Daniel Audy 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (72) comment rss

  • On the post: No, The Wall St. Bull Sculptor Doesn't 'Have A Point'

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2017 @ 01:24pm

    Re: Re: Control

    I actually genuinely feel sorry for the poor artist. He has a fairly distinct style that you can recognize if you've seen Pepe and most people won't know that he doesn't support the movement that has appropriated his character and completely altered the association that character has. The irony is that he actually does have legal standing to sue over the use of Pepe but doesn't because he recognizes that it is an impossible battle that will get him nothing but scorn.

  • On the post: Court Strikes Probation Restrictions Banning Teen From Using Encryption, Accessing Internet For Personal Reasons

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 06 Apr, 2017 @ 05:42pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Likely she wasn't guilty of the actual offence. Typically these statutes are worded in a way that only criminalize the penetrating party since they were written by puritanical idiots who assumed that no one would consent to it.

  • On the post: Appeals Court Says Right To Bear Arms Isn't A Right If Cops Are Banging On Your Door In The Middle Of The Night

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 27 Mar, 2017 @ 07:46pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The citizen's of the vast majority of the developed world would strongly disagree with you on the idea that them not having unlimited access to guns somehow makes them slaves.

  • On the post: Man Actually Arrested For Assault With A Deadly Tweet

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 21 Mar, 2017 @ 07:23pm

    Re: Re: Deadly weapon?

    I suppose you also think that people get raped could (and should have) protected themselves by not going out at night? Blaming the victim for not stopping someone with hostile intent from hurting them is morally reprehensible.

    There is a big difference between taking reasonable precautions to minimize risk (not watching anime with flashing sequences for example) and expecting someone to structure their entire life around avoiding the possibility that an asshole who wants to hurt them (Eichenwald didn't wear sunglasses outside to prevent buddy from walking up to him with a strobe light either - he must have been asking for it).

  • On the post: New Zealand Court Says Kim Dotcom Still Eligible For Extradition… But Not Over Copyright

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 22 Feb, 2017 @ 11:19am

    Re: The "fraud" part

    Interesting that by that section of the crimes act many corporate announcements and reports would be 'conspiracy to defraud' since they involve multiple people, are intended to effect the price of stocks, and are frequently dishonest about all the true details rather than just the ones that paint the company in the best light.

  • On the post: New Zealand Court Says Kim Dotcom Still Eligible For Extradition… But Not Over Copyright

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 22 Feb, 2017 @ 11:10am

    Re:

    Statute of limitations apply to when charges can be initiated and does not expire while a case is being argued. The only way the statute of limitations could be relevant for this case is that the government would not be able to amend their complaint to include additional charges for which too much time has passed nor can they voluntarily dismiss the case and then recharge him with a virtually identical set of charges if they start losing.

  • On the post: One Fish Two Fish, We Will Sue Fish: Seuss Lawyers Hop On Pop Art

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 15 Nov, 2016 @ 09:48am

    I was initially pretty strongly on the side of the Trek project but looking at those samples I'm finding myself torn. That isn't just using the style but copying the individual compositions in great detail and adding the Star Trek stuff in. Particularly for the second sample, it looks like they just used tracing paper for the tree and the background down to copying the exact number and layout of twigs on the tree and the number and shape of the background hills, neither of which feature is distinctly memorable enough to be part of the Seussian style. The utter lack of originality in the composition of those pieces of art is going to be a bloody high barrier to convince a judge or jury that they are making creative choices when to me, someone who was inclined to their side in the first place, 'slavishly copying' seems like a fairly honest description.

  • On the post: Homeland Security Wants To Subpoena Us Over A Clearly Hyperbolic Techdirt Comment

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 06 May, 2016 @ 12:56pm

    Re:

    "Remember kids... when it comes to Tyranny... JUST SAY NO!!!"

    Unless the government tells you that you aren't allowed in which case just roll over.

  • On the post: Milwaukee PD Hid Stingray Usage From Judges, Defendants And Now Congress Members Want Answers From The FBI

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2016 @ 04:44pm

    Re:

    On the road to a police state!?!

    Oh you sweet naive boy, our GPS just dinged and told us that we have now arrived at our destination.

  • On the post: Canadian Court Orders Blogger Who Reposted Another Writer's Defamatory Statements To Pay $10,000 To Defamed Party

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2015 @ 05:15pm

    Re:

    Techdirt actually missed the mark even more because it stated that US defamation laws would have produced a different outcome which is far from clear. At this time reposting someone else's defamation as part of a larger article making the same point is exercising sufficient editorial control that Veck takes on legal responsibility for verifying the veracity of that content. If he had taken even the barest amount of effort to do a Google search he would have know that the original had been retracted thus he falls under the standard of 'reckless disregard for the truth' which would result in him being guilty of libel even if Patrick Warman was considered a public figure (a dubious claim given his 'fame' is largely involuntary).

  • On the post: Canadian Court Orders Blogger Who Reposted Another Writer's Defamatory Statements To Pay $10,000 To Defamed Party

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2015 @ 04:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: CDA § 230

    Or more accurately the CDA immunizes hosts from liability for the any potential libel on the part of its users and prevents non-originating users from being held liable for things like nested comments. The user who originally wrote the libelous comment are still fully liable for any libel. It adds the tiny hurdle of filing suit against a Doe and performing discovery against the host to acquire the information retained about the libelous user but frankly if that is enough deterrent against filing suit then it was a vastly unworthy lawsuit to begin with. Sites are still accountable legally for any material that they exert editorial control over, just not that of their visitors.

    Without CDA 230 much of the functionality of the internet would become unfeasible as everything would need to be manually reviewed before linking or they could be liable for whoever they are linking to's actions. Google couldn't give you search results with a snippet of text to give context to the link, no comment sections, no youtube, not even web chats would be safe without hosts being protected from the unsupervised actions of users.

  • On the post: DailyDirt: These Things Are Not Really Making You Any Smarter, But Try Them Anyway?

    Daniel Audy ( profile ), 31 Jan, 2015 @ 01:48pm

    Re:

    Oy! I'm not sure if your (stupid) argument proves the point that people are getting dumber or if you are just a special case.

    Expecting people to have the same skills to operate a mass market device that has been designed for unskilled users as a tiny population of hobbyists who require those skills in order to do anything useful with it is just plain imbecilic. It is akin to complaining that the fact that people who drive cars are stupid because they no longer know how to properly curry and brush a horse