DH's Love Child's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the let-the-love-child-speak dept
Wow. What a week. Unless you were living under a rock this week, you probably noticed a rather pervasive theme... At my last count, 46 articles were written this week about SOPA/PIPA including 20 on SOPA protest day. As I look back at the week, I was almost overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of articles and comments about this issue. For something that was supposed to just breeze through the legislative process, these bills very quickly polarized the population.
My favorites are a mix of the political (which, I have to confess, normally bore me to tears), and the funny.
Marcus Carab's article about mocking the blackouts easily got my top spot for the week. His analysis was thoughtful and witty. I particularly loved this part:
"WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE? WHY AM I THE LAST TO KNOW WIKIPEDIA IS BLOCKED! I BE ON THERE DAILY!!! [I like that she is less annoyed about losing Wikipedia than she is about the fact nobody told her. I've often thought SOPA/PIPA supporters are just mad because they were the last to find out about free movies.]"Too true.
On the political side, this short but sweet article about both SOPA and PIPA being delayed (but not canceled) was a great result of netizens mobilizing, while this article asking what's next is a good reminder that there's still a lot of work to be done to make sure we keep our internet freedom.
This write-up about government and technology was a fascinating look into the procurement process (including some insightful comments) as well as a reality check on why government should tread VERY carefully on technology issues.
In the middle of this was the very disappointing ruling from our top jurists. This ruling disturbs me greatly and I wish the netizens could organize the same kind of blackout to raise awareness of how out of control copyright has become. The ruling also illuminates just how treaties and trade agreements (like ACTA and the TPP) can cause laws to have to change to meet our 'international obligations'.
This trio of articles on DOJ, Megaupload and Anonymous were another look at how SOPA and PIPA really aren't necessary as long as big content has the DOJ's ear. Spend those dollars wisely, Hollywood!
Finally, if you want to know more about how the MPAA and Chris Dodd think, these articles are a great read. Remember kids, it's all about the Benjamins.
And with that, I return you to your regularly scheduled trolling.
And they know it
"Not liking something that a company does isn't a reason to sue."
And companies know it. That's why they tow VERY close to the legal line to screw customers left and right.
Re:
Very true. Let us remember that ESPN is owned by ABC which is owned by that bastion of IP freedom.... Disney.
Another thing...
If this were to happen, how long would it take for ESPN to position it as a premium feature for a fee? Talk about everyone winning except the consumer...
Re:
I disagree. DMCA explicitly states that fair use must be taken into account. The **AA's essentially don't believe in fair use, so they don't ever take it into account. More importantly, an automated system has no way of determining if something is fair use.
Also, a BIG problem with the notice/counter-notice system is that it HEAVILY favors the alleged rights holder. It has been used in the past to muzzle speech.
Re: If not an "unwarranted burden" for MPAA, then
It's apples and penguins. A hosting company is not required BY LAW to actively monitor its site for infringement. And would you trust YOUR data to any company that actively monitors your uploads? I sure as hell wouldn't, and neither would any reasonable business person.
A copyright holder, BY LAW is required to take fair use into account as they are making a legal claim, under penalty of perjury, that: 1) they are the legal copyright holder and 2)the content is actually infringing.
Or to put it differently, the burden IS on the MPAA (or RIAA, or whomever) to show that the content IS infringing before taking it down. That's what the law says. It's not 'unwarranted' it's the LAW.
If we take that argument to a logical extreme, prosecutors wouldn't have jobs, because actually proving someone committed a crime would cause an 'unwarranted burden' to law enforcement.
Re:
But those logs should not be accessible to EVERY employee of the company. Especially not anyone outside of the division of the company responsible for customer service and support of the terminals.
Re:
We can only hope!
Re:
If I remember correctly, the DSM uses ICD codes which are used across all medical fields, so this shouldn't affect insurance billing.
Re: yet another bad idea
"The reason for patents is without them cos will not invest in R&D..."
You do realize that the R&D for the VAST majority of drugs is actually funded and performed by universities, not the pharma companies?
You also realize that marketing is far and away the largest budget item for big pharma companies?
The knowledge of how to create a Strad is lost because he chose NOT to share it with anybody, not because there weren't patents at the time. The idea that patents would have spread that knowledge is ludicrous.
Just a thought...
So, Schroeder publicly alleges that Crouch broke the law, hacked his account, etc... imagine the delicious irony if Crouch sued Schroeder for defamation and won.
Re: name a ban that isn't
I never found Ban roll-on to be arbitrary or capricious.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not according to the trolls. Copyright infringement is FAR more serious than murder.
Re: Re: Actually this could be good for employees!
Just make sure you log in using a company computer on the company network. :D
Re: Re: Re:
As much as I hate to say this, he's at least somewhat correct. For the most part, the Constitution protects you from government intrusion, not other parties (including businesses). There are, however other laws to protect employees.
Re: Typo Alert
Though in that case it should have perhaps been "Catheter in the Rye" as the publisher and estate pissed away any public goodwill.
Re:
I'm just glad I haven't been playing the home version of "Prenda, the drinking game". You would be able to cleanse wounds with my saliva if I had been.
Re: Re:
It does make me long (sometimes) for Angry guy (?) his posts were at least entertaining.
(untitled comment)
I'm starting to think that all those drugs that the 'boomers did in the 60's completely dissolved their skin. This and many other articles on here seem to illustrate that nobody can take any kind of criticism anymore. WTH?
Re: Re: Re: This never wears out for you, does it?
Does that mean he's really out_of_the_blue_balls?
Re:
I may be wrong here.. but this article isn't saying the DOJ shouldn't enforce the CFAA, only that they change their interpretation to not include violating TOS as a criminal act.