Gwiz's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the golly-gee-whiz dept
This week's favorites post comes courtesy of Gwiz.
I have to admit that when I first said I would give the Favorite Posts a shot, I didn't realize how hard it would be to pick a few favorites from so many interesting articles. I happened to luck into a shorter week due to the holiday and I thought it might be easier, but not so much. Anyway, without further preamble, here are my picks for the week:
As an average working stiff with no vested interest in the industries usually discussed on Techdirt, my interests tend to lean towards the articles that deal with the slow erosion of things I hold dearly, like privacy, due process and protection against unreasonable search and seizures. The story about Austrian police seizing computers used as a Tor exit node was especially interesting to me. I found the initial discussion concerning anonymity on the internet to be very enlightening. This article also spawned an interesting phenomena in the comment section when one of the commenters voiced an extremely distasteful view of pedophilia. The subsequent reaction of the Techdirt community to this commenter became a very good argument in itself as to why the internet really is not a wild west that needs to be regulated and can do a fine job of policing itself.
Along the same lines, we had a few articles concerning PROTECT IP and the technological implications of this bill, which actually made me go and read the white paper written by some of the most knowledgeable people in regards to the DNS system. And, as an added bonus, we got to see a video of Mike discussing this issue. We also had the RIAA more or less attacking the public domain and telling us that it really has no value. At least, to offset that to some degree, we had the Polish Prime Minister realizing that things funded with public monies should be in the public domain. We need more thinking in that direction.
Making an account on any website is something I rarely do, but I felt compelled to register a profile on Techdirt for one main reason, the generally high level intelligence and mostly civil debates that happen in the comments section here. I have learned quite a bit from reading both sides of the debates and have on occasion had to revise my initial stance on issues because of it. The article about the arrest of people dancing at the Washington Memorial was one such post. When I last looked there were over 350 comments and the debate over civil disobedience and the reactions by law enforcement. Unfortunately, since I needed to keep abreast of all of the Techdirt articles this week, I haven't finished reading though them all, but what I did read was fascinating.
On a brighter note, it's good to see a body such as the UN acknowledging that the three strike laws and ACTA pose civil rights problems.
And lastly, on the humorous side of things, I found it very funny to see two fully grown companies acting like children on the playground and the Malaysian man who was required to apologize 100 times on Twitter for defaming someone, kind of like a modern day equivalent of writing "I will not say bad things about Susie" on the chalkboard.
Well, that's it for my Favorites this week. I hope you enjoyed them and it's back to lurking in the comment section for me.

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.
Attacks of all kinds are about the only response.
Bullshit, Blue.
You have been refuted so many times that it's becoming pathetic. Any argument that disproves what you say you simply ignore and pretend it doesn't exist.
It must be getting pretty hard to type with your head buried that far in the sand.
Re: Re: Re: I'z THE MOST COPIED COMMENTER!
A couple of more observations:
...like a cat keeping score by number of yapping ankle-biters.
Do you not see the irony in that statement at all?? You are the biggest yapping ankle-biter here and you do it on every single article. Yet you have the audacity to call other people that.
You are just one among many idiots who have nothing but ad hom.
This one is classic Blue here folks. Complaining that the "idiots" are engaging in ad-homs. Oh the irony, it burns!
Re: Re: Re: I'z THE MOST COPIED COMMENTER!
I measure my influence here by the number of idiots mocking me; it's necessary, like a cat keeping score by number of yapping ankle-biters.
Hah. I measure your "influence" here by the number of times your comments get down-voted. Unfortunately, my micrometer doesn't measure such small quantities.
You are just one among many idiots who have nothing but ad hom.
And you are an idiot who keeps repeating the same bullshit, no matter how many times and how many different people completely debunk pretty much everything you say.
Personally, I couldn't care less about you, except for the fact that you annoying derail every conversation on every article spouting all the same debunked garbage.
Re: I'z THE MOST COPIED COMMENTER!
I'z THE MOST COPIED COMMENTER!
You spelled "MOCKED" wrong.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, bad example really.
Mike doesn't care if anybody reproduces his content and has repeatedly stated that. He's had more than a few sites do exactly that and they usually fail pretty quickly since everyone can go to the original anyways and the other sites don't have some of the scarcities that Techdirt offers, like comments from the authors themselves and an engaged community.
But yeah, I would think that's a pretty strong case of fair use myself. Of course, only a court of law could determine that for sure.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
....framing the tool as a way to infringe on their copyright.
And that framing confuses me. How is this tool a way to infringe their copyrights at all? It's not like everyone is going to use it to create the exact same story over and over again.
I think a better analogy would be if created an oven that makes exact replicas of Twinkies. Couldn't I create an advertisement that has customers tasting my sponge cakes and comparing them to Twinkies?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If that's the case, why can't I go to Flickr, download images, and use them in a TV advertisement?
The purpose in your case would be use the images for your advertisement. The purpose in the Scroll Kit case is to show that their product can produce a Snow Fall-like experience faster and easier than what NYT had to do. It's like creating an advertisement with your product and your competitor's product to show comparisons and contrasts.Because the first factor would have to be considered also:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This use fails on the 4th factor of consideration...
Oops. Worded that wrong. Didn't mean "fails". I meant that the 4th factor would support that this use is fair use.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
How is this any different?
This use fails on the 4th factor of consideration and does not "effect the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work."Mike already explained why he thought there is a strong fair use argument in the article:
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
Re: As I've said, police aren't even thugs now, just attack dogs.
Oh, and take this egregious tenuously related dig: I bet EVERY ONE of those savages played violent video games until they could do it in real life. How could violent games possibly lead to any other behavior than savagery?
Once again Blue ignores any evidence contrary to his predetermined beliefs.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121219/09593821438/yet-more-evidence-shows-no-link-be tween-video-games-actual-violence.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130228/09391122151/vid eo-games-do-not-cause-violence-according-to-former-fbi-profiler.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/art icles/20100609/1109309754.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090318/0212264165.shtml
The re is plenty more where that came from.
Re: Re: Re:
... yet they ignore the robots.txt file's disallow instructions, and not only that, but publicly display links found on a site where those links were clearly delineated as "disallow" in that file.
Do you have a citation for that? It's not that I don't believe you - just haven't heard that one before.
Re:
I cannot wait to see how long it will take before Google Fanboys to defend Google's lax in security over this.
WTF are you talking about, Wally?
Why would Google have anything to do with some other company's lack of security on the pages they have facing the web?
Re: Anon E Mouse
I enjoy how you spell like a poorly-educated third grade girl..... Stay stupid my firend.
Too funny.
Re:
Tim says it like it's a noble stance but the anti ip attitude of the techdirt "crew" is always against profit, at least of the created by forced IP rights kind.
If your marketing strategy involves the use of any kind of "force", then maybe your doing it wrong.
Just my 2¢.
Re: Re: So, anyone who still believes that "1984" is fiction?
You're like someone who thinks reading People every day makes them an expert is sociology.
Gave you an insightful AND a funny - for that line alone.
Re: Re: Re: Re: A sad misunderstanding
That's kind of the problem.... the 'whatever that means' part.
Are you seriously saying that someone should declare what the best path is before exploring ALL the paths? That's just crazy.
If you seriously think that our current copyright system is the best way, then you have no reason to be afraid of exploring different means to achieve the same goals.
Re: Re: Re: A sad misunderstanding
err...exclusive *rights*
Re: Re: A sad misunderstanding
He'll never put things into perspective or acknowledge that there are even positives.
You are the one looking at this issue with blinders on, most likely because you wish copyright to continue as an income stream for the lawyers.
Mike advocates that copyright should promote progress, whatever the means. You are the one who has decided that granting authors exclusive is the *only* path. Your narrow view leaves out way too many possibilities that could achieve the same ends.
Re: Re: Re:
But we give the exclusive rights to the artists/authors so that in turn can benefit the public. We don't give the rights to the public first.
... And a growing segment of the public is considering whether they wish to continue giving anyone those rights at all anymore. Copyright itself is being completely reconsidered these days.
The public is the most important stakeholder concerning copyright for the simple fact that those exclusive rights are granted by the public in the first place. That which is granted can always be revoked.
Re: I don't need your consent .....
....and as long as it is not for commercial gain
No so sure that's accurate. The paparazzi wouldn't exist if that was true.