Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What a whiney baby + @ "Oh, you didnít just say that."
He made a fucking movie, or did that prove too much for you to handle? He spent time, money and effort (just like your AA saints) to create a documentary on the Piratebay. Whether you think it's biased or not doesn't matter, the fact is he made speech of his own, that is now being threatened. He did express himself.
Re: Re: Re: What a whiney baby + @ "Oh, you didnít just say that."
Well, it's finally been said. The copyright loving troll has out and out said that the only artist is one who does it for money, not for love of the art or because he has something to say.
Let's forget the possibility of making money while not relying on the exclusion principle; let's ignore the possibility that many works are on the site deliberately with their creator's permission; nope, the only artist is a professional one, who needs to exclude as many people as possible from viewing his art and if his wish to exclude means that the little people's right and ability to make speech and art must be destroyed, that's a small price to pay.
Stand up and take a bow, Out_of_the_blue! You've earned it! Then exit stage left and kindly stay the fuck away from where you're not wanted.
If so...then I'm not sorry to say, but he's an idiot. While his message is serious, and has serious implications and I support what he's saying...the fact his camera is acting like it's drunk detracts attention away from what he's saying. Twice while watching, I had to rewind because I focused more on the erratic movement of the camera than on what he was saying.
I want to know how it's possible for a site that never deletes a torrent to take away speech. If you go on about how you can't make back money for your movie - that's a completely separate issue. Even if true, the movie has already been made, the speech has been spoken.
IF you want to apply for a job as editor at Techdirt, so you can correct these oh so horrible mistakes in one wrong word (in your eyes), apply via e-mail to Mike and send a glittering resume. However, please please please, don't come whinging here when (not if) you're rejected.
Prenda lawyers send out letters in an attempt to make cash.
Judge at one of the cases smells something fishy and, after many shenanigans, asks the Prenda team for their side of the tale, to try and defend themselves.
They say no.
They say they won't talk.
This is the end of due process for them, at least where they're concerned. They had ample opportunity to set the record straight, but willingly and knowingly said they won't talk. Therefore, the only evidence before Judge Wright and other judges, the only evidence before them that they could look at and rule on, was evidence that pointed to Prenda's guilt. By pleading the fifth, by not talking, Team Prenda didn't enter anything to contest that.
I'm not a lawyer and I'm able to understand that much. What about you?
"However, in the aftermath of Columbine shooting, school districts have to take a "zero tolerence" policy when it comes to juvenile antics "
Just like when two boys pointed fingers at each other and made gun noises? That's right, that's what really happened. Two boys pointed their fingers at each other, made noise, and were promptly suspended, thanks to zero tolerance. Do you support that too?
Yes of course - internet subscribers being told that they are violating COPYRIGHT law cannot contest it, even though it invokes a law enforced by government, and was in fact a system heavily pushed by Joe Biden.
If there is no force of law behind six strikes, then the subscribers can rest easy, knowing that the accusations have no force and therefore, it would be illegal to arbitrarily restrict or cut off their internet service based on nothing more than an accusation.
If there is force of law behind Six Strikes, then you've got to include Due Process.
You care about everyone's due process rights? What about in all the articles leading up to Six Strikes, you were praising it as if it were a gift from God? There's no due process there, it's six accusations and you're out.
Look here, folks. You heard it from Average_Joe. To be pro-copyright, you have to be equated to a group of thuggish lawyers who demand millions all over shoddy evidence and baseless threats. To him, that's what being pro-copyright is.
You ignore willingly that Hansmeier is suffering due to his own actions. He and the rest of the Prenda gang, PLED THE FIFTH. That was the end of their due process. They willingly and knowingly ended any attempts for them to tell their side of the story when they admitted that any attempts by them to do so would either catch them in a lie or truthfully reveal their abuses of the law.
Oh you were commenting on the article as a whole? Rather than trying to find fault with a single sentence that grammatically doesn't have any faults? Also where is there a case of your followed by brackets? I've just searched for all instances of the word your, and nowhere on this page is there a bracket next to the word, so I don't know where you got that from.