"Mike skips over the actual crimes and focuses on details of HOW gov't got the information."
Well yes, the FBI's flagrant violation of the 4th amendment is the story, not the alledged criminal activity.
I don't give a rip what crime he's accused of. He could be accused of eating babies for all I care. We can't have law enforcement throwing out the Bill of Rights whenever it pleases them. This guy has only been accused, not convicted. It's INNOCENT until proven guilty, not the other way around.
For the record, his PhD is in Philosophy, so he is in fact a doctor.
This is no defense of his actions though. I giant douche bag is a giant douche bag, with or without a title.
Nah, we just enjoy seeing people hoisted on their own petard.
You have got to be kidding. You're darn right the burden is on the "offended." That's where it belongs. If you think you're entitled to justice, your options are simple. Consult a lawyer who can advice you if you can legitimately make that claim in court. Then you find out what it will cost to properly make that claim, and you decide whether to proceed, or take your lumps and stfu.
On the other hand, if you sue me willy-nilly over some half-cocked notion, you place an unfair burden on me to defend myself. If it is determined that you were in the wrong, why should I have to pay legal fees?
Under "loser pays" you'll think twice before you try to pervert the legal system by turning it into a weapon.
Isn't it obvious? Sure, the number of people EMPLOYED is up, but the number of people with JOBS is rapidly disappearing. You see, just because someone is employed, it doesn't necessarily mean that they have an actual job to do.
My point, exactly. It's my neighbor's HBOtoGo, it's his password, and I have explicit permission to use it. So how is that a crime?
My neighbor gave me the key to his house so I can water his plants while he's on vacation. Apparently the minute I entered his house, I committed breaking and entering, because the lock was designed to keep me out. Is that the logic we're employing here?
Well, hiring armed guards is another way to go about getting the names and addresses of gun owners.
I know, huh? It's like jumping through all those hoops to legally own a firearm is the same as being a registered sex offender. Another nail in Privacy's coffin.
" if you take / steel a song, you are not taking anything physical off them, so no harm done."
Except you are taking something from them: their privacy, and quite possibly their safety.
The rest of your rant is just crazy-talk. Maybe in the interest of the safety of your neighbors, Mike should publish your email/IP address.
I Yahoo'd the etymology of the verb "to Google." Turns out Merriam-Webster has made "google" official, so to answer your question, no. No, we can't stop.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/google
Unfortunately true. Voters think "incumbent" means "right person to vote for." It usually means the opposite.
Yup, now the forst link under that search is to opposingviews.com's story on the lawsuit.
#2 is Techdirt. Let's all click that link!
But who would read it?
Yawn
You only had to read one more sentence to find the point you're claiming doesn't exist:
"the studios and other copyright holders seem to insist that a single IP address is proof positive of liability, doesn't it seem reasonable to question the studios about this bit of evidence as well?"
These guys are putting so much effort into going after file sharers, you'd think at the very least they'd get their own houses in order first.
If they obtain a patent on something, but go to great lengths to hide it, what other conclusion can one draw but that they are encouraging others to unwittingly infringe?
The Iphone came out in 2007, so I figure that turd sandwich owes apologies to Symbian (2000), Blackberry (1999), Android (2003), and Palm OS/Handspring (2003).
Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone
I'm pretty sure I've read that statement in various forms on a great many Techdirt posts. Where have you been?
The good old days of the music industry weren't that good. The brick-and-mortar record store was plagued by shoplifters, mix tape makers, DJ's, and those rat bastards who buy CD's, copy them, and then return them.
No matter what industry we're talking about, there will always be people who take things for free when they should be paying for them. All the bitching in the world will never change that, but there are lots and lots of ways to address the problem that will dramatically reduce it. Techdirt happens to be a rich source of such wisdom. The "New to Techdirt" section on the front page says it all. Go read it with an open mind.
Yeah, I think politicians take Christmas Day off. The conservative Christian ones, anyway...
Just curious...
Yelp has currently filtered out 84 of Hadeed's 91 reviews. Another 6 were totally removed. Most of those 6 are outside Hadeed's area, so I can imagine they were totally inappropriate/spam/etc. But I wonder why 84 reviews were filtered out, leaving only 7? That seems suspicious, as if Yelp is trying to tell us there's been a lot of shenanigans.