An obvious solution to the problem would be to make the CCRB the federal monitor. Suddenly a purely advisory body would have real teeth, and be able to act directly when IAB refuses to r is unable to.
The only way I can think of that would make a copyright infringement actually BE theft is if you somehow hacked the owner's computer and deleted all of his copies, then broke into his house and destroyed all of his hard copies as well. THEN an unauthorized copying would be theft.
Problem is, the only individual or group that has ever done anything remotely like that is the MAFIAA itself.
What I'm wondering is... Does the "damage" done to the man by that low quality recording exceed the damage done by having to refund tickets because he refused to perform?
The ability to vote people out of the Assembly was one of the main factors that killed off the Athenian democracy by creating large classes of people that were required to act like citizens in every way except they had no voice.
Given that the US system was created and designed to prevent the sort of totalitarian abuses common to the Athenian system, bringing them back would be foolish at best.
Ah, but that's criminal law the government exempts itself from (mainly by refusing to prosecute itself). In civil law, the plaintiff is the one who decides whether or not to file.
Wait, so if a US citizen leaks confidential data to his fellow US citizens, he has committed espionage and treason by giving that data to enemies of the United States...
But if he were to give that confidential data to a foreign intelligence service, spies employed by a foreign nation, it's not only not espionage, it's just business as usual, part of the job?!?
Has it never occurred to anyone in our government that those foreign nations are sovereign, and free to do whatever they want with that data whether the US government likes it or not? That those nations often are friendly with nations that are our deadly enemies?
What if they misidentify a target? Instead of hacking back the actual infringer who they think is bootlegging MP3s, they get some random person who doesn't even know what an MP3 is.
Could that target that got hit in error then turn around and hack back in turn?
If someone walks up to me on the street and with no justification whatsoever, punches me in the face, my response of punching the guy right back is lawful and justified.
So I've punched him and he's lying on the ground.
Then 8 of my friends walk over and each one of them punches him, and one of them has a dog that takes a bite as well.
Technically none of us have gone beyond the legally justified act of self-defense I was legally able to engage in when assaulted. Any one of my friends could have legally defended me from my attacker by punching him.
But when almost a dozen people pile on one guy and each individually takes action, that guy on the ground is going to be severely beaten if not dead. It's no different with 9 deputies and a police dog.
There are chemical solvents for many plastics, they're used for things like shaping plastic objects and welding things together all without use of heat. Splash a little on and the plastic goes soft like taffy. You can easily deliver them with a squirt gun, so long as the gun is made of a plastic the solvent has no effect on.
Good luck trying to fly when your rotor strut is flopping around like a rubber band...
It seems to me that the common sense answer would be that if you're directly above someone's land, but lower than the roof of a building on that land, you're clearly trespassing.
If you're higher than the buildings, you're in the public highway.
Of course, even if you're in the public highway, you might still be liable in the event of a noise complaint or for being a peeping tom.
That perjury clause is a real problem. If you did check whether you or your company owned the intellectual property you're taking down, and you don't own it but take it down anyway, that's perjury. But it's also perjury to claim you checked when you didn't even if the IP turns out to truly be yours.
Perjury is a federal crime, with a 5 year prison sentence attached. Given how many false takedowns happen and how many are automated, it's astounding that people aren't going to prison over this.
A private citizen perjures himself once and rarely gets acquitted. You can even get convicted of lying to the feds because the FBI wrote down something untrue about what you said to them. But if an organization engages in a criminal conspiracy to commit perjury hundreds of thousands of times...nobody in the government cares.
Each individual incident of perjury carries a rusk if going to federal prison for up to five years if convicted.
At some level, there must be someone who said "I don't care how many false positives this program creates, we're using it anyway."
Assuming 0.1% of all automated DMCA takedowns are false, if you send out one hundred of thousand automated takedowns that person who approved the program could go to prison for 500 years.
Do people seriously not realize what danger they're in when they act in bad faith under penalty of perjury?
Re: Re: Godwin's Law
Afghanistan is our Russia.
Re:
WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
(untitled comment)
An obvious solution to the problem would be to make the CCRB the federal monitor. Suddenly a purely advisory body would have real teeth, and be able to act directly when IAB refuses to r is unable to.
Re: Re: Re: @ "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft"
The only way I can think of that would make a copyright infringement actually BE theft is if you somehow hacked the owner's computer and deleted all of his copies, then broke into his house and destroyed all of his hard copies as well. THEN an unauthorized copying would be theft.
Problem is, the only individual or group that has ever done anything remotely like that is the MAFIAA itself.
Re: so hold on
What I'm wondering is... Does the "damage" done to the man by that low quality recording exceed the damage done by having to refund tickets because he refused to perform?
Re: Treason
Yes, it would indeed.
If giving information to We The People is aiding the enemy, then anyone making that statement is proclaiming themselves an enemy of The People.
Treason is one of the things you can be impeached for.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Of course we are the enemy
The ability to vote people out of the Assembly was one of the main factors that killed off the Athenian democracy by creating large classes of people that were required to act like citizens in every way except they had no voice.
Given that the US system was created and designed to prevent the sort of totalitarian abuses common to the Athenian system, bringing them back would be foolish at best.
Re:
Ah, but that's criminal law the government exempts itself from (mainly by refusing to prosecute itself). In civil law, the plaintiff is the one who decides whether or not to file.
Re:
We really need a Scary button to go with Insightful and Funny.
(untitled comment)
Wait, so if a US citizen leaks confidential data to his fellow US citizens, he has committed espionage and treason by giving that data to enemies of the United States...
But if he were to give that confidential data to a foreign intelligence service, spies employed by a foreign nation, it's not only not espionage, it's just business as usual, part of the job?!?
Has it never occurred to anyone in our government that those foreign nations are sovereign, and free to do whatever they want with that data whether the US government likes it or not? That those nations often are friendly with nations that are our deadly enemies?
This is utter madness!
Re: Turnabout is fair play
What if they misidentify a target? Instead of hacking back the actual infringer who they think is bootlegging MP3s, they get some random person who doesn't even know what an MP3 is.
Could that target that got hit in error then turn around and hack back in turn?
(untitled comment)
If someone walks up to me on the street and with no justification whatsoever, punches me in the face, my response of punching the guy right back is lawful and justified.
So I've punched him and he's lying on the ground.
Then 8 of my friends walk over and each one of them punches him, and one of them has a dog that takes a bite as well.
Technically none of us have gone beyond the legally justified act of self-defense I was legally able to engage in when assaulted. Any one of my friends could have legally defended me from my attacker by punching him.
But when almost a dozen people pile on one guy and each individually takes action, that guy on the ground is going to be severely beaten if not dead. It's no different with 9 deputies and a police dog.
Re: Re: Lowered expectations
Yeah, given Chicago's reputation, he could well be.
Re:
There are chemical solvents for many plastics, they're used for things like shaping plastic objects and welding things together all without use of heat. Splash a little on and the plastic goes soft like taffy. You can easily deliver them with a squirt gun, so long as the gun is made of a plastic the solvent has no effect on.
Good luck trying to fly when your rotor strut is flopping around like a rubber band...
Re: Re: It's not that hard
Silly string infused with a stronger polymer. That will bring down a drone nicely.
Re: Interesting question
It seems to me that the common sense answer would be that if you're directly above someone's land, but lower than the roof of a building on that land, you're clearly trespassing.
If you're higher than the buildings, you're in the public highway.
Of course, even if you're in the public highway, you might still be liable in the event of a noise complaint or for being a peeping tom.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That perjury clause is a real problem. If you did check whether you or your company owned the intellectual property you're taking down, and you don't own it but take it down anyway, that's perjury. But it's also perjury to claim you checked when you didn't even if the IP turns out to truly be yours.
Perjury is a federal crime, with a 5 year prison sentence attached. Given how many false takedowns happen and how many are automated, it's astounding that people aren't going to prison over this.
A private citizen perjures himself once and rarely gets acquitted. You can even get convicted of lying to the feds because the FBI wrote down something untrue about what you said to them. But if an organization engages in a criminal conspiracy to commit perjury hundreds of thousands of times...nobody in the government cares.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Each individual incident of perjury carries a rusk if going to federal prison for up to five years if convicted.
At some level, there must be someone who said "I don't care how many false positives this program creates, we're using it anyway."
Assuming 0.1% of all automated DMCA takedowns are false, if you send out one hundred of thousand automated takedowns that person who approved the program could go to prison for 500 years.
Do people seriously not realize what danger they're in when they act in bad faith under penalty of perjury?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Whac-a-mole with mallets: Good.
Whac-a-mole with 10 kiloton nukes: Not so good.
Re:
No way! That would be an invasion of his right to privacy.