Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the votes-are-in dept

Yikes. Not only did we get a ton of traffic this week, but a lot more comments and a lot more votes on comments than usual. Keep it up! Coming in first on the “insightful” list was Todd responding to Jon Stewart’s analysis of SOPA (just days after Stewart admitted he’d heard nothing about it). The fact that he got the details so quickly didn’t go unnoticed:

I find it ironic (and also quite sad) that a comedian can figure out the core issue within two days and that congress has been working on this for two years and still hasn’t gotten the point.

This is why I think we all agree that we need more comedians in Congress (though, I guess, we tried that with Al Franken… and he’s still supporting PIPA).

Coming in second is a long, but thorough, comment from Rubberpants, in which he breaks down the MPAA’s statements concerning the protest on Wednesday:

People often say far more than they intend to simply by the words they choose. Even carefully crafted PR statements contain hidden insights.

“Only days after”

The date of the blackouts was determined before the white-house released their statement. The use of the word “only” implies that having the timing of the blackout was somehow improper, unreasonable, or wrong.

“the White House and chief sponsors of the legislation”

Intentionally grouping the White House and chief sponsors together so that it is unclear who the actions and positions in the rest of the sentence are attributed to.

“responded to”

“Responded to” doesn’t mean removed, fixed or addressed. Responded means anything other than silence, up to and including “screw you.”

“to the major concern”

Note the singular of “concern.” They acknowledge that there are other concerns, and that they did not respond to them.

“expressed by opponents”

By using the word “opponents”, they reveal that they see this as a game. There are many other words they could have used there. The game theme keeps popping up later as well.

“and then called for all parties to work cooperatively together,”

They just finished saying that they see people who don’t support the bill as their challengers in a game, that there are concerns they didn’t respond to, and then somehow think we’ll believe that they want all parties to “work cooperatively together.” This is clearly a lie. The other things they’ve said indicate that they don’t want that at all.

“some technology business interests”

“Some” is a pretty weak word to represent a quantity that tends to mean “not many.” They want to minimize the number. Including the word “interests” evokes the term “special interests” and the negative connotations associated with it. (I find that particularly interesting as this is coming from an organization that’s whole reason for being is to influence policy. Where as the “technology” businesses are actual businesses.)

“are resorting”

They use “resorting” to imply desperation or a last-ditch effort, that they believe the blackouts were a hasty reaction and not well thought out or carefully considered. That’s not true. We know there was lengthy discussion, advanced planning, and careful coordination between many parties before hand, especially in the case of Wikipedia.

“to stunts”

You know, “stunts”, like Evel Knievel jumping a flaming car or a seal balancing a ball on it’s nose; implying hollow and pointless entertainment with no real purpose or effect. It’s too soon to see all of the effects of this, but early indications are it’s been quite effective.

“that punish their users”

This is an attempt to persuade people that encounter the blackout that the site isn’t punishing the MPAA – it’s punishing them. (Again, interesting coming from an organization that not only literally threatens to punish it’s users every time they use their supporters products with a red warning about big punishments but has also actually punished it’s users, including children and elderly people by suing them for enormous sums of money.)

“or turn them into their corporate pawns”

Again with the game metaphors. The MPAA doesn’t produce or sell anything they simply follow the orders of the companies that fund them. Pawns. Furthermore, the whole point of the MPAA is to influence policy makers with campaign contributions and lucrative private-sector employment opportunities. Pawns again. But somehow, when someone is encouraged to contact the person elected to represent them, they’re pawns.

“rather than coming to the table”

They are making clear here that they don’t want the direction of the country being determined by the voice of the public, but by big players in a closed room sitting around a table making deals. First chess, and now poker.

“to find solutions”

“Solutions” plural. These bills are not the end, in other words.

“to a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging.”

We know that all do not agree. It’s hard to tell a blatant lie through, it causes psychological discomfort. So, they had to add the word “seem” to soften the statement. The fact that they even put this phrase in there, shows that they know this isn’t true. When someone is writing about drunk-driving, do they bother to write that “all now agree it’s very real and damaging?” Of course not, everyone already agrees with that. Also, by trying to strengthen “real” with the word “very”, they are betraying that they suspect it isn’t real but they want us to think it is.

“It is an irresponsible response”

They are saying that the blackout was reckless and that someone just like you could get hurt by it. Classic appeal to fear.

“and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services.”

They are admitting that people “rely” on their opponents. If someone relies on you, then you are essential. I’m surprised by this and think it was a slip up on there part.

“It is also an abuse of power”

They are acknowledging that the Internet is powerful and they resent that.

“given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today.”

This is clearly a threat. They’re saying that these companies have too much freedom and they can take it away. “Those are some nice freedoms you have there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to them.”

“It’s a dangerous and troubling development”

“Dangerous” is, again, an appeal to fear. The use of the word “development” tries to suggest that these actions are a surprise and were not provoked or precipitated by any events. It’s an attempt to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

“when the platforms that serve as gateways to information”

I’m surprised they would use the word “gateways” here. It’s a common criticism that they are the “gatekeepers” of content and they just want to lock it up. Perhaps they are trying to imply that “those other guys are gatekeepers too, see!”

“intentionally skew the facts”

“Skew” is a pretty weak criticism, akin to “tilt” or “spin”. They could have said, “they are lying”, but they didn’t because that of itself is a lie and would be too strong for comfort. It also would be too hard to fact check them on that – whereas “skew” could mean anything.

“to incite their users”

“incite” is clearly an homage to mob violence and implies coercion rather than persuasion. (Shouldn’t they have said “induce” just for kicks and giggles?)

“in order to further their corporate interests.”

They are saying, “See, we’re not the only ones with corporate interests. Everyone is doing it so it’s okay.”

“A so-called “blackout” is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one,”

We know it’s called a blackout. Everyone is calling it a blackout. “So-called” is an attempt to weaken the term. “Yet another” is trying to imply that there were previous actions that were also “gimmicks.” (Writing a letter to congress is a “gimmick?”)

“designed to punish elected and administration officials”

This is a deflection of blame and criticism away from themselves to congress. Guess they’re not true friends after all.

“who are working diligently”

They are pointing out that the congress who can’t get anything done has a chance here to look like they’re doing something and they want us to stop being so hard on them and just give them this chance to save their careers.

“to protect American jobs from foreign criminals.”

Of course, “jobs” is the buzzword of the year so that’s no surprise. The big old “American” and “foreign criminals” is an appeal to nationalism and patriotism. They went one step short of saying “terrorists.” That might have worked ten years ago.

“It is our hope”

“Hope” here shows that they doubt this will work.

“that the White House and the Congress will call on those who intend to stage this “blackout” to stop the hyperbole and PR stunts”

Again with the deflection. “You guys tell them, we’re too scared to.”

“and engage in meaningful efforts to combat piracy.”

They are implying that they are engaging in some efforts but those efforts are not meaningful. Notice they didn’t say “effective.” “Meaningful”, implies moral righteousness which gels with their line that “piracy is illegal” and therefore must be stopped – no matter if it’s actually harmful or the laws practical to enforce.

Phew. Onto the editor’s choice. I don’t always agree with Crosbie Fitch, but he makes a point worth thinking about here. Can copyright and the internet co-exist?

As we should know by now, either copyright has a future or the Internet has a future.

There is no future for both.

Stop kidding yourself that in the future some incredibly talented legislator will invent a magical copyright law that can prohibit the copying of published works without interfering with the people’s cultural liberty.

It’s an interesting point. The thing that computers do is copy stuff. They’re the most powerful “infringement enablers and facilitators ever.” Can the two things co-exist?

Next up, we’ve got blaktron, explaining how, under the original definition of “piracy” SOPA and PIPA themselves are a form of piracy:

Piracy was originally defined as an aggressive attack against a shipping lane.

Since the internet is the ‘shipping lane’ of the 21st century, and PIPA/SOPA attack its foundation, then both PIPA and SOPA would technically be acts of piracy.

Blows your mind doesnt it?

On that note, we move over to the funny side of the ledger. The vote here was actually super close, but coming out on top was BeachBumCowboy responding to the news of the estate of Martin Luther King locking up his speeches by using IP laws:

“Paid at last! Paid at last! thank God Almighty, we are paid at last!”

For second place… oh wait…. for the first time ever (I think…) we actually have a tie for second place, so we’ll list out both. First up, we’ve got an Anonymous Coward channeling one of our usual critics responding to the news of PIPA support falling apart:

The wild west days of the internet are over, it’s just a matter of time until these bills pass. Now, if you will excuse me, I have to finish sticking my head in this sand that I keep inside my ass.

What’s amusing, of course, is that the guy — a confessed lobbyist — who did make a number comments that read exactly like that first sentence for most of last year, and who’s still commenting on the site pretty much every day — has not admitted yet that he was wrong.

The “second second” place comment was from :Lobo Santo, responding to the Supreme Court Justices discovering naked statues in their own chambers:

Bare breasts where once a symbol of honesty and openness, I personally think we need MORE honesty and openness in video(s) everywhere.

And even though we already have three funny comments, because I just can’t narrow it down, I’m giving you three more editor’s choice comments this week. First up, Capitalist Lion Tamer, with his response to Lamar Smith’s claim that SOPA was necessary to protect business and jobs “from foreign thieves who steal America’s intellectual property…” Stealing intellectual property is a neat and misleading turn of phrase, so out of it we got this story:

Good thing the TSA is now patrolling the roads in conjunction with ICE. I can’t count how many trucks loaded with American IP I’ve seen hightailing it to Mexico. One was stacked to the ceiling with pending patents. Another had nothing but 1’s and 0’s in it but still somehow managed to be over the weight limit.

I saw an ICE agent dressed in a Donald Duck outfit (undercover?) patting down a semi driver for any extra Brothers Grimm stories he might have hidden on his person. I even saw Smith’s former IT person sitting in the back of squad car while SWAT-geared officers searched his trunk for unlicensed photos. He claimed he had no idea the photos weren’t in the public domain, at which point the ICE agent let out a huge guffaw, stating in a barely intelligible quack that “the public domain is nothing but a pirate myth.”

But the worst thing I saw, the thing that chilled me right to my completely American bones, was a trailer full of nothing but empty hard drives, each one capable of housing huge tracts of intellectual property, and if one had the means to link them, could contain all of the mp3s at with room to spare. The worst part, though? The hard drives were stamped “Made in China.”

At that point I wept harder than any person with first world problems like “intellectual property theft” has ever wept, knowing that all of our hard-won IP would now be freely handled by third-world countries where reliable and affordable sources of food, heat and clean water were not much more than a hazy mirage on the very distant horizon.

But I knew right then and there that we were right: we had the power to legislate the entire world through a controlled internet. I knew we could help add to the amount of repression and censorship in the countries that were busy victimizing our way of life. I knew that, despite America being in the midst of a recession and attendant financial crises and that an internal occupation indicated great dissatisfaction with the status quo, despite our soldiers still being embroiled in unwinnable wars and our human rights swiftly eroding back home, despite an out-of-control debt and deficit, despite public approval of all levels of government having fallen to all-time lows, I knew in my heart of hearts that this legislation would still be first and foremost in the minds of our legislators and I KNEW that despite everything else, these industries MUST BE PROTECTED.

Next up we’ve got Chris Rhodes responding to the MPAA’s insistence that the protests involving companies shutting down their own websites was “abuse.” Rhodes found that either ironic or insane:

Taking down the websites of others = Not abuse
Taking down your own website = Abuse


And, finally, we’ve got Jupiterkansas with a positively brilliant NY Post headline version of Rupert Murdoch lashing out on Twitter after the world came out against SOPA/PIPA:

“Old Man Yells at Cloud”

Get ready to yell at your own clouds… we’ll be back tomorrow with plenty of stories.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Keith_Emperor_of_Penguins (profile) says:

Re: The thing that computers do is copy stuff. Can the MAFIAA and the Internet co-exist?

YAY, the 80s!

I can’t wait to wear my tracksuit and doc martens, mousse up my jheri curls and walk like an Egyptian while being a Material girl… Oh god, now I know why the MAFIAA and shills are such massive douchefags. Its still the Eighties for them. THE HORROR, THE UNRESTRAINED PASTEL HORROR!

Anonymous Coward says:

“People often say far more than they intend to simply by the words they choose. Even carefully crafted PR statements contain hidden insights.”

In all fairness, the MPAA clearly did not put a lot of thought into their statement. It was a knee-jerk reaction and they should have had their PR people read it first.

I do think this is partly why their reaction was more candid than usual though (then again, the RIAA/MPAA has made some obviously bad, non knee-jerk, PR statements in the past, so who knows). This was anything but a carefully crafted PR statement, the MPAA pretty much said what it intended here without thinking out of knee – jerk anger.

Loki says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Very little of what they do has ever really been well thought out. They have largely relied on obfuscation and obscurity to carry their message.

The problem for them is the technology has made it exceedingly easier for exponentially increasing numbers of people to see what they say in relation to what they do, and especially to be able to directly compare how they interpret what others have said or done.

Anonymous Coward says:


Can copyright and the internet co-exist?

Nope, copyright is a law that outlived its usefulness.
There are no more lone thinkers, there are no more lone writers, anything today to have some depth needs the input of a dozen people to reach a point where can be useful, that means having to share research and ideas and the anachronistic view that the first person to reach something should hold ownership of that thing is just not useful or desirable.

Bush Jr. told people that their jobs in manufacturing were gone and they were not coming back, instead he promised people that they would be trained in other better jobs, those jobs are techjobs and they only can happen if there are no monopolies in place, where people can use the common resources available without stumbling onto others.

Apparently governants and corporations believe that they will hold all the knowledge and resources to themselves and collect taxes from everybody else, and they will do it, if people let them.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

“he promised people that they would be trained in other better jobs, those jobs are techjobs …”

You mean the jobs they want to grant more HB-1 visa’s for foriegner’s to fill?

“governants and corporations believe that they will hold all the knowledge and resources to themselves …”

This is why investment income is taxed at less than half of honest working income. Now, who is the patasite?

Josh in CharlotteNC (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

You mean the jobs they want to grant more HB-1 visa’s for foriegner’s to fill?

There’s a few problems with your statement.

First, the implied racism/nationalism aspect.

Next, the other option is for companies to outsource jobs they can’t fill here without that process.

Finally, you assume that its a zero-sum game, in that if an American doesn’t get that job, there’s no other benefits. That’s false, as each new job here creates more new jobs for others.

To sum it up: I’d rather hire a qualified person from another country, bring them here on a visa, have that job contribute to our economy here, first from itself, and then as added effects for others here, instead of hiring an ignorant asshole like you that already lives here.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

You mean the jobs they want to grant more HB-1 visa’s for foriegner’s to fill?

There’s a few problems with your statement.

First, the implied racism/nationalism aspect.

Next, the other option is for companies to outsource jobs they can’t fill here without that process.

Why play the race card? It’s kind of gratuitous. As far as nationalism goes, there’s a fairly high unemployment rate here. And other countries are virtually impossible for Americans to work in.

You’re wrong about the job being outsourced if no H1-B (the correct designation). The reason companies seek H1-B visas is that these jobs generally cannot be outsourced. These scumbag companies would gladly outsource the job if they could.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:


Why play the race card? It’s kind of gratuitous. As far as nationalism goes, there’s a fairly high unemployment rate here. And other countries are virtually impossible for Americans to work in.

America needs to learn to cooperate with the world now, open source has just proven that you can work anywhere in the world, cooperation not impositions will change that picture.

Imagine a world where everybody works together to solve a problem and rip the benefits locally, that is open source models, all the programmers in the world work to improve some piece of code and they use that on their day to day business.

The research and development is global, but the work done is local, the services are local the economic benefits are local and that is incredible.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:


You mean the jobs they want to grant more HB-1 visa’s for foriegner’s to fill?

Google was founded by whom?
Disney, Warner Bros, Banks, Paypal, Amazon and almost all America 500 hundreds were created by whom?

Oh that is right HB-1 visa guys.
America could have lost the WWII war or the cold war if it was not for HB1 visa guys, who do you think build the foundations for the American rocket program? It was not an American, aviation also was not advanced in America in WWII.

Dr. Michio Kaku America Has A Secret Weapon (HB-1 the genius visa) in “The World in 2030”.

But that has nothing to do with the ability to use common resources, the ability to copy freely and use that to ones advantage, today the bar to entry a market is low than it ever has been, anybody can copy anyone, but only a few will succeed big time the rest will use what the few made to create their own little markets and function as a natural inhibitor to excessive growth, it also increases the robustness of the system because is not one single entity defying what the market needs, is a lot of individuals that will try to cater to all segments of the market from the poor to the rich instead of having one big company catering to only the upper class secluding the lower income brackets decreasing economic activity, you can be copied, but you also can copy others and there should be no one with power to exclude anybody from a market, that power should be granted for the people most able to cater and dominate the market through hard work not “given rights”. Through hard work and keen business sense one should be able to dominate a market through delivery of goods and services that people want not through “entitlement attitude” or granted monopolies these last one really harm the economy, the public and everybody else, the best way to protect our economic interests is to work hard, not to make contractual monopolies, not to try and corner the market using legal tools but corner a market by hard work, that is what will keep the jobs we already have and create more.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

“he promised people that they would be trained in other better jobs, those jobs are techjobs …”

You mean the jobs they want to grant more HB-1 visa’s for foriegner’s to fill?

“governants and corporations believe that they will hold all the knowledge and resources to themselves …”

This is why investment income is taxed at less than half of honest working income. Now, who is the patasite?

Anonymous Coward says:

Pirates are everywhere!;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=211928&page=3

The U.S. Army was one of the most criminal places in the world.;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=214239&page=3;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=212008&page=3;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=212009&page=3;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=232801&page=2;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=232802&page=2;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=219286&page=2;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=235108&page=1 (penguins are everywhere);jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=235332&page=1;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=210659&page=4;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=210102&page=5;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=196503&page=5;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=148810&page=8;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfpweb21?displayContent=148257&page=8

Yep I see how copyrights where totally respected by everyone inside society including the people responsible for the safety of the USA.
I wonder if the entertainment industry would have the balls to sue the Army, Navy and Airforce of the USA.

Culture used to be something that everybody took it without asking for permission and shared with others, now apparently this thing called culture is no longer alive, children can’t even print sugar plates in bakeries or anything for that matter.

The entertainment industry is ruining something that used to be great.

Suja (profile) says:

Can copyright and the internet co-exist?


i’m tired of stupid & ignorant people who think that it can, it’s like putting fire & ice into the same pot and thinking they can coexist

it’s not going to happen, one will eventually win over the other at best or it will a shoddy existence in constant tension at worst

it’s one or the other, i’m fucking sick of copyright crippling my internet, making content i want unavailable & making my life as an artist needlessly more difficult, fuck you and fuck off, the internet don’t need you, won’t miss you and would be MUCH better off without you

Suja (profile) says:

Re: Re:

& i’d tolerate a reduction time on the length of copyright, somewhere around 2-3 years, these days 2 or 3 years is like 20 or 30 for tech and 200-300 years on the internet itself

we really don’t need anything longer than that, by the time the copyright expires whatever it is probably passed into the vault of dust & cobwebs

practically the only people looking for it by then will be the cult classic/hardcore/underground fans and i say let them have it and do whatever they want with it ’cause it’s well past it’s prime for money making

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

I waited all week for this.
All I will tell you is that, you believe copyright can’t be repealed like you believe SOPA would have an easy time?

It is just great that all this copyright nonsense is coming to the public, so they can see how a monopoly is affecting invisibly their lifes and making it worse, the more people debate granted monopolies the more people realize is not in their best interests to have anybody have the power to exclude them from the pursuit of happiness or heavily limit the paths they can pursue it.

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

um, copyright has been around for hundreds of years
For most of that time it had no visible impact on the general public because the machinery of copying was too expensive.
During the period 1960-1998 there was little in the way of serious attempts to enforce copyright against the public.

So, yes, copyright has been around for about 300 years butit has not operated directly and obviously against the public interest until very recently.

and has been a proven motivational factor in business start-ups.

Citation needed! On the other hand if you look at Boldrin and Levine’s work you will find plenty of evidence that says the exact opposite.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Just look at the army.;jsessionid=4CA028C3286A1C3BC7CC4DF4389C6D86.sfp web21?displayContent=210102&page=5

I’m pretty sure they didn’t pay a dime for content producer in WWII nor did they pay George Lucas for the use of Princess Leia. See there in that link they gloryfying the use of illegal IP content to decorate their planes, boats and cars.

Until very very recently every daycare center had copyright infringement in it, maybe that changed but I doubt people will pay for the privilege to use the IP from Disney.

You can also ask to anyone on the streets if they copied any DVD or CD recently the mere ripping is illegal and with the Library of Congress changing the rules every 3 years it will be hard to see when something was illegal or not at the time.

A. Nnoyed (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

I disagree that “during the period 1960-1998 there was little in the way of serious attempts to enforce copyright against the public.” In reality Microvision was the first shot across the bow. Microvision was designed to prevent copying prerecorded video tapes. Then there was the attempt in the late 80’s by copyright control to create a version of Microvision for music. That was rejected by the National Bureau of Standards after it was found that the system damaged the music it was designed to protect. During that period the DAT recorder, Original developer of the MP3 Player/Recorder and Digital Compact Cassette, was sued and/or restrained out of existence. The Serial Copy Management System was introduced for consumer CD Recorders to prevent recording a copy of a copy of CD with a music flag. Copyright control also required that only blank Music CDR’s for which a copyright fee had been paid, could be used to record music on consumer music CDR recorders.

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

I presume you mean “Macrovision” – and yes I was aware of most of the things you mention – but I don’t count them as serious attempts because in general there were easy ways around them.

During that period copying was mostly contrained by the fact that analogue recording systems cannot make multiple generations of copy without serious degradation.

1998 marks the onset of reasonably cheap home CD recording and the high point of Napster. In any case these are minor quibbles. The fact is that the general public has had no reason to wake up to the evils of copyright until very recently – so simplistically predicting the future based on the past is not viable.

Loki says:

Re: Re:

I think the more accurate question is if copyright in its current form co-exist with the internet.

The answer to that is clearly a no.
There is simply no way to sustain modern copyright and still maintain a functional internet.
And when it comes down to that choice, an ever increasing number of people are going to choose the internet.

However, that being said, copyright in it’s original form and for its original purpose could in fact co-exist with the internet.
Unfortunately for content creators, just as the only way for the internet to work under current copyright structure will require us to break the internet, the only way for copyright to work accurately on the internet will first require us to break copyright.

Anonymous Coward says:

Something’s going on:

Deleting multiple files. Closed affiliate program.

(Owned by FileServe) Deleting multiple files. Testing out blocking some USA IP addresses.

(Owned by FileServe) Deleting multiple files. Testing out blocking some USA IP addresses.

Sharing disabled. Closed affiliate program. Deleting files and accounts.

Closed affiliate program.
Banned USA IP addresses.

Started suspending accounts with infringing material (doing what Hotfile did)

Closed affiliate program.

Deleting multiple files.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Jeez it’s realz man!


“You’ve got an opponent who has the capacity to reach millions of people with a click of a mouse and there’s no fact-checker. They can say whatever they want,”

Source: Los Angeles Times: Hollywood regroups after losing battle over anti-piracy bills by Richard Verrier, Jim Puzzanghera, Ben Fritz and Joe Flint on January 2012. (Damn they need four people to make a report)

Poor ex-Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, he can’t get a break.


The former senator and now CEO of the MPAA can’t catch a break: “You’ve got an opponent who has the capacity to reach millions of people with a click of a mouse and there’s no fact-checker.” Must be terribly hard to represent the largest media empires in the world, who collectively own all the major newspapers, TV stations, radio stations, billboards, record labels and studios. How will they ever get their side of the story out?

Source: Boing Boing: Poor Chris Dodd by Cory Doctorow on Jan 22 2012.

Anonymous Coward says:

CATO Institute debunks the false claims the industry makes.


Finally, more demand for content being captured by the content industries is not always the same thing as demand for more content, in the sense of ?a greater variety of output.? I noted earlier that the past few years have seen a significant spike in the number of movie titles released annually. But as the Los Angeles Times reported in 2008, studio executives soon began complaining about a ?glut? of new movies, many of which were targeted at the same demographics, and therefore cannibalizing their own audiences. As one executive suggested, that meant that (at least in a market dominated by a few huge distributors) releasing fewer titles could yield higher profits?and, indeed, the number of titles released in the following two years dropped back to mid-decade levels. The key point here is that shifting some portion of the pirate audience to some form of legal viewing doesn?t necessarily change this basic calculus, because there?s an upper bound to the number of hours most people are going to spend watching (say) racing movies, whether they?re paying for the privilege or not. Rising demand can just as easily, for instance, bid up star salaries for a fixed number of films.

Source: CATO: Internet Regulation & the Economics of Piracy by Julian Sanchez on January 17, 2012.

Anonymous Coward says:

Anonymous – Message to the American People (NDAA commentary) 3,559,595 views.

Scary New Message from Anonymous! (#Operation Paparazzi, film the cops at all times) 1,048,199 views.

Best Comic-Con Cosplay and 4Chan Blocked? (What happens when you seat your ass on top of an anthill? Ask Chris Dodds and AT&T about it.) 3,612,185 views, although to be fair there is a lot of boobs on this one…I mean “honesty and openness”. Yes it is safe for work all the honesty and openness is from the Comicon of 2009, but I digress, because of all the “honesty and openness” it may be a bias factor that skewed a little the viewing.

Christopher M. Vanderwall-Brown (profile) says:

Comedian is to human as satirist is divine

The key here is that Al Franklin is no Satirist. He’s just a stand up comedian. Satire is more than comedy–it involves digesting the situation, understanding the players and their positions, the human element and transforming that into comedy that does more than makes people laugh–it presents arguments, points out flawed reasoning–it teaches.

What would we call John Stewart?

We need more satirists and “nerds” in Congress–just look at Congress’s response to SOPA/PIPA, they even asked for us!

That said, two days is an unfair assessment of John Stewart. Recently, Stewart had Lawrence Lessig on his program, the legal scholar for open source and community commons. Stewart asked very smart questions and had berg smart responses to his book “Republic, Lost”.

Before Stewart had him on, I had no idea who Lawrence Lessig was.

Stewart undoubtedly has read his work and is in touch with the issues to some extent–perhaps not the actual acts, but most definitely the keynotes behind it and the criticism.

I wouldn’t”t be surprised if these people in Congress are more out of touch than the average citizen, which I find amusing, given how much access these people could get. If a Congress member called up the leading members of these communities and asked questions, I find it hard to believe they wouldn’t drop and bring them up to speed.

A. Nnoyed (profile) says:

Megaupload, Silicon Valley

Megaupload: If the MPAA Government Puppets read the BetaMax decision by the Supreme Court they might have gotten it through their corrupt skulls that Megaupload conformed to that precedent. Just like the VCR, Megaupload had both infringing and non infringing uses. The Supreme Court found in favor of Sony because of the non infringing uses. Why doesn’t the same law apply to Megaupload?

Silicon Valley: Since the BetaMax decision the RIAA and MPAA cartel has developed psychotic delusions that everyone is stealing their stuff. Each time new technology is developed the cartel requires that more draconian copyright protection be applied to the new technology. Compare the copyright protection applied to DVD’s and Blue Ray DVD’s. Silicon Valley has been a victim of this psychosis. Hardware developers fear that the copyright cartel will withdraw content for their hardware. The cartel trashed Sony, by refusing to release new movies in Beta format until long after they were released in VHS format. Consumers stopped buying BetaMax VCR’a and started buying VHS VCR’s.

Remember when the DVD was developed. The Copyright Mafia refused to release any content until copyright protection was developed for the DVD. In reality even though the movie studios state in their advertisements of a movie “Own It Today” in reality the purchase price is a one time right to use fee and consumers do not really own the content the movie studio retains ownership. Then of course there was the prosecution of that kid in Sweden, under the DCMA, for creating the DVD copyright protection decode and publishing it.

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Megaupload, Silicon Valley

I don’t agree with your take on Silicon valley. Some parts of the tech industry have actually exploited (even fed) the psychosis. The reason is simple. Even if copy protection doesn’t save a penny for the content industry it definitely makes loads of easy money for the tech companies that supply it. Usually you have to work hard to sell snake oil – in this case however…

Re “own it today”. Actually I would have thought they could be sued over that one under trade descriptions or fraud legislation.

Anonymous Coward says:

I disagree that copyright, internet and computers can’t co-exist. We just have to find copyright laws that make sense. You should not be able to copy and paste a book and claim it as your own, for example. On the other hand, you can’t shut a site down for posting a picture of someone (fully clothed) without their permission. Honestly, what we are doing right now with the internet is about right, we just need laws to fit accordingly. Or people should just play nice, that works too.

Richard (profile) says:

Re: Re:

We just have to find copyright laws that make sense.
You’re asking a tough one there!

You should not be able to copy and paste a book and claim it as your own, for example.

Copyright law is not needed for that – that is plagiarism – and make be illegal depending on the context without the need for copyright law.

Whilst there is a need for some law in the space I don’t think that law needs to enforce a monopoly over published work. Unpublished work is a different issue and here there need to be some re-enforcements to contract law to ensure that artists who are commissioned to create non-material work have the right to be paid.

Steve R. (profile) says:

Comprimise Will be Futile

“and then called for all parties to work cooperatively together,”

Over the weekend, I heard a lot of so-called pundits making the prostration above. There can be NO compromise with someone who rejects earlier negotiated agreements, dismisses them as being “inadequate”, and then offers to come back to the negotiating table in the “spirit of compromise” to the demand further concessions and stronger laws to protect them.

Want to reduce piracy? Restore copyright to its original form. That should be the comprise that achieves the goal of reducing piracy.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...