All you can say in defense of your precious government is that someone else might be worse than the government?
A sane person who realized that the blog was about legislation currently being discussed, might actually consider the legislation. But you chose to whine because the author didn't choose to focus on a something else.
A whiny guy once said 'you can't reasonably use someone else's work as the central part of yours!'.
Fail. From the beginning of known history, people always use ideas and concepts from other people and build upon them. That is a reasonable, logical and beneficial system.
People who feel that the government should grant monopolies to the one who does something first, and lock those ideas and concepts down, are promoting an unreasonable, illogical and malignant system. That system does not advance anything but greed, enrich lawyers and discourage new artists.
Of course, since you are paid by the beneficiaries of the malignant system, it will never be in your best interest to consider this.
It's fine to disagree with his opinion, but this is an appropriate place to write his opinion.
You know, you could start your own blog, and write how you hate stuff, you might get out_of_the_blue will comment how brilliant you are, because he hates stuff too.
I recognize that there are some people out there who really just don't like techdirt, but I'm often amazed at how this sometimes leads people to blame other societal woes on those kinds of things.
I picture him peering out of his dirty kitchen window, a pale figure not unlike Mr. Burns from the Simpsons with burning red eyes and a stringy comb-over. He peers out across his brown grass, seeing the neighbor kids playing and running around, and plots revenge for the noise they are making. Then he darts back to his computer to teach those kids on techdirt a lesson on how things work in the 'real world'.
"They will never suspect what I'm going to say next" he chortles, "In fact, not even I can suspect what it will be, because it will be completely out_of_the_blue!"
Pretty sure the Pet Rock was a gag gift, nobody I know remembers it as anything but a joke... The lava lamp on the other hand, was interesting to watch and can be used as a night light. If anyone spent much time watching their pet rock, then I hope they got the help they needed.
Given that Hollywood got some nice tax breaks extended in the 'fiscal cliff' deal, I am led to believe that violent movies are necessary for our well-being.
Apparently you missed the entire point of the article.
It's not that Wortham did something morally wrong, it's that the LAW is wrong.
This sentence might help unclog your cognitive dissonance: Just the fact that Wortham could find herself on the receiving end of lawsuits (both criminal and civil) over both of those laws (and considering her public admission to the key facts, she might have a difficult time pleading innocence) shows why those laws desperately need to be fixed
Too bad your hatred of anyone that doesn't worship IP is interfering with your comprehension.
Yeah, and by that logic, if you don't lock your house, then the police are welcome to walk right in, and browse your computer, unless password protected, and look in all your closets and drawers, unless locked.
Lock everything or post a sign saying 'private' or else you have no right to privacy.
Because everything the gubermint does is good, holy and just... There should never be any oversight or transparency, the gubermint should be able to do what it wants, and the peasants need to shut up and show some gratitude.
Re: Re:
According to the definition provided by the current US President they are:
"Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror."
...aaaand, I'm pretty sure you already knew that, but I like the quote.
Re: First problem is corporations collecting the data.
That's all you got?
All you can say in defense of your precious government is that someone else might be worse than the government?
A sane person who realized that the blog was about legislation currently being discussed, might actually consider the legislation. But you chose to whine because the author didn't choose to focus on a something else.
Fail.
Re: As I've said, "transformative" is the key problem:
A whiny guy once said 'you can't reasonably use someone else's work as the central part of yours!'.
Fail. From the beginning of known history, people always use ideas and concepts from other people and build upon them. That is a reasonable, logical and beneficial system.
People who feel that the government should grant monopolies to the one who does something first, and lock those ideas and concepts down, are promoting an unreasonable, illogical and malignant system. That system does not advance anything but greed, enrich lawyers and discourage new artists.
Of course, since you are paid by the beneficiaries of the malignant system, it will never be in your best interest to consider this.
Re:
You forgot google. Google is at the heart of this conspiracy.
(untitled comment)
Justice Scalia followed that up by asking why would anyone invent anything if they can't get a patent.
Obviously, the wheel, and paper were both invented later than the patent system.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's a blog. Mike gives his opinion on a blog.
It's fine to disagree with his opinion, but this is an appropriate place to write his opinion.
You know, you could start your own blog, and write how you hate stuff, you might get out_of_the_blue will comment how brilliant you are, because he hates stuff too.
Substitute one word, and is apt for OOTBs mania:
I recognize that there are some people out there who really just don't like techdirt, but I'm often amazed at how this sometimes leads people to blame other societal woes on those kinds of things.
Re: WILL "lead to too much litigation." Dead cert.
You need to realize this is a blog, not a network news site...
Re: Re:
I agree, this is insignificant, we should just give up, it's no use. Humanities final chapter has been written. You'll never know love.
Re: Re: "It's completely over the top," so I suspect it's a plant,
I picture him peering out of his dirty kitchen window, a pale figure not unlike Mr. Burns from the Simpsons with burning red eyes and a stringy comb-over. He peers out across his brown grass, seeing the neighbor kids playing and running around, and plots revenge for the noise they are making. Then he darts back to his computer to teach those kids on techdirt a lesson on how things work in the 'real world'.
"They will never suspect what I'm going to say next" he chortles, "In fact, not even I can suspect what it will be, because it will be completely out_of_the_blue!"
Re: Lava Lamp!
Pretty sure the Pet Rock was a gag gift, nobody I know remembers it as anything but a joke... The lava lamp on the other hand, was interesting to watch and can be used as a night light. If anyone spent much time watching their pet rock, then I hope they got the help they needed.
Re:
All I hear is Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Talk to your doctor to see if 'shut up and stop whining' is right for you.
Re:
Given that Hollywood got some nice tax breaks extended in the 'fiscal cliff' deal, I am led to believe that violent movies are necessary for our well-being.
Re: She isn't allowed within 1km of Police HQ?
So, no charged have been filed, but she has been denied (at least partially) access to police services.
Now that is a clear abuse of power.
Sorry Canada, I thought the US was more of a Police State than you, way to step up the competition.
Re: Re: Re:
Apparently you missed the entire point of the article.
It's not that Wortham did something morally wrong, it's that the LAW is wrong.
This sentence might help unclog your cognitive dissonance:
Just the fact that Wortham could find herself on the receiving end of lawsuits (both criminal and civil) over both of those laws (and considering her public admission to the key facts, she might have a difficult time pleading innocence) shows why those laws desperately need to be fixed
Too bad your hatred of anyone that doesn't worship IP is interfering with your comprehension.
Re:
Simple.
The US Attorneys office is completely corrupt.
They have no intention of enforcing the law, unless that enforcement achieves a political goal.
Re: You keep mistaking what sue-crazy lawyers do with copyright.
You keep mistaking the voices that whisper in your head with lucid thoughts.
Re:
Yeah, and by that logic, if you don't lock your house, then the police are welcome to walk right in, and browse your computer, unless password protected, and look in all your closets and drawers, unless locked.
Lock everything or post a sign saying 'private' or else you have no right to privacy.
Frack that.
Re: Mike, is your "position" that we really need the names
Because everything the gubermint does is good, holy and just... There should never be any oversight or transparency, the gubermint should be able to do what it wants, and the peasants need to shut up and show some gratitude.
Your position is clear on this, time after time.
Re: BUT ARE THE STORIES OVER?
They aren't going to the prom with you. Get over it and live your life.