> Of course. There's not really any way for them not to.
Sure there is: they could just *not do it!* Collecting and organizing data isn't something that happens by default, let alone something that one has to put in effort to avoid doing; it's something that one has to put in effort to actually do. And Facebook is doing it, when they have no right to.
I'm not one to believe the idea that Russians are such implicitly brilliant tacticians that they'd deliberately play the US into taking the exact response they want.
There's an old story about a royal banquet that was held in Christopher Columbus's honor, with several other admirals in attendance. One of the admirals grumbled about this honor being heaped on Columbus's head, pointing out that the route to the West Indies isn't particularly difficult to sail. In response, Columbus handed the man a boiled egg, and asked him if he could make it stand up on its end.
After a few tries, the admiral was of course unable to. So Columbus took the egg and struck its end firmly on the table, flattening it slightly, and was able to make it stay up that way. "It's not particularly difficult to do," he pointed out, "once someone smarter than you has figured out how to do it."
The Russians don't have to be particularly "brilliant tacticians" to pull this off; all they have to do is look at our reaction to 9/11.
According to Navalny, Google has already informed him that he needs to remove the material in question or his account will be banned. The video is still up as of the time of this writing, but if Google indeed tried to bow to the censors in Russia, that needs to be called out.
Wait, I'm confused here. Aren't you supposed to be some sort of shameless Google shill? That's what all the trolls say, at least...
"To argue that this video amounts to the same kind of deliberative process that goes on behind the scenes in terms of an agency deciding an official policy on a topic, or what actions it’s going to take, is absurd,” Marshall said.
Marshall is simply not nearly cynical enough to look at it the right way: this was the FCC's official policy, framed in a humorous fashion, and therefore the making of the skit is legitimate deliberation.
Re: Re: DMCA is abridged civil process due sheerly to number of potential complaints.
Let's be clear up front that you do not support copyright any more than Masnick does.
This is probably technically true. I support it about as much as he does, which is to say that while I recognize its importance I also recognize the harm that it can do when abused, and I understand that it should not be an absolute right. As Mike does.
Specifically, when John Doe's copyright clashes with my fundamental Constitutional right to the Presumption of Innocence, the Presumption of Innocence needs to win out every single time. When it does not, something is very wrong, and in the DMCA, it does not. Therefore, something is very wrong with the DMCA.
and likely from your wish to get all content for free.
I once heard an AI researcher give a very interesting definition of intelligence, as in "the quality that humans have that computers find exceptionally difficult to emulate." His definition was: the capability to grasp and appropriately respond to nuance.
Please be more intelligent in future posts. It helps you to not appear so dumb to the rest of us.
Our approach ultimately puts the decision about whether content is defamatory, or instead, protected speech, in front of the right decision maker: a neutral court of law. Leaving such important decisions to the discretion of Internet hosts is misplaced and tilts the balance in favor of silencing often legitimate voices.
This is a very important point. My only quibble with it is that it doesn't go far enough: there's nothing particularly special about defamation. No content at all should be removed for violating the law on accusation alone. The DMCA's notice-and-takedown system is a legal abomination; these are matters that should be determined in a court of law, because they're too open to abuse otherwise. The DMCA needs to be thrown out.
The governor has argued an injunction would constitute prior restraint.
OK, I'm not a lawyer, so maybe this makes more sense to people who are, but how can it be prior restraint when they're already doing something wrong rather than simply intending to do something wrong in the future?
I have a dream that one day, the quotability of people's words will be judged, not by the whims of their IP owner, but by the character of their content! I have a dream!
And thus ends this David and Goliath story, with Goliath once again slain.
This is one of the most misunderstood stories in history. Goliath was an infantryman, facing an opponent armed with a ranged weapon. He had about as much chance of winning as that thug who came at Indiana Jones with a sword did, and for the same basic reason. The only thing that's at all surprising about what happened is that he didn't seem to realize at any point just how utterly screwed he was!
Professor James Bessen has been doing lots of research on this for years, and has found that in areas of heavy automation, jobs often increase (though they may be changed). That links to an academic paper he wrote, but he also wrote a more general audience targeted piece for the Atlantic on what he calls the automation paradox.
Is Professor Bessen unaware of the Jevons Paradox? This is simply another manifestation of that broader principle.
For those of you who are too young to remember a time without a widespread internet, there basically was no such thing as a publicly facing website in 1986.
There's no "basically" about it. Tim Berners-Lee didn't invent the underlying HTML/HTTP technology that makes up the Web until 1989.
On the post: German Court Says Facebook's Real Names Policy Violates Users' Privacy
Re: Re: Re: too glib
Sure there is: they could just *not do it!* Collecting and organizing data isn't something that happens by default, let alone something that one has to put in effort to avoid doing; it's something that one has to put in effort to actually do. And Facebook is doing it, when they have no right to.
On the post: German Court Says Facebook's Real Names Policy Violates Users' Privacy
Re: too glib
Too glib by far.
On the post: Germany's Speech Laws Continue To Be A Raging Dumpster Fire Of Censorial Stupidity
Re:
On the post: Germany's Speech Laws Continue To Be A Raging Dumpster Fire Of Censorial Stupidity
Then why do we still have the DMCA?
On the post: Even If The Russian Troll Factory Abused Our Openness Against Us, That Doesn't Mean We Should Close Up
There's an old story about a royal banquet that was held in Christopher Columbus's honor, with several other admirals in attendance. One of the admirals grumbled about this honor being heaped on Columbus's head, pointing out that the route to the West Indies isn't particularly difficult to sail. In response, Columbus handed the man a boiled egg, and asked him if he could make it stand up on its end.
After a few tries, the admiral was of course unable to. So Columbus took the egg and struck its end firmly on the table, flattening it slightly, and was able to make it stay up that way. "It's not particularly difficult to do," he pointed out, "once someone smarter than you has figured out how to do it."
The Russians don't have to be particularly "brilliant tacticians" to pull this off; all they have to do is look at our reaction to 9/11.
On the post: Terrible Copyright Ruling Over An Embedded Tweet Undermines Key Concept Of How The Internet Works
from the proofreading dept
Oh, is this case related to Twitter's "firehose" feed?
On the post: Instagram, YouTube Face Full Block In Russia After Billionaire Wins A Privacy Lawsuit Over Pictures With An Alleged Escort
Wait, I'm confused here. Aren't you supposed to be some sort of shameless Google shill? That's what all the trolls say, at least...
On the post: Facebook Takes Down Post Critical Of Indian Film For Copyright Violation, Even Though It Was An All-Text Post
You know it's true...
Facebook: Don't even bother pretending we're not evil.
On the post: FCC Refuses To Release FOIA Documents Pertaining To Its Stupid Verizon 'Collusion' Joke
Marshall is simply not nearly cynical enough to look at it the right way: this was the FCC's official policy, framed in a humorous fashion, and therefore the making of the skit is legitimate deliberation.
On the post: BrewDog Beats Back Trademark Action From The Elvis Presley Estate
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why (Allegedly) Defamatory Content On WordPress.com Doesn't Come Down Without A Court Order
Re: Re: DMCA is abridged civil process due sheerly to number of potential complaints.
This is probably technically true. I support it about as much as he does, which is to say that while I recognize its importance I also recognize the harm that it can do when abused, and I understand that it should not be an absolute right. As Mike does.
Specifically, when John Doe's copyright clashes with my fundamental Constitutional right to the Presumption of Innocence, the Presumption of Innocence needs to win out every single time. When it does not, something is very wrong, and in the DMCA, it does not. Therefore, something is very wrong with the DMCA.
I once heard an AI researcher give a very interesting definition of intelligence, as in "the quality that humans have that computers find exceptionally difficult to emulate." His definition was: the capability to grasp and appropriately respond to nuance.
Please be more intelligent in future posts. It helps you to not appear so dumb to the rest of us.
On the post: Why (Allegedly) Defamatory Content On WordPress.com Doesn't Come Down Without A Court Order
This is a very important point. My only quibble with it is that it doesn't go far enough: there's nothing particularly special about defamation. No content at all should be removed for violating the law on accusation alone. The DMCA's notice-and-takedown system is a legal abomination; these are matters that should be determined in a court of law, because they're too open to abuse otherwise. The DMCA needs to be thrown out.
On the post: BrewDog Beats Back Trademark Action From The Elvis Presley Estate
No, Elvis is not dead. He just went home.
On the post: Missouri Governor Sued Over His Office's Use Of Self-Destructing Communications
OK, I'm not a lawyer, so maybe this makes more sense to people who are, but how can it be prior restraint when they're already doing something wrong rather than simply intending to do something wrong in the future?
On the post: Tarnishing The History Of Martin Luther King Jr.: Copyright Enforcement Edition
that one day, the quotability of people's words will be judged,
not by the whims of their IP owner,
but by the character of their content!
I have a dream!
On the post: Portland Surrenders To Old Town Brewing Over Stag Sign Trademark
This is one of the most misunderstood stories in history. Goliath was an infantryman, facing an opponent armed with a ranged weapon. He had about as much chance of winning as that thug who came at Indiana Jones with a sword did, and for the same basic reason. The only thing that's at all surprising about what happened is that he didn't seem to realize at any point just how utterly screwed he was!
On the post: Fighting The Future: Teamsters Demand UPS Ban Drones And Autonomous Vehicles
Re: Re:
Is that documented? Because it kind of sounds like the best kind of urban legend? (Which would just make it funnier if it were actually true...)
On the post: Fighting The Future: Teamsters Demand UPS Ban Drones And Autonomous Vehicles
Is Professor Bessen unaware of the Jevons Paradox? This is simply another manifestation of that broader principle.
On the post: Pablo Escobar's Brother Gives Up His Quest For A Billion Dollar Extortion Of Netflix Over 'Narcos'
There's no "basically" about it. Tim Berners-Lee didn't invent the underlying HTML/HTTP technology that makes up the Web until 1989.
On the post: Co-Head Of Virginia's FOIA Council Introduces Bill To Make State's Court System Even More Opaque
Re:
Yes, as through this world I've wandered
I've seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen.
And as through your life you travel,
Yes, as through your life you roam,
You won't never see an outlaw
Drive a family from their home.
-- Woody Guthrie, Pretty Boy Floyd
Next >>