...it raises serious questions about why they were purchased and put into use in the first place...
Oh, I think we all know why they were purchased. As for why they were put into use, it's a principle established by long precedent that the government never negotiates away or takes out of service any piece of Congressional pork until it's been paid for and its sponsors adequately compensated.
Let's say that I make available a copyrighted work in a share folder, and the 1,000 people download it from me. Under Mike's view, where there's no distribution right, I haven't done anything wrong since I didn't violate the reproduction right.
If you want to get pedantic about it, you did violate the reproduction right when your computer retrieved the data and transmitted it on request. I did not violate the reproduction right when I simply received and stored the data that you reproduced for me.
The FTC is upset over the robocalls because they have personally been pestered by these people.
The FTC doesn't care about the fraud as they haven't fallen victim to the scam.
Not quite. It's the FTC's job to do something about the robocalls, but they aren't law enforcement and have no power to deal with the fraud. It's the FBI's job to tackle the fraud, but they have no authority to prevent people using the telephone network.
Perhaps now the FTC have shown a lead, the FBI will stir themselves.
I think the truth is that the President just doesn't have the power people expect he has. The Federal government is less about Congress and the President than it is about what might be called the permanent civil service, the agencies that go on and on with their own agendas regardless of which party holds office. I don't believe George W Bush had anything more to do with the abuses of his administration than blindly signing the papers that were put in front of him, and I don't believe Obama (or for that matter, Eric Holder) has enough of a leash on the security agencies to restrain their existing power, let alone roll them back.
And let's not forget what happened to the last President who acted decisively against the wishes of one of the agencies. No other president has taken that chance for fifty years.
Re: Re: Is Liebowitz an "econmist"? If so, then like all, he's crazy.
Yes, but the effective tax rate is asymptotic to the marginal rate - the more you make, the closer it gets. When The Beatles released "Taxman", they really were paying a marginal rate of 95%, and an effective rate probably well over 80%.
Well, simply, everyone should use encryption for everything as a matter of course. It should be built into mail applications. You wouldn't post a letter unsealed, or write your correspondence on postcards, so why would you not take the trouble to seal email?
I'm regularly asked to sign Draconian non-disclosure agreements for my business, yet the people who are so concerned for their secrets are quite happy to exchange drawings and sensitive business information by unencrypted email that can be snooped from any place on the planet. I've had PGP or its equivalent for twenty years and I always ask these NDA folk to exchange keys, but so far nobody has ever bothered.
I don't think Sweden is corrupt, just careful and conservative. They make sure the cases are judged by the right people, so that the right verdict will be returned. All right-thinking people will agree that's the right way things should be done, all right?
Microsoft is being very, very clear that they are and will do everything they can to get rid of the desktop eventually.
As long as there are desktop computers, or should I say computers with keyboards, they will have operating systems. They just might not run Windows. I suspect this fact will sink into Microsoft sometime soon and they'll reconsider their policy.
Meantime, they can do as they please with their latest unnecessary version of Windows. I won't be using it until I need a new computer and I can't get one with anything else.
There is always the possibility that Server Beach was well aware of what they were doing and were making a point of their own. If every host responded to DMCA requests in this manner, it would anger the public enough to demand action. A million and a half bloggers may turn out to be a good start.
There's precedent. US 6,280,318 (2001) patents the use of a fan to cool electronic equipment cabinets. US 7,499,276 (2009) also patents the use of a fan to cool electronic equipment cabinets, with the important difference that it sucks instead of blows. I see no reason why you wouldn't be granted a patent for the wheel, but when you file, remember to specify in the claims that it includes wheels turning in both directions, otherwise you may lose the reversing rent to a competitor.
Indeed. While I understand that the civil tort case has to be brought by private parties, what we actually need to see is "United States v. Innovatio et al", with a real prospect of those famously disproportionate Federal penalties being handed down (like 1 year on each of 8000 counts, to be served consecutively). I'm sure this would only have to be done once.