They do. Email also ought to be covered by the "right to petition for redress of grievances". But did they argue that the mailboxes should have infinite capacity or that it should be illegal to delete such messages or that they couldn't hire a third party service to listen to those messages?
The problem with this whole argument is it's all built upon what I think is likely a flawed premise that this removal was some kind of unintentional collateral damage. Given Face-tagram's history, I find that implausible.
If you consider the possibility that the moderation guidelines aren't meant to promote "good" content or police hate speech or anything like that, but are instead designed primarily to reduce controversy, then this makes a lot more sense. They don't want to kick out or drive away the Nazis, that's bad for business! They also don't want to be investigated and questioned by cops and government officials. They want a bland, sanitized, advertiser-friendly network. They aren't doing this to push social progress, they're doing it so they can be the place where Nazis and Antifa alike can chat with grandma and wish their college roommate a happy birthday and never encounter anything that might make them too uncomfortable.
Perhaps, with sufficient public outrage, they'll restore this video. Perhaps they'll decide the controversy of removing it is worse than the controversy of leaving it up. That still won't make them good people though...
If they ever bothered to seriously prosecute the negligent corporations that made systems with less security awareness than an average nine year old things would change real fast. But as long as breaches don't actually cost these companies anything at all it would be pretty illogical for them to spend the money for proper security...
Next time a sensitive government system gets hacked through some unintentional back door or some undisclosed "support" account, fine them a couple million and give the CTO a year behind bars, it'll be the last time that ever happens.
Anyone else notice that when there's some massive hack caused by someone putting systems on the open internet with a password of 1234, they act like it's some natural disaster on act of terrorism instead of properly handling it as a simple act of corporate negligence! Security costs money, breaches currently do not.
Oh, and in addition to "wear your damn masks", stay the heck out of crowded bars and clubs and such! I really don't think those morons are any better than the anti-vaxxers. This global pandemic is not magically ended just because you personally got a somewhat effective prophylactic! It is not party time yet! An anti-vaxxer who stays home is still a MUCH lower risk than the unmasked vaccinated guy at a rave...
The antivaxers are far from the only problem though. The vaccinated ones acting like it's a 100% effective full immunity aren't helping much either. We know the vaccines aren't 100% effective at preventing symptoms. We suspect they're even less effective at preventing infection. We know that vaccination can create a higher rate of asymptomatic carriers, which is one of the biggest problems with covid to begin with! If the mask mandates had stayed in place we could have stopped this. With the current tactics, we can only hope the vaccines alone will be enough, and it doesn't look like they will be.
Wear your damn masks, people!
It legitimately feels like our elected officials are trying to keep this pandemic around sometimes...every time we start to make progress they all trip over each other racing to roll back protections before the rates can fall too far..and then the rates start to climb again and everyone acts like it's a complete mystery why...
TL;DR: the world is full of idiots and anti-vaxxers are merely one particularly potent strain...
I don't think "They didn't have the form I wanted" is a valid defense against perjury....surely there are ways to serve a court order to YouTube even if they don't have an automated system set up to handle it.
Well sure, but it's fraud to call this an open license, and it's kinda fraud to call it a license at all. It's no different that a regular copyright really. You can use it as you want until they decide you can't. Most licenses can't be revoked in that way. Most licenses have clearly defined terms.
And furthermore...I think this document claims rights that they legally do not have. Ultimately it's all based on copyright, right? You agree to and comply with the terms or it's copyright infringement. Since when does the copyright holder of a book get to say who can READ or OWN the book though? Copyright covers production and distribution, not use. This license is trying to claim a right to regulate use.
You could say it's just a combined distribution license and EULA, but EULAs cover services. A document isn't a service. You can regulate access to a server with a EULA, but once it leaves that server (which this license allows) the EULA can no longer apply (but this license claims it would).
The whole thing is a mess and hopefully largely unenforceable...
"Freedom 0" is the Free Software definition, this article is discussing open source. And in THAT context....we just need to talk about principles five and six of the open source definition. :)
Most CoCs are more of a terms of service document for a project's private infrastructure...and as far as F/OSS goes, that's perfectly fine. But making that into a license -- saying you can revoke someone's right to use a library (not distribute, use, which goes beyond what traditional open licenses even attempt to regulate -- although that may make sense in a SaaS age) if you feel they don't sufficiently "acknowledge others' feelings" or because you used it to build a dildo is a clear violation of the OSD and also just an utterly ridiculous thing to do. The license says that if you use that library, you MUST make me "feel heard". So if I ask a question but I'm distracted and don't hear your response, YOU violated the license terms! My personal feelings are now YOUR responsibility! Brilliant idea, isn't it?
Isn't precision also something lawyers are supposed to like? Kinda goes along with the hating uncertainty thing, doesn't it? But this license sets up a small, self-appointed committee (with no system in place for that committee to ever change or be in any way responsive to the community) that can revoke anyone's rights for any reason at any time -- literally "they looked at me in a way that made me uncomfortable" seems to be a perfectly valid justification under that text, so ultimately the committee can justify almost any decision they want. I really hope nobody would use such vague, arbitrary, and dictatorial terms for anything serious....
They don't need to. I recently purchased a perfectly good PC for $25 at a local thrift shop. They had a whole wall of 'em. They aren't Ryzen or RTX, but they'll run office stuff just fine. If you can afford $15/mo for internet then you can probably afford $25-$50 for a PC that should last at least two or three years.
And the government itself already provides food at least through food stamps, although you are correct that the government isn't setting retail prices there. However, the government also hasn't given grocery stores billions of dollars in grants specifically intended to provide access to low income or otherwise under-served communities, so it's also about time that they actually start asking for some return on those investments...
"The other thing that is idiotic is why are there goddamn electronics in a fooken shake machine? Like, at all."
Because otherwise you've gotta train the employees how to properly operate the thing. Much easier to train the electronics. Plus it keeps the employees less secure when the job is basic enough that they could be instantly replaced by any stoned teenager off the street.
So, our nation's top law enforcement officials can neither confirm nor deny that they were involved in behavior that was at the very least extremely unethical, if not outright criminal.
Yeah...even if they didn't do it, the fact that they can't give a straight 'no' is extremely concerning...or at least it ought to be in any nation whose laws actually mean anything...
Good. Veto that fucker so they can't use it to sneak the CASE Act into law. And if that requires cutting off our bloated military budget for a short while...what's the problem, exactly?
I mean I get it, Trump is a moron, but even a broken clock is right twice a day, right?
Stop fuckin trolling. That's basically the only thing the Human Cheeto ever got right! WHO's absurd denial of the existence of Taiwan started long before the US left. Stop inventing "facts" just because you think they'll support your "team". This shit is not a goddamn sport, there are peoples' fucking lives at stake...
Hmm...there's a link on that page to report "suspected fraud". The claims that these are counterfeit Apple products seems pretty damn fraudulent to me...
No way is Gamestop going to go retro and focus on older consoles. As far as I can tell they seem to deliberately try to stay out of that market. Sure, they'll sell whatever they get in trade-ins, but have you ever tried to buy any specific older hardware from them? Every time I've looked, even for stuff just one generation old, even for stuff that's still being manufactured, whether it's controllers or games or consoles, you've gotta search every Gamestop in the city and hope you get lucky. You might end up driving two hours just to find a single controller...or you could just buy it on Newegg. I bet they're already trying to get all the PS4 inventory out of their stores....
" OK, let me see if I got this straight. Website copy-licenses content from one source that was created by another source, sets up a useragent file to request another entity to publicise it for download by anybody, then sues their publicity agent for ... doing too good a job?"
Sounds a bit like a movie studio suing Blockbuster for having a movie night where they pick a random rental off the shelf and project it on the wall in their parking lot for $5 a ticket. And they would absolutely get sued for doing that if they didn't pay for the proper license. Even though the studios did agree to let Blockbuster help them get those movies to more people, that doesn't mean they can do it any way they want. You can't just pass someone else's content off as your own, even if you HAVE been asked to help publicize it. Which is exactly what Google did here...the only reason they got away with it is because the person they lifted it from doesn't legally own it either.
Re:
I highly doubt Trump is capable of such an accurate assessment...
Re: Re: IMPEDING ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGES PROHIBITED
They do. Email also ought to be covered by the "right to petition for redress of grievances". But did they argue that the mailboxes should have infinite capacity or that it should be illegal to delete such messages or that they couldn't hire a third party service to listen to those messages?
Faulty premise
The problem with this whole argument is it's all built upon what I think is likely a flawed premise that this removal was some kind of unintentional collateral damage. Given Face-tagram's history, I find that implausible.
If you consider the possibility that the moderation guidelines aren't meant to promote "good" content or police hate speech or anything like that, but are instead designed primarily to reduce controversy, then this makes a lot more sense. They don't want to kick out or drive away the Nazis, that's bad for business! They also don't want to be investigated and questioned by cops and government officials. They want a bland, sanitized, advertiser-friendly network. They aren't doing this to push social progress, they're doing it so they can be the place where Nazis and Antifa alike can chat with grandma and wish their college roommate a happy birthday and never encounter anything that might make them too uncomfortable.
Perhaps, with sufficient public outrage, they'll restore this video. Perhaps they'll decide the controversy of removing it is worse than the controversy of leaving it up. That still won't make them good people though...
Re: Re:
If they ever bothered to seriously prosecute the negligent corporations that made systems with less security awareness than an average nine year old things would change real fast. But as long as breaches don't actually cost these companies anything at all it would be pretty illogical for them to spend the money for proper security...
Next time a sensitive government system gets hacked through some unintentional back door or some undisclosed "support" account, fine them a couple million and give the CTO a year behind bars, it'll be the last time that ever happens.
Go after the negligence!
Anyone else notice that when there's some massive hack caused by someone putting systems on the open internet with a password of 1234, they act like it's some natural disaster on act of terrorism instead of properly handling it as a simple act of corporate negligence! Security costs money, breaches currently do not.
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, and in addition to "wear your damn masks", stay the heck out of crowded bars and clubs and such! I really don't think those morons are any better than the anti-vaxxers. This global pandemic is not magically ended just because you personally got a somewhat effective prophylactic! It is not party time yet! An anti-vaxxer who stays home is still a MUCH lower risk than the unmasked vaccinated guy at a rave...
Re: Re:
The antivaxers are far from the only problem though. The vaccinated ones acting like it's a 100% effective full immunity aren't helping much either. We know the vaccines aren't 100% effective at preventing symptoms. We suspect they're even less effective at preventing infection. We know that vaccination can create a higher rate of asymptomatic carriers, which is one of the biggest problems with covid to begin with! If the mask mandates had stayed in place we could have stopped this. With the current tactics, we can only hope the vaccines alone will be enough, and it doesn't look like they will be.
Wear your damn masks, people!
It legitimately feels like our elected officials are trying to keep this pandemic around sometimes...every time we start to make progress they all trip over each other racing to roll back protections before the rates can fall too far..and then the rates start to climb again and everyone acts like it's a complete mystery why...
TL;DR: the world is full of idiots and anti-vaxxers are merely one particularly potent strain...
Re: YouTube mistake?
I don't think "They didn't have the form I wanted" is a valid defense against perjury....surely there are ways to serve a court order to YouTube even if they don't have an automated system set up to handle it.
Re: Re: Re: Call a spade a spade
Well sure, but it's fraud to call this an open license, and it's kinda fraud to call it a license at all. It's no different that a regular copyright really. You can use it as you want until they decide you can't. Most licenses can't be revoked in that way. Most licenses have clearly defined terms.
And furthermore...I think this document claims rights that they legally do not have. Ultimately it's all based on copyright, right? You agree to and comply with the terms or it's copyright infringement. Since when does the copyright holder of a book get to say who can READ or OWN the book though? Copyright covers production and distribution, not use. This license is trying to claim a right to regulate use.
You could say it's just a combined distribution license and EULA, but EULAs cover services. A document isn't a service. You can regulate access to a server with a EULA, but once it leaves that server (which this license allows) the EULA can no longer apply (but this license claims it would).
The whole thing is a mess and hopefully largely unenforceable...
Re: Context free zone
No concrete examples? Did you miss the paragraph about ml5.js and the link to its bizarre terms?
Re: Call a spade a spade
"Freedom 0" is the Free Software definition, this article is discussing open source. And in THAT context....we just need to talk about principles five and six of the open source definition. :)
Most CoCs are more of a terms of service document for a project's private infrastructure...and as far as F/OSS goes, that's perfectly fine. But making that into a license -- saying you can revoke someone's right to use a library (not distribute, use, which goes beyond what traditional open licenses even attempt to regulate -- although that may make sense in a SaaS age) if you feel they don't sufficiently "acknowledge others' feelings" or because you used it to build a dildo is a clear violation of the OSD and also just an utterly ridiculous thing to do. The license says that if you use that library, you MUST make me "feel heard". So if I ask a question but I'm distracted and don't hear your response, YOU violated the license terms! My personal feelings are now YOUR responsibility! Brilliant idea, isn't it?
Isn't precision also something lawyers are supposed to like? Kinda goes along with the hating uncertainty thing, doesn't it? But this license sets up a small, self-appointed committee (with no system in place for that committee to ever change or be in any way responsive to the community) that can revoke anyone's rights for any reason at any time -- literally "they looked at me in a way that made me uncomfortable" seems to be a perfectly valid justification under that text, so ultimately the committee can justify almost any decision they want. I really hope nobody would use such vague, arbitrary, and dictatorial terms for anything serious....
Re: competition
They don't need to. I recently purchased a perfectly good PC for $25 at a local thrift shop. They had a whole wall of 'em. They aren't Ryzen or RTX, but they'll run office stuff just fine. If you can afford $15/mo for internet then you can probably afford $25-$50 for a PC that should last at least two or three years.
And the government itself already provides food at least through food stamps, although you are correct that the government isn't setting retail prices there. However, the government also hasn't given grocery stores billions of dollars in grants specifically intended to provide access to low income or otherwise under-served communities, so it's also about time that they actually start asking for some return on those investments...
Re: Re: Customers?
"The other thing that is idiotic is why are there goddamn electronics in a fooken shake machine? Like, at all."
Because otherwise you've gotta train the employees how to properly operate the thing. Much easier to train the electronics. Plus it keeps the employees less secure when the job is basic enough that they could be instantly replaced by any stoned teenager off the street.
Fucking fantastic...
So, our nation's top law enforcement officials can neither confirm nor deny that they were involved in behavior that was at the very least extremely unethical, if not outright criminal.
Yeah...even if they didn't do it, the fact that they can't give a straight 'no' is extremely concerning...or at least it ought to be in any nation whose laws actually mean anything...
Re: Re:
I called, emailed, and then typed up a letter and mailed it.
CASE Act?
Good. Veto that fucker so they can't use it to sneak the CASE Act into law. And if that requires cutting off our bloated military budget for a short while...what's the problem, exactly?
I mean I get it, Trump is a moron, but even a broken clock is right twice a day, right?
Re:
Stop fuckin trolling. That's basically the only thing the Human Cheeto ever got right! WHO's absurd denial of the existence of Taiwan started long before the US left. Stop inventing "facts" just because you think they'll support your "team". This shit is not a goddamn sport, there are peoples' fucking lives at stake...
fraud.
Hmm...there's a link on that page to report "suspected fraud". The claims that these are counterfeit Apple products seems pretty damn fraudulent to me...
They sure aren't going retro..
No way is Gamestop going to go retro and focus on older consoles. As far as I can tell they seem to deliberately try to stay out of that market. Sure, they'll sell whatever they get in trade-ins, but have you ever tried to buy any specific older hardware from them? Every time I've looked, even for stuff just one generation old, even for stuff that's still being manufactured, whether it's controllers or games or consoles, you've gotta search every Gamestop in the city and hope you get lucky. You might end up driving two hours just to find a single controller...or you could just buy it on Newegg. I bet they're already trying to get all the PS4 inventory out of their stores....
Re:
" OK, let me see if I got this straight. Website copy-licenses content from one source that was created by another source, sets up a useragent file to request another entity to publicise it for download by anybody, then sues their publicity agent for ... doing too good a job?"
Sounds a bit like a movie studio suing Blockbuster for having a movie night where they pick a random rental off the shelf and project it on the wall in their parking lot for $5 a ticket. And they would absolutely get sued for doing that if they didn't pay for the proper license. Even though the studios did agree to let Blockbuster help them get those movies to more people, that doesn't mean they can do it any way they want. You can't just pass someone else's content off as your own, even if you HAVE been asked to help publicize it. Which is exactly what Google did here...the only reason they got away with it is because the person they lifted it from doesn't legally own it either.
More comments from urza9814 >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by urza9814.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt