anonymousanonymouscoward 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (3524) comment rss

  • On the post: Sean Hannity Hires Charles Harder To Threaten The NY Times And Its Reporters, Because Of Course He Does

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 28 Apr, 2020 @ 11:52am

    Money talks, but does it speak truth?

    " Failure to do so will leave Mr. Hannity with no alternative but to consider instituting immediate legal proceedings against you. "

    Of course he has alternatives. He could stop representing censorious asshats. He could interpret defamation laws the way they were supposed to be interpreted. He could instruct clients who wish to file baseless lawsuits in the folly of their wishes. But then that might destroy his business.

  • On the post: OK, Landlord: If Copyright Supporters Are Going To Insist Copyright Is Property, Why Are They So Mad About Being Called Landlords?

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 28 Apr, 2020 @ 11:17am

    Tell it like it is

    OK, if they want it to be property, then the little © isn't enough. Let them place No Trespassing signs on their works. That way, us little people will understand how they feel, and stay away entirely.

    /s...or maybe not

  • On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2020 @ 04:35pm

    Re: Re: Constitutional crisis in the making

    With the bogus patent in hand the holders could accuse infringers they will still wind up spending money and time in court till a court says the patent is invalid. That is if they do. The really sad part is that until someone is sued they won't have standing to object to the patent issued, bogus or not.

  • On the post: Supreme Court Says Georgia's 'Official Code' Is Public Domain — Including Annotations

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2020 @ 04:25pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Well, judicial activism isn't a new thing, even for the Supreme Court. Qualified immunity comes to mind, but there are probably other examples.

  • On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2020 @ 01:11pm

    Re: Re: HOw stupid can this get.

    "How many people need to be taught that on a computer is not patentable."
    Well, the USPTO bosses for a start.

  • On the post: Supreme Court Says Georgia's 'Official Code' Is Public Domain — Including Annotations

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2020 @ 01:08pm

    Re:

    "Plus this does not fix the problem with copyrighted works being incorporated by reference and having the force of law. The obvious case is building codes, but there are more obscure cases such as privately drawn maps used in zoning."
    Maybe the court is setting up an act of self preservation. They need to have more things to decide in the future. Being clear and all encompassing is not in their best interest.

  • On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2020 @ 11:58am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Abuse of power

    I have a feeling that some of his corporate buddies...ah...contributors might have put a bug in his ear when they had trouble getting their government granted monopolies.

  • On the post: US Patent Office: Supreme Court Made Us Reject More Patents, But We've Now Fixed That And Are Back To Approving Bad Patents

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2020 @ 08:04am

    Constitutional crisis in the making

    The question now is how do we get the USPTO to follow the directions the Supreme Court laid down, rather than what appears to be direction from the Executive. Courts don't have enforcement powers, but I doubt they could rely on the DoJ to follow up anyway.

    I have never heard of the Supreme Court issuing a contempt of court ruling, but I suppose they could. It would certainly be interesting for such an order to be issued against the person in charge of the Executive. It would be even more interesting to see someone try to enforce that ruling. Who would they get, Capitol Police? What other options are there?

  • On the post: Public Colleges Are Violating The 1st Amendment In Using Facebook Filters

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 24 Apr, 2020 @ 03:00pm

    Re: No 1A issue here

    I would think that the mere presentation of keywords to Facebook for addition to their filters by public entities, universities or not, would be the 1st Amendment violation. The fact that Facebook is running the filter does not come into consideration, except for their integrity part, in accepting those keywords and applying them.

  • On the post: Censorship Kills: US Government's Focus On COVID-19 'Messaging' Over Actual Protection Did Real Damage

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2020 @ 08:55am

    Re: Re: Say no more

    It is hard to extricate scientific achievement from politics, but there are examples of politicians giving scientists a challenge and then using those achievements for their own advantage. To name a couple, the development of the nuclear bomb and the space race, both of which have ancillary consequences both good and bad. I am sure there are many others.

  • On the post: UNESCO Suggests COVID-19 Is A Reason To Create… Eternal Copyright

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 23 Apr, 2020 @ 08:44am

    How long is infinity minus 1?

    Isn't public domain the same as eternal copyright? The creator(s) get their fiscal reward during the monopoly period (which should go back to the 14 + optional (but expensive) 14 years) and then it remains as culture with creative recognition rewards, eternally.

    Maybe the eternal part should include required reference to whatever creator 'influenced' the current creation, though that list might get awfully long and has big opportunities for missing contributors which might extend the maximalist penchant for litigation.

    That satisfies all the objectives that UNESCO stated, without the money part, which has a tendency to stick to processing parts and never makes it to the supposed beneficiary(s), a likely intended consequence of the imagined protocol.

  • On the post: Famed Law Professor Richard Epstein's Ever Changing Claims About How Many People Will Die From COVID-19

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 22 Apr, 2020 @ 09:42am

    Re:

    Libertarians? I heard that Trump was a Republican. Did I hear that wrong?

  • On the post: Federal Court Dismisses Twitter's Long-Running Lawsuit Over NSL Reporting

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 22 Apr, 2020 @ 09:40am

    Re: Re:

    The government, and apparently you, are suggesting that some mind reader might pick a particular twit out of the thousands (millions) of twits posted daily that that NSL, that likely took at least several days to procure and transmit, would be a clue as to which twit it was? Would you, and the government please share what your smoking?

  • On the post: AT&T Provided FCC Bunk Broadband Availability Data Across 20 States

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 22 Apr, 2020 @ 09:35am

    Re: Missing the *bigger* picture.

    At least a part of the issue is will any of the broadband providers (including AT&T) actually spend the money on its intended purpose? They haven't in the past which raises the question as to why they are being given more? 5G is one excuse, and not a very good one as it would take 5-10 times more installations than 4G, but wireless is one of the excuses for broadband to not upgrade their networks last mile installations.

  • On the post: Texas Attorney General's Office Says It Can Toss People In Jail For Suggesting Coronavirus Fears Are A Legit Reason To Vote From Home

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 21 Apr, 2020 @ 08:15am

    Re: Isn't it obvious by now...

    Give them enough Hydroxychloroquine (the one for fish tanks, not the malaria medicine) to cure what ails them along with a directive to follow Trump's advice. It should make all the 'fake' new channels, and create some opportunities.

  • On the post: Texas Attorney General's Office Says It Can Toss People In Jail For Suggesting Coronavirus Fears Are A Legit Reason To Vote From Home

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 21 Apr, 2020 @ 07:11am

    Two Things

    "...providing that a person commits election fraud if the person knowingly or intentionally causes a ballot to be obtained under false pretenses, or a misleading statement to be provided on an application for ballot by mail"

    The first is, what if the application says 'because I don't want to take the risk of being infected with the Coronavirus at your close quarters voting place' and the ballot is sent anyway. Does that constitute a violation of the law by the voter, or just the people processing the ballots?

    The second is, what if some large percentage of Texas voters do lie on their applications and claim disability for say a hangnail and get the ballot. Is the attorney general will to put more than, say 50% of Texans in jail? I could see him trying to fine them the $10,000, but what would the process do to the court system?

  • On the post: Oversight Board Calls Out Austin PD For Revamping Policies To Minimize Citizen Complaints

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2020 @ 05:20pm

    Re: Police Oversight Boards Are a Joke

    Agreed, but we have a big problem in that I don't see a methodology for constituting such boards without significant issues. If appointed (I think the most usual way) the person doing the appointing is usually the head of the municipality, an elected official. People in these positions tend to be influenced in many ways, their political party, contributors, groups like police unions that have wide sway. If elected, the people running for the positions on the oversight board may be similarly influenced. Thinking about getting someone from outside the jurisdiction to do the appointing I am having a hard time coming up with any entity that would take the position of citizens. DoJ, no. Some court, they are sometimes elected or appointed and then approved through a politically compromised process. What other way could we get a board that has the citizens rights foremost in their consideration to give the powers you suggest to?

  • On the post: Australia Gives Up Any Pretense: Pushes Straight Up Tax On Facebook & Google To Pay News Orgs

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2020 @ 02:46pm

    Re:

    Mike is home, and there is no reason he, nor anyone else should not have or express their opinion. You wear your own flag bravely, but you haven't thought this through. You do know what will happen if Google takes their ball and goes home, don't you? The media organizations will be in the same sad position they find themselves now, only worse. They could of course start their own search engines, spend a few years figuring out how to run them, and then a few more years getting all the users in Australia to stop using Google (or other search engine) and move to their search engine, and then they can pay themselves for using their own snippets. Oh, wait...that won't work because then they would be transferring money to their competitors (unless they use a double standard and exempt themselves) and might very well ban all the smaller media companies from their search results. How will that sit?

  • On the post: Australia Gives Up Any Pretense: Pushes Straight Up Tax On Facebook & Google To Pay News Orgs

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2020 @ 02:20pm

    Re:

    I have some agreement with the nuclear option, then I think about what will happen when the rest of the world gets on the same train. Does Google news only list blogs? Do other search engines follow suit in a self-protective move? Do they de-list the media organizations entirely out of spite? Is Google News a significant enough part of Google Search to have a serious impact on the rest of their search business? In the end it will be the users who get hurt. Yes the media organizations will also get hurt, and after a whole lot of screaming and crying foul, followed by some serious pouting, might, and I mean might, beg the search industry to re-include them. Whether they do or not will depend upon their fiscal ability to remain solvent in the mean time.

  • On the post: Unshocking Report: Trump Admin Is Historically Terrible At Reining In Destructive Monopolies

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2020 @ 10:53am

    Re: Re: Re:

    From your description, other than name, how is that different than the Democratic party?

Next >>