Re: Re: The problem is with the means, not the ends
You say: "thats right, so dont ever try to enfore ANY crime EVER because it might at some point actually hurt someone who is innocent."You probably mean "don't enforce any law" but even if you'd stated it correctly it's pure strawman. NO ONE you are "arguing" with took that position.Try to argue against the actual position that they've stated: That ACTA doesn't address child porn AT ALL. Go ahead, try to use logic not logical fallacies.
Sure roads might have a legitimate use but no matter how hard you try, liability is attached. People were driving over the speed limit. People were using roads to drive to and from crime scenes. Sorry, it's just too bad. That's why we closed all the roads.
And you come to that conclusion how? They have no bearing as long as you completely ignore the fact that SOPA/Protect IP will make this sort of abuse much, much easier and much more common. Well, you are ignoring that, so your comment kind of makes sense.
Well, yes, you are confused. Content creators have NO inherent RIGHTS to ANY monopoly protection. Period. That isn't a RIGHT like Freedom of Speech. There is no "you shall have a monopoly" clause in the Constitution.
Why should "we the people" give them any monopoly at all? Many creative industries do quite well without such monopolies.
You are assuming that monopoly is their RIGHT and it isn't. It is a PRIVILEGE, given by US to them to encourage their creativity. That is the exchange. THEY get a limited monopoly and WE benefit from their creativity.
There is nothing in the vastly extended monopoly that encourages the ORIGINAL creator -- we're long past that cause and effect. Today the BENEFIT accrues to some big corporation and the original creator gets nothing.
The agreed-upon exchange has been destroyed. WE get NO benefit so why should we keep extending the privilege?
Re: No matter how prolix you get, Mike, problem is still PIRACY.
No, but the existence of the Internet does mean that the industry must change if it is to survive.
Their refusal to recognize this fact is their problem, not the problem innocent users who are being treated like criminals.
The problem is not "piracy", the problem is new technology. Barring outlawing all new technology from here on out, there is only one solution for the movie industry: Find out how to live with the world as it is not how they wish it to be. Old industries have always had to do that.
If some in the industry can't figure it out and go under, don't worry, there are many others who can and will figure it out. Laws designed to protect the old dinosaurs only delay the inevitable. Soon, the movie industry will be composed entirely of those who happily coexist with the Internet and the new technologies.
The difference here is that PIPA and SOPA make the abuse of the law legal. Under these laws you couldn't stop the abuse because they actually protect and even encourage the abuse.
Laws are supposed to protect the innocent -- these laws encourage the abuse of the innocent and protect the abuser. There are absolutely no penalties for misusing these laws. All the penalties are on the accused, even if they are completely innocent.
What's REALLY strange is that companies who are supposed to be providing services (i.e. phone and internet connections) think they have the right to dictate what you may and may not do with your PRIVATE property, your phone -- and that there is a sense that rooting your phone is, somehow, wrong.
Well, from their viewpoint, a rooted phone has already shown that its owner could care less about violating his carrier contract, and his device EULA, and probably Google's Android agreement to boot.
Michael, you make many assertions without any facts.
My carrier works for me. I don't work for them. I pay them, like I would any employee, and they provide the service I've contracted them for. No document gives them the legal right to dictate what I do with equipment I own. And they know that. You're the only one who doesn't seem to understand what's going on.
If you with to claim I am "violating my contract", you will need to provide a direct quote from that contract. Same with the mythical EULA you claim I violate.
The worst they can threaten me with is that I may "void my warranty". That's the extent of their powers in this matter -- and it's a pretty empty threat.
You think rooting is illegal in some way? It isn't. You claim it "violates my contract"? It doesn't.