from the rikuo-rolled dept
Well, looks like we've got another clear winner this week, with Rikuo taking both Insightful spots and second place for Funny. First up is a reaction to a judge's statement about the government trying to hide information that is already public, where Rikuo saw some synergy with the world of intellectual property:
"If information is publicly available in some other way, the government does not have the right to retroactively clamp it down and remove it from the public record."
Right hands up. Who else here noticed that that describes what should be the situation concerning copyright and copyright term extensions?
Next, Rikuo took second place by pointing out that fearmongering about ever-growing terrorist threats doesn't necessarily send the message that the government wants:
Since the NSA programs have been shown to have been operational for several years, but now apparently the threat of terrorist attacks is higher than ever...wouldn't that point to the NSA programs being completely ineffective?
You don't scream and shout that you must continue your highly controversial program by saying it's actually failed in it's stated mission goal.
For editor's choice on the Insightful side, we start with Chris ODonnell, who proposed a simple and strict remedy for government misbehaviour:
Any government employee who is found to be willfully obstructing justice or willfully violating the constitutional rights of a citizen should be banned from working in the public sector ever again.
(The fact that you can already anticipate some people reacting "well, that's just ridiculous" is telling, and frightening.)
Next up is OldGeezer, who did some quick math to underline just how insane Life-Plus-70-Years is for a copyright term:
Let's do some math. I am 61 and was 12 when I first heard the Beatles. Paul McCartney is 71. Let's assume he lives to 80. (Year 2022). Ringo is only 2 years older so likely at least one of them will be alive at least until then, very possibly much longer. Plus 70 Years (2092). My son is 28. He would have to live to 107 to legally download "I Want to Hold Your Hand". He has no children but let's assume if he just had a child. My grandchild may be able to if he lives to nearly 80. Say he has a child at 25. Much of the music I listened to in my early teens will not be public domain until my great grandchild would be in his mid 50's. AND THAT'S NOT LONG ENOUGH ALREADY?!!! Life plus 70 is an appropriate sentence for a serial child rapist, not for a song copyright.
...And all that assumes that nobody succeeds in further extending copyright sometime in the next century.
Over on the funny side, first place goes to FHuminski, who seems to have tracked down the inspiration for the creepy US spy satellite logo:
Haven't I seen this logo (or one like it) before?
Oh that's right...it was in the 1966 Batman movie...
(The sad part is that the one from Batman actually looks much less menacing.)
In second place, we've got one more win for Rikuo, who heard that the MPAA was told not to say "piracy", "theft" or "stealing" during the Hotfile trial, and mused on the impact such restrictions would have:
Hands up if you expect the MPAA's filings to just be blank pieces of paper now ;)
(That's two winning comments that started with "hands up" — so Rikuo may have found an effective tactic for drawing in more votes.)
Are you the Jamaah Islamiyah Malaysia?
We're the Jamaah Islah Malaysia! The only people we hate more than the bloody Romans is the Jamaah Islamiyah Malaysia!
Last but not least, we've got a comment that really made me laugh out loud, and another case of synergy between ongoing civil rights issues and ongoing copyright issues. Xenomancer heard the assertion that "the NSA’s mission is of great value to the Nation" and immediately identified an all-too-common error:
There they go confusing price and value again...
That's all for this week!