Once again gamers are outraged, but that outrage does not lead to them not purchasing the new dildo with which the dev wants to f them with.
If they were really upset they shouldn't buy anything more and look for a studio that isn't about using the lubeless dildo. There are tons of fantastic games out there (hell some indies release far more polished crap than the AAA studios do on day 1) that don't spend their time being interviewed and admitting, you are just a cash node we are harvesting because you don't fight back.
It is one thing to give bad reviews, yell on the internet, and a far better one to say I've had enough who else wants my money. Until the outrage finally effects the bottom line they will do this and worse to the customers. So are you going to buy the dildo and take it... or start screwing the companies bottom line by walking away?
Once again allegedly intelligent people who for some idiotic defect in logic think the Google is the internet.
- Google links to it, they owe me. This is also seen as going after the deepest pockets who, once upon a time, might have paid these delusional idiots to just shut up and go away.
- Google links to it, they are responsible. Look at all of the DMCA takedowns sent, a HUGE majority of them target Google... not the site hosting the alleged infringing content. (Alleged is used properly here as one need look at about 10 notices to see the huge defects in detection.)
- Google should just do what I want. Google has the spine to stand up to these petty morons, because it will cost them far much more to cave in. Look at how much they have had to sink into the DMCA processing, and the nightmare let they it become. Had they gone to court & made the solid case of we just index we do not host, promote, post any of these thing and gotten a Judge smart enough to understand Google is not the internet they could have escaped the nightmare.
Google is not a magic wand like politicians and idiots (same diff) want it to be. They should not be the sole target of laws & demands. It might make them work to try and target those they should but with Google being the internet to so many people it makes a better soundbite.
I hope the researcher fails, and the court finally suggest that she researches why she lost. But then I'm guessing she isn't that much of a researcher given her activities so far.
It occurs to me, as it often does after I've thought more, that she is falling into the new amazing explaination.
People are not responsible for their own actions, there is always an outside force to blame.
Words on the internet did it, not the freak who went on a spree. Words on the internet did it, not the fact we've taken brownphobia to such a level that young Muslims feel that much more apart from the world that they find support in words online than in society. Words on the internet did it, not the parents who paid no attention to the long term plans of their kids to murder a schoolmate to get in with the Slenderman. Words on the internet did it, not a community that thought nothing of years of racism & blaming the other for misfortunes that befell them raising someone who didn't learn the value of people who were different.
Maybe stop blaming the inanimate objects, and put the blame on the people who should face blame for their (in)actions. Stop finding an out, assign responsibility and own up to it. Stop pretending someone made a speech and the problem got solved that one time decades ago.
"Newsday.com now uses Facebook for our comment boards." This way we can avoid the liabilities we demand everyone else face.
Old white woman tells everyone what is best for them, film at 11.
Its words on the interwebs, not a societal problem. Its words on the interwebs, not institutional racism. Its words on the interwebs, not parents who spend more time following faux news than raising their children. Its words on the interwebs, not talking heads from "news" organizations who reframe everything to suit their use of fear to keep a demographic. Its words on the interwebs, not the media. Its words on the interwebs, which means I can tell this stupid woman to shut the fuck up. Your solution is a feel good piece of bullshit, meant to pander to a demographic, not to actually solve the problem.
The internet isn't the problem, the problem is the media deciding to create the spin rather than report actual facts without hysteria or slant.
Did you ever think they are trying to drive more people to piracy by doing obviously insane things like this? Pirates don't get punished with stern talking before they can watch the movie they paid for.
I think the MPAA goal is to try and get a Fed bailout, and the right to execute people who infringe copyright.
Secret courts, secret rules, secrets. These are the death of the country, founded on liberty we now all kowtow to the fear of terrorists or other horrible things and give up so much and gain nothing. The programs do not work, those that run them should be jailed, but we secretly made it legal but never bothered to inform everyone that our rights are merely illusions we cling to waiting for those we turned everything over to, to remind us we do not have them when we are flagged.
First they came for the... Well they got everyone else, now they are coming for you.
Someone please take stock of those cheering this on, because I want to see their faces the day it expands to nab them as well. The definitions always expand and grab more, to show a larger pool of "bad guys" being caught... at the expense of justice & rights.
It is disgusting to see how far the system is willing to go to protect itself. Ignoring the supposed rule of law that we are all supposed to be bound by, unless you work for the system then you can do whatever you want with no concern.
and one of the largest fixes would be assessing fines for incorrect notices. Big corporations have been caught taking down content they don't own but want to control. They can do this because there is no downside to bad claims. If they had to pay up each time, and lets add multipliers for breaking thresholds in each quarter, they would behave better.
Only when there is a cost to them, do they care. For far to long everyone else had to bear their costs on multiple levels, time for them to pay up for their bad behavior.
Have we stopped to consider that this is their attempt to get the perfect censorship in place without having to write their own? With each stupid thing they pass and expect the rest of the world to police them for they move closer to a nation geoblocked from everything... then the government can proclaim it isn't their fault as they cut their citizens off from the world and knowing anything more than they government wants them to know.
This is the first problem, the middlemen. There are so many middlemen at every step slicing away the cash all to benefit themselves and those who choke the content stream.
Copyright would let a small creator protect themselves from the large players who manage to "accidentally" steal someone elses creations to line their own pockets. As we have seen copyrights have been twisted so far to the corps often screwing the actual artists. IIRC there was a comic book artists who was BARRED from signing his own work because one of the cartels owned his creations and to be dicks they said no its ours because we got you to sign a contract & then changed the law to make our terms more favorable to us.
If a copyright was easy to get an artist could acquire one on their creation and license it rather than have to sign it away. No longer do they need the cartels to get out there, the interwebs makes it so anyone can get their content out there. They no longer have to be bled dry with hidden costs being taken from their small slice (seriously vinyl breakage costs in current music contracts). They can then reup the license or move their creation to someone willing to give them a better deal. No more seeing a beloved character twisted into something the creator never wanted only because a focus group told the cartel it woudl play better if watered down.
I think artists are pushed to surrender their copyrights with promises from liars. They don't look to see all before them who got screwed. Control of your copyright gives you the power, and if you look you can find someone who will work with you rather than demand to enslave your ideas for 3 lifetimes.
And here is where people flip out, because I disagree. I think what we need is actual reform of the entire system.
I think that content makers should have a LIMITED TIME to profit from their work, but we have perverted that ideal to giving them multiple lifetimes of control to make a buck. Dead people long after their death will not be encouraged to create anything new, and the system only encourages them to seek rent from anyone who wished to build upon what should be a shared cultural heritage.
I think that separating commercial from noncommercial when computing fines would remove the incentives to not meet market demand. If the most they could hope for was x2 retail (a reasonable punishment for the 'crime') they would do everything they could to get it into the market and selling, rather than playing games trying to maximize the multiple cuts they give themselves through all sorts of channels.
I think that in an age of abundance of content, it should be a crime that content is not available at any price. If we reward them for withholding, they will withhold. Without that benefit they would find a way to make the content available.
I think that who has the rights needs to be centralized, so we never face someone building on something trying to do the right thing only to be met with we dunno if we have the rights, we don't care to look, but if you make a buck we'll sue you blind. This does not encourage creation, it encourages holding expression hostage to the whims of those who create nothing.
There is more, but I think the idea of copyright isn't horrible, what we turned it into is the real crime.
One wonders if part of the reason to not talk about numbers is they are going to be banking on Australians not being aware of the actual penalties involved. Copyright trolls have used the 'Gold Standard' of the $150K damages even in countries where that isn't supported by the law. They are trying to prey on people who aren't aware of the actual law. (and pretty much proving that exporting the US system is such a goal because of the high numbers)
If someone were to search these firms and lawsuit you end up getting much of the coverage form the US and elsewhere, and while these cases often have problems the $150K is ALWAYS talked about in media coverage (though on most blogs covering trolling we point out the number is a scare tactic) and people might freak getting "legal" notices.
These letters are going to try and gather a bunch of information based on the flawed premises - that the supersecret tech works perfectly - that you are responsible - that even if you were unaware you are responsible - you better tell us who did it or we go after you (shades of McCarthy) - the courts will stop watching us, and we'll keep sending letters without an underlying case (this will look prophetic soon enough, but its been done before)
On the upside they are getting much more media coverage of this dirty secret of the 'War on Piracy' and perhaps more people will wonder why they don't win by making the content available sooner and at the price the market wants to pay. That the content cartel players want a broken system like this because they win all around. - they use the numbers to demand more law - they use those laws to get more power - they use the power to get more financial incentives - that using a broken outdated system makes them more than remembering their business is selling to consumers not lording over them.
And even in the face of this latest bloom of those who promise the moon & deliver moldy cheese... they will still tell us the DMCA is not broken.
Until there is a fee to file, a penalty when you file absolute trash, & something to punish repeat offenders beyond that... this type of crap will continue. Hell for every 100th bad takedown open the door to ding the actual rightsholder for staying with a crap provider.
The people at the top only seem to care about numbers, oh look Martha - Content Protect filed 300,000,000 takedowns last month... they are worth the money. What they do not see or understand is that 299,999,999 of them were invalid or targeted the legal routes to the content. Content Protect isn't going to tell the people employing them that their work is crap, they want to get paid. We need to cut into their profits, to force them to evolve to a real business that doesn't just submit every link from a Google search. Perhaps Google might even use part of the penalty payments to send a note to the actual rightsholders showing the absolute failure of many of these companies to protect content.
I've seen polished sites and now this new low, but the single constant has been a very high number of these content protecting operations (even those from "reputable" companies) are total crap. Once again everyone else has to bear the costs & burdens of these poor monopoly holders. If they understood these methods were not actually helping, perhaps they might understand that creating easier access to legal content is better than living in the past where they had total control.
Why do they keep making laws like this? Why do we waste taxpayer dollars to protect groups who are exempt from the tax base?
Much time, effort, money is wasted on passing laws (and fighting court cases trying to strike them down) to protect these groups who only seem to contribute their personal outrage to the equation.
Words are icky, but they are just words. We make things taboo, and then are shocked some people use them to get a rise out of people. Perhaps it would be better to learn to ignore the yammerings of those saying things we dislike rather than attempt to regulate thought. If you want to be a racist, sexist, yadda yadda yadda... go for it. Nothing makes them more angry than being ignored. Blaming all of the ills of the world on a certain group, is the lazy mans way of sloughing off any blame they might share in the issue. Let the nutters rant, I'd rather see more time put into solving actual issues than protecting someones feels.
Oh well that nutter might do something!!! And an asteroid might fall from the sky & kill you. You can live in fear of what if, or you can live your life and know if the nutter crosses the line we have laws to deal with them. Punishing them for being loud & ignorant to appease a certain group is silly. (Although attractive as something to apply to Congress). Everyone deserves the same protections, and until we can do that we shouldn't be making some more equal than others.