Didn’t the guy who killed Charlie Kirk align with Trump?
There's no proof of that. We know he memed about Trump at the start of his first term. That's it. We also know that he was a kid at the time, and that he comes from a conservative Mormon family. A lot of people start off parroting their parents' politics until they're old enough to start forming their own opinions. His stated motive for killing Kirk was that his partner is trans, and he was disgusted by Kirk's transphobia. That doesn't sound very MAGA.
And sure, you could argue (as many have) that he's lying, that his alleged partner is actually a cis man trying to frame the trans community, and that the whole thing is a massive conspiracy between Robinson, his friends and family, and state and federal law enforcement to pass off a case of right-on-right violence as an attack from the left... but that's conspiratorial thinking. The problem with that line of thinking is that it starts with a conclusion (Tyler Robinson is a fascist) and works backwards to prove it. It's no different than Republicans claiming that every right-wing terrorist is actually an Antifa supersoldier trying to make conservatives look bad.
It's pointless anyway. Denying him won't stop Republicans from calling us murderers, and we're not obligated to take collective responsibility for the one case of potential left-wing violence after over a decade of fascists killing people on the regular.
How? This ruling denies copyright protection to faithful reproductions of public domain material, but that wouldn't make it legal to create derivative works from works that are still under copyright.
Copyright, at this point, is the destruction of culture. Corporations want to create a world without memory, where media exists solely to be quickly consumed and immediately forgotten in favor of the next new product. The Disney Vault is their vision of the future.
Fun question for you to consider: How many AI models are trained on works by creators who actually, fully, and knowingly consented to having their work used to train AI models?
A year ago, you said you wanted to "kill" copyright. Has your view changed since then, or do you only support copyright when it can be used to justify banning AI?
I can't say I'm surprised. Both major parties are controlled by corporate interests, and have no interest in doing anything that would benefit the working class.
At this point, we might as well just cut out the middleman and start letting corporations run for public office.
No surprise there. Copyrighted works generally stop making money after the first few years, and most creators have no desire for copyrights that outlive them. Longer copyright terms exist to protect franchises owned by immortal corporations, which can theoretically go on forever while still remaining profitable.
It's never been about protecting artists. It's about making sure Disney can sell Avengers and Star Wars sequels for the next 350 years. In fact, it arguably serves a dual purpose: Longer copyright terms ensure that only the most successful works remain on the market, thus reducing competition as the majority of works inevitably end up orphaned once their owners die or go bankrupt. As I mentioned in another comment, I've actually seen people defend perpetual copyright for this exact reason.
Never forget that the optimal copyright term is only 14 years.
Tables have turned against you liberal fake journalist. Now, you know the feeling of not being heard. When vile old twitter cancelled most concervatives you were ecstatic. Now, you complain. You call it KARMA. It backfired on you. Now, cry us a river.
If the nation of Islam store is open to the general public then yes. All neo-Nazis are white, else they’re not neo-Nazis. Therefore, the nation of Islam would be discriminating against the white devil, which is discrimination based on race and illegal under the federal public accommodations law.
Neo-Nazis aren't (and shouldn't be) a protected class. Even if they're all white, they're still not being discriminated against because of their race. As long as the NOI store is willing to serve white customers who aren't neo-Nazis, they wouldn't be violating any laws.
Anyone else reminded of Papers, Please?
In other news, Bayer AG has declared its intent to reclaim the trademark on Aspirin™.
I love this. Almost reminds me of OFF in a way.
I guess that's just how the cookie crumbls.
Copyright, at this point, is the destruction of culture. Corporations want to create a world without memory, where media exists solely to be quickly consumed and immediately forgotten in favor of the next new product. The Disney Vault is their vision of the future.
I can't say I'm surprised. Both major parties are controlled by corporate interests, and have no interest in doing anything that would benefit the working class. At this point, we might as well just cut out the middleman and start letting corporations run for public office.
No surprise there. Copyrighted works generally stop making money after the first few years, and most creators have no desire for copyrights that outlive them. Longer copyright terms exist to protect franchises owned by immortal corporations, which can theoretically go on forever while still remaining profitable. It's never been about protecting artists. It's about making sure Disney can sell Avengers and Star Wars sequels for the next 350 years. In fact, it arguably serves a dual purpose: Longer copyright terms ensure that only the most successful works remain on the market, thus reducing competition as the majority of works inevitably end up orphaned once their owners die or go bankrupt. As I mentioned in another comment, I've actually seen people defend perpetual copyright for this exact reason. Never forget that the optimal copyright term is only 14 years.
The party of "free speech" at it again.
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"