Bi-partisan on the POINT of the ENTIRE BLOG ENTRY!!!
Did you skip right to the comments and not bother to read the blog?
It was a pretty short entry on how:
THE SENATE, HOUSE and PRESIDENT all WORKED TOGETHER.
That's pretty much Bi-partisan.
Sigh.
I didn't read that into his comment.
I do see that rationale a lot, but I don't see it here.
According to the definition provided by the current US President they are:
"Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror."
...aaaand, I'm pretty sure you already knew that, but I like the quote.
That's all you got?
All you can say in defense of your precious government is that someone else might be worse than the government?
A sane person who realized that the blog was about legislation currently being discussed, might actually consider the legislation. But you chose to whine because the author didn't choose to focus on a something else.
Fail.
A whiny guy once said 'you can't reasonably use someone else's work as the central part of yours!'.
Fail. From the beginning of known history, people always use ideas and concepts from other people and build upon them. That is a reasonable, logical and beneficial system.
People who feel that the government should grant monopolies to the one who does something first, and lock those ideas and concepts down, are promoting an unreasonable, illogical and malignant system. That system does not advance anything but greed, enrich lawyers and discourage new artists.
Of course, since you are paid by the beneficiaries of the malignant system, it will never be in your best interest to consider this.
You forgot google. Google is at the heart of this conspiracy.
Justice Scalia followed that up by asking why would anyone invent anything if they can't get a patent.
Obviously, the wheel, and paper were both invented later than the patent system.
It's a blog. Mike gives his opinion on a blog.
It's fine to disagree with his opinion, but this is an appropriate place to write his opinion.
You know, you could start your own blog, and write how you hate stuff, you might get out_of_the_blue will comment how brilliant you are, because he hates stuff too.
I recognize that there are some people out there who really just don't like techdirt, but I'm often amazed at how this sometimes leads people to blame other societal woes on those kinds of things.
You need to realize this is a blog, not a network news site...
I agree, this is insignificant, we should just give up, it's no use. Humanities final chapter has been written. You'll never know love.
I picture him peering out of his dirty kitchen window, a pale figure not unlike Mr. Burns from the Simpsons with burning red eyes and a stringy comb-over. He peers out across his brown grass, seeing the neighbor kids playing and running around, and plots revenge for the noise they are making. Then he darts back to his computer to teach those kids on techdirt a lesson on how things work in the 'real world'.
"They will never suspect what I'm going to say next" he chortles, "In fact, not even I can suspect what it will be, because it will be completely out_of_the_blue!"
Pretty sure the Pet Rock was a gag gift, nobody I know remembers it as anything but a joke... The lava lamp on the other hand, was interesting to watch and can be used as a night light. If anyone spent much time watching their pet rock, then I hope they got the help they needed.
All I hear is Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Talk to your doctor to see if 'shut up and stop whining' is right for you.
Given that Hollywood got some nice tax breaks extended in the 'fiscal cliff' deal, I am led to believe that violent movies are necessary for our well-being.
So, no charged have been filed, but she has been denied (at least partially) access to police services.
Now that is a clear abuse of power.
Sorry Canada, I thought the US was more of a Police State than you, way to step up the competition.
Apparently you missed the entire point of the article.
It's not that Wortham did something morally wrong, it's that the LAW is wrong.
This sentence might help unclog your cognitive dissonance:
Just the fact that Wortham could find herself on the receiving end of lawsuits (both criminal and civil) over both of those laws (and considering her public admission to the key facts, she might have a difficult time pleading innocence) shows why those laws desperately need to be fixed
Too bad your hatred of anyone that doesn't worship IP is interfering with your comprehension.
Simple.
The US Attorneys office is completely corrupt.
They have no intention of enforcing the law, unless that enforcement achieves a political goal.
You keep mistaking the voices that whisper in your head with lucid thoughts.
Credit where credit is due.
"Now, I don't know if it counts as a conflict of interest that I play a ton of sports games and also find it massively annoying when I can't beat 14 year old Russian children anymore because EA shut down the servers, but I figured I'd disclose that anyway. "
Damn, I can't beat those 14 year old Russian children, you must be pretty good.