Butcherer79 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (277) comment rss

  • On the post: EU Commissioner Kroes: Copyright Is 'A Tool To Punish And Withhold'; New Business Models, Not More Enforcement Needed

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 22 Nov, 2011 @ 12:51am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "Were it not for legal drugs and prostitution in Holland, it would enjoy the level of international recognition as Vanuatu."


    Doesn't that suggest they may have got something right?

    Holland is insanely dull? I take it you don't travel much?

  • On the post: Wayne Coyne Of The Flaming Lips On Twitter, Pirate Sites, Coldplay v. Spotify And How To Use 'All Technologies' To Reach Your Fans

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 21 Nov, 2011 @ 06:23am

    Re: Re:

    "Coldplay has infinitely more cash than Mr Coyne"

    Incorrect, nobody can have:
    in?fi?nite Pronunciation (nf-nt)
    adj.
    1. Having no boundaries or limits.
    2. Immeasurably great or large; boundless: infinite patience; a discovery of infinite importance.
    3. Mathematics
    a. Existing beyond or being greater than any arbitrarily large value.
    b. Unlimited in spatial extent: a line of infinite length.
    c. Of or relating to a set capable of being put into one-to-one correspondence with a proper subset of itself.
    n.
    Something infinite.
    [Middle English infinit, from Old French, from Latin nfntus : in-, not; see in-1 + fntus, finite, from past participle of fnre, to limit; see finite.]
    infi?nite?ly adv.
    infi?nite?ness n.
    Synonyms: infinite, boundless, eternal, illimitable, sempiternal
    These adjectives mean being without beginning or end: infinite wisdom; boundless ambition; eternal beauty; illimitable space; sempiternal truth. See Also Synonyms at incalculable.

  • On the post: Washington Post Column Incredulous That Congress Is Considering Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 21 Nov, 2011 @ 04:56am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    TWO is the going rate... man I was had!

  • On the post: Aaron deOliveira's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 21 Nov, 2011 @ 02:26am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Sometimes it makes me wonder if part of the who economic issues are as a result of everything that the internet has taken away from us all, of all the industries it has ruined, and those few success stories that seem to be mostly hoarding cash and not lubricating the economy."

    WOW, and you AC's accuse Mike of 'so much FUD'.

    "I would love to see the effect if Google actually had to put some of their hoard back in the economy each year... what would actually happen?"

    You mean like taxes? You might want to copyright that idea before governments worldwide think about taking some of everyone's 'hoard' (or income)... No, hang on...

  • On the post: EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 02:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: Wikileaks

    IF he's proven guilty on this charge, then if you "screw" him, surely it his own comeuppance?

  • On the post: EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 01:56pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    possibly - though your link mentions "current and former" so how many countries currently run their lives by an ancient and frequently amended constitution

    Also, unfortunately, I dont know who to make the smartarse reward out to?

  • On the post: EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 01:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    something we (people in the UK) have wanted for centuries).

    Sorry Mr. Allen, I do not agree, the people of the UK have never expressed the need for an all encompassing document which, when voted for, can be amended in any way the current "rulers" see fit.

  • On the post: EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 01:44pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Please name the 'other' countries with a constitution...

    I'll be back later, could take you a while...

  • On the post: EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 01:38pm

    Re:

    Citation s'il vous pla?t?

  • On the post: EU Parliament Warns The US To Stop Censoring The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 01:31pm

    Re:

    If you have nuclear weapons, you don't need a moral high ground.


    UNBELIEVABLE

  • On the post: New Head Of UK's Newspaper Regulators Thinks Bloggers Are A Bigger Problem Than Phone Hacking Tabloids?

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 05:48am

    Re:

    "Rich people have been known to go to court to prevent traditional outlets from reporting true news."

    AKA the super injunction, which apparently works for blogs too, but only those hosted in the UK, which is where the courts fell over. Bless. If you don't want to be seen as someone who sleeps around, don't sleep around:
    From Wiki:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_British_super-injunction_controversy
    "In April and May 2011, users of non-UK hosted websites, including the social media website Twitter, began posting material connecting various British celebrities with injunctions relating to a variety of potentially scandalous activities. Details of the alleged activities by those who had taken out the gagging orders were also published in the foreign press, as well as in Scotland, where the injunctions had no legal force."

    If you're really interested, you can read on the above page about which footballer's it was about.

    Makes me laugh really, how about NOT going to court to get the injunction, thereby NOT bringing attention to yourself.
    OR, as suggested above:
    Don't have the affair in the first place.

  • On the post: New Head Of UK's Newspaper Regulators Thinks Bloggers Are A Bigger Problem Than Phone Hacking Tabloids?

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 04:14am

    Too Right!!

    I agree with the learned gentleman: If there weren't any bloggers, the only opinion we'd see is that of the press or government, who have no hidden agenda's and are not afraid of free speech at all.
    I say the UK should bring in some more realistic stances on 'free press', like the chinese for instance, I can't see how their lives are impeded by such government rule (probably because those stories/images wouldn't be released, but hey-ho, if I can't see it, it's not happening!)

  • On the post: And Now… Back To Your Regularly Scheduled Posts (i.e., Not Just SOPA)

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 02:55am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HA. "exhausting day", eh?

    "You keep ignoring the basic issues, that sites that are not generally used for piracy are surely not going to get the bums rush for a single link or a single offending file. The internet concept of SOPA is to get after sites who make their living off of piracy, and don't take positive steps to avoid it."

    What's the limit then? A percentage of income? Or level of uncited damage to 'the industry'?
    I cannot believe that someone who lives in a country where laws are routinely bent, stretched and snapped to appease the 'big players' does not believe that if this bill passes, it too will not be abused, moreover, without a court to decide whether it's right or wrong to do so.

  • On the post: And Now… Back To Your Regularly Scheduled Posts (i.e., Not Just SOPA)

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 02:49am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HA. "exhausting day", eh?

    a quote from each of the three above comments:
    "Your posts do nothing but reinforcing my view of copyright maximalists as greedy, spoiled and slightly retarded. Not to mention uncivilized."
    "so says the greedy freetard..."
    "game. set. match."

    That about sums it up, you've just cited Prisoner 201's comment, Game set and match indeed - well done.

  • On the post: November 16th: American Censorship Day; Don't Let Congress Censor The Internet

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2011 @ 12:50am

    Re:

    The first amendment doesn't mention the word censor unfortunately, so it would have to be argued that this is a breach of free speech and I believe they're already lining up the 'only free speech limited is that of illegal activity' stance, hopefully it can argued successfully against.

  • On the post: A Look At The Testimony Given At Today's SOPA Lovefest Congressional Hearings… With A Surprise From MasterCard

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2011 @ 07:58am

    err, loving the censorship logo & link lol

  • On the post: A Look At The Testimony Given At Today's SOPA Lovefest Congressional Hearings… With A Surprise From MasterCard

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2011 @ 07:57am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: It's old fashioned, but...

    "Would you tolerate a child porn site operating in the UK? After all, their topless models can be 16. Should they be allowed to market it in the US because they aren't based in the US?"
    Actually, it's 18.

    Are you saying that Americans are not allowed to know what other countries do and do not do? To not know what other countries accept as part of their culture? To not be allowed to go to a holiday destination because prostitution is legal there? To not be able to go to the UK because the age of sexual consent is 16 (note; not sexual/topless/glamour modelling).

    Your argument would be rather weak if you only knew what the government wants you to know.

    I'll choose freedom thanks, innocent until proven guilty and all that gubbins.

  • On the post: A Look At The Testimony Given At Today's SOPA Lovefest Congressional Hearings… With A Surprise From MasterCard

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2011 @ 07:38am

    Re: Re: It's old fashioned, but...

    Because it's not illegal in it's country of origin, or do American laws now have to be ahered to wherever the internet is accessable?

  • On the post: A Look At The Testimony Given At Today's SOPA Lovefest Congressional Hearings… With A Surprise From MasterCard

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2011 @ 07:31am

    It's old fashioned, but...

    If you kill somebody with a gun, you are the responsible party, not the shop that sold it to you, the person you borrowed it from, the owner of the place you decided to do it, the manufacturer of the gun or ammunition, the paper you saw the gun advertised in.
    If you download content to which you have no license or rights, surely you are the responsible party again, not the ISP, the search engine you found it on, the site with the link.
    If you pirate content, you're responsible and should face the consequences.
    If you make your money by distributing pirated content, you're responsible and should face the consequences.
    If you're (for example) the owner of a search engine that allows results to certain content, but do not supply that content, you are not responsible, you should not face the consequences.
    People will alwys find a way around what they consider over zealous censoring, and if that means a LOT of people doing it, maybe it is a tad over the top?

  • On the post: House Judiciary Committee Denies That Its SOPA Hearing Is Stacked In Any Way

    Butcherer79 ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2011 @ 07:14am

    Re: Live Stream of the Hearing

    Surely SOPA would have to shut it's own streming down if someone's phone goes off with copyrighted content as the ringtone, that wouldn't make them look over the top at all.

Next >>