What they are trying to say is that disclosure of metadata — the details about phone calls, without the actual voice — isn't a big deal, not something for Americans to get upset about if the government knows. Let's take a closer look at what they are saying:
They know you rang a phone sex service at 2:24 am and spoke for 18 minutes. But they don't know what you talked about.
They know you called the suicide prevention hotline from the Golden Gate Bridge. But the topic of the call remains a secret.
They know you spoke with an HIV testing service, then your doctor, then your health insurance company in the same hour. But they don't know what was discussed.
They know you received a call from the local NRA office while it was having a campaign against gun legislation, and then called your senators and congressional representatives immediately after. But the content of those calls remains safe from government intrusion.
They know you called a gynecologist, spoke for a half hour, and then called the local Planned Parenthood's number later that day. But nobody knows what you spoke about.
Sorry, your phone records—oops, "so-called metadata"—can reveal a lot more about the content of your calls than the government is implying.
Unless you're the AC who posted the comment I was replying to, I completely agree.
"I don’t think Sheriff Winder’s use constitutes abuse. That is largely an issue regarding the roles of shame and forgiveness in Salt Lake County, rather than copyright..."
Copyright has a clearly defined purpose, and it's not for censoring websites officialdom don't like. Quoting Mike from his post; "There's clearly no copyright interest in the photos. They weren't created because of copyright. The government isn't using them to promote greater public learning or to support more content creation." The use of copyright law to suppress speech is one of the reasons why respect for copyright law is at an all-time low and still falling.
In your blind rage you might have missed that this post doesn't discredit copyright at all, or even call for any changes to copyright law other than clarifying the logical assumption that local governments shouldn't be able to claim copyright on their creations, as per the federal government.
For someone who clearly loves copyright, you're strangely at ease with such an obvious example of it's abuse, especially since it's the government censoring public info. Says a lot about you...
"Oh look, Pirate Mike is whining about the MPAA again yet not offering any substantive suggestions to solve the problem he's whining about."
Stupid troll is stupid. The solution to the problem is for the MPAA to shut the hell up and let the treaty that's been on the table for years move forward. The treaty is the solution, and the MPAA is blocking it, which Mike has very clearly explained numerous times.
Your inability understanding is not Mike's or TD's problem, it's entirely your own.
And this is why you simply have no place in these discussions. You're an immature child trying to be heard by the adults. It'll never work; no matter what you say nobody will take you seriously when you post crap like that.
"... but some people believe that a decrease in piracy is a good thing, because, you know, it means that less people's rights are being violated."
The true basis of the anti-piracy crusade has never been about "violating rights", only 'lost' or 'stolen' income. If anti-piracy efforts do not result in more income to artists (not just copyright holders) then they are a waste of time and money, and don’t come near justifying the negative consequences.
"I won't run away like a coward and make all sorts of excuses and pretend like I can't answer your questions."
"That many of his peers reported this and also knew him well should tell you what you need to know."
It tells us something we all know very well: teenagers can be malicious little bastards, and his 'peers' knew exactly what sort of trouble he'd get in if they reported him. They didn't report him out of fear, they did it for entertainment.