Maybe she should have gone to trial then
Because lawyers are so cheap. The difference of the High Court and Low Courts continues.
Do you realize the government gets it wrong and can mess up people's lives with merely an accusation of wrongdoing?
I guess the girl deported to Columbia was her own fault for giving a fake name.
I believe the Congresscritters don't care about the unintended consequences. We know that they're all bought. Yes, there is growing opposition daily to these censorship laws. But I doubt highly that Congress would pass this. The main reasoning is because this quite literally puts a gun to Google's head. Let's think about how much the tech industry lobbied Congress before SOPA and kept their principled stance. Now think about how much Google has spent in staying in DC's crosshairs for every problem under the sun.
It's a cash grab and everyone knows it. That's what makes this fight so mind numbingly frustrating.
This is the same man that was involved with the Countrywide scandal so long ago...
He IS an overfilled gas bag.
He might be right about the OPEN Act being more difficult to help resolve copyright issues. But notice how there's no mention of punishing those that bring false copyright claims. Someone needs to bring that up at the next Chris Dodd tour.
Looks like the PIPA bill...
*puts on glasses*
Is on thin ICE.
Lemme get this straight...
Ebay is the new Google and needs to be auction neutral?
Wow, people thought I was insightful...
And I talk a lot!
I'm going to talk even more in 2012! :)
The problem with Smith is that TX21 is so gerrymandered, he's in a safe district. It's hard to vote out someone that has so many defenses built in around the system.
1 & 2) Agreed.
3) It's very difficult to change when that's been the MO of certain trade industries for 2 decades...
4) It's a shame that more hasn't been done to expose this problem. The ones promoting it are the ones that benefit the most from copyright extensions.
5) We would have to change the laws of PROIP. Reason being, she has to report to the industry, not the public. This is the same with all czars though. They all respond to business interests over the people who are affected the most by bad laws.
Cornyn is an original supporter of PIPA. He heard the criticism from the get-go and chose not to engage in any way with amending the bill. Also, he's just like Marsha Blackburn, where he was against the rules for Net Neutrality.
From what I get with the Congressional aides that some TX content creators have said, the bill continues to have some misunderstandings.
I highly doubt that Cornyn, being a supporter, would actually have read the bill given his former stances on similar legislation.
John Cornyn would be one. His aides recently tried to talk to some TX business owners who would be affected by the bill. Because of the wording, they had to agree to disagree on how the bill affects them. If Cornyn were interested in this bill to protect creators, he would have worked to clarify the law. But he had ignored all criticism of this bill. Considering how legislation works, NO one reads the bills, opting to put through a lot of bad legislation at once.
And most of the ones that caused that calamity are in the obama administration.
I once thought copyright was sensible. But then I took am arrow to the knee.
There's needs to be a confirmation here. Either he bought a song or he bought a license. Both contend that this legal purchase can be used without a need to buy a license. It's not up to the extortion company to tell this guy his legal rights.
Unless you promote ASCAP going for the girl scouts as well...
No difference between commercial and noncommercial uses, disproportionate license fees, and an out of touch Copyright Board with little to no public hearings on fees.
No, let them do the Aaron Burr approach. They don't need a stick into that hole...
"Asimov"
I don't think anyone understands the power of Asimov. He created the word "robot" based on his own influences in sci fi. He influenced people as disperse as Keiji Inafune, who created Megaman based on the three laws and the entire field of robotics wih his observations and stories.
But it's amazing how people don't understand that others don't build new stories in a vacuum. There's no evidence of this. Even Asimov would probably say the same thing.
?I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I?ll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be.?
? Isaac Asimov
I don't think it's just that. Compare Bryan McCarthy's case with the Righthaven's. The rules are certa.inly different for lawyers to a certain degree.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How much did you donate to her defense fund Jay. Did you even offer to help. Don't bother answering. It's already numbingly embarrassing.
Probably a lot more than you ever would. But I'm not expecting a lobbyist for bad laws to actually adhere to civility in a debate.