Do you have proof that Paypal will do the due diligence needed to verify if a reported site is indeed breaking their terms of service.
Their track record doesn't speak for them in this case.
Case in point: Wikileaks. And there are countless other users who found their accounts blocked with no way of accessing THEIR own money that was in those accounts.
What do you mean? You mean that they can't offer their media in unencumbered formats, nor can they offer better quality?
The majority of people who download stuff from these pirates would gladly pay for the stuff instead, but because of wrong formats, or DRM, or being burned in the past by rubbish material, they decide to grab it first from a website to see if it's worth their time or if it even works on their machines.
I fear as much, we keep having to educate these people of those principles over and over again, and they keep misreading it, either willfully or unintentionally I won't judge.
We can't move on with the discussion because of them sandbagging us with those ridiculous analogies, that we have to explain again and again that copying isn't the same as stealing. I wish we could move to more productive ways of furthering our culture.
In 50-100 years time, nothing that's created today culturally-wise will still be (fondly) remembered, at least nothing created by the "content industry", whereas the people who do share their media might stand a chance of being remembered.
So, if a tool has been used for illegal or illegit purposes, it makes that whole tool illegal and should just be banned?
I'll have the police confiscate all guns, hammers, ballpoints, axes, icepicks, knives, cars, fists, swords, electricity, etc. Because all those tools have had a connection with illegal use. They have all been used to kill someone, which is illegal, and would make the tool illegal in your view.
The fact that this was one of the first gun-related tragedies in peace-time in Norway since the second world war, means that their gun laws are working.
How many gun-related deaths are there in the US per year?
Tell that to the people who want to ratchet up the security theater. (Like Denmark looking to forbidding the sale of, or making it harder to buy, large amounts of manure)
Tell that to the media conglomerates that were so quick to label this tragedy as a "Jihadist terrorist", even before any news came out as to what the identity of the attacker was.
Sometimes it's necessary to draw the line, even in the face of hardship and bad timings.
I mean I still can't get on Pandora. How long has that service been running?
The music business people doesn't want people to listen to music. Well Fuck Them, and good luck. I'll listen to soma.fm and stations like that, that do welcome my listening ears.
I think you mean that you don't believe any of those studies, because they don't jibe with your view of reality. You only believe the studies that actually agree with your view of reality. And thus confirmation bias was born.
Re: Re: Re: JSTOR is "selling scarcity": isn't that your advice?
Actually, there is a right for you to make a copy.. Maybe not of the entire book, but certainly of pages. I've done this many times for schoolwork. And my country doesn't even have fair use in the lawbooks.
Reasonable, in whose point of view? You mean the laughably ridiculous, frothing-at-the-mouth actions that copyright holders cling to when their precious little intellectual properties are 'stolen'? The frivolous lawsuits clogging up the legal system?
The accusing of 90 year olds of downloading porn?
Of printers alledgedly sharing the latest top40 songs?
Of dead people sharing files over the great celestial information highway?
Of the highway robbery of people who dare to legally purchase the precious little IPs?
Of the unwillingness to see when the world around them has changed?
Of the downright lieing? "copyright infringement is theft and is a criminal matter." or "piracy costs us a gazillion trillion dollars. Each download is directly attributable to a lost sale."
Of the "think of the artists" excuse that gets trotted out every few hundred meters, while in the meantime, even the artists get shafted?
You mean those reasonable actions?
Maybe, what Aaron Swartz has done was wrong, but the crime was not copyright infringement, because he was legally allowed to make said copies (there was a license in place), and he hadn't distributed them yet. Also there was no intent to make money with these files. Often the infringement is not to make money, but to share knowledge, information, entertainment. "Hey you guys, I like this band, you should listen to it, totally!"
But you don't dare to see that side of the conversation, because it doesn't fit with your narrative.
It's amazing that these organisations are so much behind the times. Indeed we welcome the AP to the 90s. In about 18 years, they'll (re)discover youtube and twitter.
Return what exactly?
The digital copies he made of those documents that were still in JSTOR's actual possession? And how did he do that?
And why should he need to pledge not to release the purloined material if he had to "hand it over"?
Also care to elaborate on his 'history of this kind of behaviour', preferably with links to the sources instead of just hear-say and anecdotes.
I sometimes skulk in the hallways here at work too, and act a little bit weird, it's because otherwise the day would be dull.
I also keep my eyes on security cameras, because I wanna know where they are, not to be a criminal, but I'd like to know when I'm being watched.
I also sometimes try to figure out if I can hide from them, does that make me a criminal immediately? No.
Sure, hiding your laptop in a closet is weird, but nothing illegal per se.
And yes, downloading that many documents might be against the terms of service of JSTOR, but all that combined still does not warrant a 35 year prison sentence. Especially after JSTOR made it clear that it didn't want the state to prosecute this matter any further.
In the case of large amounts of drugs, yes. But in this case, where exactly is the intent. And besides all that, if the documents are already available on the website of JSTOR for free download, then what's the (financial) harm?
On the post: PayPal Agrees To Help IFPI Cut Off Funding For Sites IFPI Doesn't Like Without Judicial Oversight
Re:
Their track record doesn't speak for them in this case.
Case in point: Wikileaks. And there are countless other users who found their accounts blocked with no way of accessing THEIR own money that was in those accounts.
On the post: PayPal Agrees To Help IFPI Cut Off Funding For Sites IFPI Doesn't Like Without Judicial Oversight
Re: Re:
The majority of people who download stuff from these pirates would gladly pay for the stuff instead, but because of wrong formats, or DRM, or being burned in the past by rubbish material, they decide to grab it first from a website to see if it's worth their time or if it even works on their machines.
On the post: PayPal Agrees To Help IFPI Cut Off Funding For Sites IFPI Doesn't Like Without Judicial Oversight
Re: Re: Re:
We can't move on with the discussion because of them sandbagging us with those ridiculous analogies, that we have to explain again and again that copying isn't the same as stealing. I wish we could move to more productive ways of furthering our culture.
In 50-100 years time, nothing that's created today culturally-wise will still be (fondly) remembered, at least nothing created by the "content industry", whereas the people who do share their media might stand a chance of being remembered.
On the post: PayPal Agrees To Help IFPI Cut Off Funding For Sites IFPI Doesn't Like Without Judicial Oversight
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: PayPal Agrees To Help IFPI Cut Off Funding For Sites IFPI Doesn't Like Without Judicial Oversight
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'll have the police confiscate all guns, hammers, ballpoints, axes, icepicks, knives, cars, fists, swords, electricity, etc. Because all those tools have had a connection with illegal use. They have all been used to kill someone, which is illegal, and would make the tool illegal in your view.
On the post: Looking At Security Theater Through The Lens Of The Utøya Massacre
Re: Re:
The fact that this was one of the first gun-related tragedies in peace-time in Norway since the second world war, means that their gun laws are working.
How many gun-related deaths are there in the US per year?
On the post: Looking At Security Theater Through The Lens Of The Utøya Massacre
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Tell that to the media conglomerates that were so quick to label this tragedy as a "Jihadist terrorist", even before any news came out as to what the identity of the attacker was.
Sometimes it's necessary to draw the line, even in the face of hardship and bad timings.
On the post: AP Finally Learns That On The Internet, You Can Link To Other Sites
Re: Re: WTF Bit.ly?
Hmm is that a capital I or an l?
Is that a 0 or an O?
On the post: Turntable.fm Showing How Sharing Music Is Communication
Re:
I mean I still can't get on Pandora. How long has that service been running?
The music business people doesn't want people to listen to music. Well Fuck Them, and good luck. I'll listen to soma.fm and stations like that, that do welcome my listening ears.
On the post: Industry Suppressed Report Showing Users Of Shuttered 'Pirate' Site Probably Helped Movie Industry...
Re:
On the post: AP Finally Learns That On The Internet, You Can Link To Other Sites
Re: Re: Yes, let them go to the marquee tag immediately
Actually I'd prefer a lolcat over a dancing hamster. I can't believe I just uttered that sentence.
On the post: AP Finally Learns That On The Internet, You Can Link To Other Sites
Re: They've still missed part of the html spec
I fear clicking those bit.ly links, I've seen enough of Rick Astley.
On the post: AP Finally Learns That On The Internet, You Can Link To Other Sites
Re: Don't mess with my pickup
On the post: Copyright Alliance Takes On The Aaron Swartz Case With A Post Full Of Bad Analogies
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Copyright Alliance Takes On The Aaron Swartz Case With A Post Full Of Bad Analogies
Re: Re: Re: JSTOR is "selling scarcity": isn't that your advice?
On the post: Copyright Alliance Takes On The Aaron Swartz Case With A Post Full Of Bad Analogies
Re:
The accusing of 90 year olds of downloading porn?
Of printers alledgedly sharing the latest top40 songs?
Of dead people sharing files over the great celestial information highway?
Of the highway robbery of people who dare to legally purchase the precious little IPs?
Of the unwillingness to see when the world around them has changed?
Of the downright lieing? "copyright infringement is theft and is a criminal matter." or "piracy costs us a gazillion trillion dollars. Each download is directly attributable to a lost sale."
Of the "think of the artists" excuse that gets trotted out every few hundred meters, while in the meantime, even the artists get shafted?
You mean those reasonable actions?
Maybe, what Aaron Swartz has done was wrong, but the crime was not copyright infringement, because he was legally allowed to make said copies (there was a license in place), and he hadn't distributed them yet. Also there was no intent to make money with these files. Often the infringement is not to make money, but to share knowledge, information, entertainment. "Hey you guys, I like this band, you should listen to it, totally!"
But you don't dare to see that side of the conversation, because it doesn't fit with your narrative.
On the post: AP Finally Learns That On The Internet, You Can Link To Other Sites
Yes, let them go to the marquee tag immediately
It's amazing that these organisations are so much behind the times. Indeed we welcome the AP to the 90s. In about 18 years, they'll (re)discover youtube and twitter.
On the post: Once Again, Law Enforcement Protects Us From The America-Destroying Scourge Of Children With Lemonade Stands
On the post: Feds Charge Aaron Swartz With Felony Hacking... For Downloading A Ton Of Academic Research
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The digital copies he made of those documents that were still in JSTOR's actual possession? And how did he do that?
And why should he need to pledge not to release the purloined material if he had to "hand it over"?
Also care to elaborate on his 'history of this kind of behaviour', preferably with links to the sources instead of just hear-say and anecdotes.
I sometimes skulk in the hallways here at work too, and act a little bit weird, it's because otherwise the day would be dull.
I also keep my eyes on security cameras, because I wanna know where they are, not to be a criminal, but I'd like to know when I'm being watched.
I also sometimes try to figure out if I can hide from them, does that make me a criminal immediately? No.
Sure, hiding your laptop in a closet is weird, but nothing illegal per se.
And yes, downloading that many documents might be against the terms of service of JSTOR, but all that combined still does not warrant a 35 year prison sentence. Especially after JSTOR made it clear that it didn't want the state to prosecute this matter any further.
On the post: Feds Charge Aaron Swartz With Felony Hacking... For Downloading A Ton Of Academic Research
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In the case of large amounts of drugs, yes. But in this case, where exactly is the intent. And besides all that, if the documents are already available on the website of JSTOR for free download, then what's the (financial) harm?
Next >>