as the solution to every problem, I will not sit idly by when American jobs—including thousands in Nevada—are threatened by foreign pirates.
H.R. 3261 would prevent foreign criminals from profiting off their theft of America's intellectual property. To be clear, the bill only pertains to foreign websites that are based overseas or are foreign-owned or operated, i.e., only those websites not reached by current U.S. law. Therefore, the bill does not apply to Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, eBay, YouTube, personal blogs, e-retailers based in this country, or other popular domestic websites. Those sites would continue to be governed by existing law.
It would empower the U.S. Attorney General to seek injunctions in court against foreign websites whose primary purpose is trafficking in counterfeit goods and services and pirated, U.S. copyrighted content. Persons or companies victimized by such foreign websites would be able to seek court injunctions, but not monetary damages.
With respect to the injunctions, courts could order search engines to refrain from linking to the infringing portions of offending foreign websites and/or order third-party payment processors or advertisers doing business with that site to terminate the business relationship. Such remedies may only be ordered after full evidentiary hearings that meet the legal standards and the burdens of evidence applied in all federal cases requesting injunctions.
A prior provision that would have required Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to the infringing portion of a site—an action ISPs already use to block access to child pornography sites, malware, spyware, and viruses—has subsequently been removed from the legislation.
I would never support any piece of legislation that intentionally undermines the First Amendment and the founding documents of our Republic, which "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." This bill targets only illegal conduct that violates the protected expression of Americans, not protected speech itself, and would only curb such illegal conduct through due process in courts of law.
Since it was referred in October to the House Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member, my colleagues and I have worked in a bipartisan manner with the intellectual property industry to refine the legislation in order to best protect American businesses, workers, and consumers, while eliminating unintended consequences. Based on these efforts, I have come to believe that it is possible to target foreign criminal websites and preserve the freedom of expression and enterprise that makes the Web the social and economic engine of our time. The recent manager’s amendment to the legislation, along with the decision to remove the controversial Domain Name System blocking provision, significantly narrows the scope and impact of the bill, reflects collaboration with the entire spectrum of parties, and has increased industry support, while ensuring the protection of American innovation and jobs.
I appreciate your concerns and will keep them in mind as we continue to work on this issue. Please be assured that I will support any well-founded changes to such legislation as the process continues.
I appreciate the fact that you have taken the time to apprise me of your opinions and hope that you will contact me again should you have any further comments or concerns. If you would like additional information on my activities in the House, please visit my website, www.Amodei.house.gov or also at facebook.com/MarkAmodeiNV2.
In closing, please know that I consider it a privilege to serve and represent you and your family in Congress
On the post: 70 Groups Tell Congress To Put The Brakes On Any Further Efforts To Expand Intellectual Property
Re: Listen up, union leaders!
On the post: The NFL Issues Takedown For Chrysler Super Bowl Commercial
Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Response to: Androgynous Cowherd on Feb 5th, 2012 @ 12:21pm
On the post: ICE Seizes 300 More Sites; Can't Have People Watching Super Bowl Ads Without Permission
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Beach Boys Lyricist Goes After Artist Who Dared To Paint Works Inspired By Beach Boy Songs
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawyers like to support...
On the post: Poland Prime Minister Suspends Any Effort To Ratify ACTA; May Kill ACTA In The EU
Re: Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphynx_(cat)
I could totally see either of them sitting in their offices with one of these cats.
On the post: Poland Prime Minister Suspends Any Effort To Ratify ACTA; May Kill ACTA In The EU
On the post: Watch Out: Widespread Protests Against ACTA Spreading Across Europe
Government leaders listen up
On the post: ICE Seizes 300 More Sites; Can't Have People Watching Super Bowl Ads Without Permission
Re: Re:
On the post: Beach Boys Lyricist Goes After Artist Who Dared To Paint Works Inspired By Beach Boy Songs
Re: Re: Lawyers like to support...
On the post: Homeland Security Denies Entrance To UK Tourist Because Of Twitter Joke
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The really scary part
On the post: Hollywood Gets To Party With TPP Negotiators; Public Interest Groups Get Thrown Out Of Hotel
Re:
On the post: Hollywood Gets To Party With TPP Negotiators; Public Interest Groups Get Thrown Out Of Hotel
Re: Re: Despicable
On the post: Warner Bros. Just Keeps Pushing People To Piracy; New Deal Also Delays Queuing
Re:
On the post: Author Jonathan Franzen Thinks That Ebooks Mean The World Will No Longer Work
Re:
On the post: Author Jonathan Franzen Thinks That Ebooks Mean The World Will No Longer Work
Re: Re: GAH!!!!
We burn and cut the rain forests so we can get oil, expand farm land cause we need to have strawberries in december, and we really like imported beef.
On the post: Author Jonathan Franzen Thinks That Ebooks Mean The World Will No Longer Work
Re: Re:
On the post: The SOPA/PIPA Protests Were Not Pro-Piracy... They Were Anti-Crony Capitalism
Re: Re: Oh come on-- they were just pro-other cronies
On the post: The SOPA/PIPA Protests Were Not Pro-Piracy... They Were Anti-Crony Capitalism
Re: Oh come on-- they were just pro-other cronies
Here is a letter from another one: From Mark Amodei (R)-NC
Thank you for contacting me about your opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act (H.R. 3261), commonly known as SOPA. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Internet piracy and the sale of counterfeit goods amount to the pick-pocketing of American businesses, to the tune of $100 billion annually. This translates to millions of American jobs lost or threatened at a time of double-digit unemployment. Nevada-based IGT, the industry's leading manufacturer of gaming machines, sees its technology routinely looted by Chinese criminals. Such theft endangers the livelihood of thousands of our neighbors. While I am not inclined to turn to regulation as the solution to every problem, I will not sit idly by when American jobs—including thousands in Nevada—are threatened by foreign pirates.
H.R. 3261 would prevent foreign criminals from profiting off their theft of America's intellectual property. To be clear, the bill only pertains to foreign websites that are based overseas or are foreign-owned or operated, i.e., only those websites not reached by current U.S. law. Therefore, the bill does not apply to Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, eBay, YouTube, personal blogs, e-retailers based in this country, or other popular domestic websites. Those sites would continue to be governed by existing law.
It would empower the U.S. Attorney General to seek injunctions in court against foreign websites whose primary purpose is trafficking in counterfeit goods and services and pirated, U.S. copyrighted content. Persons or companies victimized by such foreign websites would be able to seek court injunctions, but not monetary damages.
With respect to the injunctions, courts could order search engines to refrain from linking to the infringing portions of offending foreign websites and/or order third-party payment processors or advertisers doing business with that site to terminate the business relationship. Such remedies may only be ordered after full evidentiary hearings that meet the legal standards and the burdens of evidence applied in all federal cases requesting injunctions.
A prior provision that would have required Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to the infringing portion of a site—an action ISPs already use to block access to child pornography sites, malware, spyware, and viruses—has subsequently been removed from the legislation.
I would never support any piece of legislation that intentionally undermines the First Amendment and the founding documents of our Republic, which "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." This bill targets only illegal conduct that violates the protected expression of Americans, not protected speech itself, and would only curb such illegal conduct through due process in courts of law.
Since it was referred in October to the House Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member, my colleagues and I have worked in a bipartisan manner with the intellectual property industry to refine the legislation in order to best protect American businesses, workers, and consumers, while eliminating unintended consequences. Based on these efforts, I have come to believe that it is possible to target foreign criminal websites and preserve the freedom of expression and enterprise that makes the Web the social and economic engine of our time. The recent manager’s amendment to the legislation, along with the decision to remove the controversial Domain Name System blocking provision, significantly narrows the scope and impact of the bill, reflects collaboration with the entire spectrum of parties, and has increased industry support, while ensuring the protection of American innovation and jobs.
I appreciate your concerns and will keep them in mind as we continue to work on this issue. Please be assured that I will support any well-founded changes to such legislation as the process continues.
I appreciate the fact that you have taken the time to apprise me of your opinions and hope that you will contact me again should you have any further comments or concerns. If you would like additional information on my activities in the House, please visit my website, www.Amodei.house.gov or also at facebook.com/MarkAmodeiNV2.
In closing, please know that I consider it a privilege to serve and represent you and your family in Congress
Here is a link to an image of the document.
http://i.imgur.com/VbJlq.jpg
On the post: Can Reddit Write Legislation, Too? Proposes The 'Free Internet Act'
Re: Re:
Next >>