Almost Anonymous 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (932)

• On the post: Appeals Court To Determine If Wizard Of Oz Images Can Be Retroactively Plucked Out Of The Public Domain

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 23 Feb, 2011 @ 10:00am

  Re:

  """Copyright is implied from point of creation. Always has been. You need permission to reproduce."""
  
  I actually agree with you, at least in your case. You require permission before you reproduce.
  
  Permission denied.

• On the post: Musician/Comedian Faces 20 Years In Jail For Silly Video No Different Than Done On TV & In Movies

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2011 @ 01:32pm

  Re: remember, prosecutors in the US are elected politicians

  Yep, that's it in a nutshell. The more "sexual offenders" he can prosecute, then theoretically the better he'll look to his constituency. And in point of fact, scratch that 'theoretically', the sheep will look at the numbers never caring about the underlying details.

• On the post: Police Chief Tells Parents To Hack Kids' Facebook Accounts

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 18 Feb, 2011 @ 08:21am

  Promoting crime?

  Last I heard, 'hacking' facebook was not just a breach of facebook's TOS but actually a crime:
  US looking to use computer-hacking law against assange
  Thanks To The Lori Drew Case, I Can Make Each Of You A Criminal
  By the way, I'm certainly sick of seeing the once noble word 'hacking' used to essentially mean 'guess a password'.

• On the post: Walmart Employees Fired For Disarming Gun-Toting Robber

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 18 Feb, 2011 @ 08:02am

  Re: Re:

  While I don't necessarily agree with Shon, he quite clearly said:
  """If I'm going to die it will be fighting. So screw Walmart because I won't be protecting their money. I will be protecting my life."""
  
  Reading really is fundamental.

• On the post: If The Whole World Knows A False Statement Was Made About You… Why Still Sue For Defamation?

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2011 @ 02:23pm

  Re:

  """And as long as his reputation is still in tact, and people continue to see him as a hero..."""
  
  But you have to consider the kind of people who consider him a hero.
  
  Having said that, I can't really blame her for filing.

• On the post: If The Whole World Knows A False Statement Was Made About You… Why Still Sue For Defamation?

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2011 @ 02:20pm

  Re: Re: Re: So Sherrod should just roll over and take it?

  Dude, birthers will believe anything, provided (Rush, Beck, Hannity, Breitbart) tells it to them. But having credibility with birthers is kind of like owning a bag of air since no one really takes them seriously either.

• On the post: Ron Wyden Speaks Out Against COICA: We Shouldn't Toss Out The First Amendment Just To Go After A Few Bad Actors

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2011 @ 02:12pm

  Re:

  Where's the freaking 'off' button on you? Do you just sit at TechDirt's homepage hitting F5? Heck, I think I'd like you better if you just stopped at "Frist post!"
  
  Now to your post. Let's see, you're a lawyer-in-training who thinks that our laws should apply to foreign countries. I think you may have skipped a few classes.

• On the post: The Return Of COICA; Because Censorship Is Cool Again

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2011 @ 12:25pm

  Re:

  """So Sly's argument is that since COICA could be abused, we shouldn't have COICA?"""
  
  Not because it could be abused. We should not have COICA because it WOULD be abused. Immediately. And frightfully.
  
  """Couldn't you make that argument about any power?"""
  
  Finally average_joe sees reason! Hell yes you could and should make that argument about any power! Let's start with the Patriot Act. Then let's move on to the DMCA. Then let's look at wiretapping laws used to prosecute people for recording police in the line of duty. Then let's look at ...

• On the post: Once Again, Why Homeland Security's Domain Name Seizures Are Almost Certainly Not Legal

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2011 @ 12:16pm

  Re: Re:

  average_joe is implying that Mike is a liar. While I rarely agree with average_joe, and I certainly am not calling Mike a liar, I too would be interested in some commentary from the lawyers that examined Karl's post.
  
  Also, Karl, all I can say is "Wow." Awesome, awesome work there.

• On the post: CBS Reporter Posts YouTube Video Of Grammys… Only To Have CBS Send Takedown Notice

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2011 @ 09:57am

  Happened to me too!

  I googled for the video recently to show someone who hadn't seen it. The top result might have been that CBS page, but whichever it was I also received the CBS copyright image. So I went back to my search results and chose the auto-tuned remix of the reporter video. If there is a hell, I'll be going there, cause that was hilarious. Felt really bad for the reporter afterwords though.

• On the post: Did The Record Labels Kill The Golden Goose In Music Video Games?

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 11:17am

  Re: Re: S.O.P.

  """It's all about people making poor choices up front.""" No, I would propose that it's more about the screwed up system that demands that you pay for "rights" to play a snippet of music.

• On the post: Judge Admits She Was Wrong To Order Playstation Jailbreaker To 'Retrieve' Code From Elsewhere

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 11:08am

  Re:

  Holy crap.
  
  You've just restored the teeniest tiniest littlest bittiest of my destroyed faith in humanity. Thanks for that.

• On the post: Judge Admits She Was Wrong To Order Playstation Jailbreaker To 'Retrieve' Code From Elsewhere

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 11:05am

  Re: Re:

  Lrn2trll harder. Ur not doin it rite.

• On the post: Firm Involved In Planning Attack On Journalist Glenn Greenwald To Hurt Wikileaks Apologizes; Cuts Ties With HBGary Federal

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 11:02am

  Um, hell no

  They were instrumental in helping to prepare a campaign of disinformation and cyberattacks using the Internet and traditional media, and now suddenly they develop a conscience? Give me a f#cking break. I'm so sick of this "we got caught! Quick, apologize!" mentality, but you know what's even worse? I'm not sure whether or not people are actually accepting the apology, but everyone sure lets this shit blow over fast. Just like the DynCorp pimping fiasco, and hell, as far as I know they didn't even apologize! It just blew over.
  
  Bah, sorry for the rant, but this shit is just getting out of hand, and we're letting it pass by with barely a blink. Something's really wrong.

• On the post: Leaked HBGary Documents Show Plan To Spread Wikileaks Propaganda For BofA… And 'Attack' Glenn Greenwald

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 10:49am

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

  I'm going to have to demand that you reimburse me for all the brain cells that I've lost reading your drivel.
  
  However on the other hand you truly are an epic troll, and for that you deserve some small amount of respect.

• On the post: Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issues

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2011 @ 10:48am

  Re: Stick to your subject

  To the best that I can see, the pamphlets did not discuss particulars of the actual trial itself, but rather discussed juror's rights such as jury nullification. I would agree with you if they were trying to pass around details pertaining directly to the trial. However, since they were not, your "stationary rape" comparison is just apples and oranges.

• On the post: Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issues

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2011 @ 10:41am

  Re: Re: Re:

  """if that is an issue, it is for the defense lawyer to bring up on appeal."""
  
  That's just retarded. State the proper instructions up front. Don't lie. Issue solved. Also, you and I both know that no lawyer will EVER win an appeal with the defense of "the judge neglected to tell the jury that they could nullify the law." Give me a break.
  
  """If you really think the legal system is broken, move somewhere that doesn't have a functional system and find out what it's really like."""
  
  Ahh, the old love it or leave it line. Hey buddy, fuck you. I love my country, I just deplore the sorry state of affairs we're in. I'm embarrassed about our reaction to youknowwholeaks. I'm ashamed of our ultra-partisan representatives. But I still hold out hope that things can get better. I suggest you think twice before telling someone to leave.

• On the post: Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issues

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2011 @ 10:29am

  Re:

  Agreed, that's bad. Really bad. But it's also too bad. Not to belittle it, but it comes down to: a group of people abused their power. Gee, who else abuses power on a daily basis? Wall Street? Washington D.C.? Do we throw out the whole system because it was abused?

• On the post: Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issues

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2011 @ 10:20am

  Re:

  Ok, how do you justify the fact that judges very deliberately misinform jurors about their instructions when they not only do not mention the right of jury nullification, but also ban discussion of it outside of their courtroom?
  
  In fact, most instructions run diametrically opposite to the concept of jury nullification, thereby giving the deliberate impression that there is no such thing: "You must find only according to the law as given to you..." and so on. The instructions are a flat-out lie.
  
  Also, considering the kinds of laws being passed nowadays, I don't have a real problem with "legal system nullification." Frankly, the whole thing is broken anyway.

• On the post: Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issues

  

  Almost Anonymous ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2011 @ 10:11am

  Re: Re: Re:

  Then reading must not be your strong suit. The warning labels were McD's sarcastic over-reaction to losing what was actually a very legitimate damage claim; to the best of my knowledge, there is still no law requiring those labels.

Next >>