Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   dupe...

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 17th, 2005 @ 8:15pm

   
   

   and to think I came here as a slashdotter...

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Re: dupe...

   

   Mike (profile), Oct 17th, 2005 @ 9:11pm

   
   

   ??? This isn't a dupe. It's a follow up to the original story (which we link to in the post...).

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Re: dupe...

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 18th, 2005 @ 2:38am

   
   

   Mike,
   
   Slashdotters are either correct and loud, or wrong and silent. He won't be back.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Re: dupe...

   

   Luke, Oct 18th, 2005 @ 6:27am

   
   

   As a fellow slashdotter, I agree. He (obviously not a she if they read slashdot) will never be back again. BUt hey, at least we don't have dupes every day.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Wrong again

   

   Brett, Oct 18th, 2005 @ 9:50am

   
   

   While I agree that JibJab's position has no legal basis, once again Techdirt gets the facts wrong. JibJab was not sued for the original parody (they received a C&D letter). Likewise, JibJab did not sue Black Lantern; they sent them a C&D.
   
   While this site is sometimes interesting, its frequent errors and knee-jerk anti-IP stance ruin any credibility it may be trying to acheive.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Re: Wrong again

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 18th, 2005 @ 10:53am

   
   

   What's wrong with an anti-IP stance? The idea that immaterial things can be counted as property is holding back the development of humanity in a hundred different ways.
   And everybody makes errors sometimes. That it means so much to you says more about you being anal-retentive than it does about techdirt.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Re: Wrong again

   

   Brett, Oct 18th, 2005 @ 12:23pm

   
   

   Very big of you to attack me personally rather than arguing the merits. Why stop at suggesting that ownership of intagible property is bad; do you advocate for no private property at all? If not, how do you make a prinicpled distinction? the protection of creative expression (copyright, in case you're unaware) encourages authors to make their work available, secure in the knowledge that someone else cannot come along and steal it for free)
   
   I suspect your anti-IP stance is not an informed one and you probably don't know the difference b/n patents, copyrights and trademarks. And you likely wear birkenstocks w/ socks.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Re: Wrong again

   

   Anonymous Coward, Oct 18th, 2005 @ 5:23pm

   
   

   Haha, that's hilarious. You're so backward. You really think that money is the reason why people are creative, don't you? Man, you REALLY don't get it. And I'm not going to explain it to you.
   I won't discuss the merits of intellectual property laws with the likes of you though, as discussing alternate points of view with those who have opinions such as yours is usually as pointless as talking with a wall.
   However, I would like to know just how much of the funny statement you made above you truly believe in so if you don't mind, could I ask you a question?
   If all the money in the world vanished tomorrow, do you think that people would stop inventing, researching, programming, writing, making movies, and making music, since there wouldn't be any cash in it?
   Please say yes, I love a good laugh.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment