Why did Congress abdicate from its duty/powers about eternal copyright policy? The obvious problem is who we vote for. We vote for the wrong people! How does one pick a quality candidate/judge from the poor choices offered on typical ballots? Best answer; Write in. There is still hope for the election process though...
How can anyone recognize an honest candidate much less likely to violate your Constitutional Rights? What kind of test or list of questions can we ask to sort out the Constitutional malcontents from the honest hard working candidate? Of course its not the questions or test that are important but the answers and results.
Its likely that these questions and analysis wont be asked on the normal walled garden chosen question presidential TV/Radio candidate debate.
Keep in mind that it is not just the popular presidential candidate elections that are important but especially the smaller elections which are often used to sneak through unwanted tax bills or drug enforcement and or copyright activits.
Question #1; Are you aware of the various foreign treaties being pushed by trade-associations?
Answer A; “Why yes isn't it a great thing that our trade-associations and the USTR are looking out for us?”
Yikes This person wont even read them let alone pay attention to details like privacy or right of resale and the million other ways clever wording can steal personal (and corporate) freedoms. Its likely this person has been visited by the MPAA/RIAA/patent-trolls/other who donated largely. This person might even ignore a 12,000 voter signed petition just for his valuable corporate contributors. Or... The person is a real idiot. (its possible)
Answer B; “There are several trade treaties like TAFTA and TPP being contemplated in secret right now but its hard to call them trade agreements since they seem more to do with controlling the culture and spread of culture in the signatory nations than trade or business. A trade agreement has nothing to do with Intellectual Property. Ideas cant be owned. If the term limits of copyright were sane like 14-28 years there wold be no problem at all anyway.” Having a candidate say things like that wold be very helathy.
Question #2; Accessibility any way we want. What is your stance on how one obtains media/entertainment/news? More technically stated; How do you feel about Digital Rights Management (DRM) and untoward bad licensing agreements forced on the public at large?
Answer A; “Whats the problem? Intellectual Property must be protected its a priority.”
Do NOT vote for this totally technically illiterate candidate unless you want badly written law written by special interest groups? Intellectual Property is a buzzword that really means this candidate will enact law that further restricts your access to culture in many ways.
Answer B; Makes technical sense. Spout technically correct answers about technological based topics. Keeping in mind the exceptions in question #4. This is kind of a “fill in the blank” answer.
Question #3; Privacy. How do you feel about individual privacy in terms of phone records/tapping and outright spying on citizens? What about an individual purchasing spending habits on content sensitive entertainment in various formats books/films/mkv/avi/pdf/other?
Answer A; “I fully want to protect the average citizen right to privacy and will enact law to protect the rights of Intellectual Property and protect Americans from Terrorists.”
Expect nothing but more NSA/FBI/DoD/CIA/other unconstitutional spying on the public at large. Intellectual Property is that buzzword meaning corporate monopolies will get more power and you get the bill to pay for it.
Answer B; “Its clear that government has been panicking about terrorists and some sense of reason and calm must be inserted into Washington quickly. The threat of terrorism may be real but democracy and the American Culture of Privacy must be able to survive. Anonymous use of the internet is an important issue and must be protected by removing the PATRIOT and various other anti privacy acts.”
Question #4; Qualifications. What do you feel your qualifications are for the political/judgeship/sheriffs/other office?
Here we have a trick question derived from the REAL reasons we elect an officer in government.
That is... we elect them for honesty and integrity in the way we want them to enforce and interpret the law. Not how slick they act nor how tough a stance on crime they spout off about. We elect people to NOT enforce bad law and NOT to convict anyone for victim-less crimes. (no way a Hollywood studio is a victim of violent crime)
Answer A; “I'm gonna be tough on crime of any kind and lock up anyone suspected of any kind of crime.”
Its likely that this sheriff or candidate will bust down your door with a SWAT team and shackle your kids just for practice. Unless you want to pay for a lot of broken down doors. Don't vote for this power mad psycho.
Answer B; “I will lock up only violent offenders period. Congress writes many bad laws and copyright/drug laws are some of them. If you are a violent person you will be arrested and prosecuted with all due process followed. You may get a ticket for jaywalking but never arrested.” These are good things to say.
There will be obvious accusations of lawlessness and such drivel. Since bad laws ARE the REAL problem... its not a problem.
There are many more issues that great probing questions might be asked also. Like what about Intellectual Property itself and the Cultural black hole of out of control copyright industry? What about all the horrible treaties that have been trying to lock the US down and let foreign parties control US lawmaking process?
At the moment its basically easy to recognize a candidate that will not act in the publics behalf... they are Democrats and Republicans. Who else can we blame the current Constitutional crisis on? They are really weirdos being supported by two weird political organizations.
The Democratic and Republican parties protect their candidates in much the same way a union will force a company to keep a bad worker in spite of being worthless. They have such good PR staff that their candidates always look good and the opposition always looks bad. The dirt throwing is famously used.
Another way to recognize a looser is the size of anonymous corporate contributions. If there are not a lot of legitimate small grass roots donations its time to question the candidates viability. It would be a good sign if a candidate would submit to an interview with WIRED magazine or even from TechDirt itself. Some group that actually did discuss the real issues an definitely not any TV network more worried about their White House press pass than tacky things such as privacy/Bill of Rights/etc issues.
If any of the local dummy politicians complain about it vote them out also. Keep voting out monkeys and replacing them with reasonable people that support the constitution( especially the first paragraph), due process, privacy, the Bill of Rights and thinks Intellectual Property is a bad phrase.
There is nothing wrong with putting the relevant sections of Blind Treaty under Fair Use (Rights). The only thing preventing such a simple categorization is what? The Panicking of a copy-exception (right) support group a hundred times more massive than the entire Blind and Blind-support community?
Do they see their massive Monopoly crumbling down because of one chip in the verbal/literary column? Maybe. And. For gumming up a perfectly workable treaty for the Visually Impared with political monopolistic nonsense... Fine.
In any case imagined will the copyright industry stop at just trying to recategorize Fair Use for the Blind community? No way. If they felt frightened by such a small thing as that then there is no appeasing them. Ever. Wont happen. Its likely they will be obstructionist forever regardless of what they speak or say. More cigarette argument lies.
Until the MPAA entered the scene this was a treaty that everyone (almost) totally agreed upon. Did they understand the high(er) rate of suicide among the Def- Blind and Blind? The utter hopelessness of having everyone around you try to describe a world that you can never visually interpret nor see? Having to pay more for things that others take for granted.
It is correct to say that people are dying because of the selfish obstructionism of the copyright industry. What we are experiencing is not semantics but literal obstruction for the glory and expansion of a copyright empire that has already crushed the uncrushable American Culture of Freedom. (while the baby slept?)
Freedom for the Blind community? Ha! Such a long way to go for even such a humanitarian goal as that. Hell. Basic Bill of Rights freedoms have been washed away years ago. All for what? Hollywood Accounting Principles? Hollywood? Porno film stars?
My earlier comment on what went on behind the scene for the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to wangle/negotiate with the National Federation for the Blind (NFB) still applies; What threats of force, promise of lawsuits or magical hints of huge donations in the future did the MPAA likely wage/make or nuance. What soothing song/lullaby was played?
It seems that contrary to what the MPAA says they are themselves more like the Pirate Horde they supposedly battle against. Negotiations with the MPAA have more similarity to towns and cities trying to pay off the Mongol Barbarians as they sat outside the city gates than civilized contracts or boardroom office deals.
Lets get a real-like analysis of how the MPAA (and other **AAs) do their barbarian like warfare. They used to sue on behalf of their members but have begun to play dirty by bribing lawmakers with huge campaign donations to... write law?
Laws especially in their favor since, of course, much of it was written by them. Laws that put the burden of prosecution on the government thus getting the US government to pay for their own (what used to be civil) lawsuits! Laws that further extend and perpetuate a horrible monopoly. A pirate would do no better.
In fact the slick and professional efforts by the copyright industry advocate groups put the pirates to shame in terms of nasty written law and dirty legal deeds done dirt cheep. Thats right we now have Lawyer (pirate?) Hordes operating copyright (and worse porn) troll operations skimming millions off of people they just know as an IP address number. Why bother with such a nitty detail like evidence when intimidation will suffice?
To be specific; the MPAA effectively pirates American (and other) Culture. Our right to wear whatever slogans on our T-Shirts. Our right to sing whatever song we want to whomever we want? Our right to associate with whomever we want should not be placed in peril just because a few publishers (and whatever whining the artists make) say?
Can the MPAA do anything but steal from Public Domain Rights and Fair Use Rights. The totally unfair method they use is a US government granted Monopoly of ruthless business nature called copyright. Copyright is already completely out of control to the extent that basic human rights (as in the Bill of Rights) are becoming extinct.
-end general rant #1-
-begin specific rant #2-
So now we have the MPAA trying to hijack a treaty for the Blind not just to what has been perceived as hobbling it but for what now amounts to pirating the treaty for their own ends! Its makes the average reader ponder just who the real pirates are?
It stands to reason that the clever and powerful lawyers and political machine sponsored by the MPAA whale will crush and devour whole the lonely small NFB krill/fish. Sharks and tadpoles do not make for good swimming pals. Pirates upon the high seas might do the same to a modern luxury ocean cruise liner. Arrrrrr.
NONE of this would be much of a problem if the eternal copyright term limits were retracted to something culturally reasonable like 14-28 years.
The whole idea behind this treaty was to provide expanded/greater access to published works in the first place. Placing wording to prevent that makes the treaty so much more impotent.
If lawmakers would do anything other than warm seats and take political contributions they might try to corral the wild west untamed nature of the copyright-industry beast. Its the copyright industry itself that is the problem. They are the Cultural Pirates themselves!
Instead we get what? The lawmakers themselves seem to be parroting/echoing what the MPAA wanted them to say?
The Blind as a group just get pushed out of the way. A footnote along the copyright industries way to pirate ALL of American Culture. It is impossible to see how the MPAA could even attempt to say they support the Blind's battle against all manner of barriers they must overcome to survive in an obviously hostile copyright world.
The obvious hippocritical-ness of this situation takes the entire cake. In a way ya just have to appreciate their gall. Its still a tragedy that such small groups are likely played for the innocents they are in the treacherous world of copyright law.
P.S. In a very recent previous post about the Blind treaty-negotiations was a very good expose on the naming conventions and their use/abuse by current copyright maxilmalists. An example would be that copyright should be renamed in to copy-exception because that is what it was SUPPOSED to be.
The treaty negotiations seem to be progressing nicely and somehow the first drafts actually seem to address real life situations of the Bind.
The treaty is good in that, well, its good thinking. The problem is that it does not go far enough to protect the legitimate Fair Use Rights of Blind users and enablers. The slippery slope word “exceptions” is used too prominently.
There needs to be slipped into the treaty the term “Blind Use Rights” to further cement the expanded Fair Use Rights. This solid wording would help provide some protection from further erosion from the out of control eternal copyright monopolies.
While we are at it renaming 'copyright' into 'copyexception' wold be nice too... (hehehe) Because it was originally designed to be a short term (14-28 yr) exception to the greater needs of Public Domain Rights and Fair Use Rights.
Who would even believe anything the MPAA says or does anyway? Isn't this “joint statement” just another cigarette sales ad lie? Even the direct interpretation of their actions and words are “our selfish monopolistic needs are greater than a whole cultural group of Blind handicapped?”
The whole thing sounds disingenuous in every way. Am a bit cynical. How much of a donation the the National Federation For The Blind allowed the MPAA to slither up next to the NFB and make these “joint” statements? Who really wrote the “joint” statement anyway? Exact wording is of vital importance especially in treaties.
For the MPAA to basically take advantage of a legitimate Blind activist support group is a painful thing to hear about... Isn't this just some plan to just use the NFB as a platform for their own ends?
Its scary the the MPAA wants to rewrite the treaty in their own way. Surely they would waste all the good work done so far if even one of their sentences end up in the final draft. The MPAA has already stated that they don't mean to allow ANY benefits at all and are already AGAINST the treaty entirely. Nobody lets their pet shark swim with their kids. Its just not done.
Its not great that the MPAA is trying to schmooze its way past the NFB with what is/was likely bad intent on their part. In cases like this; One just has to realize that groups like the MPAA will NOT be any help. Almost surely the opposite. Its like warning your kids to stay away from bullies, drug pushers in shiny cars and shark infested waters.
Somehow the flashy bling bling bearing special-interest-group lobbyists would make any parent/citizen/voter cry about wayward money addicted politicians.
Trademark law is way to powerful and needs to be trimmed if not lopped off mostly to the ground.
First off the I ♥ N Y trademark seems to simple in its use of a heart. There has got to be prior art in this case somewhere as the city is 200 years old. Its likely a nonsense trademark.
Second here we have a case where the city of New York is probably (figuratively of course to any literary terrorists out there!) shooting themselves in the city foot. This is a great example of how culture spreads and modifies current slogans and ideas to be both original and creative about normal things/places/topics expressing their love and wonder (or disgust) about them.
The city of New York has lost. Period! In what way has this episode increased the cultural diversity (thus happiness) and tax revenues (thus viability) of the city? Its a double three stooges whack on the noggin and a painful noogie to the city. (again, figuratively of course to any literary terrorists out there!)
Thirdly where is a coffee cup in place of the ♥ not an original creation? Its probably Trademarkable in and of itself.
Some solution oriented proposals;
One of the great problems of trademark is that it is way to inexpensive to obtain a trademark enforced throughout the US. It costs $250-350 usd for a trademark that lasts 10 years at that time it must be renewed (for $400 usd) before a 6 month grace period is up.
It might be a good thing to cut the territory given up for such a low cost Trademark to just one city, county or state. This would have the effect of letting local culture not squashed out be every small mom and pop store or over reaching city legal department. This would solve the great majority of silly trademark disputes.
The fee for a nationwide Trademark would be much larger maybe (at least) ~3000 per year and much much greater (say +3 million/year) if the trademark itself was some corporate attempt to limit the legitimate spread of popular culture. The best example are the Trademarks on Disney characters like Micky Mouse, Batman or Superman. No way anyone cannot recognize these characters a part of American Culture! (have to think about the cultural significants of a trademark and its impact on society and come up with some formula...)
It was once common law that if any concept/idea/character/etc became a “Household word” it became a legitimate part of American Culture and thus non trademarkable nor copyrightable. Can one use in a sentence the characters of any comic to label someone's behavior? Example “Wow! It felt like Superman entered the room when so and so made the scene.”
Another of the great problems of Trademark law is that it WAY to easy to threaten anyone indiscriminately. A good possible solution is to force the accuser/plaintiff to put up a bond that covers all legal fees from both sides just for even sending out a strongly worded demand asking for monetary settlement. It has to hurt enough to be a restraint on stupid lawsuits and idiotic trolling threat letters.
That Anonymous Coward. Is only a matter of time that the Stop and frisk cops start looking for trademark violations on tattoos? Think of the extra revenue a “Trademark Ticket” plus further legal charges bring in to an obviously broke city because they threw out all the clever small coffee shops?
Have to partially agree with 'Horse with no name' about some confusion in between international and US copyright law. As if US copyright law is not confusing enough. But that was not the thesis.
The (short 700 word) argument took the 4 Danish Mayors use of music and threaded mostly through popular culture and applied US copyright law to reach some logical conclusion or observation not obvious to the general discussion. Which was the point.
Its amazing how many pages/paragraphs/rants are not posted as they weren't relevant enough or to wanky. In general the TD comments are quite thoughtful and each response might easily turn into a book if posting times limits for an active article would permit.
The thesis is American Culture which is mostly a mystery/enigma/topic that eludes everyday consciousness like each breath cycled without awareness. Many others also seem to forget culture too since it is so rarely broached/brought-up/mentioned/explored almost every time it's consequences and impacts are involved.
In a way, these essays are a way to ferret out this/some/any missing cultural puzzle piece. In this essay the personal discovery that American Culture was at one time larger than copyright law(s) and dominated every aspect of life. Whereas (200 years later) current federal and state laws (patent, copyright, public performance, etc) seem to be a damper on the spread of culture as exemplified by the last paragraphs in this essay.
“What is important in this case is that it involves the use and spread of culture. Culture and all that is entails and encompass (which is almost everything) is entirely reserved for free public use under the terms of Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association.
It is ironic that in the original Constitution the copyright law was outlined as a short termed (14-28 year) very limited exception to Public Domain Rights and Fair Use Rights. Whereas in the present day it has transmogrified into some legally lethal monster that dares to call Public Domain and Fair Use exceptions? In what indignant form of attitude about Democratic values is that?”
It kind of hit me on the head in the cultural awareness department. Powerful in some way.
Of course the real target is India with its recent refusal to allow some medical drug patent. India also has a history of harboring and supporting generic drug firms that produce cheaper alternatives to US and EU generics. (many examples please google it)
India is one of the few countries strong enough to fight the ridiculous Hollywood Accounting Practices of large drug (big pharma) firms that are used to justify charging +$100,000 (usd 2012) a year for many life saving drugs. (cancer, leukemia treatment and others) Good for them!
There are many ways to attack such any country that dares to defy big pharma and one of them is by ancillary means. Better said is that if one cannot directly use existing draconian patent law practice then try wringing their necks through the back door.
Obviously using the World Health Organizations (WHO) funding to directly strangle developing counties and attempt to force them into very unadvised (and stupidly named) one sided Intellectual Property treaties is bad diplomatic manners to say the least.
India seems like a wise and cultured society politically speaking as compared to its western counterparts. Whereas US and EU political circles seem to have been dominated by entertainment and pharmaceutical special-interest-groups for many a year.
Changing gears... The WHO will be an easy target for any attempt to restrict their funding as they are admittedly one of the most corrupt and organizations under the United Nations preview. “Unethical practices”, wild claims of influenza pandemics, waste of research funding, waste of funding... on and on (at a loss of words for how many reports of WHO corruption. Another good google). And. In respect to big pharma criticism and rivalry about patent fees who know which side is correct as at least the big pharma groups pull no punches. (Who knows ultimately about the WHO claims) (yawn...)
The WHO is an easy target... Which is likely why they are directly mentioned in this proposed legislation. (want to laugh but am extremely bored by this...)
The US has tried before to stop UN (thus WHO) funding and did so for some years but was ultimately force to continue their funding of previously agreed to treaties. Any such limitations on WHO funding might find a similar ending. To successfully end such international obligations the US would have to create another Constitution. (The original founders of the Constitution estimated that this would happen every 50 +/- years or so.)
This direct attack on WHO funding (however justified/nonsense) is only a distraction when compared to enforcing current health/life killing current patent law. Considering how many levels current copyright/patent malicious-special-interest-groups have penetrated current government at all/most/many levels how can anyone be surprised?
There is no such thing as Intellectual Property! This may be a paraphrase of current political industrial activism but it has no meaning in culturally based reality. None.
Life over death. (why do I have to consider such!) Antagonistically!
Zakida Paul, IP theft? IP is theft. This is reality in anyones eyes that sees that ideas are NOT copyrightable nor patentable.
(Thanks for the comments in general. Mina desu.)
Defense of personal opinion. Copyright is OK if (and only if) its terms are limited to a length much less than the lives of the audience/listener/viewer/etc. Why? We want to TELL the story/message/content to OUR CHILDREN! What good is it if otherwise?
Keroberos. The issues of each individual US department are at many times in conflict with each other. This is good in-terms of democracy but bad in terms of bureaucracy. When US bureaucracy is involved the public is bound to suffer.
RadialSkid; A good example of an awareness of how Intellectual Property (stupidly named IP) tries to trump the basic concept that IDEAS are NOT patentable.
Machin Shin; Good analysis that profits are NOT a measure success in response to eternal/prolonged life.
Mike Masnick; Thanks for the perspective. Your intuition of medical drug development might be the basis of current industrial cultural analysis. (Unspecific, obvious reasons.) Life over profit is an easy cultural goal. Profit is the key as Hollywood Accounting Methods (screw the political correctness) have distorted any so called real analysis.
Radamonkey. (Bwahahahah) Is funny in respect that 911 is a function of Congressional law which is a function of special-interest-groups... (fill in the blank)
Internet Zen Master. Regardless of how you roundabout corral your argument... right on!
Here we have a another fascinating conjunction of music licensing, political campaign with the use and spread of popular culture. (i.e. Fair Use Rights)
Music licensing is its own problem in respect to culture. Current law combined with effectively eternal in length terms (your going to die before the term lets up!) prevents the spread of culture. If it were not for the presently meager Fair Use Rights hardly anyone would even hear or ingest any new culture from media at all.
If Music distribution, Radio and TV execs/firms were kings and queens then they would surely proclaim that any other source of culture is wrong and punishable by death! Its the very normal Monopolistic way to do things in a federally granted Monopoly... Crush the opposition even if it means tearing apart and disposing of Democracy?
Political advancement using current (pop) culture is amusing especially when one realizes that politicians mostly drowned out by the materialistic culture of malicious-special-interest-groups seeking advancement of their own plans. Its probably a good thing that these politicians can/have used a song that hopefully resonates with their campaign/personal style. Its a good case for Fair Use Rights.
More interesting is what do we deem commercial use? Is the paid for advertising created for a candidate a commercial product? Would Universal Studios permit the use of Psy's music track for a reasonable licensing fee? Or not?
If is would grant the use (for a REASONABLE licensing fee) then Future Factory and the Danish politicians are most likely liable for collecting reasonable use fees. If Universal Studios would not have likely granted use then we have a very real Cultural use and there are even more Fair Use Rights invoked although this is a very weak legal argument? (read reactionary)
In one way its cool that some Danish Mayors can use “Gamgnam Style” in some culturally relevant way as exemplified by the popularity (Utube views at 1.6 million) of their efforts. Just to be able to pull it off in a publicly acceptable way is nice to see. However keeping in mind that this was possibly a staged sudo-viral event put on by the production company Future Factory? Hard to say.
What is important in this case is that it involves the use and spread of culture. Culture and all that is entails and encompass (which is almost everything) is entirely reserved for free public use under the terms of Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association.
It is ironic that in the original Constitution the copyright law was outlined as a short termed (14-28 year) very limited exception to Public Domain Rights and Fair Use Rights. Whereas in the present day it has transmogrified into some legally lethal monster that dares to call Public Domain and Fair Use exceptions? In what indignant form of attitude about Democratic values is that?
its likely Psy will see nothing from any settlement from copyright action. Un-recoverd Artists see zip until some Hollywood Accounting Method determines some level of contractual satisfaction.
AC mentioned Bruce Springseen's Born in the USA legal attacks about 'misinterpretation'. In this way culture and copyright law collide. Copyright law gives an artist a lo of leeway in the use of their works and as such. Its great cultural humor that Bruce and the users of his work disagree on what the meaning is.
Were the politicians using the song in some belief that it was pro USA even if only they did not understand the lyrics? Or. Were they selling the fact that such was real life and that if you voted for them one could expect more of the same? Did they do ether of these scenarios consciously or unconsciously? A great cultural debate!
Another AC mention the "droit morale" claim of abuse which if no credit to the original authors is not given might have some traction. It might be due to sloppiness on the part of Future Factory?
Its almost always true these days that the ridiculous 'damages' contrived by both politicians and present (insane) copyright law are indeed extortion. So much so it gives rise to a legal black market of copyright troll extortion.
AC had a good statistic while I was writing the above essay.
"Ten million people die each year from diseases that have available cures."
Since its possible that already a billion have died the title of this article might be better in line with reality by saying; “How Long Before A Patent Kills A Few Billion People?”
Trillion may be a bit much for now but maybe not if we have a pandemic or two or what about a real epidemic? Also the possibility of a bad global depression might change the employment rates of many a country not to mention the ratio of health care cost to available family resources. At the least 'Trillions' of deaths is not out of scope.
If patent holders treat the sick and vulnerable in the same way as copyright holders treat the highly handicapped Blind there will be no pity on the helpless. None.
This is a fascinating tech topic! Few times have the time delays in innovation and technological advancement and their consequences been so highlighted.
Of course the real issue is whether the fees charged were 'reasonable and just'. $3000 for one test/medicine/diagnose does not seem like either. It sounds more like extortion from the sick and or vulnerable. Again we probably see the ugly ghost of Hollywood Accounting Principles. (HAP)
The high cost of medical care/medications/diagnostic-tests/etc have likely already caused way more than 100,000,000 deaths. It even likely that we could count them with a little research.
“Myriad's monopoly has allowed it to set a high price for its tests -- $3000 -- and this is bound to have acted as a disincentive for those who were unable to afford such a sum.” Count these as dead victims from patent laws.
Its common everyday occurrence that the elderly/sick/poor die from seemingly simple things such as tooth decay as dental work costs a lot of money. Count these as dead victims from patent laws.
The costs of health care in the US is already at such an extent that many go without medications fro chronic medical conditions. Also count these as dead victims from patent laws.
This shows up most vividly in Cancer treatment. Few can afford the often 100,000 dollar per year treatments expense for drugs and irradiation. Count these as dead victims from patent laws.
The huge cost of an Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) device is surely a result of patent costs. How many people die each year because at a basic level testing and imaging are the best ways to get an early diagnosis. Count these as dead victims from patent laws.
The cost of US health care is already so out of proportion to average world prices that medical tourism is normal for operations and major dental work. Just take a 'vacation' to Mexico or some south Caribbean Island (where a significant portion of US doctors are trained also because US based education is also way out of whack) and get that cancerous blob removed or bypass surgery.
Is it safe? Who knows and at the unreachable price US health care charges... Who cares? Or more likely; Who can afford to care. The ones who could not even afford this low cost alternative? Count these as dead victims from patent laws.
The claim that US health care is 'the best' in the world is mostly false. Like most boasting there will be some little part that is true but it surely is not the price-tag. This unofficial counting of the dead caused by patent law is almost surely way over 100 million already.
Yeah. The Constitution says a lot of good things and many of them were supposed to be inalienable. And. Two hundred years of special-interest-groups writing weasel worded law for an likely illiterate congress cancels almost all that out?
The middle ground in the cost of treatments/diagnostics might be found in enforcing Standard Accounting Methods upon the various drug manufactures. instead we have the likely Hollywood Accounting Procedures that don't just count the cost of development of that treatment/diagnostic but a few hundred thousand kitchen sinks also. (remember that billions of $ are on the table and thats a lot of kitchen sinks including installation costs too!)
Its also normal that much of the research was not only done at public universities but actually sponsored and paid for by the public through grants and tax subsidies.
Yes it callous and unthoughtful of the White House staff/support-team for allowing this to happen. Its tempting to go off on another rant on how the Blind are left out of normal life but this type of behavior is quite normal. Who cares about such a small group? Not many.
Its logical that anyone posing a question about the Blind would actually make the process available/functional/easy to use. Such an effort when done successfully looks very good and adds a professional level of good execution that few can do.
Technology has come quite a long way but with patent and copyright law the way they are now don't expect any growth in the Blind adaptive devices/services industry for about 18 years or more. Like many medical breakthroughs the patent term delay diminishes the lives of the ill and handicapped alike.
It would be interesting to see how many Blind actually sign the petition. Don't expect a lot because of many issues that often overwhelm Blind people.
silverscarcat. Yes there is almost always one or more 'helpers' for every Blind person. However its normal that the blind person has several other medical problems (often the cause of blindness) which keep them so busy that outside world/concerns/important-issues seem almost irrelevant.
Most of my essays try to be self referential conceptually in that an augment is built up with reason and evidence and some conclusion is reached. Many times has the conclusion surprised me and like that a lot.
It does take some time and usually they end up at the bottom of the posting stack. Oh well.
It pains me to admit that there could be better examples rather than what comes 'out of mind' in real time and that there should be more linked references for better relevance. But if one takes the time to do all that it gets posted very late and whats the point if nobody reads it?
Democracy does not make sense in many an analysis. It's a young (200 years is nothing) and unique concept that still needs special attention/investment by its citizenry to flourish. In many ways its like a brilliantly conceived start up company that still needs encouragement to take off in a freedom-profitable way.
In the historical sense individual freedom does not make sense to any Monarchy, Religious or Authoritarian government. Most if not all see Vassals and Serfs only as tools to be used and thrown away as needed. This is fully exampled by the suffering and cruelty imparted on people during the Dark Ages where millions died if only for reasons of control.
On the business side one might side with socialist values and try suppress individuality, freedoms and property ownership in an attempt to maximize total profits and efficiency. Historically this usually ends up with a totalitarian government likely associated with communism or dictatorship. Hence one cannot just sum up the running/operating of a democratic government 'as a business'.
Additionally, on the business side, we have the difficult to abolish concept of Slavery. Slaves are assets not to be removed from the accounting books just because of some remote concept like respect for life, individuality and freedom.
In spite of all historical precedent and business/socialist analysis Democracy grows wildly and thrives wonderfully. Its citizens are the happiest and most productive and outperforms any other form of government.
Of course this is just stating the obvious but this background build up seems to be a basic necessary lesson that the last few generations have skipped out on history class. The greater majority of current politicians and world leaders included.
Despite all the political degrees and education of politicians it still seems that they are illiterate in terms of Democracy. Its likely a shame that some college Political Science textbooks have the word “Elitism” in the title.
Technology is the double edged sword that cuts both ways and as such any authoritarian leaning Democratic government must be forced by its citizens to limit its use and especially abuse.
Power and control exercised through traditional force and modern Internet surveillance opportunities is its own goal. Profit, however inefficient or coerced, is funneled by and to the controllers of power. Its an Ageless formula used by all the Monarchies, Religious and Authoritarian governments in history. (Its even so boring that writing this essay is hard because of the apparent background needed.)
So now we have WCIT meetings about global Internet policy. Its no surprise that the various world governments had to make their own play for power and whatever profits such control can squeeze out.
However. This is complicated by the US/EU/other's current problem with the badly phrased concept of Intellectual Property and the mistake of titling ideas as assets to own and sell. Ownership valued above freedom of expression in the form of, again extremely badly phrased, “Performance Rights” laws only make implementation of such control all that much easier.
Lately the term “Intellectual Property” has morphed into Intellectual Property Rights” which is likely the worst term ever coined by malicious-special-interest-groups. (MSIGs)
Combined with eternal copyright terms this is a control formula any Monarchy, Religious and or Authoritarian government would drool over. In short... We (the citizens of US/EU and other malformed treaty signers) are the greatest threat to Democratic society in the world today.
Its so much of a problem today that the power and respect that American voice is totally lost on the world today. With diplomacy waged with drone attacks rather than Democratic values its easy to understand the when the US President speaks... the message is garbled amid the current authoritarian tendencies.
Fear and threats seem to speak louder than reason and democratic rational these days. Its a very unhealthy problem for a supposedly Democratic Society to deal with.
Democracy is something that we know it works and does so wonderfully. Keeping in mind that it is a cool concept still in its infancy and that even its own citizens know little about... Its a Democratic path that must be followed regardless of the careful rationalizations and cunning lies that power seekers spew.
The well phrased Public Domain Rights, Fair Use Rights and other Intellectual Freedoms cherished by all Democracy's citizens are under attack by the usual mess/group of control-freeks/power-seekers.
A good step in the defense of Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association concept of Public Domain in the average citizens eye/mind needs to be elevated to Public Domain Rights. In this same way Fair Use needs to be elevated to Fair Use Rights.
Retraction of current, effectively eternal, copyright term limits to something reasonable like the original terms set forth in the original Constitution would be of great benefit to Democratic culture and society.
Its important that the US/EU/other countries are not torn apart by the same forces that were unleashed by the Gutenberg Press invention. Its Democratically insane that any entity could think it can control such forces. If the Church were able to go back in time they would certainly change their policy of killing anyone who printed the bible to making them saints if only for their own power and glory.
If history is any lesson/precedence then... Todays “bible” is not just one book but ALL the books/music/films/video/knowledge made available on the Internet. (Including the bible of course)
Bitcoin is one of the greatest, most brilliant, technical and cultural innovations. (What a statement!) Its a wisely envisioned way to enable personal privacy in conjunction with Internet/digital-commerce and still keep the very private concept of cash alive. Since paper-money/credit/bank/prepaid cards are under attack from every way possible by malicious crooks (notice no mention of the legitimate words like hacker, nerd, or white hat security tester) and counterfeiters is wonderful to see an improvement such as the Bitcoin concept.
In no way can individual anonymity of normal everyday purchases be underestimated in its function of allowing a free and open democratic society pursue the cultural ways it wants to express itself in. (open ended statement) This shows up immediately in how we contribute to political/activist organizations we support that may be controversial to other parts of society following culture we do not believe in.
Lets examine, some of this, concept with currently hot topics;
In the case of Prenda vs. John Doe (various/many) where an typical defendant might have been trying to use the (somewhat/mostly) anonymity of torrents to download controversial content made easily available because of recent technological advances (the Internet). (duh)
Why did this cultural group use this method of obtaining items? A) It probably was not available from any other source. B) The on-line available source required an address and credit card or PayPal and destroyed any form of anonymity that a cash purchase might provide. C) Other. (the concept of honey-pots/forced-rarity comes to mind)
Considering the religious and puritanical wars current politics wages their battles in... anonymity is the only way to defend ones personal cultural habits. Lets face the facts that marital infidelity (gimme a break!) is more damaging to a politicians career than fraud, waste, mismanagement of public funds, deception, theft, lying under oath, spying on the public, violating constitutional right, etc, etc, etc. (Citizen awareness is at an all-time low?)
Would the defendant in the Prenda case use a legitimate source to purchase these items if there was an reasonably anonymous and easy way to obtain them? A 100%, Likely, yes. It would, at least, be guaranteed to increase licensing profits.
This has wider implications than providing a way to pursue ones happiness in whatever form. How do we protect the anonymity of political contributions?? With US (and other) governments routinely abusing the tax collection agencies (IRS) to enforce audits and non-profit-status on any opposing group (Tea Party, candidates, etc... So much evidence, over so many administrations, please google it yourself) this should not be an argument?
The accusations of laundering and terrorist support are baseless in respect to the anonymity of an cash donation to whatever group/person/industry/item/whatever/etc anyone wants. Screw the critics. If anyone has evidence of wrongdoing don't please provide the evidence and not just mess up democratic society with some tyrannical scheme.
“Some” money laundering is no excuse to destroy or confiscate any exchange in the same way the Safe Harbors Act protects Internet Service Providers from random content. One might complain that the US Dollar is used for firecrackers or porn. Its always idiotic to enforce opinion/religious/puritanical values over democratic civilization as a whole. When one culture is allowed to pick on another we have the classic war of one class over another.
In a good democratic society we know that each individual will not always make a choice that others will agree on. Thats life. What is important is that we understand the diversity of our own population and allow for all the possibilities.
STUPID NOTE; The terms counterfeiters, hackers, down-loaders, IP, activist, protester have been misused/abused by malicious-special-interest-groups/government-bureaucracy so much that it must be painfully pointed out that only the normal dictionary meanings are used in this opinion here.
Ninja. Control over the habits of average citizens by an industry influenced government is an obvious pitfall that any aware citizenry must try to avoid. Megaupload is a good example where the only thing that may be the media industry fears is the dissemination of creative commons based licensed content not under their control?
Control is a topic that should send shivers down any democratic citizens spine.
AC. The Bitcoin concept is in its infancy. Its value is dependent on both some leveling/averaging of world currency (evaluation/devaluation) and scarcity. The scarcity might be solved by increasing the bit level depth of encryption. (both a suggestion and complaint as weak bit level encryption is a vital concern.)
Key Take Away/Gwiz. Trust is a major factor in any currency. Current Fed money printing policies combined with current administration(s) lack of wise investment of such a windfall does not make for a promising economic future. In matters of trust would anyone feel that a US Fed based Bitcoin implementation a good thing? Would they likely manage it in the same was as the US Dollar?
Tax law has been a traditionally abused way to force purchasing habits of the average citizen. Tax refunds and even purchase rebates on your tax refunds are normally provided for any industry with the political special interest savvy to incorporate such motivations.
It is an opinion of mine that any purchases under 20,000$ usd (inflectionally adjusted) should be anonymous. Argue with me.
Rome is Burning. Democratic ideals are not dead. What is important is average citizen awareness. The current dangers to this is the DMCA and the indiscriminate Take-Down notice that requires no peer review.
Horse with no name. One must believe in democracy. To not believe in democratic society is to support some other society. What are your suggesting?
A nice realization of how technology has brought us new ways to express ideas/concepts/feelings through new formats like MP3/mkv/avi/pic/mpg/pdf/etc. Which contain content that in itself we alone cannot express or articulate.
Throughout history there has been no other law more damaging to the spread/growth of cultural knowledge/awareness than eternal copyright. If the term limits of copyright were sensible in the way that anyone might share their learned revelations to others before they die/expire then there would be little or no problem.
Everyone wants to be a storyteller of great import and wisdom. Often we need to spew out all the collected bits of understanding, of some topic/concept, to friends, and or groups using the various media available, just to get feedback and opinion thus revising/growing/shrinking our greater knowledge as a whole. Eternal copyright makes even this most-common form of association and expression illegal. (the cultural insanity is mindboggling)
In the way that ideas and freedom of expression are involved in no way is the badly phrased term Intellectual Property (IP) recognized except in disgust and revulsion. (At least anyone who is aware of what is being sacrificed/lost/stolen.)
The recent criminalization of eternal copyright law has put a burden on US/EU/world society that is only exceeded by the extremely bad mistake of Drug law. The cost of copyright prosecution alone, now the responsibility of US DoJ, might all by itself bankrupt an already strained government/economy in the same way that drug law drains from society at large.
The additional unspoken/uncalculated cost of a lost culture of freedom should make any patriot/citizen cry.
Freedom of speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association are but a few of the now almost lost Constitutional values that make up a core of American cultural values. Ever wonder what and how to define culture? They are the shared values that we express when we associate with each other and speak out about current issues/concepts/topics/whatever.
The Xbox One article does bring up many questions starting with privacy and ending up with almost pesticide enhanced closed-wall/sealed-greenhouse gardening techniques. The hints about the extremely limited sales/resales licensing might cut into legitimate businesses like GameStop. Why would they even consider cutting into their supporting fan/user/commercial base?
For any product to be universally accepted it must be... universally available? (lets not forget universally appreciated) Yeah. Ideally it should be available at the local 7/11 convenience store or truck stop. Its sweet that MS shareholders want a larger cut of the pie but have they considered the size of the marketshare pie itself? (Is it growing or shrinking? What corporate wanking decides whether to squeeze cash out of a small captive market or profits from a larger open market??)
If EA/Microsoft/Maxis/etc were selling bubble gum or candy bars at the local convenience store who would care if a 50 cent or dollar item was disposable or not redeemable (with quality exceptions of course)? MS games cost about 30-60 a pop! They are NOT selling Life Savers or chocolate but ultra premium products that few could consider disposable. What can the average family afford? Zip.
MS seems to dance around the topic of 'always online'. Even if this is not totally true, exactly what data does MS record and is there the capability to refuse/shutoff automatic updates and yet retain full functionality? Do the updates include changes to the End User Licensing Agreements (EULA) or Terms Of Service (TOS)? This only sounds trivial but it's major contractual stupidity for any user. (Want to rant about such open ended nightmares of legal responsibility heaped on the average consumer.) -restrains self heroically-
Ok. The real beef in this imaginary triple decker with special sauce 2140 calorie burger... Privacy. Of which John Kass of the Chicago Tribune wrote a much more scary article about where it might be convincingly the only case where nuclear drone strikes might do some good.
To bring the 'always online' threat to full boil... The Xbox One has both a “camera and a microphone” both tuned and pointed directly into your living room or game parlor not to mention one of the better micro possessors actually and actively monitoring your presence/movement/voice/guests. Since there will undoubtedly be voice recognition...
Waring... Spoiler Alert!
In 2001 A Space Odyssey HAL9000 was 'always on(line)' with a never ending stream of access to personal crew life-data. HAL 9000's problem was that it was officially ordered (by defense/security officials) to keep its alien obelisk discovery mission a secret from the crew and not suprisingly considered the spacecraft crew members a risk. (and tried to kill all of them) A very real Artificial Intelligence (AI) dilemma that anyone who codes/programs self configuring programs/apps/networking might worry about.
Compare this with the Xbox One's self updating programming risks. Further consider the proposals by the FBI/CIA/NSA/etc. for easy to use (and easy to abuse in every case) backdoors into all large consumer/business database... does anyone really have to have this sentence finished? Write your own ending.
All endings will almost surely be bad when the EULA and TOS are not set in nutronium/steel/iron/stone/titanium. One of the best examples of this is the web based TOS that says at the bottom (in smaller than the smallest print) “this agreement can be revised at any time”. The cable (and many other) companies have obviously used/abused this prolifically.
A quote from Jeff Henshaw a MS rep; “"If you want privacy, we'll give you modes that ensure your privacy,"” which will allay any fears a child might have when worried about monsters under the bed. No mention that the current (EULA and TOS) shadows might be upgraded to substantial gremlins/monsters/dragons later on. There were other scary nonspecific quotes, please read the article.
The Xbox One supposedly will handle TV/Cable and be able to track a usage and recommend similar videos of like content. Where is this different from the TVO or Nielson ratings TV tracking devices? People actually get paid for providing consumer opinion and viewing habits... why give it up for free?
Keeping in mind that this 'game' console is being targeted and sold to kids! Can we expect any adult concerns about the obvious and substantial privacy issues from children? Do parents actually read up on the technical issues of a 'game' console when the brats are whining and screaming in the store isle?
Most high school kids and under would never even consider such details as privacy (and such) when overwhelmed by the glitzy attention grabbing graphics and captivating gameplay plot. Its reminiscent of selling cigarettes to kids. (Its done all the time if anyone remembers Joe Camel cartoon figures.)
Many other nontechnical users will also not likely be aware of the eternally changing contractual EULA and TOS traps these devices will likely be. Keep in mind that they will be tied directly to your credit card and as such contractually binding. Good luck.
Activation Fees after forking out 60 bucks for a stupid game? Yikes. (No way!)
MS's switch from nVidia to AMD video processing is not surprising considering how nVidia has severe licensing problems. ($$) AMD is decent.
Smartphones can be so much better designed in terms of personal/individual security. All it takes is a bit of clever programming and hardware tweaks.
Disclaimer. Do not own a game box. However the Wii is looking really cool... (thanks for the comments) Went Linux so many years ago.
The above article did not mention 1984 in any way... hehhe.
In other unrelated Chicago, Illinois news; Gov. Pat Quinn signed into law to 'crack down' on anyone who uses flash media (unspecified) to organize “flash-mob” violence? As if there are not already laws against violence. Is this not just another law that piles on top of existing law? Is not an offender/accused supposed to have a constitutional right not be charged twice for the same offense?
Good. Great. Awesome. Sue the hell out of them if they can and lets not exclude damages and suffering of which there have been much. Any secrecy at all at the policy making level is absurd in a democratic society.
If they were negotiating some boring trade agreement then they would have nothing to fear? Its likely something else is being negotiated and the bargaining chips seem to be the basic freedoms every individual cherishes.
It has always been my opinion that any trade agreement that citizens/firms will be held accountable for MUST be publicly debated with FULL disclosure or it would be (completely, 100%) unconstitutional. Whatever nonsense rational defending such behavior should be not only ignored but hopefully prosecuted/impeached as the dangerous tyrannical tendencies they are.
Denying even one citizen a current copy (within a few days or better yet a web page updated daily) of such a treaties converts all the efforts done by such organizations/government into 'bad faith' negotiations.
All of the trade-associations/congress/EU might profess devoutly that they were only following some boring standard policy and had the legal standing to do so. When pressed at the impossibility of such behavior by a public body they might further whine about some imaginary terrorist threat. (As if that should make any difference in an open democratic process?!)
Public Safety is as nonsensical as any idiotic reason to deny public input. It can be easily reasoned that lack of openness would be a threat to public safety. Would not any public official acting in such a non open way be terrorizing the democratic process?
Worse is the normal habit of government and trade-associations to ignore public input. Its common that treaty-negotiators or government-agencies/departments/officials will ignore tens of thousands of valid citizens letters against some idiotic treaty in favor of a few biased corporate opinions.
Have no confidence in the EU or US court system to make any unbiased ruling in regards to the unconstitutionality of any secretly generated legislation. Especially in the US... When was the last time anyone heard of ANY act or bill that was ruled unconstitutional?
AC pointed out that no good will come of any order of unmasking the secrecy or openness because the public will still be omitted from the negotiation table. The problems that manifested such behavior are still present and active... Voters are still likely electing the wrong people.
Another AC said “In the world of trade agreements, where logic is a city on the moon,” is so true although it might be added that democracy is another civilization in a 'galaxy far away'.
It seems that GEMA is another example of how monopolies naturally run away from logic and usefulness. Their activities don't make much sense in the way that it should support the various cultural groups that make up a healthy society. It is not a far toss to say that their method of operations suppress the spread and creation of new culture.
Since GEMA is a government granted for profit monopoly its likely to be just as belligerent, corrupt and horrible as the great majority of other monopolies in history. Zero surprise. Whats to like about them at all? Seemingly another music licensing organization that operates more like organized crime than a legitimate business in good standing.
GEMA makes their own rules seemingly answering to a small self profiteering group. Their enforcement is guilty until proven otherwise. Their fee structure seems more like a communist's states policy on public gatherings. (that is that they are illegal/prohibited) Their revenue distribution favors some groups over the expense of others tossing out any ideas of equality or evenhandedness. Apparent dictatorial management policies with no control of music usage by original authors. Charge/pay-up first and only possibly allow exceptions/refunds later. (maybe)
“,music-makers don't sign over ownership of their music upon joining GEMA, they sign over their usage rights—the right to legally manage and collect licensing fees for playback, reproduction and broadcast of their music”. Whats the difference between ownership and the way they define “usage rights”? This kind of legal nonsense is the same as doublespeak and congressional bill/act naming as neither says/implies what they actually do. Its the same as lying with clever words.
Why pay for a song you could not sing or play? Why pay for a video that anyone could not perform a skit from in public or at work or school? Why pay for a book that one cannot copy and pass-out whole chapters just to discuss pertinent topics within groups? (In person or on the net.) Etc. (rant) We do so only because of the current copyright based monopolies are the only source of such culture. Free market and Public Domain Rights are faltering.
It might be expected that GEMA's revenue from live events will go way down. With such putative fee structure its impossible to see how small live event clubs can survive. Its hard to understand how they can promote music and culture with such policies. Such a policy will likely destroy an entire culture and the industries (clubs, parties, etc) built up around it.
Lets put this in terms closer to home. If one puts on a party and wants either a DJ and or a live band in a cornfield they would have to pay for how much square footage? By their rules they expect a fully sold-out-house/attendance for each venue...
What charges would a street performer pay? The size of the sidewalk or more likely the whole street would be expected to be the size of the venue? Would everyone who walked by have to be considered an audience member even if they hated the music? What life destroying charges or law suits would be inflicted upon the homeless street performers just trying to get a few quarters tossed in a hat?
What about the songs groups of people sing when they get together? What about the songs and lyrics protesters sing or shout out? A lot of this reminds me of the US state of Washington's very draconian dance tax. It would still (not?) be a shocker if GEMA charged more if the audience started swaying to the tune and extra fees if the started to dance.
What is really the worst effect of GEMA's club over-pricing structure is the limiting the basic human activities like freedom of expression and the freedom of association. What is being hurt most are the various cultures that any society supports. Songs, Sining and music are some of the most basic cultural items in existence today. To regulate their usage with fees, taxes and other limitations can be described as cultural insanity.
Small nightclubs with live events must be on someones shiitlist. The likely consequence of this policy is to drive such events underground to invitation only hidden clubs. The
German local (beer) bar scene is a large tourist attraction and in no way can GEMA be helping this industry. None.
GEMA seems to be just another selfish for profit monopoly in business for itself and only for itself. Its increasing demand for a more control and profit might even destroy the very thing it makes money off of.
Of course the real problem is that Germany has similar eternal copyright laws/monopolies. If the terms were much shorter the sharing of culture would be a much more elegant/smoother event.
PaulT mentions an interesting cultural affect of the licensing structure of charging for each song stored on a DJ's laptop. Diverse culture will end up supporting small slices of pop culture under GEMA rules. Its cultural warfare! Sonic Attack! Run for your soundproof bunkers.
Steel's brazen use of the word “pirate” is surely just as childish as in any other case. Its irresponsible and unprofessional because it might poison the available jury pool or easily swayed judge. The “word” pirate is a presupposition of guilt associated with bad things of which the accused have never done. It would be a great idea for any interviewer to challenge it by asking exactly what the use of the word “pirate” means. Its a likely form of slander that should be a proprietorial offense.
Its important that the idiocy be called out in the open at every level. Its obvious hypocrisy that they would call anyone “pirates” when at the same finger-pointing 5th grade brat/bully level they could themselves be called “pirates” for endorsing legislation that “steals” culture from the Public Domain Rights.
AF holdings... hmmmm.
Guess; 30-160 million Prendda profit (plus expenses) (to unknown foreign offshore holding shell firms?)from copyporn trolling. Who knows for real? The offshore holding company is just to sophisticated an operation for just 1 to 15 million. (keep in mind that hiding cash from government or hostile adversaries is likely a good thing regardless of their political standing/position/opinion)
Have been absorbing a lot of the Prendda news lately. Heard lots of great things but so far its limited to court procedure related violations. Its a good start and probably a good thing. Will munch much popcorn as the case(s) prosecution closes in for the bite.
Unless Prendda gets the evidence tossed there seems no escaping some of these charges. The real fun is that there seems so much more going on than just these simple court procedure violations.
It seems that the real problem Prendda has... is that they have too many irons (lawsuits) in the fire. Especially since its their business to put them (lawsuits) in there (the fire). Expect Prendda to step on their foot(s) in the future. Each step and misstep might lead to other discoveries. It could even cascade. (the depth of this rabbit hole is unmeasured, as of yet.)
Prendda seems to have attempted various damage control maneuvers most notably was the closing of several vulnerable cases except some that were to late. Expect more of that along with an ultimate effort in the court of appeals. Every step along the way will be one more revealing aspect of the mysterious unknown Prendda rabbit hole.
It is some disappointment that they still are in the lucrative money making business of copyporn trolling? This industry needs to be quashed with a (few?) good civil lawsuit(s) at the multi million dollar level. Wouldn't this be taking advantage of religious and or puritanical attitudes?
Now is the time. (?!) Because... they wont take the stand or wont answer much in their defense. Since because of the (many?) missteps made by Prendda the court procedure violations might affect the civil trial they possibly would be good defense based questions. This would possibly be a discrimination case and it would be significant if they broke the law or court procedures going out of their way to discriminate?
They (Prendda) might be more worried about the likely criminal charges of falsifying/altering/forging court records and or documents. (and other stuff, its not as if anyone would know how deep the rabbit hole is) This behavior might continue until the statute of limitations runs out which is various in all the states except the fed. And. If they are not... then there is more evidence or perjury to fuel the court procedures violations cases.
All that is needed is a totally pissed off, beyond any recrimination, citizen that somehow understands the religious and or puritanical bulls eye that they have been targeted by. If they were hit by some legal 'rock' thrown by an overzealous law firm... (looking only for profit and willing to break the law to do so?) then they might have a significant case. (...)
One might want to dismiss all of this(?) in some claim of businesses as usual and thats the way to make money. If only money were the criteria of success (as a moral and intellectual society we do have some growth potential here) then thats fine. But. There are many social and cultural complications. What is important is intent to harm.
Example; Steel used the word “piracy” which might be considered slander at best especially if used before a defendant has revived a verdict. Also. The words “theft” and or “stolen” do not apply for copyright violations.