summer camps needing performance licenses to sing songs is r-e-t-a-r-d-e-d, imho. And one of the shining examples of keeping all eyes on the money and away from the ridiculous.
you should have picked a better anti stance. Seeing as the other forms of licensing are assigned for singular products, it's not too far fetched that when speaking about a general "ASCAP license" it refers to the public performance shakedown.
And the outrage should come from the fact they felt the need to have an ASCAP license in the first place, its a gd summer camp.
aww, i rarely scoop up regulars in my jest. And the next time my dark overlord refers to something as flowery it better be a makeshift grave.
just that the name string becoming an even longer amalgamation, might draw the ire of larger pool. Using my localized example.
Then I enjoyed some fine misinterpretation.
Ah yes, making the angry troll angry, the gentleman commenter's sport. Miming the account in a childish manner and offering decently sourced rebuttals (and disparaging remarks) has certainly been effective.
because a member of the BSA, Dell, was his #1 supporter in 2006 he supported the 3rd failed incarnation of IPPA.
because AT&T was #5, they got his opposition to net neutrality.
Its hard to take money out of context.
and seriously wikipedia...
2006 At&T was in the top 5 donors = against net neutrality
2012 cc media holding is in the top 5 donors = support SOPA
Dont to go far to find these, as always you are heavy on rhetoric and light on supporting facts.
my hypothesis:
AJ doesnt want to respond to me...
so he signs out and questions the merits of joining from the feigned perspective of someone who has yet to join. Using the same vernacular as always in his greeting.
Not realizing that the ability to be an AC and use that title is exactly what he is calling to end. If you didnt know he supported SOPA already...
did you just put a sentence in italics, then misquote it? If you think being completely obtuse will thwart me....you are correct, nothing left to see here.
Do you know exactly which IP Righthaven has and/or is supposed to hand over?
Yes, exactly All of it.
How can Randazza on the one hand argue
The "court" being the same Judge Pro that held that Righthaven didn't own the copyright, right?
Since you seem to be a tad slow and cant decide who is at fault to dare list IP as a Righthaven asset. The judge ordered all assets, and if by chance they have any valid IP that is included. And not just IP related to this case, ALL IP. Its safe to reason that Righthaven went and made (or attempted to) some other deals having learned from their mistakes (which would explain them hiding, sitting on the small pile of IP they have acquired that hasnt been invalidated).
ahem, no.
And because mike engaged your comment, you will continue to masturbate furiously with one hand whilst refreshing the page with the other.
Address the merits of that.
Unlike you, I don't pretend that no such solution exists.
No it's worse, you pretend that there is.
If AJ took the time to read more than the last line and glance at the list of countries then he wouldn't get to post first.
thirteen countries already do DNS filtering
Is what the text was about, "governmental blocking of speech" is what you inferred when you read the list, as you should have. And that you make the link in your head immediately and comment on it is more telling than any propaganda Mike may be putting forth.
im going to give you the benefit of the doubt on this one...
read slower.
Comparing the United States and its enforcement of intellectual property rights on the internet to those countries that practice actual censorship, i.e., governmental blocking of speech because of the message being conveyed, is idiotic.
Exactly, the MPAA shill piece was idiotic.
The above comment is the definition of petulance.
The Original Quote:
"people like you who gleefully abuse a system for profit disgust me."
Mikes response:
"As for the comment, I did not lie. You have said that you are planning a career in copyright litigation and that you support these types of actions that are a clear abuse of the law for profit."
--however the comment does not say "people like you who support the abuse of a system for profit" or "people like who you who are training to abuse a system for profit" - therefore it is technically incorrect - therefore not true.
oh noes!? please anything but reported.
Does trolling a troll really cause it to log out?
Re: Re: Re:
his 'apologism' is far tastier than the gism you cant seem to stop swallowing.