freak 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (535)

• On the post: Steve Jobs Was Willing To 'Rip Off' Everyone Else… But Was Pissed About Android Copying iPhone?

  

  freak ( profile ), 22 Oct, 2011 @ 05:00am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ugh please

  Eh, from a distance, I would probably take a long while to tell an iPod and an iPhone apart.
  
  It definitely sounds like a distance, holding the two above your head.
  Oh, here, look, a source: "Sullivan [...] told Koh she was too far away to see the devices clearly"
  
  
  It also implies a certain viewing angle; if you can pick which side I get to see, I could also confuse, for example, the bottom of my laptop and the side of my desktop, (which happen to look fairly close to begin with; Vent on upper-left, black. My desktop is in a small tower, so besides the fact that it's a little longer, the side & bottom are roughly the same size. Sure, the laptop has tons of *little* details, like screws & panels, but you wouldn't see that from a distance).
  
  
  Point being: That's not a good test of anything

• On the post: Steve Jobs Was Willing To 'Rip Off' Everyone Else… But Was Pissed About Android Copying iPhone?

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 08:11pm

  Re: finally

  I wonder if it would be tasteful for me to repost a joke told on twitter about dmr's death? It's off-topic, yes, but would it be distasteful to boot?
  
  Ah, heck, here ya go:
  
  #include
  int main()
  {
  printf("Goodbye, World");
  return 0;
  }

• On the post: Why Some 'Easy' Legal Questions Aren't Always So Easy: Is A Burrito A Sandwich?

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 08:06pm

  Re:

  When I was assistant-managing a fast food restaurant, (Yes, I have gone through a lot of jobs. Students are fired at the drop of a hat around here, usually because of reasoning like: "Well, he's not planning to be around in 5 years anyways, [other employee] might". What can I say? It's true), only half of our items had tax on them. Anything that was classified as a baked good, and that we did nothing extra to, had no taxes. Include butter with your croissant? Taxes. Cut your doughnut in half for two children? Taxes.
  
  Food laws can be a bit bizarre sometimes.

• On the post: Up Is Down, Night Is Day, US Pretends Protectionist, Anti-Free Trade Agreements Are 'Historic Free Trade' Treaties

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 05:09pm

  Re: Re:

  I was actually referring to NAFTA, but that's also a good point.

• On the post: Up Is Down, Night Is Day, US Pretends Protectionist, Anti-Free Trade Agreements Are 'Historic Free Trade' Treaties

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 03:33pm

  Heh, as if the US ever followed its free trade agreements to begin with.

• On the post: Homage Is Expensive: Rihanna Pays Up To Settle Photographer's Lawsuit

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 03:32pm

  Re:

  The case was settled, so no judgment was made, so the answer is: we don't know yet, but LaChapelle has a better case now when he goes after someone else.

• On the post: Homage Is Expensive: Rihanna Pays Up To Settle Photographer's Lawsuit

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 03:31pm

  Re:

  With mike's clarification above, "If the idea/expression dichotomy is so arbitrary that this doesn't apply here, then [...] that makes the idea that it's some sort of bright line protection for free expression a total myth.", I totally agree with him.
  
  
  I guess I play Devil's Advocate, and suppose the judge just isn't that familiar with BDSM, and thinks that the ideas are very similar, but then we still have that the photographs aren't copying the expression at all. Look at the 2nd pair of photos, not remotely similar past "Shot of woman's face wearing a latex mask". Heck, one of them isn't even a mask. You couldn't copyright "Shot of a woman wearing a hat", could you?

• On the post: Homage Is Expensive: Rihanna Pays Up To Settle Photographer's Lawsuit

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 03:27pm

  I, for one, don't think Mike is exaggerating too much. In this case, I think he's right that this court in particular doesn't recognize the idea/expression dichotomy.
  
  I mean, look at these pictures. Any BDSM photographer could look over his/her portfolio and find pictures like these. Some photographers would have much, much closer matches.
  These ideas are common in BDSM. We seem to have: Person walking someone like a dog, woman's face in latex mask, and people in a garish room.
  
  IF LaChapelle can say at all that Rihanna was infringing here, then LaChapelle is CLEARLY, beyond a doubt, infringing on The Iron Cross. Or perhaps something not currently in the public domain, I'll bet Bettie Page has a few photos similar to at least the 1st pair of photos. Sweet Gwendoline, maybe, but I'm not sure?

• On the post: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash For Secondhand Sales

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 01:58pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  Yes.
  
  But since that admission means you aren't one of our usual trolls, I'll take back my "slimy weasel fucker" comment :)

• On the post: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash For Secondhand Sales

  

  freak ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2011 @ 04:38am

  Re: Re: Re:

  Only upto an hour?
  
  Oh, I thought it was much longer than that.
  Also, I could've read that myself, if I'd thought about it.

• On the post: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash For Secondhand Sales

  

  freak ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2011 @ 10:08am

  Re:

  . . . wut?
  
  He got his story from klfy.com
  
  They published the story Oct 18.
  
  Your provided link was published Oct 19, in fact, probably after the story was available here for crystal ball users, (how far ahead is the time window on that, guys?)
  
  
  I'm calling bullshit, you slimy weasel-fucker.

• On the post: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash For Secondhand Sales

  

  freak ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2011 @ 09:59am

  Re:

  "Seeing has how only a criminal would [knowingly] have stolen property, he already has no incentive to follow this new law."
  
  I dunno down there, but up here, by the time something enters a pawn shop, it's already gone through a few owners past the criminal, usually in increasing order of scruples.
  
  I can see how this law would allow police officers to track back the purchase a few steps further.
  
  
  That said, I'm not at all defending the bill. Overzealous? Definitely. Unintended economic consequences? Probably, unless the changes in the bill were made at the behest of a large immoral corporation(s), in which case it was perfectly well within the intentions.

• On the post: Universal Music Keeps Trying To Claim Zoe Keating's Royalty Checks, Despite Having Nothing To Do With Her

  

  freak ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2011 @ 09:45am

  Re: Errors and Apolgies

  "Why then, does an erroneous metadata submission from a webcaster trump the artist info that is supposedly on file?
  
  SE are the good guys, but it seems like they're opening the door to potential abuse here."
  
  
  I really feel like whatever entity is the cause for this policy must be malicious. It could be an unintended consequence of some contract/agreement/law somewhere, but it seems like it would have to have been very oddly specific to have this as an unintended consequence.
  
  If only I knew how to start looking into this kind of thing . . .

• On the post: Universal Music Keeps Trying To Claim Zoe Keating's Royalty Checks, Despite Having Nothing To Do With Her

  

  freak ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2011 @ 07:52pm

  Re:

  . . . their service should only be using metadata for songs/artists that they do not already have data on.
  
  And they should've hard-marked all your songs as being strictly yours after the first complaint, and DEFINITELY after the second.
  
  As it is, I imagine that record companies can easily, and therefore probably are, fraudulently claim royalties that don't belong to them; either by explicitly filing a claim, or in this case, just by changing metadata somewhere here.
  
  If you want to attribute this to ignorance as opposed to malice, you should realize the very high level of incompetence this would be.

• On the post: Universal Music Keeps Trying To Claim Zoe Keating's Royalty Checks, Despite Having Nothing To Do With Her

  

  freak ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2011 @ 04:33pm

  Re: Re:

  "How exactly would that help in this case?"
  
  Who owns the copyright to this piece? *checks gov't database*
  Oh, I see.

• On the post: London 2012 Olympics Go For Gold in the Extreme 'Ambush Marketing' Law Event: 'Guilty Until Proven Innocent' ? And No Streaking Allowed

  

  freak ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2011 @ 04:24pm

  Re: There went one now.

  And 1 in a million chances crop up 9 times out of 10

• On the post: Free Justin Bieber: Do We Really Want Congress To Make Bieber A Felon?

  

  freak ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2011 @ 04:16pm

  Re: We just want to piont this gun at you

  http://mimiandeunice.com/2011/09/01/trigger/

• On the post: No Surprise: Scammers Focus On Tricking The French With False Three Strikes Infringement Notices

  

  freak ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2011 @ 05:05am

  Re: Re: Re: Why do numers surive for longer than a tiny bit of time?

  I remember working in a cell centre for comcast . . . we were instructed to lie to people about the itemized billing if we saw this happening.
  
  Yep. Ethical.

• On the post: Complexity, Why Steve Jobs Got More Coverage Than Dennis Ritchie… And What That Says About The Patent System

  

  freak ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2011 @ 09:21pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Huh, that's unexpected.
  
  I thought I was being particularly unclear & unlucid today. *shrug*

• On the post: Complexity, Why Steve Jobs Got More Coverage Than Dennis Ritchie… And What That Says About The Patent System

  

  freak ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2011 @ 09:10pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not this

  That might've blown my mind a long time ago :p
  
  What really blows my mind is that this means that computers are capable of a fuller range of thought than we are.
  
  What really, really blows my mind is that literally anything can be a turing-complete computer, if you apply the right interpretation algorithm to it. Arrangement of frogs on lilypads? Students in a lecture hall? Rocks in a grid? An empty lecture hall? Yep.
  
  
  Man, no wonder we break down computers into such small, workable parts.

Next >>