Igualmente69 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (71)

• On the post: The Press Finally Realizing Jerry Nadler Is In Bed With The RIAA While In Charge Of Copyright Reform

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 15 May, 2019 @ 01:32pm

  Re: Re:

  Lots of self-described progressives support corporatist policies.

• On the post: GDPR Concerns Temporarily Result In The Removal Of Trash Cans From Ireland Post Office

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 14 May, 2019 @ 09:22am

  Re: Re: Re:

  Not stupid at all. In fact, it is simply basic reasoning. And the reply wasn't stupid, yet you went with an ad hominem attack and didn't address the merits of said reply. Who is stupid, again?

• On the post: Schools Are Safer Than Ever, But That's Not Stopping Schools From Buying Social Media Monitoring Software

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 06 May, 2019 @ 11:53am

  Re:

  You must have misread the post. Violence isn't at the same level as before, it is much lower.
  "You must also show that the present/past levels of violence are acceptable. I very much don't accept that present levels of violence are acceptable (or that any levels of violence are acceptable for that matter)."
  And this is asinine, as it would allow increasing governmental power to near-totalitarian levels as long as even one person is subjected to violence. You can always "do more", but that doesn't mean that you should. Perfect safety will never exist and it should not be a goal as long as humans are humans.
  A free society accepts imperfections because the alternative is an unfree society that is (possibly slightly) more perfect.

• On the post: Congress Pushing A Terrible Bill To Massively Expand Patent Trolling

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 03 May, 2019 @ 08:19am

  "Removing the requirement that inventions actually be new and useful upends a fundamental Constitutional principle of patent law. The Constitution grants Congress the power to issue an “exclusive right,” such as a patent, only “[t]o promote the progress of science and useful arts.” The patent system’s entire purpose, in other words, is to encourage technological progress. Allowing patents on things that are neither new nor useful undermines the purpose of the Intellectual Property Clause."
  Which means that the bill is unconstitutional. Unfortunately few if any courts ever properly construct such Constitutional phrases, and just treat them as exposition, when they in fact are controlling as to what powers are(or are not) enumerated to Congress.

• On the post: Wherein The Copia Institute Updates The Copyright Office On The First Amendment Problems With The DMCA

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 16 Apr, 2019 @ 02:06pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Google can't regulate the conduct of people posting reviews on Yelp. Great comment.

• On the post: Be Careful What You Wish For: Twitter Temporarily Bans 'Get Out The Vote' Ads To Comply With 'Fake News' Law

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 10 Apr, 2019 @ 12:23pm

  Re: The burden of thinking here is on Twitter, BEFORE blocking.

  You are right, I forgot, laws don't apply to governments, only to the peons. Nice alliteration, Horace.

• On the post: Aussie Senate Rushes Thru Bill That Would Fine Social Media Companies For Not Taking Down 'Abhorrent' Content Fast Enough

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 05 Apr, 2019 @ 07:40am

  It seems like nearly every day one of the Commonwealth governments does something that makes you thankful for the American Revolution.

• On the post: Be Cautious About Big Internet Platforms Bearing Plans For Global Censorship

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 04 Apr, 2019 @ 02:07pm

  Re:

  It is a very good question indeed, and it is one that the people pushing such initiatives, as well as the governments that are pressuring them to do so, don't give a single fuck about attempting to answer in a coherent, rational manner.

• On the post: Be Cautious About Big Internet Platforms Bearing Plans For Global Censorship

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 04 Apr, 2019 @ 02:32pm

  "Yes, lots of people are rightly concerned that videos and manifestos related to attacks may inspire copycat (or worse) attacks."
  It is understandable that people in fear react in such ways, but the reality is that there is almost no evidence whatsoever that these things actually happen on any scale.
  The correct response on the part of the tech companies, at least in America, is nothing. Freedom of expression means people are allowed to produce media that the majority of the populace finds distasteful.
  In addition, suppressing the evidence of crime does not prevent the crime from happening again in the future, despite the continuous stream of lies from politicians in various countries, and in fact might make it harder to catch perpetrators.

• On the post: EU's Never Ending Quest To Rip The Internet And Free Expression To Shreds Continues With The Terrorist Content Regulation

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 03 Apr, 2019 @ 11:40am

  Re:

  "It's almost like they want to make it impossible for individuals, and only allow big established companies to run websites."
  Bingo.

• On the post: New York City Apartment Residents Sue Landlord Over New Smart Locks [Updated]

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 27 Mar, 2019 @ 02:30pm

  Re:

  "Forcing existing tenants to enter into a contract with a third-party is probably not legal."
  Unless that was specified in the original agreement, it is definitely not legal.

• On the post: Online 'Reputation Management' Company Brags About Abusing Copyright Law To Take Down Bad Reviews

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2019 @ 01:01pm

  Re:

  Except that's not true at all, since you can, you know, sue the actual person who defamed you.

• On the post: 170 Years Of German Publishers Demanding Special Copyrights For The Press Because Of New Technology

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 12 Mar, 2019 @ 09:14am

  Re: "And every single time they were wrong." -- Even in Nazi Era

  '"redundant" there means got. So you're flatly wrong.'
  It is a single mistake in word choice that means nothing in regards to the overall thesis.
  Your second claim in nonsensical in the extreme. You talk like it is a new thing for corporations to publish news for profit when that is how things have gone for, you know, centuries. It is called freedom of the press. Prior restraint is a term that applies to government censorship, not private entities, who can in fact decide who gets to use their services.
  Are you attempting to make an actual point? If so, you fail.

• On the post: Hollywood Accounting Rears Its Ugly Head Again: Fox's 'False Testimony' And 'Aversion For The Truth' Leads To $179M Fine

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 01 Mar, 2019 @ 07:09am

  The real issue is that this is deliberate, criminal fraud. Top executives at FOX, and other studios who do the same thing, should be in jail. That would stop this really fast. But the corrupt government doesn't give a single shit.

• On the post: Wherein The Copia Institute, Engine, And Reddit Tell The DC Circuit That FOSTA Is Unconstitutional

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 27 Feb, 2019 @ 12:25pm

  Re:

  Actually there is no evidence of trafficking in the Kraft case whatsoever.

• On the post: Beware The Rise Of Censorship Under The Guise Of Stopping Fake News: UK Regulators Push For Dangerous Plan

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 26 Feb, 2019 @ 02:02pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  Based on what principle? The content isn't illegal, by definition, so who will decide the standard? Content that is harmful to who? Also, how can courts have jurisdiction over non-illegal content in the first place?

• On the post: Fatal Houston PD Drug Raid Apparently Predicated On Drugs A Cop Had Stashed In His Car

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 20 Feb, 2019 @ 09:40am

  Re: To what end?

  Money. Where do you think the heroin came from. The cops obviously were either selling drugs themselves, planting drugs for forfeiture case, or both. They just got exposed because the homeowners exercised their rights to self-defense. If there wasn't any resistance, there would have been no story, just another case of drug-related asset forfeiture.

• On the post: Justice Thomas Is Apparently Serious About Completely Upturning Over 50 Years Of 1st Amendment Law

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 20 Feb, 2019 @ 09:52am

  Thomas's position is hard to support in this one with a straight face. You could make a case against a generalized public figure doctrine, but not for government employees.

• On the post: FOSTA Co-Sponsor Richard Blumenthal Tells Court FOSTA Didn't Change CDA 230 & That It Was Written To Violate 1st Amendment

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 19 Feb, 2019 @ 01:32pm

  Re:

  Lets make the people who build roads liable for all the crime that is facilitated via road usage. Lots of women have been victimized by people who drove or walked on roads. What about those women? Where are your priorities now?

• On the post: German Politician Thinks Gmail Constituent Messages Are All Faked By Google

  

  Igualmente69 ( profile ), 19 Feb, 2019 @ 10:41am

  Re:

  Yes, that is right, you do think your audience is stupid and easily manipulated.

Next >>