James Jensen 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (105) comment rss

  • On the post: Recording Industry Exec Says It's Not Censorship To Block Sites He Doesn't Like

    James Jensen ( profile ), 11 Aug, 2014 @ 10:51am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Copyright is specifically provided for under the Constitution, so you can't just say copyright is banned due to the First Amendment.

    Actually, copyright is provided for in the body of the Constitution, which the amendments are by definition supposed to override. So I think there is a serious argument that copyright is unconstitutional.

  • On the post: Recording Industry Exec Says It's Not Censorship To Block Sites He Doesn't Like

    James Jensen ( profile ), 11 Aug, 2014 @ 09:46am

    Re:

    I feel obligated to point out the flaw in your analogy: misogynistic music is not illegal.

    Not in our society, no, but it's not an unthinkable that some society would outlaw it and still claim to support free speech.

    Copyright infringement is not free speech. (Although it does have to be actually determined by a court first that a particular thing IS infringing.)

    In my hypothetical society, misogynistic music is not considered free speech, either.

    In any case, what the Pirate Bay is doing is not copyright infringement, it's providing a forum where people can arrange for transfer of materials that may or may not be infringing.

    Finally, there are a number of us who do consider copyright to be an abridgement of free speech.

    Imagine if the government formed a licensing board whose job it was to approve and license -- at their discretion and at any rate they chose -- the distribution of any and all works you didn't personally create, whether it's the latest best seller or Shakespeare. Obviously this would be a violation of my freedom of expression. So how does it become not a violation when the gatekeeper changes to the authors themselves, or their estates, or their publishers? They're still performing the same function of inhibiting speech.

  • On the post: NCAA Found To Violate Antitrust Laws In Preventing Schools From Sharing Licensing Revenue With Student Athletes

    James Jensen ( profile ), 11 Aug, 2014 @ 09:25am

    Re: Re:

    "Stu-dent-ath-o-leets. Oh, that is brilliant sir. Now when we sell their likeness for video games, how do we get around paying for our sla ... student athletes then?" - Eric Cartman

  • On the post: Recording Industry Exec Says It's Not Censorship To Block Sites He Doesn't Like

    James Jensen ( profile ), 11 Aug, 2014 @ 09:32am

    Getting straight to the point...

    "But what has freedom of expression got to do with generating advertising revenues by illegally promoting political dissent with disregard for the state? And yet the freedom of the state to be free from dissent is trampled!"

  • On the post: 4th Grader Suspended For Properly Completing Assignment With A Nerf Gun

    James Jensen ( profile ), 10 Aug, 2014 @ 09:59pm

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

    If you don't like the rules, then work to CHANGE THEM. Don't just ignore them and then claim some wild hair free speech fourth amendment didn't know don't care excuse for breaking the rules. Work to change them.

    The "it's the rules" defense is the quickest and easiest form of guilt-free victim-blaming there is.

    When rules are clearly not reasonable, it is not always reasonable to obey them, still less reasonable to enforce them, and still less reasonable for someone like you or I to support the enforcement of them.

  • On the post: Another Area Where There's Tremendous Innovation Without Patents: Wallets On Kickstarter

    James Jensen ( profile ), 08 Aug, 2014 @ 09:48pm

    Re: Re: innovation without patents

    It's really hard to demonstrate anything conclusively because both arguments are based on complicated what-would-have-happened-if scenarios.

    The case that copyright and patents are good for innovation has never been made in any concrete form, and even if that were established you still have the issue of whether the benefits to the public really outweigh the costs of enforcing the laws on a public that by and large doesn't seem willing to obey them.

  • On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'

    James Jensen ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 07:57pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Track Record

    Well, yeah. Different countries, different laws. Some countries allow people to restrict others, others don't, or allow it on different terms. I'm not sure what's confusing about this?

  • On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'

    James Jensen ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 05:52pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Track Record

    Not much to explain, really: different countries have different laws.

  • On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'

    James Jensen ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 04:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Track Record

    Incorrect. Copyright is a right to restrict others from making copies. The default, guaranteed in the US by the 1st amendment, is the right to make and disseminate as many copies as you like because copying = speech.

  • On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'

    James Jensen ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 04:38pm

    Re: Re:

    If someone HAS to own the image, I'd like to submit my candidacy. I know I didn't take the picture, but apparently neither did he.

    I'll of course dedicate it to the public domain upon confirmation of my receipt of copyright. CC0 FTW.

  • On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'

    James Jensen ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 04:22pm

    Re: Response to: Gwiz on Aug 7th, 2014 @ 11:32am

    …or the plays of Shakespeare, or Moby Dick, or The Brothers Karamozov or Sherlock Holmes, or…

  • On the post: How That Monkey Selfie Reveals The Dangerous Belief That Every Bit Of Culture Must Be 'Owned'

    James Jensen ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 04:12pm

    Re: Track Record (Later Guys)

    Indeed. I run into the same problem when I point out that Obamacare requires yearly virginal sacrifices to Cthulhu. People demand a source and I point them to Public Law 111-148, which is the law itself, but they seem to think that's not good enough or something.

  • On the post: Awesome Stuff: Crowdfunding To Get Money Out Of Politics… Now With Steve Wozniak!

    James Jensen ( profile ), 23 Jun, 2014 @ 04:36pm

    Re: Re: Re: I'm not really liking this

    Not a single one of those has anything to do with political speech.

    So? Is "political speech" more sacrosanct than non-political speech?

    Please stop using that as an example of the need to regulate speech. It's a contrived, ridiculous red herring that needed to be done away with even before it was conceived.

    The linked article misses one big, big point: the scenario has actually happened. It happened in 1856 during one of Charles Spurgeon's sermons in the Surrey Gardens Music Hall. Several people were killed in the panic. So, no, it's not ridiculous or contrived.

    At any rate, that's why I mentioned everything else first. Free speech is not an absolute right and trying to make it one is as dangerous as any other form of extremism.

    Corporations are legal fictions that exist because it's a hell of a lot easier for the legal system to deal with a single party than to deal individually with all those who own or are employed by a given company.

    This has precisely nothing to do with the subject. Corporations exist as a deal between government and individuals, and the owners receive both benefits and obligations they wouldn't otherwise have. If the government decides to change the deal, that is not a speech issue.

  • On the post: Awesome Stuff: Crowdfunding To Get Money Out Of Politics… Now With Steve Wozniak!

    James Jensen ( profile ), 21 Jun, 2014 @ 12:11pm

    Re: I'm not really liking this

    The free speech defense is not very convincing.

    First, limiting how people can pay for something is not a free speech issue. I can't pay for ads with sexual favors or human organs, either.

    Second, the right to free speech has lots of exceptions. These include harassment, defamation, obscenity, inciting a riot, divulging national secrets, infringement of copyrights, helping to plan a crime, and of course yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

    Thirdly, the main target of this, as I understand it, is corporate funding. Corporations are legal fictions that exist by decree of the government. Regulating the use of corporate funds is really just changing the deal between the government and corporation owners.

  • On the post: Australian Media Company CEO Accuses iiNet ISP Of Piracy 'Lies', Says Illegal Filesharing Is Theft

    James Jensen ( profile ), 20 Jun, 2014 @ 11:00am

    Re:

    ...it's baffling that these people seem to be confusing a pointer to something with the actual thing, but that's sure what it looks like.

    Sounds like they need a class in C/C++...

  • On the post: Australian Media Company CEO Accuses iiNet ISP Of Piracy 'Lies', Says Illegal Filesharing Is Theft

    James Jensen ( profile ), 20 Jun, 2014 @ 10:56am

    Re:

    I love the morality of maximalists:

    "I want a monopoly, so I'm going to call it property."

  • On the post: Australian Media Company CEO Accuses iiNet ISP Of Piracy 'Lies', Says Illegal Filesharing Is Theft

    James Jensen ( profile ), 20 Jun, 2014 @ 11:26am

    "If people are given elegant explanations of why [downloading content] is theft, the bulk of people will be reasonable."

    If these explanations existed they would have been offered a long time ago. As in two or three centuries ago. Instead the copyright lobby has always gone straight to special pleading and laughable legal theories -- and that's when they don't just stick to dogmatic assertions.

  • On the post: Xbox One Caves Again: Console Will Now Be Offered Sans Kinect

    James Jensen ( profile ), 14 May, 2014 @ 01:02pm

    Re: Better late than never

    +1

    Exactly the point I was trying to make, made much more succinctly.

  • On the post: Xbox One Caves Again: Console Will Now Be Offered Sans Kinect

    James Jensen ( profile ), 14 May, 2014 @ 12:59pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Well, yes, on that size TV I'd agree. I personally have a 42" and really don't see myself ever getting one larger than the 55" my folks got. On those and from a comfortable viewing distance the difference is much less noticeable.

  • On the post: Xbox One Caves Again: Console Will Now Be Offered Sans Kinect

    James Jensen ( profile ), 14 May, 2014 @ 06:53am

    Re:

    Resolution is just about the least important measure graphically. The difference between 1080p and 720p/900p is just not that significant.

Next >>