This restricts the free speech rights of Google, in that if I search for Person X Controversial Topic Y on Google, they can't tell me what it is they can link to. Also, about people in your generation not having this "liberty" anymore of not having records of their mistakes. They never did. If you did something stupid that was newsworthy, that ended up in the newspapers. All anyone has to do then is ask the newspaper company for their archives and they can see the stupid thing that you did. People never did have and never should have the right to demand that speech about stupid actions they did in the past should be restricted, taken down or not linked to. Every single person on the planet does stupid things, you and I included. Part of growing up is learning to deal with these events and to move past them. Ever hear of the saying "Those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it"?
Antidirt, just why do you pay Techdirt money for insider status? I'll have to assume you just pay for the badge, maybe access to crystal ball articles (since I never see you in the chatbox). What's your reasoning for paying a blog money that you clearly detest and are wholly against (hence your user-name). This wouldn't be the same as someone who's against what a newspaper publisher prints and always buying their newspaper to get at the article, since that's pretty much the best way to read the articles that person would be wanting to counter. Here, you don't have to do that.
"if someone divorced or otherwise separated they might want to scrub all records that they had that particular spouse,"
I think alimony courts might disagree with you a tad bit on that...It's kinda important that they have accurate records on who married whom, on who divorced whom, don't you think?
"As for death notices, there are some funny religious beliefs out there, and we are taught not to mock them." Which is why I believe not one single religion should be respected at all in the legal system, since to cave to the demands of one religion means having to cave to the demands of all religions. Apart from standard freedom of speech rights, that is. As for us not mocking them - I'll not mock them if they can stop saying I and all other non-believers are destined for some sort of unpleasant experience after we die, simply for not believing.
Can't believe I never noticed that antidirt has insider status. Yep, it's official - he's fucking insane. Goes by a username indicating he's against whatever it is Techdirt says, so he's biased from the get go (imagine calling oneself Anti-New York Times, and trying to get people thinking you have a fair viewpoint)...yet he paysTechdirt money for insider status?
"They don't like my comments, so they insult me, they bait me, they call me names"
"Points out the hypocracy of the local crazies, I guess."
If you can dish it out, you certainly ought to be able to take it. Also, that comment of yours reads to me like a whiny five year old "Miss...whaaaaaa! They they...*sniff* called me a bad name! WHHAAAAAAAAA!" Grow a fucking pair why don't you.
"Anyone who wants to sign up and pay (the horror!) can do so." Again, as others have said, the problem is that this then means that to get as close as possible to legal access to most movies, you'd have to pay for MULTIPLE services. So are you really suggesting that people should pay for the 34 different services here? Do you honestly think the vast majority of people can afford that?
Case in point - Madoka Magica is a very popular 12 episode/3 movie anime series that has been very well received by critics. I want to watch the English dub of the first two movies on Blu-ray (since the visuals are outstanding, and it would be a crime to watch it at 480p), and potentially pass them onto friends. However, I simply cannot get them. Only one website sells the discs, and only to the US. My only option then is either pay someone in the US to buy them and then ship them to me (too bad I don't know anyone in the US), or to get through illegal means (which, despite me searching very hard, I cannot find a torrent for the English dub movies)
Technically, you're right, in that nothing in the report is factually untrue. The report is correct when it states that if a title is available on at least one service, it is, well, available. However, that is not enough. If a title is available legally via only one service that pretty much no-one uses, then the title may as well not be available at all. Everyone has heard of Netflix, and has used it at least once, even yours truly. If a title is not on there, it is tantamount to unavailable.
Here's the important bit in the article, which you must have willingly ignored. "The clever folks at KPMG have hidden the important factors in the aggregate stats, looking at a big list of 34 services, and saying that as long as a film or TV title are available on one of them, it's "available." But this conveniently buries the more important stat, dug out by TorrentFreak, that the study actually shows over 80% of top film titles are not available on Netflix, which is, by far, the most popular streaming movie service."
"It will further counter terrorism through improving border security measures and by cancelling welfare payments for persons involved in terrorism."
And when this inevitably fails in its stated goal, are these guys going to say "Okay, sorry, my bad, we made a promise that it turns out we weren't able to keep, let's go ahead and scale back these laws that demonstrably failed"...yeah, I can't stop laughing either.
Tough question, but I'd have to disagree with your assertion of not using any of Tolkien's written materials. By definition, your work is set in the Tolkien'verse, therefore at some point, you'll eventually make mention of places, eras and nations that Tolkien did write about. I suppose it depends on how strict you want to be when saying you don't use his written materials. Perhaps you want to write a story about a sailor from Numenor, travelling back to Middle-Earth and reintroducing civilization to humankind? Tolkien only briefly touched on that, as far as I can recall (a few lines at most in the Silmarillion)
"They look at the internet as a different delivery method, not a law free zone." In other words, a broadcast medium (one to many) in your mind, instead of what it truly is, a communications medium (many to many).
I completely agree with your mention of Teamfourstar and the various abridged series. In fact, here's a question for Antidirt. Take a look at this Youtube channel. https://www.youtube.com/user/HitokageProduction/videos They make live-action fan videos of various anime series. I've only watched about three or four of their videos, but they're decent at it. In particular, this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDULWUrzVPs&list=UUof9ppdHcniLAS_pFoRkqfw which is a live-action version of a fight between two characters from the anime series "Naruto" (Kakashi Hatake and Itachi Uchiha). Should they or should they not be allowed to receive compensation for their work? Antidirt, if you say no, then what about Naruto itself? That work, and many of the characters within, are very heavily based on the Chinese legend, Journey to the West. Why should Naruto's author, Masashi Kishimoto, receive any legal protections for his work, and not the live-action crew? Is Naruto not itself a fanfiction of Journey to the West?
"Whether they want people like you infringing on the fruits of their intellectual labors is THEIR choice." Here's how one is able to tell when an argument or claim is not very well thought through. It's when one is able to turn the argument right back around and it is still "valid". In this case, using your logic, it is just as valid for me to say that Raymond E Feist is infringing on the fruits of my intellectual labors when he doesn't allow others to even have fruits of their own, in not allowing them to publish their fanfics to fanfiction.net and other sites.
"It's a shame you don't respect this decision on their part." Respect is earned, not torn from people by force of law. Why should I respect Feist (or any other author who doesn't like fanfics) when they don't respect me?
"One could easily list all of your property" Of course, you don't bother actually thinking this through at all, in that property rights for scarce, rivalrous, physical goods are not the same thing as copyright. If you take my car for an afternoon without my knowledge or permission, even if your intention is completely benign (such as repairing it), I have no ability to use that car during that time. The same cannot be said for stories. If I write a fanfic, I have done nothing at all to the ability of the original author to use his work.
"But when it's the work of others, you apparently don't have that same respect. It's a shame, really" In order to enforce this respect for intellectual works, my property rights in my computer hardware must of necessity be infringed upon. For example, the producers of a movie that is on a Blu-ray disc sold in stores have put DRM on it, such that I have to choose which region my Blu-ray drive is set to, and that I can only change that region a handful of times. Now my property rights have been completely infringed upon. How come you're not supporting MY property rights?
I agree with this article. I wrote a fanfic about two or three years ago (well...started it really, never finished it) and to help advertise it, I paid for a commissioned drawing off of a well known fan artist on DeviantArt. I remember with much surprise seeing the comments on the art (the artist had forgotten to leave a link to my fic), as pretty much everyone was going nuts over it, demanding to know just why these particular characters were in this scene together and where the fic was. The artist made money off of me and I considered it well spent. I await Whatever to chime in here (or Antidirt) to say what I and the artist did was wrong and illegal and whatnot.