G Thompson 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (3140)

• On the post: Tattoo Copyright Strikes Again: Tattoo Artist Sues THQ For Accurately Representing Fighter's Tattoo In Game

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 09 Dec, 2012 @ 08:02pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  I apologise since reading this (and your response on your own blog) I have now been made aware that the US copyright law requires that a work for hire needs to be explicitly created, whereas under Australian copyright law that same work for hire (or 'valuable consideration' as we call it) can be implied. [ Copyright Act, 1968, ? 35(5) .]
  
  This basically means there is a major difference since under AU reading a commissioning party will acquire the copyright even in the absence of an agreement as long as there was a contractual undertaking AND the work is a either a photographs, portraits, or engraving AND the work was created after 1998.
  
  Though this is totally different if the work was a journalistic work, and even different still if it was a sound recording, cinematographic work, audio &
  video broadcast, or typographical arrangements of published
  works. Yeah *eyeroll*
  
  So basically whereas the US needs an express agreement, we (and the UK to some extent too) don't.
  
  So for all the people reading my comment above, disregard it unless it's in relation to UK or AU copyright systems.
  
  Go read Marc's very nicely worded reasoning of why Fair use is the real reason why there is in all likelihood no claim here.
  
  Though I have to ask... "may God have mercy on your soul"? God??? really? FSM is looking at you! :)~~

• On the post: Tattoo Copyright Strikes Again: Tattoo Artist Sues THQ For Accurately Representing Fighter's Tattoo In Game

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 10:09pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  If Mr Condit asked the tattoo artist for this specific design and then the artist sketched it out on paper first for approval and then applied it to Mr Corbit's body, this even more than anything else creates upon balance the basis for a work for hire since the artist gets approval for the work by the client first.
  
  IF this is the case Mr Escobedo could be up for fraud since he registered the copyright on the work way after he had been payed. And in that instance the copyright is solely retained by Mr Escobedo who has already released his image to THQ for usage in the transformative work (the Game).

• On the post: Richard O'Dwyer Has To Pay ?20,000 To Close Out Lawsuit Against Him

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 08:48pm

  Re: Re: Re: NETTED ONLY an illegal L125,000 then!

  ;)
  
  For your future reference it comes directly <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/14083621150/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-over-law-banning-recording-police.shtml#c128
  ">from this comment I did to the weird one just over a week ago
  
  [ IGNORANUS - adj: A person who is not only ignorant, but is also an asshole (ie: out_of_the_blue) ]

• On the post: US Government Agencies Will Soon Be Able To Access Foreign Medical Dossiers Due To Patriot Act

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:47am

  Re: Re:

  All health records from Private or Public health providers are NOT allowed out of the country in any way shape nor form. In fact the Records are highly restricted and come under the National Privacy principals specifically that have full criminal (not just civil/governmental fines) sanctions attached for all knowing individuals (glass ceiling for PTY/LTD is gone in this respect)
  
  The info that private individuals and in a limited way business's place upon Google, Facebook, et.al are fair game yes. But a company that uses these venues is still liable believe it or not under the Privacy Act, and also under numerous other acts like the one that creates criminal sanctions for SPAM and selling of identifiable lists of people who are placed upon the DNC register.

• On the post: MPAA To Aussies: Obey US Created Copyright Rules! But Don't Even Think About Importing Fair Use

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:40am

  Re: Re:

  Sad to say that by all accounts he's Aussie.. though basically a few sheep short in the paddock department!
  
  Oh and allegedly works in Canberra... need I say more
  
  Oh and for all those that work In Canberra, I am sorry! o_O

• On the post: Richard O'Dwyer Has To Pay ?20,000 To Close Out Lawsuit Against Him

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:36am

  Re:

  Already done ;)
  
  http://www.gofundme.com/1bo8vo

• On the post: Richard O'Dwyer Has To Pay ?20,000 To Close Out Lawsuit Against Him

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:35am

  Re: I'll donate!

  Here's the donation link. I did 20 Pounds
  
  http://www.gofundme.com/1bo8vo

• On the post: Richard O'Dwyer Has To Pay ?20,000 To Close Out Lawsuit Against Him

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:33am

  Re: NETTED ONLY an illegal L125,000 then!

  You are some disgusting grifters.
  
  So why the freakin hell are you still here then? or are you trying to 'convert' us or something?
  
  Here's a clue.. to convert someone to your way of thinking you need to actually INTERACT with them. this means replying to comments and actually debating, discussing, and all the other human ways of conversing.
  
  Oh I forgot.. your not Human just an ignoranus

• On the post: Richard O'Dwyer Has To Pay ?20,000 To Close Out Lawsuit Against Him

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:30am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POINT

  Zealot countries?
  
  Like America you mean? Fanatical, Partisan, and highly religious perhaps?
  
  or were you talking about the Judean sect in 100BCE that opposed Roman rule?
  
  I think you really need to research the meaning of zealot. Then look up equity, ethics, and parochialism, with maybe a dash of Reciprocity thrown in

• On the post: US Government Agencies Will Soon Be Able To Access Foreign Medical Dossiers Due To Patriot Act

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:15am

  Thankfully here in Australia the Government has mandated that at a Federal and State level (under our own Privacy Rules) NO data of any sort by any government or quasi-government (or even ones that tender to govt) can be held outside of Australia at all.
  
  This strangely enough has made the US companies annoyed with the Australian Government to the extent that the USG has queried it and made an issue about it to no effect whatsoever. Our Privacy laws cannot be diluted, changed, nor removed for any reason for anyone no matter what any treaty the USG wants to rant about.

• On the post: MPAA To Aussies: Obey US Created Copyright Rules! But Don't Even Think About Importing Fair Use

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 12:28am

  Re: Revoking the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA)

  The FTA is basically looked at like any other bit of dunny (toilet) paper - good for removing shit but weak and easily dismissed.
  
  The MPAA response tot the ALRC has been met with resounding hilarity by everyone who has read it, and the bit about back-ups is even more hilarious since we currently under the Copyright Act as it stands already have the ability to create backups for personal purposes
  
  If you noticed Today Tonight (and I gather A Current Affair will soon) had a segment on infringing CD's last night. This was basically a huge gab fest by Neil Gain of AFACT (ie: the MPAA) and had ominous warnings how police suspect terrorism is sponsored by the sale of the DVD's (they raided a DVD shop in ChinaTown - Sydney that has been operating in full view knowingly by all concerned for over 18months)
  
  That segment is the first part of a campaign by AFACT and the MPAA etc to try to stop what the ALRC is trying to do with our copyright reforms. Next you will see all about how Big Pharma is doing it bad, etc etc, yada yada..
  
  The MPAA has basically no clout anymore within Australia's political circles after their fiasco with iiNet and the whole of their response is petulant and bullying - ie: They are scared silly! Especially after what is happening in Canada and in NZ over copyright and court cases.

• On the post: Kim Dotcom Cleared To Pursue Case Against New Zealand For Illegal Spying

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 06 Dec, 2012 @ 07:57am

  Re:

  Nope, and anyone who has actually met the guy over the last few years wouldn't either

• On the post: Kim Dotcom Cleared To Pursue Case Against New Zealand For Illegal Spying

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 06 Dec, 2012 @ 07:56am

  Re: Where's the justice?

  So we should not expect an apology for your stupid and asinine comment then?

• On the post: Protip: After Successfully Stealing A Car And Robbing A Bank… Don't Brag About It On YouTube

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 05 Dec, 2012 @ 10:57pm

  Re:

  crud! this is a reply to "Does not mean she actually did the crimes" by an AC.

• On the post: Protip: After Successfully Stealing A Car And Robbing A Bank… Don't Brag About It On YouTube

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 05 Dec, 2012 @ 10:55pm

  IF just talking about a crime is enough for you to be charged, then how many filesharers here would or could be charged because on Techdirt, the admitted that they have downloaded files that makes them in breach of the existing laws !!!
  
  None.... why? because Filesharing is NOT a criminal (ie: illegal) offence.
  
  As for the rest of your comment, true though this does not mitigate the fact that the LEO's now have absolute probable cause to obtain a warrant, charge her, use her ex as a witness, show her SMS's to her ex (after the easy warrants obtained) and if they don't want to interview her... (which is probably the case here) her Miranda rights need not be read to her.
  
  Yes a defence attorney/solicitor might be able to stop the viewing of the video in court.. Though that video could be used (and mostly is) as an admission for obtaining other more relevant and admissible evidence.
  
  If it quacks like a duck, acts like a duck and all the evidence points to it having webbed feet, floating in water, having feathers, and belongs to the Anatidae species ... normally its a freakin duck.
  
  well unless she's a witch

• On the post: Protip: After Successfully Stealing A Car And Robbing A Bank… Don't Brag About It On YouTube

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 05 Dec, 2012 @ 09:27pm

  I would normally say if one needs to break the law to never tell anyone but in this case she clearly wanted to confess her various crimes to the world.
  
  The perfect crime is one where no-one ever knows a crime actually happened!
  
  Thankfully most criminals come undone because they can't not tell anyone. Stroking Ego's is a powerful weapon in any investigators arsenal.

• On the post: Protip: After Successfully Stealing A Car And Robbing A Bank… Don't Brag About It On YouTube

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 05 Dec, 2012 @ 09:17pm

  Re: SAD

  Her alleged motive, which by all accounts is a standard minimisation for her own conscience to deal with what she knows is wrong, is irrelevant in the charging of the crime and subsequent finding of guilt.
  
  In fact she has by all accounts pleaded guilty by admission in this instance (Most crimes no matter what the media and TV shows try to say are actually solved by the stupidity or the egotistic nature - opening their big mouths - of criminals)
  
  Though her motive can be used on her behalf in sentencing, and most likely will be used by any competent defence lawyer to try to mitigate any incarceration. There should be a motion for a psych evaluations by the defence, though even if any evaluation shows that she might have self-evident problems that doesn't means she wont be fully sentenced for her crimes.
  
  People, rightly or wrongly, have children removed from their care every day but that doesn't give them the right to commit criminal offences that they know are wrongful and illegal.

• On the post: DMCA Fun: Movie Studios Issue Takedowns Over Their Authorized Films

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 04 Dec, 2012 @ 09:41pm

  Re: Re: Re: Same old duck -- I mean canard.

  Either way responding to him is a lot less dangerous than ignoring him.
  
  WHAT????
  
  Responding to him is a guaranteed way to make your stress levels rise since he NEVER EVER responds back anymore.

• On the post: Canadian Copyright Law Caps Statutory Damages At $5,000 Just As File Sharing Lawsuits Make Their Unwelcome Return

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 04 Dec, 2012 @ 09:31pm

  Re: Re: Damages?

  Yes but being damages the other elements of the case have to be proven first. The harm element might be removed (though that's actually simplistic - its a lot more involved than simply removing it ).
  
  All statutory damages are is that once ALL elements of a tort have been proven upon balance, then the damages that are to give equity for the alleged harm (and harm still has to be reasonably shown - not de minimus for example) are then easily calculated due to the statutory settings. This does not mean that the court cannot set the equity below these amounts, just not above. Unless the plaitiff wants to go the route of proving (and showing evidence) that more harm has been done.
  
  The interesting thing with these limits on Statutory damages being at $5,000 for ALL claims against any one individual (though it could also be proven that the claim could also be against a whole class - but that's a legal scenario for another day) is that the return on investment for any troll like operation could be not only poor but could also be negative. ie: Could cost them more to take respondents to court or to even send letters. that need to be very open and with NO misleading statements (or risk a counter suit) than just to sit back, claim a loss and be silent.
  
  This is a lose - lose for the trolls.

• On the post: Canadian Copyright Law Caps Statutory Damages At $5,000 Just As File Sharing Lawsuits Make Their Unwelcome Return

  

  G Thompson ( profile ), 04 Dec, 2012 @ 09:19pm

  Re:

  Actually the idea that a IP address equates to a specific individual has been tested in numerous courts and has resoundingly lost. Roadshow v iiNet for just one example - which is relevant precedent to any court in Canada due to the reciprocity between Canada and Australia.
  
  The US court system though has not tested it, though as US companies find to their dismay, Canadian courts, like UK, New Zealand and Australia courts don't care one iota about US wants.
  
  Aint life great living in a commonwealth country that actually has some semblance of Democracy

Next >>