DannyB's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the favorites dept
This week's "favorites" post comes from DannyB.
Having never done the favorite posts before, I wasn't sure if I should. Since I didn't have to
pee, I hope I made the right decision.
The best laugh all week was
Man Tries To Patent Godly Powers; Justifies It By Pointing To Software & Business Method Patents. That makes sense in an insane sort of way. Multiple forms of insanity combined. He forgot to mention aliens. 'Nuff said.
Speaking of patents: Congress Happy To Knock Out Patents That Impact Financial Institutions... But Everyone Else?. Don't worry. This is good news in disguise.
Precedent: You protected Johnny from bad patents, why not me too? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Microsoft To US Gov't: Hey, Only We Should Be Able To Use Patents To Shakedown Other Companies!. Nice hypocrisy there Microsoft. Live by the patent, die by the patent. (Apple, are you listening?)
56 pages of iTunes terms? Really? Can't we get a short version in one sentence? Try this: You agree to return to the Apple store each month and do whatever they tell you. I AGREE
Which brings me to
Music Service Simfy Files Complaint Over Apple Blocking Its iPad App. When you build a business on something controlled by a party with conflicting interests, be prepared to have the rug yanked out from under you. It's not the first time, and it won't be the last. (Disclaimer: Android fanboy talking.) Android lacks a single point of control. There are currently multiple Android app stores (e.g., Google, Amazon), with more on the way. (Will I get in trouble for saying "app store"?) If you don't like Google's store or its policies, approval process, etc, there is Amazon's store. More choice
(not less)
is a good thing.
I had to chuckle at
Former Obama Advisor Says Wikileaks Is Wonderful For The US Government. It's a shame the US government doesn't
understand the importance of anonymous public whistle blowing. Of course, maybe they do, but I'd rather not go there.
The next article was informative.
How Out Of Control Copyright Law Is Keeping Millions Of Books & Images Away From Scholars. I admit I had been one of those confused about the "science" and "arts" part of "useful arts and science". I didn't know copyrights were for science and patents were for useful arts. That profoundly affects what I think copyrights were intended to protect.
Next was Once Again, The Freedom Of Information Act Is Proving To Be Just That: An Act. If the Osama Bin Laden pictures are released, we learn nothing new. (Unless it would reveal something we didn't know! My mind races with possibilities if I go there.)
Otherwise, propaganda usage of the pictures is irrelevant.
Honest people could comply with FOIA.
If the government would act honestly most of the time, they would have credibility when they need to protect a secret.
Which leads to several ICE domain seizure favorites.
- The List Of Sites Challenging Domain Seizures
- Rojadirecta Sues US Government, Homeland Security & ICE Over Domain Seizure
- ICE Stalling On More FOIA Requests Concerning Domain Name Seizures
- Government working for private industry.
- Lack of due process, legal service, representation and response.
- Making a(nother) mockery of FOIA.
- Its ineffectiveness.
- Hurting unrelated subdomains; demonstrating a lack of understanding of how things actually work.
- Impacting sites outside the US.
Talk about the right hand of government not knowing what the left hand is doing. C'mon guys. Which do you want? The free flow of information or censorship and government control. It's a delusion to think you can have both.
I was happy to see continuing pushback on mass copyright infringement lawsuits and copyright trolling.
- From Two Nude Nuns Mass BitTorrent Lawsuits Down To None
- Judge Rules That Righthaven Lawsuit Was A Sham; Threatens Sanctions
- Denver Post Sued Over Righthaven Connection
- Those Who Settled With Righthaven Consider Taking Action; Righthaven Threatens Them With More Suits
Oh goodie. FBI Agents Getting More Power To Spy On People With Less Oversight. Why is this not surprising. CDA. DMCA. PATRIOT Act. ACTA. PROTECT-IP. Naked scanners. Patdowns. Controlling "rogue" websites. Government as a private police force, no due process. GPS tracking without due process. Making a joke of FOIA. Where does it end?
Maybe it just gets worse. US Trying To Extradite UK TVShack Admin Over Questionable Copyright Charges?. It turns out the US is not just trying, they're actually going to do it. Wow. The discussion on this topic says it all.
Summit Entertainment May Learn That You Can't File A Copyright Takedown Over A Trademark Issue. What to say? The title itself is the punch line. I hope that abuses of the DMCA starts resulting in some serious costs to the abuser.
Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos. I should be shocked. But I'm too numb from other government actions. Clearly the senators don't give the south end of a northbound rat.
What did we learn? People in government should be required to have a full bladder. Which brings me back to where I started. (Oh, gotta run now. . .)
Re: Pharmacies outside US have no inherent right to US trade!
Hey let's try this experiment.
Take your post, and replace references to pharmacy with RIAA or MPAA and let's see how it sounds.
Re: Re: AARP > NABP
Pot meet kettle.
Re: Re: Re: Get AARP involved?
Then register the domain .drugs instead.
Re: Re: Dotcom stole millions.
Actually he is the victim of such a theft. Or is it copyright infringement. I always get the two mixed up because they are so similar.
Re: Re:
Frankenstein should sue for defamation, libel, slander or publicity rights when people misuse his good name to refer to the product of his creative genius.
Why not sue each individual infringer?
Why is that such a problem to sue each individual infringer?
You file a complaint. Begin discovery to discover the identity of the plaintiff. You then prove your case of infringement. They did this against Jammie Thomas-Rasset and won.
If they then try to threaten the defendant into a settlement, it is obvious that their true intent is that of copyright trolling. Using the court as a tool in a blackmail extortion shakedown racket.
Oh, and the person who uploaded a video doesn't have any money. Google does have money. And money, not justice, not artists rights, not compensation for actual (probably nonexistant) damages, not education of the public about copyright infringement, is what this is all about. Money. Nothing else.
Blood on their hands?
If it isn't already true, at some point one of these governments will have blood on their hands when these shorter yellow lights cause a fatal accident.
Re:
Prenda cases are not now nor have ever been about copyright enforcement. It is an extortion and blackmail shakedown pure and simple. The only difference is that copyright instead of violence is used as the threat. Maybe that says something about copyright.
Re:
You only have authority if people respect it.
You may still have a big club with the force of law and a police/military behind it, but that is a different thing.
Re: "use of BitTorrent to select and share movies is expressive"
> hat's why a Court CAN allow "the plaintiffs to override
> the putative defendants’ anonymity."
The plaintiffs should only be able to obtain discovery of the identity of putative defendants AFTER they file an actual individual lawsuit which they intend to pursue.
They individually sued Jammie Thomas-Rasset and won. They should sue each and every individual. Wouldn't this help to educate the public? Wouldn't this help to stop infringement? Those are your stated goals. Don't you believe in your own lawsuits? If not, then you just want to engage in a copyright trolling shakedown using the court as a tool.
Re: Denied seeing
> [the Judge] said that rights holders do not need to comply with
> the DMCA & EUCD when take-down notices are simply too much hassle.
I thought that the purpose of DMCA & EUCD takedown notices was to super dooper streamline the censorship process so that it wasn't too much hassle.
Re: A matter of proportionate ease.
I didn't agree to any restrictive terms when I got my domain name.
Re: Re: Re:
An adversarial hearing should be required if you intend to use a nuclear weapon to destroy a 400 square mile area in order to kill an ant.
At the adversarial hearing, the collateral damage to your overreach can be considered, and other innocent and uninvolved parties can show the harm to them.
The next law they should buy
> they are still mostly at the 'IP address = person' stage,
> a demonstrably false way of identifying infringers
The next law they should buy is that an IP address is a person. Hey, corporations are people too my friend.
Re: Re: Re:
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What kind of recourse to people have who are falsely accused?
Is there any kind of due process or judicial review?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yup.
average_joe writes:
> I have eight different computers, each with different user profiles
> and multiple browsers. Whether I log in depends on which computer,
> which user profile, and which browser I use. Although sometimes
> I log in or out just because I feel like it.
Wow. That doesn't suggest unclean hands, or a guilty mind. Not at all. Nosiree. You're not acting like you have anything to hide.
Real grown ups can engage in real conversation and debate without ad hom attacks. Even when their POV is unpopular. But you don't want to face that fact that the world is changing. You are locked in to the mid 20th century.
I'll tell you why they didn't dot their t's and cross their i's
They didn't do the basic paperwork right because this isn't a real company. Real companies do the paperwork because they have real business to engage in. This "company" while not engaging in copyright trolling like the RIAA did, and Prenda still does; this company is merely in the "business" of harassing internet users. If they were truly in the business of enforcement, they would have real evidence, accuse a real person, and litigate. They successfully did it with Jammie Thomas-Rasset. Yet they don't want any real due process or judicial review. That should tell you something right there.
They also know that real copyright enforcement would give them a PR disaster. They want to enforce their rights, but they don't want to enforce their rights. They know deep down that the best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it.
Re: Deliberate anomaly to distract Mike.
Gravity isn't real. Each experimental case where an object falls is just an anomaly to distract out of the blue.
Re: Re:
Not as much as out of the blue and his paymasters hate it.
John may only get a criminal conviction.