Mike Taylor's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week

from the shiny-digital-future dept

Mike Taylor here, and it's my pleasure to be your Posts Of The Week host. By day I'm a computer programmer, working for Index Data, the world's tiniest multinational software house, with a portfolio mostly made up of free software. At night, I transform into a palaeontologist. I study sauropods, the biggest and best of the dinosaurs. I'm an associate researcher at the University of Bristol, UK.

Along with Matt Wedel of Western University, USA, I co-write the palaeontology blog Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week, or SV-POW! for short. Over the last few years, we've found that blog naturally mutating into being 50-50 about sauropods and open access. Lots of our thoughts on the appalling mess that copyright abuse has got scholarly publishing into can be found in the Shiny Digital Future section of our blog.

Saturday brought a welcome reminder that we need to get the basics of copyright right. It's not good enough just reforming bits and pieces in an ad-hoc way -- a change of term here, an orphan works ruling there. We need to start from a proper understanding of what copyright is for (it's right there in the Constitution, folks!), with a recognition that there's no clear Creator/Consumer dichotomy now (if there ever was), and a realistic perspective on how technology is irrevocably changing the field. These aren't new insights -- far from it, they're Techdirt perennials -- but they're worthy of revisiting repeatedly. These should be the foundations of our laws, not afterthoughts.

Sunday gave us a Funniest/Most Insightful Comments post touching on last week's story on how anonymous NSA officials want to murder Edward Snowden. I mention this really as a sneaky excuse to link to my own Martin Luther King Day post, Snowden-haters are on the wrong side of history, where I note the similarity of the rhetoric between Hoover's FBI against King and Clapper's NSA against Snowden. Ever notice how we don't have a J. Edgar Hoover Day?

(In a similar vein, later in the week, see Before Snowden, Nixon Admin Pioneered Evidence-Free 'Russian Spy' Smears Against Daniel Ellsberg.)

Monday ... was quiet.

Tuesday saw confirmation that the Department of Homeland Security yanked a guy out of a movie and interrogated him for hours because they didn't like his glasses. This was a man who wears Google Glass as his regular spectacles with prescription lenses, and who of course had them turned off as he watched the movie. Apparently that gets you a grilling from the federal government now. As the DHS helpfully explains on its own web-site, "The Department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation from the many threats we face. [...] Our duties are wide-ranging, but our goal is clear - keeping America safe." Safe from men wearing spectacles.

(See also ICE Takes To Twitter In Ridiculous Attempt To Defend Interrogating A Man In A Movie Theater For Wearing Google Glass.)

Better news on Wednesday as the Supreme Court reaffirmed something lower courts seem insistent on getting wrong: that in patent cases, the burden of proof is with the patent holder. This is good news because patents, originally intended as an incentive for innovation, far more often turn out to be impediments. The idea that the accused party is guilty until proven innocent is pure gravy to patent trolls, and it's encouraging to see anything that helps to bulldoze them out of the path of the Future Train.

And more good news on Thursday, from a most unlikely source. Microsoft have traditionally been Bad Guys, the owner-operators of a monopoly operating system that's modeled all that's bad about proprietary software, and taught a generation of people that daily crashes are normal, and a new computer can be expected to function well for about a year before it starts mysteriously slowing down and generally not working. It's well documented that Microsoft have abused their monopoly.

But today they're the Good Guys. All of Microsoft Research's papers will be published open access, free for the world to read. Their actual policy is not particularly detailed -- crucially, it says nothing about what license the papers will use -- but we can expect to see that firmed up, and hope that they will use the minimally restrictive Creative Commons Attribution license that's favored by major open-access players like BioMed Central, The Public Library of Science and PeerJ because it allows the freedom to re-use as well as to read.

"Many are the strange chances of the world", said Mithrandir, "And help oft shall come from the hands of the weak when the Wise falter." -- J. R. R. Tolkien, The Silmarillion

Rounding off the week, Friday showed us that while copyright abuse is common and patents hardly seem to have any other use but abuse, trademarks are perfectly capable of holding their own when it comes to the Unholy Trinity of abused intellectual properties. King, who make the popular game Candy Crush, have somehow managed to obtain a trademark on the word "candy". Not the phrase "candy crush", you understand -- which would make some sense. But the word "candy".

Frankly, this one baffles me. I can understand the motivation of patent trolls: they hope to leech free money out of society by coercing productive citizens into buying licenses for their patents. I can understand why copyright holders abuse their rights to squeeze more money out of customers. But I just don't see where the revenue stream is in this kind of trademark abuse. It's not possible to sell a license to use a trademark, so what's in it for King? I just don't get it.

Finally, and speaking of abusing a right, I'd like to take the opportunity of abusing this platform to draw attention to a speech I heard about this week. It was given by Labour MP Michael Meacher on 13 January in the House of Commons (UK): poverty in Britain. Admittedly, this isn't a techie issue; but it's relevant to Techdirt readers because Techdirt readers are human beings:

There are at least 345 food banks [...] Emergency food aid was given to 350,000 households [...] The Red Cross is setting up centers to help the destitute, just as it does in developing countries.

This in a country with the 6th highest GDP in the world. This would be appalling even if it was just an unavoidable consequence of the global economic downturn; but as Meacher's speech shows, it's largely the result of deliberate government policies, particularly benefit sanctions. Horrifying, disgraceful and shameful. We have to find a better way.

Sorry to sign off on such a negative note, but this is important and needs to be widely known. Let's hope next week brings better news.



Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:42am

    Huh...

    "At night, I transform into a palaeontologist. I study sauropods, the biggest and best of the dinosaurs. I'm an associate researcher at the University of Bristol, UK."

    Well, that's just fucking cool. Please tell me you've dignified this with an over the top awesome business card?

     

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

  2. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 12:16pm

    "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    That three word LIE was by "John Fenderson" and featured in last week's Mutual Admiration Society as funny.

    Simple little lies are difficult to counter with the always complex truth, but the facts will bear me out.

    Perhaps he's just ignorant of how much tracking Google does and how pervasive it is. But Google's over 900,000 servers aren't sitting idle in between search terms: they're collating web site visits and enough other bits to uniquely identify anyone.

    At best "voluntary" could be true only if all the following are known and done with never a slip:

    1) NEVER even go to Google's search page: at the very least it snags browser header, IP address, plus search terms, storing those for long as can, years at least. (Google doesn't just list plain links, either, but re-directs every click through its own servers for tracking.)

    2) NEVER hit any web page which re-directs to or uses Google's search or #1 applies. Again, even if you don't search it snags enough for tracking, along with site you were on. As search engine may not be explicitly stated and even hosting out Google can't prevent indirect use, this is impossible.

    3) Entirely disable javascript, including manually remove Google from its paid whitelisting in popular Noscript Firefox extension: completely undermines stated function by allowing the very worst. -- NOTE only applies to browswers in which one can disable javascript (actually, assumes that clicked check box works as implied): appears that on any Android system besides Chrome browser, one cannot.

    4) In Firefox about:config remove all Google data, but you again just have to assume it's not in actual code... Google funds Mozilla, gets its search engine installed in every copy as default, so who knows what else is sneaked in?

    5) NEVER allow Google "cookies". Those are explicitly for tracking.

    6) In system "hosts" file list ALL of Google's many parasites. -- Also assumes this actually works in every operating system, including Google's...

    7) NEVER use a site which requires Google's APIs for crucial function so that one MUST enable javascript: those include captchas and much CGI. That's spreading rapidly. For example, it's become apparently impossible to download the Korora Linux distro without letting Google snoop. It's totally unnecessary for a simple download, but Google has billions to corrupt with. -- NOTE specifically this will rule out Youtube: you're shut out from much of the internet unless surrender to the corporate monster.

    8) Even after ALL the above NEVER use a site which directly supplies Google with information besides javascript and parasites.

    There are surely yet more ways Google snoops: it has people working every day on how to do more and better snooping, besides lock in advertising and every commercial function. It's not too much to say that nearly every corporation will be against you if try to avoid Google. Also general trends are increasing to find ways to snag even those who actively try to avoid being tracked -- because we're the most interesting in every way, and "commercial" spooks just can't stand to not "get it all", either.

    Do even you supposed techies know ALL the ways Google is snooping? ... Of course not.

    And do you know EVERY site to avoid in advance? ... Of course not.

    Even if one could entirely avoid Google, you are then hampered and crippled on the web. Is that the techie ideal of a free internet? ... HELL NO.

    Google is NOT voluntary, and NOT wanted, that's why it SNEAKS in.


    Does the public even suspect this and explicitly agree to be tracked? Or is it impossible to avoid even with knowledge and effort? -- Clearly the latter. Google is NOT voluntary especially to the foolishly trusting public.

    Fenderson's simple little LIE is excusing a corporation to prey on public trust. Manifestly he trusts corporations but not the public.

    Now, I'm sure "John Fenderson" will at this point try to dismiss as unfounded raving of future fears. Or say stay off the net, then. -- Anything to avoid confronting the actuality of Google's unavoidable tracking and its direct ties to the surveillance state.

    So when will this already mega-corporation stop snooping on and tracking us? At the last shreds of privacy on the net? -- HA! It's NOT staying on the net, it's NOW getting into household gadgets to spy on you constantly! Explicitly going for camera and microphone in every room just like Orwell's "1984"! It can't be more clear that whatever slight "voluntary" is left now will soon be gone.

    And will Google's militarized robots obey the Asimov Laws? Of course not: they'll just be first generation Terminators.
    This week Snowden said:
    The second, less understood but far more sinister effect of these classified programs, is that they effectively create "permanent records" of our daily activities, even in the absence of any wrongdoing on our part. This enables a capability called "retroactive investigation," where once you come to the government's attention, they've got a very complete record of your daily activity going back, under current law, often as far as five years.
    Clearly that applies to the information Google has. We just have to trust won't be abused.

    And protesters in Romania were actually threatened by what I've long had in tagline: Google's ability to target you for advertising is EXACTLY what NSA needs to target you as political dissident, NOT coincidentally.

    Google's spying is big as NSA and increasing every day. (Go on, deny it! You'd only prove it's on same scale.) And the problem is not just Google; there are hundreds of corporations which are "commercial" fronts of NSA all conspiring to funnel bits of information to be collated to implement the police state.

    SPYING is the main "business model" of the internet. Commercial interests are greedy for money and control. Greed makes ALL businesses conspire together to TAKE all privacy from "natural persons" in order to use the internet at all.

    When globalist corporations have trapped us all into de facto Panopticon system, even if only "commercial" for non-stop ruthless advertising, will "John Fenderson" blithely tell us we accepted it "voluntarily"?

    Are you utterly unable to look forward and see the dystopia of an economic system based on surveillance that "monetizes" your privacy?

    Wouldn't it be wise to stop "The Rise Of The Machines" NOW?

    Instead of "John Fenderson" lying that "Google is voluntary" we need a "John Carter" yelling "STOP, YOU FOOLS! That's Skynet itself!"


    All the news you saw last week on other sites, re-written to cherry pick points that fit Mike's agenda.

    08:16:37[j-257-1]

     

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

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 1:14pm

    Re:

    Yet you still use Google to find things. Over other alternative search engines. Voluntarily.

     

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

  4.  
    icon
    Mike Taylor (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 1:59pm

    Re: Huh...

    Thank you - yes, it is cool! :-)

    I do have an awesome business card, but it doesn't mention my spare-time career in palaeo. It does give my official job title as "Software Guy", though.

    BTW., if you're interested in how to get into palaeo, some of my story is told in The Accidental Palaeontologist.

     

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

  5.  
    icon
    miatajim (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 2:07pm

    Your sons teacher(s), must love you. Very cool.

     

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

  6.  
    icon
    artp (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 3:24pm

    Microsoft Research's Open Access

    I predict that they will come out with a NEW Open Access license - that won't be Open Access. Sort of like Shared Source. Not pessimistic, I just cheated and looked at their history.

    I'm still not sure why one of the major sports in the US is hoping that Microsoft will start making nice with others. It always ends in disappointment.

     

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

  7. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 3:44pm

    Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    And it's been well over a week since Google purchased Nest for 3.2 million bucks, but not a single article or mention by Mike, or any of the other worshipers - they know better at this point. GOOGLE WILL DO ANYTHING TO SUCK YOUR DAMN DATA.

    http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/Google-buys-Nest-to-feather-its-data-trackers-5160286. php

     

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

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 3:49pm

    Microsoft will go open source because if you pay for a product you expect privacy, when its purchased.( keep an eye on the consumer laws) they'll go the google route open it up insert more garbage for user to have to deal with , because tracking you is what they all do. I do find it funny that most people are ok with all the tracking google and other do but are up in arms about the nsa who purchases it from them .

     

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

  9. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:08pm

    Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    "We need to start from a proper understanding of what copyright is for (it's right there in the Constitution, folks!), "

    we already understand what it is, that's right ITS PROPER UNDERSTANDING !!!!

    As you say, its right there in the Constitution (even though you linked to Wikipedia!!).


    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.


    BY

    SECURING FOR A LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS AND INVENTORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR RESPECTIVE WRITING AND DISCOVERIES.

    You might want to redefine it, but we all understand it now.


    "with a recognition that there's no clear Creator/Consumer dichotomy now (if there ever was), and a realistic perspective on how technology is irrevocably changing the field"

    what the hell does that suppose to mean, "no clear creator/consumer dichotomy now" ?????????

    I would of thought the very reason why TD drones on and on about copyright is because there is (in its mind) a clear dichotomy. That being the consumers want stuff that is copyrighted, and the creators want their constitutional protection for the exclusive right to their respective works.

    That's a clear dichotomy! You (as a consumer) and what the constitution says you cannot have (its right there in the constitution, and wiki).

    The dichotomy is that you want it but the constitution and the law backing the constitution says you cannot have it.

    Just saying something does not make it true, although it is common TD practice to do so.


    " and a realistic perspective on how technology is irrevocably changing the field."

    and you fail to elaborate on that as well, are you saying its easier to steal and defy the constitution now days with 'technology' therefore as its easier it should also be legal ?

    Its a hell of a lot easier to kill someone these days with "technology" (guns and such) so by your argument murder should be legalised ?

    What field is technology changing??? it might change how things are created, it does not change the underlying laws in regard to that creation.

    existing copyright is a reflection of the constitution, should you want to quote the constitution make sure it agrees with your argument.

    It does not.. and no technology will change that basic fact.

     

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

  10. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:12pm

    Re:

    "I do find it funny that most people are ok with all the tracking google and other do but are up in arms about the nsa who purchases it from them ."

    we find it funny too, most people are upset about all the Google spying, but this is TD, they are Google apologists.
    But its still funny... as some point out here.

     

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

  11. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:16pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    I noticed that too, its been on all the 'real' news and technology blogs, but not a single word here.... I WONDER WHY!!!!!

     

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

  12. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:16pm

    Re: Re:

    HELL NO WE DONT !!!!! voluntarily... NEVER. HATE FUCKING GOOLAG

     

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

  13. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:29pm

    SPYING is the main "business model" of the internet.

    Exactly right !!!!

    So 100% correct, everyone on the internet who makes money has a massive interest if:

    FINDING OUT WHAT YOU WANT AND PROVIDING IT TO YOU.

    TD does it, it has found a very small market for freetards and pirate supporters, and provides those people products and services (and comment) to support for them.

    Google does it, it find out what people want by spying on users and finding what they want, they then direct advertising and services to provide those services it IS their business model.

    NSA does not do it, it does not use its data in order to provide a service for profit.

    Facebook does it, Masnick you LIVE it, you make your living off finding out what people want (from statistics and spying from your web site) and you provide a service based on that spying.

    and you accept that when you go on the internet, you know it is the case, stating otherwise is simply a lie to yourself.

     

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

  14. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:32pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    do you remember when Google came to your house and asked you if you wanted photos of your house taken for display to the entire planet???

    I don't.

     

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

  15. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:46pm

    Re: Re: Huh...

    I have never met a real 'programmer' who calls himself a 'programmer', "Software guys" (System engineers, software engineers, analysts (or systems analysts) but NEVER "programmers".

    (well may be sometimes)

    looking at your web site, I would say you are in the field of systems analyst.

    looks like basically what the NSA does for a living too !!!!

    "Search and harvesting" "integrating into new or existing platforms" "mix and match between our pieces and yours"

    So basically enable people to search and harvest giant databases and allow them to derive all sorts of information from that meta-data in order find things out ! and to provide more value from that data. (do it for money)..

    but the 'software guy' title is pretty cool.. I could think of worse (programmer for one).

     

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

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:50pm

    Re: Re: Huh...

    your a database guy, so what about "Super Schema"
    or "Schema scammer"

     

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

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 4:54pm

    Re: Re: Huh...

    I co-write the palaeontology blog Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week, or SV-POW! for short.

    went there because I did not know what a Sauropod looked like, found a picture of a dead mouse, said to self "that dino looks just like a dead mouse".
    Note: theory confirmed by reading text ! :D

     

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

  18.  
    identicon
    weneedhelp - not signed in, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 5:12pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Who's we? Its funny the comments with your snowflake are awfully blue-esque in nature.

     

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

  19.  
    icon
    ottermaton (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 5:30pm

    Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!


    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

    BY

    SECURING FOR A LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS AND INVENTORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR RESPECTIVE WRITING AND DISCOVERIES.


    Boy, your reading comprehension skills are a bit lacking (to say the least) aren't they? You stress the last part of the sentence of that sentence as if it's the end-all-be-all of the Copyright Clause and the reason for it's existence. But it's not.

    Securing those rights is just a side-effect of the real purpose of copyright. Or, it might be more accurate to say that it's the tool that is used. And the only reason for the existence of that tool is TO PROMOTE THE PROGRESS OF SCIENCE AND USEFUL ARTS.

    If, at the time of writing, the authors would have thought of a different way to achieve that goal those "rights" would be have never existed in the first place. They certainly didn't prior to that, and they are certainly not inalienable human rights. Governments don't grant those type of rights, they can only make laws forbidding taking them away. This copyright "right" was GRANTED by the government. Big difference.

    You might want to redefine it, but we all understand it now.

    No, clearly you do not.

     

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

  20.  
    icon
    Paraquat (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 5:49pm

    Re: Microsoft Research's Open Access

    I wouldn't get too excited about Microsoft Research making their papers publicly available. Maybe I'll be surprised, but I would bet that Microsoft hasn't done any research of significance. Well OK, maybe legal research, like looking for innovative new ways to corrupt patent law and drive start-ups into bankruptcy - they've broken new ground there. It certainly was creative the way they funded the SCO UNIX lawsuits, and continue to fund patent-troll Intellectual Ventures. The amazing methods Microsoft uses to extort license fees from Android vendors ought to win them a Nobel prize.

     

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

  21.  
    icon
    Alana (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 6:00pm

    Re: SPYING is the main "business model" of the internet.

    Mike didn't write the post, you idiot.

     

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

  22.  
    icon
    Alana (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 6:00pm

    Re: Re: SPYING is the main "business model" of the internet.

    (At least, not the Mike you're referring to.)

     

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

  23.  
    identicon
    The Old Man in The Sea, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 6:20pm

    One AC who got out of the wrong side of the bed today

    Sheesh, AC what's got up your nostrils today?

    Anyway, I think the best point out from Mike Taylor's post this week was about the food banks. I am involved with a small food bank myself. Our "clientele" consists of those who cannot access support services because they cannot get access to the health care card. They earn too much to receive help but not enough to properly live.

    Here in Australia, if you earn below a particular fortnightly wage, you can get a health care card which enables you to get access to support services. To maintain this access, you can then earn an extra amount each fortnight. But if you earn just above the the initial amount but below the maintenance amount you cannot access the services, go figure. It is this group of people who quite often need help but in general cannot access the help required.

    Under our current federal government, these support services will become increasingly difficult to access and the requirement for access to food banks will become more prevalent.

     

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

  24.  
    identicon
    The Old Man in The Sea, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 6:30pm

    Re: Re: Re: Huh... Point being?

    You obviously have a very short attention span. You didn't look further down the page at the other articles covered.

     

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

  25.  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 7:06pm

    "because Techdirt readers are human beings"
    [citation needed]

     

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

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 7:13pm

    Re: Re: Microsoft Research's Open Access

    Have you looked into what Microsoft's Research Department does? They actually have some pretty cutting edge technology research going on. More on what can be used together rather than how to make something but still, it's pretty cool what they have.

    Now keep in mind, cool does not equate to useful let alone marketable to any size-able audience.

    I have a slight feeling this is a move to license patents on the research even if the papers are open. They are just opening the papers so that ANYONE who figures out how to make the millions spent on mostly useless but really cool R&D can be turned into a income source for Microsoft.

     

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

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 7:22pm

    Re: Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    Do you remember when anyone can take a picture of your house because it's in public and you can't do anything about it?

    I do.

     

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

  28.  
    icon
    CK20XX (profile), Jan 25th, 2014 @ 7:59pm

    Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

    BY

    SECURING FOR A LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS AND INVENTORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR RESPECTIVE WRITING AND DISCOVERIES.


    70+ years is not limited in any way except an extremely perverted one.

     

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

  29.  
    identicon
    kyle, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 10:28pm

    thx for posting on Meacher's speech. it's heartening to hear a politician speak logically and with sympathy to the difficulties of the human condition. as he points out this situation is,when you think about it, quite stupid. a benefit to no one except for a very few, in the very short term. was beginning to wonder if I wasn't sane...

     

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

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 25th, 2014 @ 11:30pm

    darryl just hates it when due process is enforced. He's Australian, but he supports Australia having to pay extra dollar for American entertainment, which he loathes with a deep-seated passion but will defend to the death all the corrupt practices surrounding it. What a douchebag.

     

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

  31.  
    icon
    Mike Taylor (profile), Jan 26th, 2014 @ 12:35am

    Re: Re: Re: Huh...

    Well, as I said, the blog has diverged a bit fro its original sauropods-only mission. The mouse is one in a series of Thinks to Make and Do posts in which we try to learn interesting things from dead animals. See for example part 3: Butchering a Wallaby (WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT).

     

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

  32.  
    icon
    Mike Taylor (profile), Jan 26th, 2014 @ 12:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Huh...

    "I would say you are in the field of systems analyst. looks like basically what the NSA does for a living too !!!!"

    No.

     

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

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 11:40am

    It's not possible to sell a license to use a trademark


    Of course it is. As an example: just about every McDonald's store is a franchise (which is not owned by the McDonald's corporation) and they pay a substantial fee to use the McDonald's trademark. Nothing is stopping them from selling hamburgers under another name; they're pretty much paying for the trademark.

     

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

  34.  
    icon
    Leigh Beadon (profile), Jan 26th, 2014 @ 11:45am

    Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    I leave this comment not so much for blue's sake but for others, in case they have missed the amusing irony:

    Maybe Blue has a bit of a point that we are being over-simple in calling Google voluntary -- there is some challenge in avoiding it, and doing so would drastically reduce the usefulness of the internet even beyond the direct loss of Google tools.

    Now, what would happen if Blue had his way with copyright? I mean all the things he's advocated: secondary & tertiary liabilities, ISP strike programs and other heavy enforcement at the user level, official treatment of all piracy as "simple theft". Blue has always insisted that it's easy to just go without media that you can't acquire legally and for a fee -- but how many "steps" would be involved in preparing your computer to go online without almost immediately becoming a criminal by accidentally clicking the wrong link or watching the wrong youtube video?

    So I challenge blue to try both -- spend a week completely avoiding any chance of Google seeing you at all in any way, and then a week avoiding any chance of any shred of unauthorized material crossing your connection.

    (There, that's two weeks without ootb on the internet)

     

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

  35.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 12:15pm

    Can we submit a photograph of ootb spines to the sauropod blog?

     

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

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 1:52pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    Pardon my french - that's 3.2 BILLION bucks. They're much more desperate to suck your data than previously realized.

     

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

  37. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 4:57pm

    Re: Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    you cant 'pick and choose' from the constitution buddy, same with laws, you cant choose the ones you like, and reject the ones you don't like.

    get real.. its what the constitution THE AUTHOR QUOTED says, you don't like what it says, stop using the term all together.

    but don't make yourself look stupid by omitting the part that IS THE MEANING of why it was put there.

    One part say "artists need protect" the second part is HOW THEY ARE PROTECTED..

    nice try, but no prize..

    until your asked to re write the constitution, you might as well accept the one you have.

     

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

  38. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:01pm

    Re: Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    I would say the limit on 70 years is "a reasonable time", you can argue times all day, but you cant change what the constitution says..

    The constitution is a guide, for the creation of laws.
    Its what the constitution says, A limited time is limited to 70+ years (or whatever) that is a law issue.

    If you become a lawmaker you can argue another period should be consider "a limited time" but your not, do deal with it..

    If you have to wait 70 years to have the right to copy that thing, even after that 70 you still value it enough to want to copy, then it still have value for the owner of the copyright AND YOU.. otherwise you would not want to pirate it.

     

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

  39.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:03pm

    Re: Re: SPYING is the main "business model" of the internet.

    never said he did, or implied that he did, you genius.

     

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

  40.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:19pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    how do you avoid google driving by your house and taking a picture of it, and posting it so the entire world can view it?

     

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

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:20pm

    Re: Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    even if you are not on the internet and don't have a computer Google is spying on you, as you should well know.
    (you honestly don't?)

     

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

  42. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:22pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    "Maybe Blue has a bit of a point that we are being over-simple in calling Google voluntary -- there is some challenge in avoiding it,"

    impossible challenges!!!

    See even TD's writers are concerned with the TD 'extremists' that populate it. As they should be.

     

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

  43. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:25pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    but how could you even use TD web site without being spied on by Google, TD is a spy front for Google just like many other site, Masnick reports to TD with information to enable Google to direct advertising for TD readers.

    You know it, we know it, some of you extremists don't want to believe it, some deny it, but we all know the reality. As you tacitly admit.

     

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

  44. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:29pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    was this post hidden because you don't agree with it, or simply because you hate to see the truth?

    Is that the same reason why TD has not covered this issue? we've been waiting, but NOTHING, and when someone does say something its hidden, very telling..

    says more about Masnicks attitude to Google than a million words of denial that he is not a Google apologist.

     

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

  45. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:37pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    "Blue has always insisted that it's easy to just go without media that you can't acquire legally"

    it does not matter what is "easier" or not, 'easier' is not a defence for theft. The point is YOU WANT IT, therefore you value it on some level (if you did not value it you would not want it) legal or not, you feel if you value something (but are not willing to pay for it) you have 'the right' to acquire it illegally, with the excuse its "easier" to not pay for it, or to acquire it.

    so you want it, you consider it of value to you, so you want it (demand), and you value it (value), but because you have to pay for something you want and value and you have an 'easier' way to acquire it you feel you have the right to take what you want and value for free, that is simple theft.

    If it has value for you (even if you would prefer to steal it) then it has far more value to the person or group who created it, and enough value for honest people to accept that value and pay for it, in turn maintaining its value of it to the person who made it.

    Its clear if you did not want it and you did not value it you would not want to steal it.

     

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

  46. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:47pm

    Re: Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    so your saying you have to make a concerted effort to 'avoid Google' and to avoid having unauthorized material crossing your connection??

    if you think someone could not go for a week without having some "Youtube" send you "unauthorized material" then you need to look at the service providers and the Googles to fix that, which they can easily do, (they know who to search data for information you know)!!

    If you are trying to avoid Google how are you not going to be able to avoid watching a Youtube vid ? Youtube is GOOGLE !

    TD is Google too (as you also know), TD gives its meta-data to Google and Goolag pay TD.

     

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

  47. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 5:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    BY

    SECURING FOR A LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS AND INVENTORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR RESPECTIVE WRITING AND DISCOVERIES.

    I put that separately, as it has one important issue..

    IT IS THE VERY DEFINITION AND REASON FOR COPYRIGHT LAW. (in the US).

    BY

    SECURING FOR A LIMITED TIMES TO AUTHORS AND INVENTORS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THEIR RESPECTIVE WRITING AND DISCOVERIES.

    =

    COPYRIGHT

    people here are always talking about "what is copyright" and trying to redefine it for their own reasons (usually desire to steal).

    But I include it because it is the definition of copyright, directly from the constitution, it is what copyright is, so it might pay for you to read that line 100 times a day until you understand not only the words but the meaning of it.

    Its just one little line, but it has a lot of meaning.

     

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

  48.  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Jan 26th, 2014 @ 6:15pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    So much caps lock use, and you still miss it...

    Here, I'll try and make it nice and clear, and point out the flaw in your argument.

    This is the text:

    'To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8'

    Did you catch it this time? That 'by' means that the second half, the 'securing for limited times...' bit is the method to accomplish the first half, the 'exclusive rights' are not the goal, despite your claims to the contrary.

    If those 'exclusive rights' fail to accomplish the purpose, namely 'To promote the progress of science and useful arts', then they are going against the entire purpose copyright was brought into law in the US.

     

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

  49.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 6:17pm

    Re: "Google is voluntary." -- Now there's a good brazen LIE.

    Don't forget about system32. That's a tracking program that Google paid Microsoft to install on the Windows OS. If you want to avoid Google, you should delete it.

     

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

  50.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 26th, 2014 @ 11:44pm

    darryl just hates it when due process is enforced.

     

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

  51.  
    icon
    ottermaton (profile), Jan 29th, 2014 @ 9:36am

    Re: Re: Re: Creatir/consumer dichotomy ?? what !!!!!

    you cant 'pick and choose' from the constitution buddy,

    I didn't. WTF are you talking about?

    One part say "artists need protect"

    Where the hell does it say that? You are completely making shit up now.

    nice try, but no prize..

    Fuck you very much.

     

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


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This