jakerome 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (214) comment rss

  • On the post: Publishers Realizing There's Revenue In Selling Ebooks Of Old Content… Even If It's Available For Free

    jakerome ( profile ), 13 Oct, 2011 @ 12:08am

    A certain irony...

    The GigaOm article is titled, "Planning a paywall? Maybe you should sell some e-books instead"

    Then below the article are links to more stories... stuck behind the GigaOm paywall.

    Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
    Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

    Maybe they should take their own advice?

  • On the post: Redskins Owner Dan Synder Realizes He Was Going To Lose His Defamation Lawsuit Badly, Drops It

    jakerome ( profile ), 12 Sep, 2011 @ 04:02pm

    Satire

    Amusingly, Masnick also declares -- pretty much in line with all evidence -- that he's been "vindicated" in writing the article, because Snyder:

    realized that certain assertions contained in the lawsuit that are the subject of the mocking were, in fact, unintended by the plaintiff to be read literally as sane

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    jakerome ( profile ), 15 Aug, 2011 @ 02:49pm

    I insist on subject lines

    Dah, it's tough to sue someone for defaming you via your own news outlet.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    jakerome ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2011 @ 05:45pm

    SUBJECT LINES EXIST FOR A REASON!

    Mike can no more prove his innocence to you than Obama can prove to birthers that he's an American.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    jakerome ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2011 @ 03:15pm

    Re: Re: Re: What's with the war on subject lines?

    You've engaged in libel by falsely claiming that Mike is a liar. Seems to be a pattern, and you sure do enjoy trolling. But really, if you're going to troll, troll well. Do it right. Find something Mike actually said, take it out of context and then engage in a thinly supported supposition to extrapolate an outlandish proposition that Mike never stated. That's how you do it.

    Just calling Mike a liar and making stuff up... I've no monks that troll better than that.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    jakerome ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2011 @ 01:22pm

    Re: What so hard about including a subject?

    Since you're making accusations, you want to link to the post where Mike said, "musicians don't care about piracy?" Is that the new straw man, as the ruse that internet visionaries constantly proclaim "information wants to be free" is getting a bit hackneyed.

  • On the post: AT&T Accidentally Reveals That It Doesn't Need T-Mobile At All

    jakerome ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2011 @ 06:12pm

    This is too bad, because now that AT&T has admitted what everyone already knew, the FCC commissioners will feel bad when they approve the merger anyways.

    Shame on us.

  • On the post: BART Turns Off Mobile Phone Service At Station Because It Doesn't Want Protestors To Communicate

    jakerome ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2011 @ 05:00pm

    Re: Re: Disturbing comments

    Hard to tell whether or not that's snark... I guess the best kind of satire is the kind when you're not sure if it is. That comment was left on the news website.

  • On the post: BART Turns Off Mobile Phone Service At Station Because It Doesn't Want Protestors To Communicate

    jakerome ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2011 @ 03:15pm

    Disturbing comments

    Yikes. I kid above, but apparently there are at least some Americans that want to end freedom of assembly.

    "I don?t like protesters. I hope they will deserve hell as a heavy price to pay for all the media garbage they are promoting. Cowardly protesters are just a menace to society and their act of disobedience will not be tolerated. I would like it when Uncle Sam makes protesting an illegal activity worthy of a lengthy jail sentence. Protesting is as counterproductive since it can contribute to a full scale riot similar to the one in London. I think there should be a law against all form of protests because a single protest can lead to a violent confrontation with the police who are trying to control the disturbance before it becomes completely unmanageable."

  • On the post: BART Turns Off Mobile Phone Service At Station Because It Doesn't Want Protestors To Communicate

    jakerome ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2011 @ 03:09pm

    Hey, the Syrians did it first!

    So did the Egyptians, the Chinese and many other nations. How are we going to maintain our status as the leading nation in the world if we refuse to employ the same tools of state censorship that have proven so ineffective for totalitarian regimes around the world?

  • On the post: Journalist Bemoans Fact People Won't Pay For Online Content; Suggests Users Be Forced To Pay For Online Content

    jakerome ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2011 @ 11:51am

    Fantastic idea!

    Really, this idea is such a great & profound game changer that it needs to be expanded, not mocked! Why just focus on newspapers ($2), movie studios ($5) and record labels ($5) each collecting a $2-5/month tax on every ISP? Surely many others make valuable IP contributions to teh intarwebs that are then leeched upon by the great unwashed masses.

    Let's start with photographers, many of whom have been unwilling to adapt their business models to account for changing technology and are no longer to earn a living the exact same way they used to do so. I think $2/month is a bargain for all the great photography.

    And game developers, as many of these games are available free on the internet through the web or smartphone apps. Whereas once they could only sell games for $50 a pop, now they're forced to compete against small developers selling games for $1-2. In light of the dramatic reduction in prices, $2/month is about right.

    Oh, and authors! Lots of books are on the web, for free! Of, for the want of royalties paid to Shakespeare's great-great-great grandchildren, there is free competition. And sometimes authors offer their own books for free! But are they really free? NO! Surely no one would begrudge an extra $3/month to make sure the next Twain doesn't starve?

    And we must account for the poets whose poems can now be enjoyed without buying a $200 anthology. That's $1/month. Painters & sculptors, no one pays to view photos of their artworks on the web, let's tack on another $1. Lest we forget the broadcasters, who can't cram in as many ads on free webcasts as on free broadcasts-- $3/month should soothe their pain. And of course, the ad writers, that much maligned profession, don't have as many print publications to target. I think they'll settle for $1/month.

    Lastly, I'm surely leaving out other great contributors, we'll put them in the catch all, cap that at $5/month. Sure, it's not much, but much more and folks might start to notice.


    An extra $30/month seems like a pretty small price to help keep that "free" content coming.

  • On the post: UK Prime Minister Wants To Ban Suspected Rioters From Facebook & Twitter

    jakerome ( profile ), 11 Aug, 2011 @ 02:13pm

    Wrong way

    Instead of exporting democracy to totalitarian regimes in the Middle East & elsewhere, western politicians seem intent on importing freedom-restricting "innovations" like censorship from these dictatorships.

  • On the post: More Canadian Universities Opt Out Of Access Copyright's Skyrocketing Tariffs

    jakerome ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2011 @ 03:55pm

    How much is it really going to hurt?

    They increase their fees by a factor of 14. And they lose 60% of their customers. By my math, that means they'll now make:

    FY12 Revenue = FY11 Revenue x 14 x 0.4 = 5.6 x FY11 Revenue

    So that's nearly a 700% increase in revenue this year! The short term thinkers at Access Copyright will no doubt be high-fiving each other.

    Next year, though, when the other 40% ditch the program, they won't be feeling so SMRT.

  • On the post: House Committee Approves 'Keep Every American's Digital Data for Submission to the Federal Government Without a Warrant Act of 2011'

    jakerome ( profile ), 29 Jul, 2011 @ 11:05am

    The "If you don't have anything to hide, you don't have anything to worry about Act of 2011"

    Or IYD HATHY DHATWA- 2011. Or come up w/ your own acronym.


    -----------------
    Whereas,

    The internet is used primarily by child pornographers, drug counterfeiters & music pirates,
    Whereas upstanding citizens are happy to have their lives intruded upon,
    Whereas the most upstanding of these citizens are our congressional representatives,
    It is the will of the Congress that the following law be enacted.

    Pursuant to federal regulations pertaining to the retention of internet browsing histories for all computers, smartphones, tablets & other devices accessing the network via Internet Service Providers ("ISPs"), and pursuant to this body's stated goals of ensuring maximum transparency in the dealings of Congress, and pursuant to demonstrating the forthright ways in which Congress conducts itself, the following new rule shall be put into place.

    For any & all communications stored in accordance with "The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011" that pertain to the actions of any sitting member of Congress, these records may be accessed, examined and shared by any citizen of that member's district. Forthwith, this includes necessarily all internet logs from any computer or smartphone in the congress person's office in Washington or home district. This shall further include any personal device owned by the congress critter and used to conduct official business of the congress, including but not limited to voting, researching on bills, conducting fundraising or lobbying activities. This bill extends the authority to any computer, phone or tablet that the Congress critter borrows to do the same, which may include (but not be limited to) computers of spouses, children, other close family members and friends of one sort or another. To facilitate enforcement of this law, all congress critters will be required to submit a daily report identifying which computers they have used to access the internet for official business. This law will take effect on the same day as The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011 and will be automatically repealed when that legislation is found to be constitutionally lacking or otherwise repealed.

  • On the post: Music Industry Wants To Put 'Red Lights' In Google For Sites It Says Support Infringement

    jakerome ( profile ), 26 Jul, 2011 @ 02:53pm

    How do I put this gently...

    Build your own fucking search engine, you bunch of parasites.

  • On the post: The Lack Of A Legal Or Moral Basis For The Aaron Swartz Indictment Is Quite Troubling

    jakerome ( profile ), 20 Jul, 2011 @ 12:53pm

    Moral equivalency

    He "broke into the wiring closet" in the same way he "stole the articles." That is to say, he didn't break in anywhere or steal anything. He did, however, copy some articles that were free to copy and access a computer he was free to access.

    He's basically being prosecuted for changing his IP address. This is the moral equivalent to using multiple computers to stuff the ballot box in some online poll.

  • On the post: Newspapers Win Suit Against Google, Get Their Wish To Be Delisted, Then Complain

    jakerome ( profile ), 18 Jul, 2011 @ 09:45am

    Schadenfreude

    scha?den?freu?de
    noun, often capitalized ˈsh?-dən-ˌfrȯi-də : enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others

  • On the post: Pro-IP Blogger Feels Raising The Level Of Debate Means Locking Up Your Comments And Throwing Around The Word 'Freetard'

    jakerome ( profile ), 13 Jul, 2011 @ 12:01pm

    Tried to sneak this in

    But the comments were closed by the time I hit the post button. Dang it, some of my best snark yet! Note the first sentence initialism.
    -------------------------
    So, always this is really important, critical and logical.

    I am also getting pretty sick of these freetards fighting for their so-called "fair use." Law abiding citizens know that real fair use is to only create wholly original works, unless you receive permission from the original creator. I've seen so many lazy freetards copy whole paragraphs into their "original" blog posts, without ever having asked the original writer for permission how is that possibly fair?

    And agreed on Creative Commons, or as it's more accurately described, Creative Communism. This whole idea that artists should have the right to license their work for free, to let people copy or even sell their creations without first asking for permission, that is the very death of creativity in our society. If more untalented freetards keep licensing their own creative work with Creative Communism, then there will be no reason to ever pay professional artists for their own work. With so much crap out there, why bother paying for something good!

    We need to strengthen copyright laws, to put an end to abominations like Creative Communism which, while being presented as an optional method for artists to license their work, is clearly a evil freetard plot to dismantle copyright protection for all. No more 3rd party protection for copyright free-fire zones like YouTube, eBay or Flickr... for now on, service providers should be required to ascertain the provenance of artwork before allowing the possibly stolen videos or photos to be posted online. No more anonymous comments, or unmoderated comments! Let's make blog publishers stand behind every word posted on their sites, so we can end this tyranny of slander plaguing our discourse!

    End unfair use. End Creative Communism. And let's put the old gatekeepers back in place to make sure that amateur so-called artists don't destroy the ability of real artists to make a living.

  • On the post: Another Fair Use Debacle: Photographer Settles Bogus Copyright Threat From Artist

    jakerome ( profile ), 06 Jul, 2011 @ 11:22am

    Can't get the point to sink in...

    One photographer has decided to make it his crusade to encourage the formation of a real-life mob to harass the employers of Thomas Hawk for his involvement in the Baio/Maisel as it were. the article is a cheap hit piece, but it's worth reading through the comments to ascertain the attitudes of many "real" photographers (whatever that means). My attempts at a rational discourse on the underlying issue-- the ridiculousness of the statutory damages-- proved impossible as I was attacked repeatedly for promoting a different point of view, and with one poster implying that he would "unmask" me (I wasn't really masked) in a vain attempt at intimidation. Not sure Hawk wants this to go too much attention, but hope Mike & the regular "freetards" here will pop over & read the discussion.

    http://www.jeremynicholl.com/blog/2011/07/04/how-stockbroker-andrew-peterson-aka-thomas-hawk-smeared-photographer-jay-maisel-in-andy-baio-copyright-row

    P.S. Where's my shout-out for submitting this issue (along with others, no doubt). I really need the XP to level up my character.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    jakerome ( profile ), 03 Jul, 2011 @ 12:39pm

    Yes!

    Just leveled up my internet character-- (a) comment of the week on Techdirt.

Next >>