I for one, would never associate BEV STAYART with PORN or SKANK or VIAGARA, and neither should a web-crawling robot.
SEO = Streisand Effect Optimization
All WOPR wants to do is play games. Then again, so do most DC politicians.
Still, I'm glad they shelved the system (for the time being, anyway) instead of correcting the one exploit, declaring it 'fixed', and pushing ahead with it.
"i would argue then that if the main idea of a book is to slander and defame someone then yes..."
Well, that'd be one way to cut down on the UK's libel tourism industry...
"Sounds like someone has been reading Thomas More' "Utopia"."
And noted it was in the Public Domain?
"5,758,352: Common name space for long and short filenames (yes, again)"
I think we have a winner. Not only is it obvious (for a problem of MS' own making,) but *twice?*
"It's a cold war mentality. They think everyone can be secure if everyone has nukes. Or in this case, "intellectual property.""
Oh yeah, and I understand that mentality. The difference is that we've essentially legislated nukes, and are equally empowered to legislate them out of existence.
But we won't, because the big boys give bigger contributions to your campaign. And MAD works for them.
"Jobs saw it at PARC and copied it."
And paid handsomely for ability to do it.
The whole 'Gates copying Jobs was no different than Jobs copying Xerox' is a lardball of MS spin.
Sorry, that just gets my dander up.
If everyone is allowed to just just patent/copyright/trademarking everything under the sun, how does that help anyone? It's like allowing everyone the ability to print their own cash. (Well, minus the lawyers' cut. (and I think I just answered my own question.))
" Go ahead, consume for free away."
Will do. Thanks for the free content, BTW.
Everyone likes pizza. And scooters.
Even the Mafia can be a positive influence in besieged communities.
Michela Vittoria Brambilla, sadly ranks lower than any of the above.
And brick layers make money from the thing they produce. Hollywood is based on getting people to do stuff cheap for the hope of future riches. Hey, pave my patio on the cheap and you might, just might, recoup a royalty from it.
The weird thing is that people buy into it, because a few people are actually benefiting from the status quo.
"A rational person might realize that the point at which you have to spend so much time "protecting" or "defending" that it interferes with your life would be a good time to rethink their blind reliance on outdated laws."
Or try to get others to do the job for you, which seems to be the current M.O.
"Earlier on techdirt someone had the idea of forcing politicians to wear sponsor iron-ons like NASCAR drivers."
That may have been me, although I've seen a bunch of others come to the same conclusion independently.
At the very least, we could photoshop what they should be wearing.
There's a culture of entitlement in Hollywood, that has permeated LA, and to some extent CA, culture as well. Some of the older generation has managed to bank a comfortable living on residuals or whatnot, and everyone has a vague hope of cashing in on that gravy train, even though it's like planning for your retirement by buying lottery tickets.
Point being, they see 'piracy' as 'residuals lost,' which explains a lot of the attitude there.
Doctor Horrible is listed, while Dr. Smoov isn't. I love them both, but I can understand drawing a (necessarily arbitrary) line somewhere.
I can't wait to see all the corporations lining up to declare their competitors 'cyberwarriors.'
No, I mean I can wait, actually.
Yeah, as someone inside the US, it's increasingly difficult to tell the difference. We're essentially governed by a handful of industries now.
You know who else corrected grammar?
Down, peasants!
"Free trade" applies to corporations, you smelly wretches, not to consumers. So long as manufacturers and providers are offshoring their operations, it's fine. But if one of you uppity bastards tries to take advantage of price differentials, there will be hell and the courts to pay.