DudeWasHere 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (24) comment rss

  • On the post: Ninth Circuit Tells Online Services: Section 230 Isn't For You

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2019 @ 05:21pm

    Re: I disagree.

    It seems you missed the point. The decision os wrong because AirBnB is being held responsible for the speech of a landlord. This decision is the same as holding the manufacturer of a sheet of paper for what was printed on it. AirBnB should not have any risk associated with it for facilitating a conversation between two parties ( or more ). If some law is being broken in this advertisement, that is on the Landlord. AirBnB does not make any declaration to anyone that they shoukd break any law. In fact read the terms of usage and you find that they require all users comply with local laws.

  • On the post: John Oliver Robocalls Ajit Pai For Not Doing More To Thwart Robocalls

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 13 Mar, 2019 @ 08:31am

    Re: God News

    This is a prime example of an unhealthy market. Free speech does not apply to invading personal privacy. My phone is not a public space. I did not pay for a phone to hear from unsolicited callers dial me about whatever. Unless a unsolicited caller is willing to pay a fee to me for time and patience, at my option, then they should not be legally allowed to call period.

  • On the post: Article 13 Was Purposefully Designed To Be Awful For The Internet; EU Moves Forward With It Anyway

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2019 @ 06:16am

    Re: Flip it around

    Hmm. Muat have missed that part about a copyright violation leading to jail time. Especially where no court was involved. Interesting. Can i have more details on this change?

  • On the post: Article 13 Was Purposefully Designed To Be Awful For The Internet; EU Moves Forward With It Anyway

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2019 @ 06:06am

    Re: Re:

    And there lies the problem. Thanks for supporting the argument that Article 13 and 11 needs to go away.

  • On the post: Article 13 Was Purposefully Designed To Be Awful For The Internet; EU Moves Forward With It Anyway

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2019 @ 05:53am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Is it? From your very statement, sounds like existing legislation worked. Perhaps if more copyright holders used existing laws to protect them as all citizens need to and do on a daily basis, then perhaps millions of dollars would not be wasted on grandiose extortion schemes. It seems you have been hoodwinked into believing this has anything to to with piracy.

  • On the post: Australian MP Pushes Back Against Expanded Site And Search Blocking Laws

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 30 Oct, 2018 @ 04:57am

    Re: Re: Re:

    No. And the basic premise of art is the creation and offering of art. There was never an implied expectation of payment.

  • On the post: New FCC Boss Ajit Pai Insists He's All About Helping The Poor, Gets Right To Work Harming Them Instead

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2017 @ 08:33am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: what did U expect ?

    Absolutely correct. Was worried about losing people in the length of the comment. Apologies.

  • On the post: New FCC Boss Ajit Pai Insists He's All About Helping The Poor, Gets Right To Work Harming Them Instead

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2017 @ 08:19am

    Re: Re: what did U expect ?

    Sorry DillonN you clearly do not understand socialism, or it seems capitalism either. Socialism is a political term related to how the voices of many influence the decision making system of a particular government institution. Democracy can be argued is a form of Socialism. Capitalism is an economic term relating to how markets are derived and operate. Communism is another economic model, one where there are no free markets. Again an economic model, not political. You also seem to have an issue with the grey line that separates private from public. You see, when a point arrives where a consumer no longer has a choice to consume or not consume, that the ability to live and operate within a society becomes dependent on a product X, that product can no longer be considered private, it becomes a public need critical to safety and stability of a population, hence a need for government intervention/control. The issues you express with the FCC make no sense if you truly support a free market because the most critical requirement of a free market IS A FREE MARKET!!! There can not be one or two or three players colluding at a table to divide the market among themselves (a monopoly), but a truly vibrant competitive market with true competition. If no such free market exists then either government intervenes or it doesn't. And you have what exists today. A strong FCC and other entities like are required for effective control of monopolies and the abuses that come from them. Imagine where we would all be if IBM in the fifties were the only ones allowed to make computers. I could go on but there are a multitude of books/websites/ and resources on this.

  • On the post: Judge Mocks Public Interest Concerns About Kicking People Off Internet, Tells Cox It's Not Protected By The DMCA

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 22 Nov, 2015 @ 08:51pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Please note that there will be no personal attack. I find they do not add to the conversation. That being said. You are mistaken. ISPs do not have the ability to remove content from the net. Only content creators/providers have that right. Hence the original purpose of DMCA being required for website owners and safe harbour status for ISPs. The issue that you are missing is that this move by groups like Rightshaven is forcing third parties to get involved with with a disagreement between two parties, the rights owner and the consumer. Nothing more, nothing less. It is wrong for groups like Righthaven to force innocent third parties from getting involved in something that they have no part in. You seem to assume that all accusations are valid. Perhaps most are. But some are not. Hence the reason we have courts to decide that. It is not really about the guilty, but the innocent that we need to watch out for.

  • On the post: Exile: Sarah Harrison On Paying The Price For Helping Edward Snowden

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2014 @ 07:14am

    Re: problem

    Have to disagree with you on this. In today's world a journalist has to goto extreme measures to protect their sources. Snowden was a source that needed protection. This unfortunately is the new reality.

  • On the post: Unarmed Man Charged With Assault Because NYC Police Shot At Him And Hit Random Pedestrians

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2014 @ 05:26am

    Re:

    And this is why you should not be a police officer. You obviously do not have the discipline or control to handle the job as required. Not everyone does, and there are those individual police officers who deal with these risks every day, living with the risks. Not taking the shot unless absolutely necessary. They are the ones we do not hear about. They are the ones we need.

  • On the post: Unarmed Man Charged With Assault Because NYC Police Shot At Him And Hit Random Pedestrians

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2014 @ 05:15am

    Re: Re: Re: Really

    Hell yeah, or at least make sure the person being approached is not between them and the police. If a cop is approaching someone with lights on and hands on holster, get the hell out of there.

  • On the post: Unarmed Man Charged With Assault Because NYC Police Shot At Him And Hit Random Pedestrians

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2014 @ 05:12am

    Re: Really

    I think you are missing the point here. It is not that all cops are bad (some may feel that way) but that the system attempts to hide the error in judgement by some individual police officers by passing the blame to someone else, instead of assigning the blame properly and correcting the situation through better training and discipline. The police are suppose to be professional and in control at all times. There is the difference. Police are only supposed to use deadly force when it is safe and prudent to do so. They lost control of the situation here. Were they totally in the wrong in this situation, no. Were they bad cops, probably not. Could they have dealt with the situation better? YES! The real issue here is that they failed to control the crowd. They failed to properly assess the threat, and finally only those with a clear sight line and low risk of collateral damage should have fired, and that means having the strength and professionalism to NOT pull the trigger if necessary. And yes the crowd bears some responsibility as does the perpetrator. The morons in the crowd that thought it was safe and prudent to stand with the perpetrator bewteen them and the police all deserve darwin awards, or at least honourable mentions.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Playing With Airsoft Guns In Their Own Yard

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 29 Sep, 2013 @ 05:53pm

    Re: Re: Re: Techdirt exception to "get offa my lawn" for juveniles, eh?

    I am not sure where that linked source got its stats so I cannot comment on the validity of that site. However according to the Australian Institute of Criminology, crime across the board has apparently declined. Whether those conclusions are valid I am not sure, but they do allow the download of the stats used and methodology applied. So there seems to be some disagreement about the effectiveness of gun control in Australia's case. Just thought I would point that out to add to the discussion.

  • On the post: Once Again, Motorola Gets Slapped Around Over Attempt To License Standards Patents At High Rates To Microsoft

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2013 @ 02:17pm

    Re: Re: Re: Motorola and unfriendly Courts

    Clearly, the ONLY "standard's banditry" was on the part of Microsoft. There was no, as you put it "...hostage royalties on these kind of standards" in this case. The initial rate offered was not unusual given what was being offered. If you think the standards patent was insignificant like MS wants to paint it, then I would strongly suggest you read up on the standards patents being discussed. The only unfair thing was the way Microsoft went about circumventing the entire FRAND process. Motorola is the victim here, keep it straight. I personally don't hate Microsoft although it seems anyone who disgrees is being painted as a Microsoft basher, but I cannot get past the abuse of the FRAND process that the likes of Microsoft and Apple have done. Without standards, we would live in a very different world.

  • On the post: Once Again, Motorola Gets Slapped Around Over Attempt To License Standards Patents At High Rates To Microsoft

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2013 @ 02:03pm

    Re: Re: I disagree completely

    And what is wrong with Motorola leveraging their GSM patents against MS? You make it would like a bad thing. That is what negotiations are supposed to be about. The problem here is MS was never intending on negotiating any licensing agreement with Motorola. Instead they ran to court crying foul instead of attempting to negotiate. This will eventually backfire on Microsoft.

  • On the post: Kevin Spacey: Give Users Control, What They Want, When They Want It, At A Fair Price, And Stop Worrying About Piracy

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 26 Aug, 2013 @ 09:51am

    Re: Oh, shift from "compete with free" to "at a reasonable price"!

    Because something is "free" does not mean that it will be the preferred choice. Most people I know would rather pay a reasonable price and watch/hear content rather then deal with anything complicated. Sure there are those out there technically capable, but most are not. That is why Napster and Limewire took off in popularity, it made piracy easy. Many early uninformed users never even thought there was a problem with it. Most people do not want to "steal", and if it is not free, they would rather pay something reasonable and consume it at their convenience. The challenge for those users is the difficulty of getting what they want. The stats generally back it up. Look up the stats with Google/Bing/Yahoo if you want the stats. This is the key point of Kevin Spacey's comments. As for the Megaupload comment, that has nothing to do with the conversation, stay focused.

  • On the post: A 'Watershed' For The Internet, An Invitation To Use A N. Korean ISP And Other Fallout From The UK's Porn Filtering Plan

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 29 Jul, 2013 @ 05:28am

    Re:

    Actually, there is nothing wrong with a web site like TD censoring postings. What content is allowed to be posted or not is the right of the owner, and is part of the creation process. People may not like it but that is the price of free speech. A website censoring its content is considerably different then a government controlled and enforced filter blocking access to certain websites because the government deems them unfit for public consumption. Let's not cloud the issue.

  • On the post: Copyright And The End Of Property Rights

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 18 Jul, 2013 @ 01:36pm

    Re: Re: (Sigh.) You've NEVER "owned" someone else's intellectual property.

    Sorry let me correct something.

    "Because someone feels entitled to something that they purchased does NOT automatically identify that person as a pirate."

  • On the post: Copyright And The End Of Property Rights

    DudeWasHere ( profile ), 18 Jul, 2013 @ 01:30pm

    Re: (Sigh.) You've NEVER "owned" someone else's intellectual property.

    Wow. You need to come back down to earth. Because someone feels entitled to something that they purchased does automatically identify that person as a pirate. As for artistic creations becoming intellectual property that remains the property of its creator, remember that this IP concept is only a recent creation. At one time, copies of artistic works WERE commissioned from an artist and became the property of the benefactor, to be traded or sold at the new owners whim. SO contrary to your statement, people who feel an entitlement to copies of artistic creations have quite a number of years of history behind them. It is certainly true that the digital age has clouded the issues. I think progress has been made in the creation of this IP concept, but it has gone too far the other way and there needs to be a balance. Those important benefactors are still needed and I can certainly see the frustration and the need to rebel by those who would otherwise be law abiding citizens. So come down to earth and understand the problem before you comment. It makes you look childish and ignorant. I don't think you are. But then I am not everyone.

Next >>