Rikuo's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the holiday-season-edition dept
Hey, fellow Techdirtians or whatever adjective you want to call yourselves. Longtime reader Rikuo here. I’ve been following Techdirt for the better part of two years now, and was sure surprised to have been asked to write the Favorites list for Xmas week. Once I stopped jumping and shrieking in pure fanboy excitement (and after the court injunction ordering me to never do that sort of stuff again), I sat myself down and decided to get serious.
Monday was a serious day for some, and a jawdropper for others. Daniel Castro from the ITIF (Information Technology and Innovation Foundation) just three weeks ago responded to SOPA/Protect IP critics by saying that DNS filtering works because some other countries do it. Well, thanks to the good folks at Public Knowledge, you learn that it’s alright for the United States of America to adopt practices from some of the worst authoritarian regimes on the planet. And here I thought "land of the free" actually meant something.
Two other Monday articles caught my eye: the first was about how ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) was adopted by the EU Council, however, it was really by a collection of ministers in a meeting discussing agriculture and fisheries? Wait, what? What do fish have to do with a treaty about copyright?
The last Monday article was by our own Julian Sanchez, about how SOPA will be abused. This prediction was arrived at by looking at what the entertainment industry has done in the past and what they continue to do today. A very good read, as it really drives home the point that these companies are already abusing the DMCA. And having tried to block technological innovation in the past, they will certainly continue to do so in the future.
Tuesday had three articles that interested me. The first is about UK singer, Dan Bull, releasing his latest music video on YouTube. Even though he's in the UK, he'd still be affected by SOPA. Dan Bull relies on user-content-generated-sites to release his media but the entertainment industry would like to shut them all down (or at least limit them), given half a chance. Once that’s done, this artist, unless he got picked up by a label, would have no easy way of distributing his music.
The second article for Tuesday was about successful photographer Trey Ratcliff. He’s another member of the growing example of artists who succeed in the digital age despite the copyrights on his work regularly being infringed. In fact, he's worked it into his business model. What I found most amusing about the article were the responses from some people, who continue to state that these examples don't matter. We here at Techdirt are offering proof but these people willfully stay blind.
The last Tuesday article was about the death of Veoh, a video sharing website that, despite being perfectly legal, was killed financially in a bogus copyright lawsuit from Universal Music Group. Under the original version of SOPA, you wouldn't need a lawsuit. Just a stern letter to the payment processors and you get the same result. If you can already kill a legal website dead by overburdening it with lawsuits, why bother pushing for all this extra legislation?
Come, Wednesday and I hear about Gilberto Sanchez who has been sentenced to a year in prison for uploading the unfinished workprint of X-men Origins: Wolverine. Despite the fact no harm has been proven and despite the fact that uploading a workprint does NOT equal uploading a full finished movie, Fox still pushed for his imprisonment. All this will do is drive further resentment against copyright law, as people ask themselves why such a harsh punishment?
Again with the superhero movies, as the Dark Knight Rises movie trailer has gone viral. Now, people in the marketing division of Warner Bros want this video to be seen by as many people as possible, so as to entice more people to see the actual movie. However, the lawyers are a different breed and have sent Rob Sheridan a notice for daring to embed the video. So what... are we NOT allowed talk about the movie?
My last favorite Wednesday article would have made me chuckle if it didn't piss me off so much. The YouHaveDownloaded tool has been used to find out that IP addresses belonging to the RIAA have been used to infringe copyright. The RIAA has been too quick to say that it could have been a third party at fault, a defense that it never allowed anyone else to use during its infamous P2P lawsuits.
I came home from work Thursday and saw that Julian Sanchez had been hard at work, showing us how SOPA will enable censorship beyond that of copyright infringement. What truly amused and dumbfounded me were the commentators who still insisted that dajaz1.com was rogue and illegal, when clearly the government couldn't make such a case. Talk about a complete disconnect from reality.
Reddit General Manager released a statement showing how SOPA still impacts domestic sites. Even if it were true that SOPA would only ever be used against foreign sites, the logistical nightmares of censoring them (and the penalties for failing to do so) would fall on US companies.
I came home from work on Friday, booted up my browser and first place I went was Techdirt, where I learned that pretty much everybody who was listed as supporting SOPA have demanded to be taken off the list. Turns out, they were never asked whether or not they supported SOPA, or in GoDaddy's case, were facing a massive boycott from their customers. So SOPA supporters...where is this massive support you've been crowing about? Are SOPA critics still limited to pirates and thieves?
I'd like to thank Mike for giving me the opportunity to write this article and the Techdirt community for just being that awesome. I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here's what happened.
Prenda lawyers send out letters in an attempt to make cash.
Judge at one of the cases smells something fishy and, after many shenanigans, asks the Prenda team for their side of the tale, to try and defend themselves.
They say no.
They say they won't talk.
This is the end of due process for them, at least where they're concerned. They had ample opportunity to set the record straight, but willingly and knowingly said they won't talk. Therefore, the only evidence before Judge Wright and other judges, the only evidence before them that they could look at and rule on, was evidence that pointed to Prenda's guilt. By pleading the fifth, by not talking, Team Prenda didn't enter anything to contest that.
I'm not a lawyer and I'm able to understand that much. What about you?
Re:
"However, in the aftermath of Columbine shooting, school districts have to take a "zero tolerence" policy when it comes to juvenile antics "
Just like when two boys pointed fingers at each other and made gun noises? That's right, that's what really happened. Two boys pointed their fingers at each other, made noise, and were promptly suspended, thanks to zero tolerance. Do you support that too?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Mr Lawyer in Training - what does Taking the Fifth mean? Go on, tell me that.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes of course - internet subscribers being told that they are violating COPYRIGHT law cannot contest it, even though it invokes a law enforced by government, and was in fact a system heavily pushed by Joe Biden.
If there is no force of law behind six strikes, then the subscribers can rest easy, knowing that the accusations have no force and therefore, it would be illegal to arbitrarily restrict or cut off their internet service based on nothing more than an accusation.
If there is force of law behind Six Strikes, then you've got to include Due Process.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You care about everyone's due process rights? What about in all the articles leading up to Six Strikes, you were praising it as if it were a gift from God? There's no due process there, it's six accusations and you're out.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: just love you command of english
Yeah so? The point is, you were the guy originally bringing up grammar/spelling mistakes, while making plenty of his own. That means you have no standing.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Look here, folks. You heard it from Average_Joe. To be pro-copyright, you have to be equated to a group of thuggish lawyers who demand millions all over shoddy evidence and baseless threats. To him, that's what being pro-copyright is.
Re: Re: Re:
You ignore willingly that Hansmeier is suffering due to his own actions. He and the rest of the Prenda gang, PLED THE FIFTH. That was the end of their due process. They willingly and knowingly ended any attempts for them to tell their side of the story when they admitted that any attempts by them to do so would either catch them in a lie or truthfully reveal their abuses of the law.
Re: Re: Re:
Prenda wasn't pro-copyright. It was pro-"Try and abuse the legal system to rake in millions in the name of copyright".
Re: Re: Re:
No, we're "obsessed" over the many abuses of the legal system they were perpetrating, like shoddy evidence, baseless legal threats and ignoring orders from judges. Not that they're "anti-piracy".
Re: Re: Re:
Alan. Alan Cooper. A man, who is a caretaker and not a FEMALE singer.
Re: Re: Re: just love you command of english
Oh you were commenting on the article as a whole? Rather than trying to find fault with a single sentence that grammatically doesn't have any faults? Also where is there a case of your followed by brackets? I've just searched for all instances of the word your, and nowhere on this page is there a bracket next to the word, so I don't know where you got that from.
Re:
Someone turn this into a picture, I want it for my avatar.
Re: just love you command of english
Other than the last few words being superfluous, (should have stopped at first hand account)...the sentence does work perfectly in English. What about your sentence? "Just love YOU command of english"? It's Your, not You, and English has a capital letter!
Re:
And going by your logic, only the very worst of crimes should be talked about or tried in court, everyone else can walk because someone else did it a bit worse than they did. Hey Joe, let's conflate rape with copyright infringement again! Harry can walk away free after raping 5 kids, cause Tom in the court room next door raped 7. Hooray for the legal system!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Apparently certain public schools think that they're above Constitutional law."
This is the part where you must be reading a completely different US constitution than the rest of us.
Just to be clear, you and I are talking about the separation of Church and State - as in, there is no state-sponsored religion, where adherents of that faith enjoy special privileges and those of other faiths don't. Public schools in the US, being run by the government, cannot promote one religion over another, so this means no morning prayers for example.
How is it a violation of that to teach kids about homosexuality, say in biology or social ethics classes (or whatever you call them over there)? The schools, being public, cannot have edited lessons for each religion: they can't have a lesson in Biology for students belonging to the Nation of Islam faith teaching that black people are superior to non-blacks. Just like here, they can't have classes where homosexuality is a pertinant topic and either not mention them or say that they're evil/anti-human/immoral/whatever, because such a determination is subjective and discriminatory.
As for the parade link - you originally mentioned being at/seeing a parade where men sodomized each other. I, in disbelief that this would happen in public without falling afoul of public indecency laws (you and I can agree on no sex in public, gotta protect the kids innocence for a while longer), asked for proof, to which you gave me a link to a gay pride parade where no actual sex occurred.
As for playing the victim? Can you answer me, with a straight face, that a group of people who share a common characteristic, who were victimized over that trait, shouldn't hold pride parades? Were homosexuals victimized for being what they are?
Re: Welly-welly-welly-well, Rikuo...
Your point? That's sex with a minor, which is what I'm against.
(untitled comment)
"Or maybe you're wondering if having your notebook computer on your lap every time you've played Doom has put your testicles at risk of mutation, turning them into monsterous, sentient testicilians, a race of self-reproductive hell-nuts bent on destroying the world. "
Timothy Geigner just won the Noble Prize for the Internetz with that sentence.
Re:
Yeah, Mike is sooo chicken shit, he responded no less than 3 times to you at the time of writing this comment.
Here's one way you can try and be taken more seriously. Don't say something so obviously false, that all anyone has to do to check its veracity is simply scroll up and down.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The more difficult to use and underground something is, the less people will use it."
Heard of a little thing called the Prohibition? It was a little thing, you might not have heard of it, but it was a period in the 1920's when you couldn't buy alcohol. Shocking, I know. The government went around saying it was illegal to buy beer, and punished anyone they could find.
Guess what happened? Even though it technically was difficult to buy beer (you couldn't do so openly, you had to be circumspect about it, go through shady channels, basically some amount of effort) and it was underground by default seeing as how it was illegal...people still continued to drink. In large numbers. The US government threw 15,000 agents last I checked at this, and failed completely.
This was because the PEOPLE didn't want it to be illegal.