G Thompson 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (3140) comment rss

  • On the post: Publisher 'DRMs' Physical Legal Textbook About 'Property,' Undermines Property And First Sale Concepts

    G Thompson ( profile ), 09 May, 2014 @ 01:55am

    Re: Re: Recent Law School Grad (Dec. 2012)

    This!!!

    actually since I highlighted and wrote in margins (sometimes doodling..but thats another story) and I know nearly all other Law students have, are, and will always do this then this becomes an interesting legal conundrum..

    Does the act of highlighting and annotating then create a transformative work? Have I by the sweat of my brow slogging through the boredom that is property law contributed to creating a new and wondrous work from my usage of this 'licensed' (what a load of twaddle) physical thing?

  • On the post: Court Tells Ex-Wife Of Husband Who Killed Himself To Use Copyright To Delete Anything He Ever Wrote Online

    G Thompson ( profile ), 03 May, 2014 @ 03:24am

    Re:

    I think she is misinterpreting this other Rub?iy?t of Omar Khayy?m's

    Ah love! could you and I with Him conspire
    To grasp this sorry scheme of Things entire
    Would we not shatter it to bits - and then
    Re-mould it nearer to the Heart's Desire


    Re-moulding doesn't mean Deleting and rewriting!

    PS: amazed someone else actually knows of Omar's works! awesome

  • On the post: Court Tells Ex-Wife Of Husband Who Killed Himself To Use Copyright To Delete Anything He Ever Wrote Online

    G Thompson ( profile ), 03 May, 2014 @ 03:15am

    Re:

    Actually thats bullshit, and not just bullshit but totally unmitigated uneducated idiotic bullshit!

    Those licenses are and cannot be revoked other than by the actual licensee and NOT by his estate for the purpose of desecration (what other word is there) to remove fully and with malice all history of the persons absolute existence and ideas on content that is absolutely not contextual to the action at hand.

    In fact his actual descendants (children) would have an absolute case against there mother (even now) for removing there fathers thoughts and actual online being and therefore denying them the absolute right to know whom he was.

    This doesn't stop specific information from being removed, but that specificity has to be weighed against the absolute human right to be immortalized by your thoughts and actions no matter what those thoughts/actions are. For the mother to even attempt this malicious and ego driven action means she has major psychological issues and gives reasonable suspicion that the children might be at risk of psychological or other abuse. The triggers are all there.

    She isn't just desecrating the memory of their father, she is removing him from ever existing in the first place in all ways shapes and form.

  • On the post: Second Apple v. Samsung Patent Trial Ends With A Partial Victory For Apple, But Far From What It Wanted

    G Thompson ( profile ), 03 May, 2014 @ 02:42am

    Re:

    No.. not the fat lady. Apple will have none of her singing... probably sue her then too.

    You see she does have rounded corners

  • On the post: Dutch Student Sued By Kanye West Over Coinye Rejects Kanye's Settlement Offers; Prepares Countersuit

    G Thompson ( profile ), 03 May, 2014 @ 02:57am

    It seems that this is a good case to bring out the Popehat signal (or equivalent) for egotistical douchebaggery by Kane West and his idiot attorneys.

  • On the post: History Repeating: Google Glass Getting Same Treatment As Walkman And Cameras Once Did

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:55am

    Re: Re: Re:

    oops. the reply to this is here

  • On the post: History Repeating: Google Glass Getting Same Treatment As Walkman And Cameras Once Did

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:43am

    Re: Re: CCTV

    At a social level not being obnoxious, not being dressed innapropriately, not picking your nose & eating it, and a whole other list of social graces are expected.

    Doesn't mean they are legally nor ethically correct though. Which was the whole point of the article.
    Mike was showing how humans are just Fearful of anything new, and will always try to stop what they don't understand because of the [insert some moral/religious/whatever reason here].

    You stating anonimity proves this point specifically.


    David Brin once wrote a book on privacy v. openness called the transparent Society . Luckily chapter one is available online [ http://www.davidbrin.com/transparentsociety1.html ] it talks about the two extremes of transparency vs big brother privacy. I know which world I'd rather live in, and its the one where google glass and others like it gives everyone transparency and no one entity controls everything.

  • On the post: History Repeating: Google Glass Getting Same Treatment As Walkman And Cameras Once Did

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:31am

    Re:

    Oh and what's with the counseling points??? As far as I know Counseling sessions are closed private meetings, are not advertised who is attending when, and are in normal nondescript offices (or medical centers) where the videoing of clients is already disallowed due to already in place laws or due to it being private property

    As for if people make widely outrageous allegations about someone attending a place that might have a councellor and who might specifically deal with your scenarios are setting themselves up for defamation actions.

    As for the 'sexy shop' or political meeting so what.. anyone who is in a position where attending them might be of concern (for stupidity reasons normally seen only in the USA) has already got a problem with private investigators looking for this anyway who use highly non visible cameras anyway.

    I'll give you the point about oppressive regimes, though the article implied it was about Democratic countries.

  • On the post: History Repeating: Google Glass Getting Same Treatment As Walkman And Cameras Once Did

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:20am

    Re:

    awwww are you all uptight because what you say, do or act like in a PUBLIC place might be shown to ANYONE publicly.

    poor diddums.. Tell you what, my advice to you is Stay indoors encased in bubble wrap and let the more mature, reasonable and non butthurt humans live outside.

    Oh and I do believe my AIWA Walkman equivalent in the 1980's actually recorded too

  • On the post: German Government Blocks Ed Snowden From Testifying Before Parliament So As Not To Upset The US

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:05am

    Re: At least now we know what it takes.

    Ah I see your problem..

    you are confusing US-German relations with German-US relations.

  • On the post: Censorious Parent Calls Cops On Teen Giving Away Books In A Local Park

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 01:33am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Curriculum choices.

    Keep thinking that..

    Though seeing as though you clean everything (or have been led to believe you do) does this mean you have been intentionally removing nefarious inculpatory evidence that may have been used to show that you have looked for "dwarf BDSM" & even "furry ponies"? :o

  • On the post: Brilliant Reporting: NYT Recreates Wacky Deposition Over Definition Of A Photocopier

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 12:57am

    Re: Re: Disorder in the court?

    For those wondering.. here's some more examples from the book
    http://www.tealdragon.net/humor/lists/courts.htm

    My favourite in them is #11

    Q: When he went, had you gone and had she, if she wanted to and were able, for the time being excluding all the restraints on her not to go, gone also, would he have brought you, meaning you and she, with him to the station?
    Mr. Brooks: Objection. That question should be taken out and shot.

  • On the post: Brilliant Reporting: NYT Recreates Wacky Deposition Over Definition Of A Photocopier

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 12:54am

    Re:

    third person singular present of be.

    To Be or not to BE. IS the question

  • On the post: Brilliant Reporting: NYT Recreates Wacky Deposition Over Definition Of A Photocopier

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 12:51am

    Re: Disorder in the court?

    This one is from Disorder in the Court: Great Fractured Moments in Courtroom History - Charles Sevilla

    Though the other one I have is quite well worth it as well

    Disorderly Conduct: Excerpts from Actual Cases

    Though looking just then at Amazon.. I had to purchase this (2nd hand) Guilty by Reason of Stupidity AWESOMENESS! ;)

  • On the post: History Repeating: Google Glass Getting Same Treatment As Walkman And Cameras Once Did

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:54am

    Yes like all torts (and most laws actually) defamation is a reactive not proactive response that tries to restrict and recompense for that damage. It's the psychological fear of having to pay damages that stops most people from defaming anyone they see. *This is the point of most laws in the first place*

    I think I know what your trying to say and its mainly about who controls what is seen, who sees it etc. Though you are already stating that its coming its going to be (like iPhones etc) ubiquitous (EVERYWHERE) so when anyone can do it, anyone can be filmed by it, all actions are monitored and broadcast and available for anyone to browse, search, whatever at leisure (though just because its available doesn't mean it will be seen) where is the problem since the control and authority is everywhere.

    When EVERYONE is able to do something and transparency is full and open, believe me human civilisation and the human psyche will get over it and carry on as it always has until the next big FUD problem comes along and makes everyone think OMG what will we do.

  • On the post: History Repeating: Google Glass Getting Same Treatment As Walkman And Cameras Once Did

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:22am

    Your whole argument is moot (I'm not even going to go into the non legality of "anonimity" in any jurisdiction) when you consider just one acronym

    CCTV

  • On the post: The Supreme Court's Real Technology Problem: It Thinks Carrying 2 Phones Means You're A Drug Dealer

    G Thompson ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 02:01am

    So I shouldn't bring my Business phone with dual sim, nor my personal phone with dual sim into the USA anytime soon then..

    Though then again maybe they couldn't charge me under double jeopardy. LOL

  • On the post: Brilliant Reporting: NYT Recreates Wacky Deposition Over Definition Of A Photocopier

    G Thompson ( profile ), 01 May, 2014 @ 07:45am

    Re: Re:

    Dammit Xerox get with the latest IP corporate program will ya!

    it's not PhotoCopy it's photoThievery!

    /sarc (for those trolls who can't tell the difference)

  • On the post: Student-Targeting Data Harvester inBloom Closes Shop, CEO Blames Parents For Their 'Misdirected Criticism'

    G Thompson ( profile ), 01 May, 2014 @ 02:48am

    Re:

    That's absolutely pointless..

    How can organisations make any money if all they have is anonimized data that no marketing company would ever pay a load of cash for

    /sarc

  • On the post: Brilliant Reporting: NYT Recreates Wacky Deposition Over Definition Of A Photocopier

    G Thompson ( profile ), 01 May, 2014 @ 07:51am

    Reminds me of one of teh transcripts from a brilliant book called "Disorder in the Courts" (if you have anything remotely to do with the legal profession Read it you will not stop laughing

    :o

    ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
    WITNESS: No.
    ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
    WITNESS: No.
    ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
    WITNESS: No..
    ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
    WITNESS: No.
    ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
    WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
    ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
    WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

Next >>