Frankly I don't give a flying fuck about the quality of journalism is shitty these days.
If you can't be bothered to do a quick search for intellectual property on FUCKING WIKIPEDIA as a quick reference check, especially since it identifies copyright and patents as two completely separate types of IP in the last sentence of the first paragraph on the wikipage, then you deserve to literally be thrown out on your ass from any respectable news organization for such a blatantly obvious screw-up.
*facepalms* Jesus AFP, do the fucking research before posting shit like this. What, did they not read the actual tweet? Did you fire all your high-quality journalists or something?
Still not sure if Dotcom was serious or trolling with the patent claim (which is so overly broad it's completely absurd), but he seems to be up to his old tricks: saying something outrageous and then watching the established media make a fool of themselves.
As somemone who's lost a close family friend to brain cancer, I'd be more than willing to let him off the hook. Provided he tells us everything he knows about the inner workings of Prenda Law (even as the fall guy, i doubt that they kept him completely in the dark.
$500 in his account and $50,000 in debt? Yeah, that sounds pretty accurate for a patient with brain cancer. Those brain-cancer treatments are mind-blowingly expensive, and a lot of them are still experimental.
Even if he's involved in a den of scam artists like Prenda "Law", nobody should have to suffer something as crippling as brain cancer.
Side-note: Can anybody find out know where the tumor is located on Brett's brain?
Hell I bet you couldn't be on any decent sized public university these days without hearding a "that's what she said" line at least once.
I'd lay odds that's the case over at WASU (Washington State University, home of the Cougars and the state's "party school"), except you'd probably hear that sort of thing at least three or four times a day.
...Christ on a pogo-stick, the Man really is trying to keep us down.[/half-sarcastic]
Although correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't FIRE a little sensitive when it comes to things that might resemble a violation of the First Amendment (and God bless 'em for it.)?
Stupid is sort of thing that the US DOJ does (see: MegaUpload case). I'm pretty sure the brainiacs at the Justice Department aren't so lobotomized that they would even consider going after an entire domain registrar.
Then again, with the current administration, who knows?
Of course they're organized blue. They're all businesses! It's very hard (or at least extremely time-consuming) to operate a business without a minimum amount of organizational structure!
That being said, I think that this "IP Theft=Terrorism" bull is just a red herring for Holder to distract from the fact that a) he should have been fired a long time ago, b) he's completely incompetent, and c) he's trying to distract everyone from the whole AP records debacle.
And for the nth time, it's not IP theft. It's IP infringement! You can't steal a copyright, you infringe on a copyright. You can't steal a patent, you infringe on a patent. You can't steal a trademark, you infringe on a trademark.
However, you can steal trade secrets, but that usually falls under "corporate espionage". So while trade secrets are considered Intellectual Property, they're the only one of the four IP categories that is actually considered stealing.
The phrase IP Theft is misleading to the common man, because you turn around and go "copyrights/trademarks/patents are IP", which leads to people incorrectly believing that illegal downloads are considered stealing, when in fact it's actually infringement. There is a big difference.
The fact that the people at the DOJ don't understand this kind of important difference (or they do and keep parroting the "copyright infringement=theft" meme anyway) is rather disturbing.
Now the question is: will Rep. Watts try to get a bill through Congress effectively saying something "IP Theft is helpin teh terrorusts (including copyright in that definition since he supports Hollywood's interests), so we need to make it a a felony, and if you don't support this bill then you're with the terrorists!"?
This. If you're going to use something in a commercial venture, at least ask for permission from the owners first.
On a related note, since this is related to memes in general, I wonder how the whole Slenderman phenomenon factors into this. There's already an independent studio releasing a film named "Entity" into theaters this July that is basing itself on the Slenderman mythos, which makes me wonder: did they ask permission from the makers of Slender/Slenderman's creator to use Slenderman for their movie (doubt he'll be referred to as Slenderman, but it's hard not to instantly recognize tall, dark and faceless at this point.)?
Oddly enough, Macklemore/Ryan Lewis and Alice in Chains are both from Seattle.
And honestly, I can kinda understand the whole twitter aversion (Didn't see the point of it when it came out, still don't now). For popular bands these days, people love hearing constant updates about whatever the band members are doing this very second. Fact is, some people still have this belief that we don't need to get on the Internet bullhorn and shout out whatever is we're doing at the moment just because.
I think Sean's point is pretty much if Alice in Chains is going to let the world know what they're doing, they'll do it the old-fashioned way: with a old-fashioned press-release.
As for their complaints about how much their music is worth these days, considering on how their contract was probably written, they're probably getting under 10% of the income that their songs actually generate (the line from Macklemore's "Jimmy Iovine" popped into my head about "7 percent to split" and whatnot). And with the advent of the Internet, their already tiny slice of the revenue pie may have declined in the past decade or so due to brief lapses in popularity/Internet piracy/rewritten contracts with record labels. so I'm not surprised that Alice In Chains would be unhappy about the apparent worth of their music.
And much as you think that the days of record labels supporting artists is over, here's a little food for thought: Macklemore's singles are getting a lot of radio play in part to the fact that he hired out Time Warner's promotions department to help get his debut album out in the open (y'know, for all those unaware of the awesomeness that is Youtube/still listen to the radio).
The success of The Heist can be attributed to how the relationship between the record label and the artist should be. Not the "I sold my soul to the record label in order to make it to the big time" relationship, but a "I am the artist, the label's job is just to distribute my music on a per album basis".
Still, both groups make great music as far as I'm concerned.
Meh, Norton does an adequate job for a run-of-the-mill anti-virus program.
That said, I have SuperAntiSpyware and MalwareBytes installed and run them every so often just to go through my drives and make sure that Norton didn't miss anything.
But yeah, I burst out laughing when I read that McAfee was the ones patenting this thing. I mean, I don't know anyone in my circle of friends actually uses McAfee these days. It's kinda common knowledge now that it's a shitty anti-virus software.
And now that I think about it, if they implement this patent into their software, aren't they technically selling legal spyware instead of an anti-virus program?
The Ambassador probably specified Game of Thrones (which I've never seen myself) for his "infringement = stealing" rant/mantra is because it's the single-most pirated show to date, so he decided to hold it up as a prime example of his tired, horse-carcass of an argument.
It should be noted though that there are two types of infringement, a civil and a criminal version. I think the arguments trying to equate the criminal version with stealing, but it still fails because even then it's still two different crimes.
Oh, and this just makes the Ambassador look like more of a fool:
Show director David Petrarca said shows like Game of Thrones thrive on “cultural buzz” and piracy, he suggested, helps to move that along. HBO programming president Michael Lombardo and actor Rose Leslie, who plays Ygritte in the show, both described piracy as a “compliment“.
[Quote courtesy of the TF article on the same topic]
Yeah, sounds like the ambassador apparently didn't do any independent research to me.
In addition to the new barriers for public participation, Enbridge’s proposal won’t undergo an environmental assessment, also thanks to Bill C-38 which gutted environmental laws.
So let me get this straight: Canadians who want to publicly participate in the NEB hearings have to do everything most company's require for job applications to simply get their foot in the door, let alone debate the issue? On top of that, they only have 2 weeks in which to do this, which means if that two weeks started on April 5, then the "application period" for the hearing expired last Friday (and if i am right, I'm gonna hold Moody at fault for not reporting on this sooner).
This whole 'applications for debate' malarkey just reeks of the tar sands lobby to me.
So the bigger question is: will this Line 9 get approved?
Nah, in terms of indie, Macklemore's still independent.
Instead of signing with WMG, Macklemore hired ADA to help him and Ryan Lewis distribute The Heist/promote Thrift Shop on the radio waves. This is also (according to Ryan Lewis) a The Heist-only deal.
In other words, the record label (WMG's subsidiary ADA) is doing what record labels should have been doing from the beginning: offering their services out to artists on a project by project basis, doing distribution and promotion for one album at a time.
-the artist wouldn't get locked into a contract that forced them into a deal with a record label 1)that takes a 93% cut of the profit, 2) be pressured by their labels to start churning out new albums and exhaust all their creativity on the earlier ones, and 3) take away the artist's right to select the record label that will treat the artist better than the others.
It would also benefit the record labels, because they wouldn't have to waste time and resources on artists they get in multi-album contracts who turn out to be nothing more than one-hit wonders, and can turn those resources toward promoting new artists or creating more productive ways to provide content......
Who am I kidding, the cash flow would probably go toward the exec's salaries.