PRK 's Techdirt Comments
Latest Comments (208)
-
On the post: Paramount The Latest To Pull Titles From Paramount Plus Streaming Catalog For A Tax Cut And To Skimp On Paying Residuals
-
On the post: OpenAI Sued For Defamation Over ChatGPT ‘Hallucination’; But Who Should Actually Be Liable?
PRK ( profile ), 10 Jun, 2023 @ 01:39amDefamation requires publication
As far as I recall, defamation and similar torts require publication. Here it seems that the plaintiff privately used his/her computer to request data from the AI. The materials were provided to the plaintiff. To show publication I would think plaintiff needs to show that ANYONE accessing the AI and asking the same question would receive the same defamatory remarks. Absent that, the only defamation came when plaintiff published the materials in the complaint.
-
On the post: Supreme Court Leaves 230 Alone For Now, But Justice Thomas Gives A Pretty Good Explanation For Why It Exists In The First Place
PRK ( profile ), 22 May, 2023 @ 10:05amTrojan horses
Justice Thomas’ ruling is paving the way for an argument that will gut 230 “because it is not necessary”. Just wait.
-
On the post: Netflix’s Unnecessary Password Crackdown Is Already A Hot Mess
PRK ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2023 @ 04:40amNetFlix Password Fiasco
They are now coming to Spain. Here is a copy of a chat I just had with a NetFlix customer service person after clicking on the link inside their email announcing the "program". It clearly shows an attempt to monetize multiple locations and has nothing to do with security.... L Louise Angel Netflix Customer Service N Hello, what can we help you with today? Netflix • 1:05 PM I tried this last night but received no reply..... 1:05 PM N These articles might answer your questions, or you can chat with an agent. How to pay for Netflix How to update Netflix account information How to change your Netflix password Netflix • 1:05 PM Chat with an agent 1:06 PM N Got it, thanks. N Before chatting, can you sign in? Netflix • 1:06 PM No 1:06 PM N OK, someone will be with you shortly. Netflix • 1:06 PM You are now chatting with: Louise Angel L Thanks for contacting Netflix. I am Louise, your personal assistant today. How do you do and how can i help you today? :) Louise Angel • 1:06 PM Hi Louise, I have two homes and spend almost equal time in each. I have always had 1 NFlix account and pay for multiple user streaming. I am not about to sign up for a new account. How am I now to deal with this issue of your changing situations.? 1:07 PM L It doesn't mean that you will be blocked or you need to buy an extra member slot every time you use your Netflix account outside the Primary Location. ONLY if there's a "persistent use" and there are "other devices" involved. When we say other devices, it means those devices has no record being connected to the Wifi network of the Primary location. Louise Angel • 1:09 PM Well that will cause an issue. I have 2 houses, both located in Spain. Each house has its own WIFI and smart TVs. So per your comment the devices at each house has no record of being connected with the other house's WIFI. 1:10 PM L If you're just at a friend's house or you'll travel only for few days or few weeks, you can still use your account without any issues. You will not have any issues using your account in a different location as long as the device(s) you will use was connected to the Wifi network of the Primary location within 31 DAYS. That's what we called the "Trusted Devices". Trusted device is a device that is connected to the Wi-Fi network of the primary location at least once every 31 days. When you’re away from the primary location, you can watch Netflix using your Trusted Devices without being blocked. Louise Angel • 1:11 PM That does not respond to my problem. Your example applies to my using my Laptop to watch NFlix. This is a situation in which I have 2 homes. 1 is in the City and the other is used on weekends, summers and holidays. Both homes have their own INDEPENDENT WIFI systems with different ISPs. Both homes have their own INDEPENDENT smart TVs. There is no way to carry the TV in 1 home to install it in the other. This is rediculous. 1:14 PM L For example, there is a second home which is far away from the Primary location where you share your Netflix account. The system will detect "persistent use of other devices" outside of the Primary Location, so those devices will be blocked from using the account. That is the time you will need to buy an Extra Member slot, so your account can be used on that location. Louise Angel • 1:14 PM That makes no sense. Your concern is that there are multiple people using the same NFlix account (e.g. I am giving my Password to my neighbor). If you will insist that I must pay more to watch my own personal NFlix account at a different home that I own and live at, then I will l drop my subscription. 1:17 PM New message Close End Chat? The goal of this feature is to protect your account for any unauthorize access or usage on your account without your permission. L Imagine, before we have this - many users are having issue where their account is being used on a location which they didnt not recognize or authorized. Louise Angel • 1:17 PM That is a security issue. That can be resolved easily - for example - by sending an alert to the user's phone and the user confirming it is a legitimate connection. This rule will help subscriber to only authorized the device where the account will be used. So if someone get a hold of your account and try to use it, they will be blocked. Louise Angel • 1:19 PM Your response makes no sense. You apparently did not read my reply above. 1:20 PM L Well, for now that is the feature we have. Rest assured that your feedback for account added security will be noted for future product improvement. Louise Angel • 1:20 PM If it is a SECURITY issue about unauthorized use, it can be easily solved by having NFlix send a message to the account holder. If the account holder responds that it is authorized there is no security issue. This is the same way that my bank does it if I sign into my account from a new device. I've taken a note of your feedback to let our Team knows about your insight and make sure it will be heard and not fall into deaf ears. We really appreciate that you took time out of your day to let us know how you feel about that. By partnering with customers like yourself, we will continue to grow. L Do you have any clarifications or questions to this? Louise Angel • 1:24 PM Well if you insist on this process you will lose me as a customer. I have also been a long-term user (starting in California when you sent out CDs in the mail). It is a huge example of poorly thought out service. I do understand and we will sure to pass on your feedback for this feature here. L First may i have the email address of the account? Louise Angel • 1:25 PM P####@###### 1:2 Thanks! let me just pull up the account real quick. L Just a reminder, Please avoid pressing the back (◀) or closing/leaving (❌) this chat window so that we won't get disconnected. Please be reminded that it is also important to respond in a timely manner so we can proceed to the next steps here Louise Angel • 1:26 PM Louise Angel • 1:26 PM are you there? 1:28 PM L I just pulled up the account. L I have now taken your feedback for the feature here. it will be heard and not fall into deaf ears. We really appreciate that you took time out of your day to let us know how you feel about that. L To make sure that we covered all of your concerns, I want to ask you, is there anything else you have in mind I can assist you with? Louise Angel • 1:29 PM What was the purpose of viewing my account? 1:29 PM L This is for documentation purposes and to also let Netflix know that you have made your feedback for the feature
-
On the post: Girl Scouts Settle Trademark Suit With Scouts BSA
PRK ( profile ), 28 Jul, 2022 @ 04:06amLots of cookies
A motion to recover 16 MILLION in legal fees? Over a trademark claim?
-
On the post: It's Time We Talk About Getting Rid Of The Bar Exam. And Here's Why.
PRK ( profile ), 30 Jul, 2021 @ 03:29amAbsolute bunk
I completely disagree with this drivel of a comment. It does nothing but complain. I am an attorney and took the bar. I found that it challenged me to be familiar with the subjects I would likely encounter. The test was grueling - 8 hours/day for 3 days. Finger print and facial recognition proof required to enter and on demand. Any equipment used had to have no memory capacity. I sat with some 9,000 others in a huge hall. A number we’re forced to leave for apparent cheating.
They did the best they could during the pandemic. You did not have to take the exam when and as you did. You could have gone to any state you qualified for. You could have delayed. Stop complaining so much and get on with it.
-
On the post: Leaked Data Shows NSO Group's Malware Was Used To Target Journalists, Activists, And World Leaders
PRK ( profile ), 20 Jul, 2021 @ 05:49amWhat a difference a customer makes
Interesting, MEGA (and other companies) have been prosecuted and shut down because of widespread misuse of their product even though there was lists of evidence of legal use.
No one seems to be even raising this issue in this case. Why? Why not sue them as was done with MEGA and try to put them out of business?
-
On the post: Spielberg's Production Company Inks Multi-Film Deal With Netflix, I Guess To Win A Bunch Of Emmys Instead Of Oscars
PRK ( profile ), 24 Jun, 2021 @ 03:44amIn business, principles are really only a negotiation tool given away in exchange for price increases and more profit.
-
On the post: Chia Cryptocurrency, Started By BitTorrent Creator Bram Cohen, Engaging In Obnoxiously Bogus Trademark Bullying
PRK ( profile ), 08 Jun, 2021 @ 03:24amGPDR
The Chia attorney needs an education.
The GDPR only protects the PII of European citizens and its obligations are imposed only against Europeans or those who satisfy the jurisdictional requirements set forth in the regulation.
She does not appear to be a protected person under the GDPR and neither the website nor the owner of the website would appear to satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of the regulation.
I find it interesting that she did not cite to the California privacy law (which is more stringent in ways than the GDPR).
-
On the post: How The Third Party Cookie Crumbles: Tracking And Privacy Online Get A Rethink
PRK ( profile ), 05 Mar, 2021 @ 08:08amChanging cohorts ?
So I question how they place you in a specific cohort.
And how is it possible to change?
Do you have to let them know that you are not actually a 35 yr old cross-dressing left handed male?
-
On the post: Now It's The Democrats Turn To Destroy The Open Internet: Mark Warner's 230 Reform Bill Is A Dumpster Fire Of Cluelessness
PRK ( profile ), 06 Feb, 2021 @ 04:06amWhat is a civil Rights Group?
“ A: No. The SAFE TECH Act was developed in partnership with, and has the strong support of, a wide array of civil rights groups”
What groups?
One could argue that the Nazi party was a “civil rights group” - it just protected the civil rights of “Arians” over the rights if others.
-
On the post: Georgia Court Streams Ridiculous 'Kraken' Lawsuit Hearing On YouTube; Then Tells People They Can't Repost Recordings
PRK ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2020 @ 04:08amOfficial or not
I honestly believe the court over reacted innocently. All hearings are transcribed and there can only be 1 “official” transcription. The court reporter is employed to provide this. The over reaction was most likely a poor attempt to preserve this archaic system.
-
On the post: EU Court Backs Austrian Court, Says Local Libel Law Applies Everywhere In The World
PRK ( profile ), 19 Nov, 2020 @ 04:13amYou do NOT understand jurisdiction
First, I have never liked the way that the ECJ writes its opinions. They always are couched in a form of language that seems over-the-top formal and difficult to read.
That being said, the author of the article clearly does not understand jurisdiction. The case involved jurisdiction over the "person" - in this case Facebook. Because Facebook was subject to the court's jurisdiction, the court is able to order Facebook to do what the court wanted Facebook to do - as long as that order was valid in the same jurisdiction. Thems the rules. Here, the court ordered Facebook to do stop publishing materials. It does not really matter where the materials were "available". As I read the ECJ opinion, the bit about social network distribution is really about the fact that publication in areas outside of Austria would likely continue to have an impact inside Austria.
Best perhaps explained by example. Let's say you were a French citizen back in the day. You were know for killing English knights. You were arrested in England and brought before the King. Because you were arrested in England you were subject to "personal" jurisdiction of the King. The King could order you to stop killing English knights anywhere in the world. Is this enforceable? Yes. The question is where? If you went back to France and continued again took up your habit of killing English knights, it is likely that no French court would care. BUT, if you EVER returned to England, the King would have your head.
In this case, if Facebook failed to honor the court's order, it would be subject to sanction in Austria because it continues to be in Austria.
-
On the post: Twitch's Freak Out Response To RIAA Takedown Demands Raises Even More DMCA Questions
PRK ( profile ), 27 Oct, 2020 @ 05:37amTwitch chose the lesser of liability evils
I do not necessarily agree with the analysis of the article in terms of "re-applying" liability. However, even if it did, liability existed, it would be to the user and not the RiAA. And, of course the user has agreed to the TOS which no doubt waive any claims as against Twitch. So, not a great result for the public but perhaps an understandable choice by the company.
-
On the post: Nintendo Nukes 'Zelda' Fan Game, As Per Usual
PRK ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2020 @ 04:53amNintendo & the Legend of Zelda
Funny, I was just speaking with my 17 year-old about this. He was just as frustrated. While I share the frustration, I tried to explain to him that there are valid business decisions that support the take-down treatment. adopting a "cooperative" mode would require Nintendo to create and manage the resources to do so. They would have to essentially not only investigate to discover, they would have to investigate to see if it was of sufficient quality to cooperate with.
And, to the extent such product become seen as any form of "official" Nintendo project would require Nintendo to invest in the people necessary to manage such an operation and maintain quality control, etc (something excused when dealing with a fan-mod but not necessarily when dealing with a large studio). The fact that they have moved away from litigation also shows a disinterest in investing - litigation is an expensive way to play "wack-a-mole".So, while I agree with the sentiment, I can also see the side that says, "no, sorry, it's not worth our time to invest...".
-
On the post: European Parliament Moves Forward With 'Terrorist Content' Regulation That Will Lead To Massive Internet Censorship
PRK ( profile ), 10 Apr, 2019 @ 04:15amNon-democracy in Spain
As much as I would love to influence my EU representative he/she is not dependent upon my votes. In Spain they are appointed by the respective political parties in proportion to the number of representative seats they have won in the general election.
Indeed in Spain there is no requirement that any "representative" actually be from your area and those "winning" the seats are in fact nominated by the relevant political party based upon their votes garnered in the general election. The parties may fire the representative and replace them with anyone else from their party. The parties control all aspects of the representatives including how much they can earn. So, in Spain a representative is more interested in keeping their seat than doing anything of importance for the public.
The entire vote for the party concept is ridiculous. In such a system there is no need for actual representatives (since they only tow the party lines). Rather, we could all save a huge amount if a single representative from each party showed up and was able to vote that number of votes that they represent.
-
On the post: Ninth Circuit Tells Online Services: Section 230 Isn't For You
PRK ( profile ), 18 Mar, 2019 @ 03:13amThe TYPE of speech matters
Courts have long differentiated between commercial and non-commercial speech when viewing the impacts of laws and regulations. I really see no difference here. The issue clearly involves a commercial transaction. I do not see it as over reaching to require that property owners provide documentation confirming that they have in fact registered their property for use on the platforms. Indeed, the platform could easily confirm registration directly with the governmental authority.
-
On the post: Apple Didn't Delete That Guys iTunes Movies, But What Happened Still Shows The Insanity Of Copyright
PRK ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2018 @ 09:51amFrontier Copyright Police
You obviously have not heard. There is a new agency - the FCP - who also searches the boxes of unsuspecting expats who move out of the US to another country. The confiscate any book or other material that has not been authorized for distribution in the country of destination. They are nice enough to place a card inside the box informing you that if you wish to recover their confiscated items you can change your mind about moving................
-
On the post: Lawyers Gearing Up To Hit UK With Corporate Sovereignty Claims Totalling Billions Of Dollars Over Brexit
PRK ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2017 @ 05:38pmRemoving Corporate Sovereignty in Trade Deals
By removing the CS provisions from trade deals is the EU now opening themselves up to a Corporate Sovereignty claim based on the fact that the provision was removed?
:-) -
On the post: Monkey Selfie Case Reaches Settlement — But The Parties Want To Delete Ruling Saying Monkeys Can't Hold Copyright
PRK ( profile ), 13 Sep, 2017 @ 04:41amSTUPID IS AS STUPID DOES......
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES......
I can only wonder why Slater would agree to an obligation to report all income from the image. Net result: PETA - who had no real standing has now obtained a contractual right to a perpetual royalty stream. I can only imagine the "demands" Slater will be receiving in the future to have his finances audited for compliance.
Tax Break for pulling titles.
Can anyone provide me with a reference to the statutory or regulatory authority in the tax code regarding this tax break?