While this is indeed a surprising step, i'm not quite ready to leap in joy at the mere chance that positive change is in hand quite yet.
So long as we can't actually know the truth, being pacified by the words of a distrusted person seems to be a poor strategy. Hopefully the unique nature of this development will prompt further discussion in the near future.
It'd be awesome if anything did actually piss off the MPAA anyway.
That's just the standard of the cynic's burden.
What mostly bothered me was specifically the fact that the signature list looked about as legitimate as something made as a joke.
Here we're watching an institution of criminals crushing privacy, innovation, and civil liberties. I look around and i see a disinterested or uninformed general public. I look to the names of those who recognize the threat and it appears they're just clowning for teh lulz.
I notice a significant amount of redundant entries in the list
As important as the issue is, i'm troubled that doomed petitioning seems to be an appropriate reminder of the extent of available recourse at the moment.
Condensed clouds contain only 1 ppt to 1 ppb silver by mass.
I can't imagine anyone involved intends to allow the senate the chance to oppose this thing. Why would they be working so conspicuously to exclude congressional oversight if they weren't confident they had a way of circumventing the powers of congress on the issue?
I see two possible (not exclusive) outcomes:
1: creating a registry endangers the existing rights of those with unregistered media
2: gaining first sale rights for digital media results in an attack on first sale rights for all media
It seems to me that they'd likely have the same reluctance to allow screening of a film to which they knew they had never held any rights. It has little to do with the actual legality of the rights holding, but simply the ultimate sense of entitlement that prevents them from allowing anyone else to have control over any creative process perceptibly related to their protected market.
Similar scenarios happen in shitty jobs every day. You see something that's a half-broken impediment to productivity or an embarrassment to the profession. You know it's been brought to the attention of management who don't understand or care or outright forbade you or anyone take any corrective measures. In an environment of zero mutual respect, i see this as call to ensure that said something gets broken the rest of the way in a manner which targets directly any claims made as to why it was unimportant.
prepare to be sued by tire manufacturers everywhere
because you're infringing on tread patents by introducing discontinuities into the periphery of a "cylindrical device intended for the purpose of rolling"
Don't give them any ideas. Watch, soon you'll have to buy a second license for "your" lawnmower in order to be able mow both the front and back yard. Forget letting the neighbor borrow it; that's illegal
It won't stop being used until it stops being effective on idiots who don't care to engage in critical thinking. Until then, these fraudsters and their partners in crime will keep their convenient cloak of lies.