Bergman’s Techdirt Profile


About BergmanTechdirt Insider

Bergman’s Comments comment rss

  • Aug 18th, 2017 @ 7:34pm

    Re: Re: Named for the device used to spy on Hobbit Beauty Queens

    That sort of thing is why we need to get these people into criminal court rather than civil. In civil court, you can pay for problems to go away without admitting wrongdoing.

    But doing that in criminal court is called lack of remorse, and leads to stiffer sentences.

  • Aug 18th, 2017 @ 7:17pm

    Re: Re:

    It's not too hard to do. Create a company that has offices somewhere that is signatory to a treaty with the US that has an ISDS provision, and then 'hire' people as unpaid interns, that buy into the company with one share of non-voting stock, and pay a lawsuit insurance fee into the company coffers each month.

    If any of them are mistreated by law enforcement or other government agency in the US, the company files an ISDS complaint on the grounds that corporate bylaws require that the company defend shareholders, and that defense is costing the company the profits it would normally have, but has to spend on legal measures such as the ISDS filing.

    An ISDS tribunal can override national laws, and fine government agencies. Problem solved.

  • Aug 18th, 2017 @ 7:12pm

    Re: Re:

    Treason? Perhaps you should go read the Constitution. You don't seem to be very well aware of it.

  • Aug 18th, 2017 @ 7:11pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Were you aware that by the modern definition of racism, Martin Luther King Junior was himself a deeply racist bigot? The ideal his 'I have a Dream' speech espouses is considered racism because color blindness does not give people free passes for choosing to bad things because of a bad childhood.

    By that standard, his statues could get pulled down too.

  • Aug 18th, 2017 @ 7:07pm

    Re: Re: Run in Circles Scream and Shout Flail Your Arms All About

    Except most of them didn't fight to preserve slavery. Revisionist historians want you to believe that, but it just isn't true.

    Most of them fought against a tyrannical regime that was ignoring the Constitution right left and center while the regime's courts rubber stamped every violation.

    There were abolitionists in the south and slavers in the north. Quite a few people in the south wanted to abolish slavery and switch to an industrialized economy -- but that would threaten northern state economies, so they got blocked from doing so in every legal and a few illegal ways. They knew full well that a slave labor society couldn't compete with a free and industrialized society, but they weren't allowed to fix the problem short of secession.

  • Aug 18th, 2017 @ 6:58pm


    Doesn't surprise me at all. Far too many people, especially in positions of authority, look to Hollywood movies for their education on how computers work.

    The Holly wood approach to defeating hackers:

    Step 1: Connect vital systems to the internet because reasons.

    Step 2: Get hacked, causing immense, irrevocable harm.

    Step 3: Dashing action heroes leads team of amusingly dysfunctional 'computer security' experts in daring last minute fight to protect data. Gratuitous car chase scenes, SWAT raids and pointing of gun at people armed only with laptops ensues.

    Step 4: Good guys win and hackers never try again despite no one ever patching the security flaw.

    How a real computer security professional defeats hackers:

    Step 1: Never connect stuff like that to the internet in the first place.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 1:36pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Perjury

    Considering that each false claim is a separate instance of perjury and each perjury charge carries a prison sentence of up to 5 years, spamming out fake DMCA takedowns can quickly rack up more prison time than Bernie Madoff got.

    Well, assuming you can find a federal prosecutor willing to take the case, anyway.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 1:14pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Funny, funny looking, what's the difference? =P

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 1:07pm

    Re: Re:

    Yes, if Yahoo had paid the commenters to make those specific comments, then Yahoo would not be immune under Section 230.

    But...Yahoo did not pay them to make those comments or any others, so Yahoo is not liable.

    I'm not sure what you mean by paying Techdirt though. Are you referring to how some people (such as myself) have donated money to them? I'm not liable for their posts either, since I donated money to support a legal battle against a skeevy litigant, I am not their employer.

    It's not rocket science, AC.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:59pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "You know what, just hand over the computers. All of them."

    A good example of why the bakery was right to decide the way they did is that while baking a cake and applying basic frosting is a simple service, the decorations that make it suitable for a wedding are artistic expression beyond any doubt.

    Such decorations are not a matter of rote application. They are the product of artistic skill just as any painting worth admiring is. The formulation of the artist's paints should not change expression that cannot be compelled into expression that can be.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:55pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "You know what, just hand over the computers. All of them."

    The bakery is open to the public, yes. But while baking a cake and frosting it is a service, cake decorations you'd actually want on the cake are artistic expression.

    Artists often create artwork through painting or sculpting that conveys a political message. Why would it be any different when their paint is made of sugar instead of acrylics?

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "You know what, just hand over the computers. All of them."

    WTB Edit button.

    While baking a cake and applying simple frosting is a service, decorating it is art. The distinction is quite clear, even if the art is sold.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:53pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "You know what, just hand over the computers. All of them."

    Where in public accommodation laws is there a requirement that an artist create art or that a public speaker speak in favor of things they oppose?

    Hint: you won't find one because if there was one, the law would be unconstitutional. Speech, particularly artistic or political speech, cannot be compelled.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:42pm

    Lies, damn lies and (no) reputable statistics

    "even though the "history" they were seeking to "preserve" generally celebrates the last holdouts against the abolishment of slavery."

    This is a revisionist lie. Quite a few southerners knew that slavery could not compete with a modern industrialized power, and were attempting to abolish slavery in the process of moving to be such an industrialized nation.

    The northerners blocked them from doing so for economic reasons. Oh, sure, there were a lot of people down south who loved owning slaves, but there were quite a few northerners of that persuasion as well.

    The American Civil War was never primarily about slavery, the politicians just loved to pound on that pulpit as a justification for doing what they were planning to do all along. The 1860s equivalent of Make America Great Again.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:35pm


    There is a fair bit of analysis of that hitting people with cars thing that is being ignored in the Left media.

    The guy in the car didn't decide to ram into a crowd because he hated their opinions -- or at least, that only played a minor role. Going by the physical evidence, he mostly decided to drive through a crowd because that crowd had surrounded his car and was attacking it with weapons, apparently in an attempt to gain access to him physically.

    The crowd was hitting his car with hammers, breaking the windows, and preventing him from escaping from the attack. A reasonable person would assume that the violence would not end if he exited his car or remained in place, which creates a reasonable belief that he was in direct danger of death if he stayed put or attempted to flee on foot.

    At that point, use of a deadly force defense (the car) to prevent his own murder is a perfectly lawful act and arguably a moral one.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 12:31pm

    Re: Why an Injunction?

    I believe the reasoning was that offering public information, blocking scraping of the information, while simultaneously offering a commercial product that bundles that information for sale would give a third party a decent chance of prevailing in an anti-competition/anti-trust act lawsuit.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 10:18am

    Re: Re: Re: employers


    I'd rather know a company fully supports our traditional values as a nation -- namely that people have the right to say whatever they like when off the clock and not representing the company -- than find out that the company thinks that person is their slave not their employee.

    I won't shop at a place that owns slaves, and neither should you.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 10:17am

    Re: I'm just saying...fuck Nazis

    Nazis deserve every bad thing that happens to them the same way liberals, libertarians, conservatives, progressives, greens, capitalists, socialists, communists and every other ist, ian and ive does.

    They dared to hold an opinion someone disagrees with, so they deserve every bad thing that happens to them. But if anyone does it to YOU, it's evil and wrong and they're bad people.

    But where does it all end, once everyone who holds any opinion whatsoever is outed, has no job, and everyone in the country knows where they live?

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 10:14am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    It also takes a special kind of stupid to be unable to spot a rhetorical question when one is asked.

  • Aug 16th, 2017 @ 10:12am


    I'm not. I went to the trouble to self-examine and found all the dark little corners where racism lives and gave them a good scrubbing using knowledge and reason. Few people bother, because the insidious nature of racism is that you feel like you're doing the right thing when being racist.

    It always amuses me (in an ironic and horrifying way, mind you) that there are people who have never gone to that trouble, who will declare that I cannot possibly be anything but racist, solely on the basis of the color of my skin.

More comments from Bergman >>