Saucy bit translated: "There are no two opposite sides, at least not producers and consumers, but at most pre-digital ignorants with a rights exploitation fetish on one side, and you and we on the other, the ones that get their oppressive contracts imposed on".
"Software Piracy (‘soft-”wer ‘pI-r&-sE): Robbery of software on the high seas; the taking of software from others on the open sea by open violence; without lawful authority, and with intent to steal."
However, if any fucking asshole comes along and compares illegal copying to a crime which every year takes dozens of lifes, then this is plain disrepspectful to the victims.
What they mean is "our ideas get copied, our innovation gets copied, without anyone paying for it".
Apart from those ideas like "censoring the internet" or "propagating intellectual monopolies" of course, which the very same people are happy to export everywhere.
How about going on "inventing" something, you know, "technical" instead? Instead of inventing "policy", I mean...
Of course, since everything internet-related was inherently "open source" and "free software" in the 1970ies, the invention of the term "Open Source" was only made necessary later, after some jerks in the 1980ies started some propaganda that all software needed to be bought and came without source.
I don't know, but nudity (which is absolutely not the same thing as "pronography") and swearing, absolutely and totally belong to our culture, and thus are appropriate at any time on any broadcast.
Anyone who says otherwise is obviously a "Puritan Puke" (according to Willy from "the Simpsons"). But then, I'm a European. Europeans, you know, those who gladly extradited their puritans to the USA ;).
And this page about swiss laws is total bogus. About half of those "laws" are regulations pertaining to habitants of very specific appartment buildings (presumably the authors). Some of them (like the one regarding absinthe or mowing your garden on sunday) were revoked something like 20 years ago.
By keeping the Status Quo? You fucking nitwits expanded Copyright to kingdom-come the last few decades, and exported every thumbscrew-measure to the rest of the world, and now you're accusing a state that is just keeping tha status quo of "creating a new home for the pirate industry."?
Thank you very much. Go away. Disintegrate yourself.
No, it's NOT legal to "pirate" for personal use. Besides that with "pirate" your probably mean "copyright infringement".
What you mean is: It's legal to _DOWNLOAD_ for personal use. Of course it is. It's actually just about legal everywhere on planet earth (or at least, it was until a few years ago; it might have changed in your jursidiction).
It's absolutely NOT LEGAL to MAKE PUBLIC any work for which you do not have the necessary rights.
But it doesn't matter between which of your computers you transfer your files -- all it matters is that you do not offer them to the public.
If one legislates something, one should always consider the possibilities of abuse.
- How easy is it to frame someone with this law?
- How big are the repercussions against the framing entity if the fact that it's an abuse becomes public?
With "possession of child porn", it's reasonable easy to frame someone (especially since computer-generated pictures "appearing to depict children in pornographic poses" also qualifies, anyone can produce the necessary material). However, the repercussions for doing so are somewhat serious.
With "Copyright", its also fairly easy to frame somebody. The repercussions are usally none. What SOPA/PIPA/etc add to the mix is that not only is even easier to frame somebody (because no objections are possible) and repercussions are nonexistent, but the consequences for the party framed are much more serious.
What I do not understand is that a shitload (ah, really) of congresspeople do not even seem to consider these matters. I can understand if a lawmaker lacks technical expertise, I can even understand if he has an agenda set by the MAFIAA. But that a lawmaker does not recognize the dangers within the law itself, that I do not understand.
Often so-called counterfeit medicaments and electronic devices are manufacterd in exactly the same factories as the original -- but stolen.
So there is absolutely no "risk" associated with them, and the whole issue should be dealt by the company affected itself; and not by customes (and surely not by internet censorship).
To totally, completely dry up any stupid domaingrabbing, the only thing that works is to open the namespace completely.
Allow all entities to register any domain below a TLD of 3 to 8 (or maybe more) characters. But not own the TLD, of course. And explicitly make clear that a TLD is a place, not a Trademark, and that nobody may bring in lawsuits regarding them, or have any rights (apart from the first-come first-serve rights stemming from the registration) to them.
On the post: German Scriptwriters Attack 'Greens, Pirates, Left-wingers And Internet Community' For Daring To Have Different Views On Copyright
51 people from CCC answer
You're wrong. Immediately 51 people from the CCC published an answer.
Antwort auf den offenen Brief der Tatort-Drehbuchschreiber
Saucy bit translated:
"There are no two opposite sides, at least not producers and consumers, but at most pre-digital ignorants with a rights exploitation fetish on one side, and you and we on the other, the ones that get their oppressive contracts imposed on".
On the post: Boxee Ramps Up Its Fight To Stop The FCC From Letting Cable Companies Effectively Break Its Device
Re: Views from across the poind
Don't fall into the same (anti-competition) trap as we did here.
On the post: Why It's Mathematically Impossible To Avoid Infringing On Software Patents
Re:
Please underlie your assumptions with hard data and statistics why a patent system is needed.
On the post: UK Government Pressuring Search Engines To Censor Results In Favor Of Copyright Industries
Piracy
Well, there is indeed a problem with piracy, and the IMB is fighting against it: http://www.icc-ccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre
However, if any fucking asshole comes along and compares illegal copying to a crime which every year takes dozens of lifes, then this is plain disrepspectful to the victims.
On the post: FBI Preaches Dangers Of 'Cybercrime' To The Choir
Re: Losing innovation...
Apart from those ideas like "censoring the internet" or "propagating intellectual monopolies" of course, which the very same people are happy to export everywhere.
How about going on "inventing" something, you know, "technical" instead? Instead of inventing "policy", I mean...
On the post: You Don't Need A Mythical Club Membership To Call Yahoo's Patent Threat Against Facebook Desperate
Re:
BTW, here's the source for WorldWideWeb, the first browser:
http://www.w3.org/History/1991-WWW-NeXT/Implementation/
it's public domain.
On the post: YouTube Taking Down Public Domain Works?
Re: An explanation of how that match might have been made
> back to the public domain original and claim copyright on
> it?
No. Doing that would be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyfraud
Actually, solely putting a notice claiming copyright onto a public domain work is already copyfraud.
On the post: UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
Henlons Razor
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity".
On the post: UK Now Seizing Music Blogs (With American Domains) Over Copyright Claims
SOCA
Shutting down sites, threatening people, seizing domains, stiffling free speech, spying... Do they also deal in extortion?
On the post: How Does The Penalty For 'Content Theft' Match Up With Similar 'Crimes'?
Schwarzkopieren
It's an analogy to "Schwarzfahren" (riding without paying the fare), and precisely what the author is comparing it to.
On the post: People Realizing That It Wasn't Google Lobbying That Stopped PIPA/SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Yes, it was Google-- and the people Google pays....
On the post: Justices Finally Notice Naked Statues In The Supreme Court While Arguing Why Nudity Should Be Censored
Cultural Differences
Anyone who says otherwise is obviously a "Puritan Puke" (according to Willy from "the Simpsons"). But then, I'm a European. Europeans, you know, those who gladly extradited their puritans to the USA ;).
On the post: It Is Time To Stop Pretending To Endorse The Copyright Monopoly
Patents
http://seegras.discordia.ch/Blog/the-end-of-the-patent-system/
On the post: Swiss Government Says File Sharing Isn't A Big Deal; Artist Are Fine, Industry Should Adapt
Swiss Laws
And this page about swiss laws is total bogus. About half of those "laws" are regulations pertaining to habitants of very specific appartment buildings (presumably the authors). Some of them (like the one regarding absinthe or mowing your garden on sunday) were revoked something like 20 years ago.
If you want to read them, all the laws are here (and even in english): http://www.admin.ch/ch/e/rs/rs.html
On the post: Swiss Government Says File Sharing Isn't A Big Deal; Artist Are Fine, Industry Should Adapt
Money transfers get spied upon
https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/german-lander-commissioner-legal-analysis-condem ns-swift-transfers-us
On the post: Swiss Government Says File Sharing Isn't A Big Deal; Artist Are Fine, Industry Should Adapt
Re:
By keeping the Status Quo? You fucking nitwits expanded Copyright to kingdom-come the last few decades, and exported every thumbscrew-measure to the rest of the world, and now you're accusing a state that is just keeping tha status quo of "creating a new home for the pirate industry."?
Thank you very much. Go away. Disintegrate yourself.
On the post: Swiss Government Says File Sharing Isn't A Big Deal; Artist Are Fine, Industry Should Adapt
Re: Technical question
What you mean is: It's legal to _DOWNLOAD_ for personal use. Of course it is. It's actually just about legal everywhere on planet earth (or at least, it was until a few years ago; it might have changed in your jursidiction).
It's absolutely NOT LEGAL to MAKE PUBLIC any work for which you do not have the necessary rights.
But it doesn't matter between which of your computers you transfer your files -- all it matters is that you do not offer them to the public.
Didn't your ever read _your_ copyright law?
On the post: Educators Worried About SOPA/PIPA's Impact On Education
Denial Of Service Law
- How easy is it to frame someone with this law?
- How big are the repercussions against the framing entity if the fact that it's an abuse becomes public?
With "possession of child porn", it's reasonable easy to frame someone (especially since computer-generated pictures "appearing to depict children in pornographic poses" also qualifies, anyone can produce the necessary material). However, the repercussions for doing so are somewhat serious.
With "Copyright", its also fairly easy to frame somebody. The repercussions are usally none. What SOPA/PIPA/etc add to the mix is that not only is even easier to frame somebody (because no objections are possible) and repercussions are nonexistent, but the consequences for the party framed are much more serious.
What I do not understand is that a shitload (ah, really) of congresspeople do not even seem to consider these matters. I can understand if a lawmaker lacks technical expertise, I can even understand if he has an agenda set by the MAFIAA. But that a lawmaker does not recognize the dangers within the law itself, that I do not understand.
On the post: Questionable 'Consumer' Group Releases Most Misleading Report Imaginable, Falsely Claiming People Support SOPA
Counterfeit often isn't
So there is absolutely no "risk" associated with them, and the whole issue should be dealt by the company affected itself; and not by customes (and surely not by internet censorship).
On the post: Universities Buying Up .xxx Domains To Stop Porn Sites Showing, Once Again, That .xxx Is A Pure Money Grab
The solution is to open the name space
Allow all entities to register any domain below a TLD of 3 to 8 (or maybe more) characters. But not own the TLD, of course. And explicitly make clear that a TLD is a place, not a Trademark, and that nobody may bring in lawsuits regarding them, or have any rights (apart from the first-come first-serve rights stemming from the registration) to them.
Next >>