someone 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (84) comment rss

  • On the post: Once Again, Law Enforcement Protects Us From The America-Destroying Scourge Of Children With Lemonade Stands

    someone ( profile ), 20 Jul, 2011 @ 04:52pm

    laws are laws

    Is it dumb kids get in trouble for selling lemonade? Sure is.

    But if that's what the law says, then that's how it should be.

    Maybe the people in the communities where this is an issue should work to get the laws changed.

  • On the post: TSA Agents Continue To Lie And Say You Can't Photograph Or Videotape Checkpoints

    someone ( profile ), 15 Jul, 2011 @ 11:11am

    TSA must stop using scaners!

    Looks like appeals court agrees that these things are illegal.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20079829-281/appeals-court-tsa-must-halt-airport-body-scanners/

  • On the post: Guy Kicked Off Comcast For Using Too Many Cloud Services

    someone ( profile ), 14 Jul, 2011 @ 04:21pm

    Re: Can't agree on this one

    He wanted to pay more to get a higher cap, comcast said no way!

  • On the post: Woman Arrested For Not Letting TSA Grope Her Daughter

    someone ( profile ), 14 Jul, 2011 @ 12:10pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "So what are you going to do when the guy goes to the can, locks the door and blows the tail off of the airplane?"

    What are you going to do when an asteroid knocks the tail of the airplane off?

    What are you going to do when the terrorists set off a bomb at the security checkpoint on a busy day?

    I can play what if games all day long too, but that does not really matter now does it?

    There is never a good excuse to exchange liberty for security.

    Especially when the security is doing nothing to stop the threats you fear.

  • On the post: Woman Arrested For Not Letting TSA Grope Her Daughter

    someone ( profile ), 14 Jul, 2011 @ 12:04pm

    Re: You play the lotto?

    On average more Americans die from car/truck accidents each month than have died from all terrorist acts combined.

    http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

    I'm not afraid of terrorists, no one should be afraid of those losers.

    But I do look both ways many times before crossing streets because I am fearful of my fellow Americans ability to operate their vehicles.

    More people die each year crossing the street than have died from all terrorist attacks combined including 9/11.

  • On the post: Monkeys Don't Do Fair Use; News Agency Tells Techdirt To Remove Photos

    someone ( profile ), 13 Jul, 2011 @ 02:55am

    Re: Re: Even the Copyright Registration Office Agrees That Monkeys Can't Hold Copyrights

    So what if the monkeys hold the copyright as you claim.

    If we follow your logic the monkeys hold the copyright.
    Great, the monkeys can not enter into a contract to transfer their rights to Caters. Nor can the monkeys bring a lawsuit for the improper use of their photos either.

    So the monkeys having copyright is the same as if the photos are public domain, no one can control how these photos are used.

  • On the post: Monkeys Don't Do Fair Use; News Agency Tells Techdirt To Remove Photos

    someone ( profile ), 13 Jul, 2011 @ 02:44am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just a thought!

    Sounds like a great theme song, but I am not quite sure who would use it.

    RIAA does music
    MPAA does movies
    humm....

    Oh yea, the AS(s) better known as the Associated Press could use this for their theme song!

  • On the post: Monkeys Don't Do Fair Use; News Agency Tells Techdirt To Remove Photos

    someone ( profile ), 13 Jul, 2011 @ 02:32am

    Re: type of copyright

    There is one problem with your idea, how did the monkey transfer its rights to the people who "made them look they way they do"?

    You see in your analogy the artist transfered his copyright rights to the record label who then had the right to make the mechanical representation copies.

    Monkeys are not human and as such can not claim copyright under us law.

  • On the post: Justice Department Says It Should Be Able To Require People To Decrypt Their Computers

    someone ( profile ), 12 Jul, 2011 @ 05:50pm

    Lost the key

    If they had a safe as evidence and you lost the key or forgot the combination they would hire a locksmith and get the evidence.

    If you forgot the password to your encrypted disk let them hire someone to crack the encryption.

    No need to shred the 5th amendment.

    They more they push this issue the more people will fight back with new technology. For example criminal hears his front door get knocked in, presses a certain keyboard combination causing his solid state encrypted hard drive, along with some fuel source, to catch fire and become ashes in a matter of seconds.

    They should be happy enough that given enough time they might some day be able to decrypt some data.

    But no thats not good enough, they want to see technology advance so they are left with a pile of ashes to decrypt.

    I could even see a company selling such a hard drive.
    It would be encased in such a way that when activated it would not start a fire externally. It would be activated by not seeing the correct pass-phrase after some period of time or after X number of incorrect pass-phrase attempts. Maybe even activated if it detected being tampered with physically.

    Companies and Governments would purchase these in bulk for laptops that contain sensitive data.
    No more concerns over lost laptops!

    Anyone want to invest and help me bring this to market?

    Thanks DOJ for inspiring this awesome idea!

  • On the post: Monkeys Don't Do Fair Use; News Agency Tells Techdirt To Remove Photos

    someone ( profile ), 12 Jul, 2011 @ 04:14pm

    So this is how Planet of the Apes happens

    This week they take pictures and transfer copyrights.

    Next week they are sexting on google+, facebook and twitter.

  • On the post: Google Wants Another Court To Determine If Accessing Open WiFi Is Wiretapping

    someone ( profile ), 11 Jul, 2011 @ 05:23pm

    Wi-Fi = wireless

    The people who certify WiFi Products:
    http://www.wi-fi.org/discover_and_learn.php

    "How does Wi-Fi technology work?
    Wi-Fi networks use radio technologies called 802.11 to provide secure, reliable, fast wireless connectivity."

    I predict another judge will indeed determine that wifi does indeed work over radio.

  • On the post: TSA Planning New, Even More Invasive Security Measures In Response To 'Threat' Of Implanted Bombs

    someone ( profile ), 08 Jul, 2011 @ 01:47pm

    So thats how ObamaCare saves us money!

    Free prostate/colon exams with the purchase of any airline ticket.

    I hope no one at the TSA watches South Park, imagine what they will want to do after seeing this:
    http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/episodes/s11e04-the-snuke

  • On the post: Woman Charged With 'Obstructing Governmental Administration' For Filming Police From Her Front Yard

    someone ( profile ), 23 Jun, 2011 @ 02:11pm

    WirelessTapping laws?

    "Police keep trying to claim that doing so is illegal, and have even tried to claim that such video taping violates wiretapping laws. "

    Kinda hard to tap a wire that does not exist.

  • On the post: French Court Says Merely Having The Word 'Torrent' In Your Domain Means You Are Encouraging Infringement

    someone ( profile ), 03 Jun, 2011 @ 05:34pm

    Re: Not

    I typically get new ISO's for ubuntu/debian using bit-torrent too.

    Considering that Linux and BSD distributions are protected by copyright I guess the courts are right when they said:

    "Torrent sites are accessed by users of the BitTorrent protocol which has a main, if not unique purpose, of enabling downloading of copyright protected works.?

    Too bad the courts overlooked the FACT that some people WANT to share their copyrighted works using bit-torrent.

  • On the post: Claims In E-Mail Sent Via Google Found To Be Opinion, Not Libel

    someone ( profile ), 24 May, 2011 @ 06:01am

    Re: Re: Striesand-Briggs effect?

    Indeed, thanks to Sandals own actions I am now aware that they may be operating with questionable ethics.

  • On the post: Lawsuits Filed Against Twitter, Facebook & MySpace For Confirming That A User No Longer Wanted Text Messages

    someone ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2011 @ 05:59am

    Re: Re: Lawsuits

    This is no different than calling customer service:
    Customer: Please stop sending me txt messages
    CSR: Ok, you would like us to stop sending you text messages?
    Customer: Yes
    CSR: Ok, I have setup your account so you will no longer receive txt messages. Is there anything else I can help you with today?
    Customer: No

    People make mistakes, things are misunderstood, it is REASONABLE to confirm what the customer wants so there is no confusion. It is also REASONABLE to confirm that the customer is actually making the request.
    Not confirming and causing a customer to loose a feature they want would be UNREASONABLE.

    You also neglect to understand how simple it is to spoof an email.
    If ONE email is enough to say you do not want anymore messages then all a malicious person needs to know is your email address and THEY can make that request for you.
    With the confirmation process the malicious party can not complete the removal process just by simply knowing your email address.

  • On the post: TSA Gropes 6-Year Old Girl: Says It's Okay Since It Followed Standard Operating Procedure

    someone ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2011 @ 12:24pm

    Re: Re:

    The supreme law of the land still states:
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    As I have said before, wanting to fly on an airplane does not make you a terrorist and as such they have no probable cause to perform a search.

  • On the post: Latest Issue Of Newsweek Down To Just Six Ads

    someone ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2011 @ 06:18am

    Re: Hmmm. I thought publicity was going to pay for content

    "Give your stuff away for free and then money will rain down on the sky from big companies that just want to advertise. "

    You need to have something of value to "give away" for this to work. A smoking pile of crap will not bring in enough eyeballs to make advertising worth while.

    I think the take home message here is that beating a dead horse will not make it gallop again.

  • On the post: Cyberlocker Responds To MPAA Lawsuit Which Tries To Give Hollywood A Veto On Tech It Doesn't Like

    someone ( profile ), 07 Apr, 2011 @ 03:19pm

    Re: Re: Re: i think they're on to something here...

    A Chrysler that does not work as advertised, shocking!

  • On the post: Is Tethering Stealing Bandwidth?

    someone ( profile ), 07 Apr, 2011 @ 12:20pm

    Re: Re: Re: _SIGH_

    Imagine what would happen if you started sharing that water with your thirsty neighbours!

    Even worse, imagine if your kids sell some lemonade made with water from the water company.

Next >>