disagree with this entirely. If he's been asked to stop and continued I would suggest that, if it were the UK, this is "death by misadventure" though I have idea whether other countries have this concept.
Yep, both Sweden and the UK have a disappointing recent history of bending over to the US in cases like this.
Like or loathe Assange, you're being willfully abstruse if you can't see that he has reason to fear the absence of a fair trial.
If he even gets a trial at all.
Seriously, why would he bother having a conversation with you, who plainly, plainly has an axe to grind, and who plainly, plainly will never be satisfied, when he could go and do something more rewarding. Like updating the merch store, or publishing more stories that the rest of us like to read and comment on without dragging it down the same stupid trolling every time.
"I also think it's very, very telling that Masnick refuses to ever talk about what he really believes about piracy, even though this blog is obviously devoted significantly to that topic."
It's a central theme of this blog: piracy, we don't condone it, but it exists, and here's how you can turn it to your advantage.
But he refuses to ever talk about what he believes?
Maybe, just maybe, he believes that it exists, he doesn't condone it, but you can turn it to your advantage.
Accepting your point Mr F about whether anonymous really is anonymous, I disagree with Tim's paraphrasing of "people would supposedly react differently if they were told that their privacy was being invaded for a positive end result".
I think you're being a trifle unfair on what is - to an extent - a valid point.
The Walsh / Massicotte point shows another fundamental mis-understanding of how social media works as well. It is fundamentally a social space first; intruding into this space with marketing is very different to sticking up a billboard or broadcasting an ad on tv. It's more like (though I hate resorting to analogue analogies) interupting a bunch of people chatting in a bar. If you're going to do that you have to be damn sure that what you're going to tell them is a) something they want to know and b) something they want to hear about in the bar.
Wow. That is, just, well, wow.
Spelling mistakes, all caps, no punctuation, random religious claptrap, snakeoil and the barest relevance to the post.
I don't know whether to report it or mark it funny?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hold on a minute
"Your response is to say that unavailability is an excuse to obtain the product illegally"
Not an excuse, a reason why some people do it. Especially given that the legal alternative may a) never be available and b) may be a worse product due to DRM or similar restrictions.
I note you're still unwilling to consider why depriving your potential customers might be a bad business model in the first place?
Re: Re: Re: Finding new ways to compensate the creative among us
Seriously, check out the case studies stuff. There are specifics from the likes of Zoe Keating, Amanda Palmer, Dan Bull, Kevin Smith, Joe Konrath, OK GO, Humble Bundle* etc going right down to how much money they're earning in $ and c.
And if we all close our eyes, and wish really hard, the internet will just disappear!
Windows made sense when the movie industry was physically shipping the movie reels around the theatres. They don't make sense now. If your contracts with the theatres require this, re-negotiate. The theatres need the content, the content doesn't need the theatres.
"the owner of said business is free to market his product as he sees fit."
And the owner of said business is free to see it go to the wall because he refuses to serve his potential customers.