What frightens me is that I can see a group of pale puritianical types in a cube farm somewhere on floor B-124 at Google staying up all night thinking this stuff up, deciding which space position the censorship will begin at.
Entirely for our own good, you understand. We need to be protected from perfectly good Anglo-Saxon words while words that originated in French before becoming part of English which every serious perv knows are left completely alone!
Even if I was to agree, totally, that the old scheme could be gamed to only provide relatives and friends already in Canada with employment, with the help of a trusty and friendly immigration consultant saying that the proposed business requires VC blessing won't stop that. It'll just add cost up front to legitimate business class immigrants who were always going to set up shop here anyway.
Incidentally there's nothing at all wrong with with employing friends and family particuarly if it keeps them off the dole and become tax paying, contributing members of society. It's long been the nature of immigrant communities that they "stick to thier own" for hiring and employment for at least the first generation particularly when places like Canada are so culturally different from where they came from. The same applies to the United States.
If we can get the needs of Canada and the immigrant to line up, which they often do, then both get properly served.
More likely we'll get unethical venture capitalists taking over from unethical immigration consultants who rob Canada and the migrant blind. And just as we get the immigration consultant scams under control we pull this one off.
Mike's centuries of history is actually thousands of years of it.
Of course you won't find it neatly filed away under "Copyright" as both the name of the law/concept are a relatively new innovation with a new stated goal.
Among other things some Roman emperors forbade unauthorized images of them be made and sold. Each one that tried that failed and the market flooded with busts and other goodies portraying the Emperor's likeness flooded the empire. Given that manufacture or these things often brought the death penalty with them and not a fine that may seem surprising but all the emperor did was to create a market for these things where none existed before. Remember, too, that almost the only way of avoiding one of several horrific deaths the Romans kept on hand for executions, was to be a Roman citizen then you'd have the relative mercy of being beheaded instead of all the other agonizing alternatives the Roman's kept on hand.
Remember, too, that the Emperor was a God and worshiped as one in Rome so he'd expect his orders to be instantly followed whether he was sane or not.
That you can't read or research history doesn't surprise me nor does not being able to find what Mike could quite easily.
Other places enforcement didn't act as a deterrent are easily found too. Poaching by hungry peasants on the local baron's hunting preserve was never stopped by enforcement. Ever. Thus far the criminalization of marijuana complete with deterrence hasn't had much in the way of deterrence value and far more to do with taking up and creating an artificial demand for more prison cells. Oh, and increasingly violent activity by suppliers of an otherwise mostly harmless substance is criminal but not, for the most part, the use of the drug itself. It has far better uses as a medicinal agent. So much for the automatic increase in enforcement married to a decrease in whatever activity supposedly it's designed to deter just isn't there. Actually the best case against your view about that is the rise of Christianity given that it flourished and spread widely, even as Christians were being killed off at an increasing rate while adherents to the religion increased.
I'm not staying up all night to prove you're no historian or even a candidate for becoming one. It just isn't necessary. There's no need for Mike to "believe" that the historical evidence he has is anything but fact. It's historical fact.
And you are a moron.
I just hope that you'll make a better lawyer than your research skills indicate here because you're simply hopeless at researching history except to enter into your own style of "confirmation bias". Then again, lawyers have to do research as well so I guess you'd be well off my list should I need a solicitor one day.
You are right on one score. There is no infallibility here. Increased enforcement can work for a short time period...short, before the activity being deterred returns to a normal level or even slightly higher. There may fallibility there but the mass of the evidence agrees with Mike.
As for being a piece of work, have a good long look in the mirror. You'll see one there while you shave. If you shave.
Please try not to trip over your ego on steroids on the way out the door and fall flat on your face into your ignorance.
Actually, he has someone to punish. Any accredited Twitter representative in the court up to and including their lawyer who is presumed to be taking instruction from them.
Even then, the fine can only be a "small" one and with some conditions that make it impossible for the judge to keep fining Twitter and/or its representatives over and over again for the same thing.
As has been noted Criminal Contempt requires a hearing. The fine I'm discussing is more in the way of the fine one might pay in any other civil matter like parking for two hours and 10 seconds in a two hour zone. You can appeal that, too, but in most cases you still pay the fine for parking.
Most judges I know of in Canada, where I live would put a stay on the order they issued as the appeal went forward. Particularly if the grounds for the appeal was a serious point of law. I'm presuming that the judge issued the "produce the data" order because he interprets Twitter's refusal to do so as, in some way, hindering the collection of information useful in a prosecution which is, in and of itself a criminal act.
Which leads us all out of the civil realm and into the criminal one again.
Though that changes nothing in terms of Twitter's right to appeal the contempt ruling and the judge's original ruling.
Incidentally none of this has to do with the judge being fair. He can pat himself on the back as much as he wants he's there to correctly interpret the law, make rulings based on that interpretation based on precedent, similar cases and so on down the line. Fair doesn't enter the picture.
Nor does effectively denying Twitter its right to appeal. That, pardon my phrasing, is contemptible in and of itself.
10 years without renewal sounds about right. Damned near perfect actually.
It's a pipe dream, of course,but far more in line with what the creators of things like copyright and patent law were looking for and, in fact, created as opposed to the corrupt corpus of law and precedent we have now.
You must, of course, be referring to a talentless collection of multimillionaires who freely stole everything from riffs to entire songs, uncredited, and got away with it while tying to sue the butts off of anyone who tried something even remotely like that on them.
Hint: one of the barf bag songs of the past century given the number of times it has, uninvited and increasingly unwanted invaded our ear canals.
If you guessed Led Zeppelin after the hints you have just won yourself a three month long cruise through every distillery around the world that the Bronfman family owns and produces beverages at from exclusively stolen recipes. (As do most distilleries.) Enjoy!
Now, what was that you were saying about failed artists and the economically marginal, entitled losers?
As for the right you claim on the chair a reminder is in order that your claimed right only goes as far as to your sale of the chair and it is delivered to the buyer at which point your claimed right is the buyer`s right until the chair is sold again. That, and you have zero control over what the original buyer does with that chair or on what terms they can sell it. Unless, that is, voluntarily agreed to by seller and buyer prior to the sale being finalized (on delivery).
"Intellectual Property" is a privilege extended by the body politic to, in the United States promote the "useful arts and sciences" or, in the British Empire and Commonwealth to promote education, trade and free information flow. It`s not property as defined in the free market it has always been a legislative or constitutional privilege and/or directive to the market to promote a broad, laudable goal in the market. What "IP" is not is a right. Nor, at least in Canada as of this past summer, is it license-able for the purpose of fair dealing/fair use though, under Canadian Law and the Canadian Constitution fair dealing/fair use are protected rights.
IP extremists such as yourself try to recast a temporary privilege as a right which they are clearly not. Nor are they property in any sense of real property from a chair to a mansion to an aircraft carrier. Trying to recast it as something it isn't doesn't mean you've miraculaously changed it into something you want it to be.
Nice to see after being absent most of the summer that some things never change. And no it won't do copyright maximalists and those still fighting the pro-SOPA/PIPA battle one bit of good except bring forward the day of copyright's demise and theirs by their continued abuse of the privileges they get with so-called "intellectual property" laws.
Our survey also revealed that 100% of anti-pirate particles, anti-pirate things and non-stuff like that smoothie you're sure you just made but has vanished, even though the blender is full of smoothie stuff clinging to the sides.
If by time delay you mean time zones you're right. Other than that you're completely wrong as far as telcos are concerned, cablecos, too.
For their own uses or for paid uses the messages, yes pictures are messanges, are sent out on their own VPNs which have enormous capacity. Far more, I suspect, than Counter Strike Force has. So the reality is that the messages/streams leave London and, in the case of where I worked before I retired, ended up in the TELUS Class Two switching centre in Vancouver a couple of microseconds later. It may be even less time for Bell Canada in Toronto. Now, depending on factors like sponsorship, Bell owns CTV which means it's a no brainer there so the next step is the CTV or anyone wanting to put up a live stream and pay the cost is welcome to. Complete with branding and all that good stuff, of course.
In remote parts of BC and Yukon it was being streamed live. Possibly in NWT and Nunavut as well. No TV in many of these places, you know.
What you seem to be telling me is that the Internet is slower in getting a signal from London to Vancouver that the older analogue transmission was either by bouncing audio and video off satellites or on cable under the ocean was. Even taking propagation delay into account.
I'm just not buying that one. Nor should anyone else. What delay there may be propagation delay should a satellite shot or two be needed but beyond that there's none.
Goodness, man, all of this is on fibre optics anyway. There's even a transatlantic fire cable from Land's End in England to Halifax NS just in case satellites fail. Which they are this year due to enormous storms and sunspots on the the Sun this year and coronal mass ejections. Heck, I've watched it happen enough on my satellite tv connection!
Game servers, bless them, suffer from capacity issues at times which means the server can't accept all the connections coming into or leaving them. Too many players trying to get on at the same time or not a big enough pipe connected back to the cableco or telco that they're connected to.