Josh in CharlotteNC 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (2290) comment rss

  • On the post: It Is Time To Stop Pretending To Endorse The Copyright Monopoly

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 05 Jan, 2012 @ 12:43pm

    Re: Re: Re: Amen

    Joe, your well reasoned arguments have convinced me, but you're still a tool.

  • On the post: Hollywood Union Members Sign Petition Asking MPAA & Hollywood Unions To Stop Supporting PIPA/SOPA

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 03 Jan, 2012 @ 01:11pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    This prevents years of potentially unconstitutional prior restraint of protected speech by the government while the case is being tried.

    Need we point out Dajaz1?

  • On the post: Verizon Wireless: Paying Online Is More Convenient, So Now You Have To Pay $2 To Do So [Updated]

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 30 Dec, 2011 @ 01:02pm

    Re: Paper!

    and mail them (ye aulde) money order.

    You forgot the part of them charging to receive paper bills in the mail.

  • On the post: Goodwill And Hospitality Theft Continue To Drive Up The Cost Of The Holiday Season

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 30 Dec, 2011 @ 12:59pm

    Ripples

    You forgot ripple effects.

    Everyone will suffer if this hospitality piracy isn't stopped. Lost jobs at hotels from "pirate guests" staying in homes. Lost jobs at restaurants from "pirate guests" eating family meals around the dinner table.

    Just think of the advertising executive who works at the company that makes those Holiday Inn commercials. Won't someone think of the advertising executives?

  • On the post: US Box Office Revenue Finally Drops; But Not Because Of Infringement

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 30 Dec, 2011 @ 09:50am

    No choice

    6. Lack of choice. Instead, all the shopping center compounds seem to be showing the same few over-hyped disappointments.

    This. Even for those of us in metropolitan areas, there's not a large choice.

    There are 14 theaters with a total of 170 screens within a 30 minute drive of my house. Of those theaters, 7 are Regal Cinemas, 3 are AMC, 1 Cinemark, and 3 that are either independent or not owned by a well known national chain. There are 33 different movies playing, but 80% of the showtimes are the same 8 movies. It was even worse earlier in the week when my family went looking for something to see, and 90% of the showtimes were made up of only 6 titles.

    Just an example, this is a set of times for one movie. The first two are from a Regal and AMC, each 22 screens, a few miles away from each other. The next 3 are on the other side of the city, an AMC (24 screens), a Regal (14) and another AMC (14), again all very close to each other.

    -10:00am 11:30am 12:15 1:00 1:50 2:40 3:20 4:10 5:00 5:45 6:35 8:15 9:00
    -11:25am 12:05 12:50 1:40 2:25 3:05 3:50 4:35 5:20 6:45 7:35 9:05 9:45

    -9:55am 10:45am 11:30am 12:15 1:05 1:55 2:35 3:30 4:20 5:05 5:50 6:45 7:35 9:05 10:00
    -12:20 1:10 2:35 3:20 4:45 5:25 6:55 7:50 9:25 9:55
    -10:30am 11:20am 1:10 1:50 3:40 4:30 6:20 7:00 9:00

    I picked that movie because there's no 3D/IMAX or other special version of it. And its a kiddie movie, so the theaters have even cut out the usual 10:30-11:30 late showing. The second group has 34 showtimes of the same movie within about 12 hours in a 5 mile radius. If there was some difference in these theaters, I'd understand. But they all have the same prices, the same (crappy and overpriced) food, the same seating, the same quality of employees, and are completely indistinguishable from each other.

    If theaters and studios want to compete with the internet, Netflix, even 300 cable channels with 20 movie channel subscriptions, then give us some choice.

  • On the post: Shouldn't There Be Significant Punishment For Bogus Copyright Claims That Kill Companies?

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 29 Dec, 2011 @ 09:35pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Agree with all of that except #3. I have a problem with "potential income." That's the same kind of thought process that copyright owners use to claim such ridiculous "potential damages" against a supposed infringer. Don't stoop to their level - just force them to fight fair.

  • On the post: The Myth That SOPA & PIPA Will Stop Infringement By 'Educating' The Public

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 23 Dec, 2011 @ 10:23pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    but 90% of the internet is pro-piracy.

    A few responses. Choose whichever you like:

    1) Because there's no other way to get the content in a quick and convenient format.

    2) If 90% really is against copyright, then the law is wrong and needs to be changed.

    3) Proof that "education" is a completely useless waste of resources.

    4) Wow, that's a huge number of untapped customers waiting for the right service to come along. Why aren't the content industries trying to make billions of dollars by coming up with the right service? Why haven't their stockholders lynched them for their complete and utter failure?

  • On the post: Gibson Guitar & Others On SOPA Supporters List Say They Never Supported The Bill

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 23 Dec, 2011 @ 11:16am

    Re: Re: Re:

    I think they are being weenies, too weak to stand up for what they signed up for. They wanted this type of legislation... they said it.

    Unfortunately for your "side" some of these companies have actually realized the inherent danger of this draconian legislation. What remains to be seen is whether they are only responding to the public backlash, or have actually figured out that more imaginary property enforcement is a losing and wasteful proposition.

    If they are only responding to the public pressure, then yes, they are weenies. Hopefully they have figured out what reality is and are willing to stand up for it in the future.

    Either way, this is a watershed moment for SOPA - it is done, its goose is cooked, finished, etc. I can even hope it is a watershed moment for all of the imaginary property industry.

  • On the post: How SOPA Creates The Architecture For Much More Widespread Censorship

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 22 Dec, 2011 @ 07:23pm

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

    A "hosting company" that aggregates content, puts it together in a walled garden, and charges a fee to access it? They are making overt acts towards a goal.

    That may be the most ridiculous technobabble I have ever heard. Stop using words when you obviously have no idea what they mean.

  • On the post: SOPA Supporters Learning (Slowly) That Pissing Off Reddit Is A Bad Idea

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 22 Dec, 2011 @ 06:33pm

    Re: Re: Re: GoDaddy / Gibson

    It wouldn't surprise me if they just collected the names from some database and use it without asking.

    Shock.

    You mean the US CoC would knowingly and willfully use a company's trademark fraudulently?

    Sounds like under SOPA, they should have their domain seized, all their funds impounded, and held for a year without any due process.

  • On the post: RIAA's Response To Infringement Via Its IP Address… Is To Note Someone Else Did It

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2011 @ 08:16pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    And the RIAA couldn't necessarily get out being sued here by saying they didn't do it either. And why should the RIAA have cared if someone said it wasn't them? Could they prove it? Were they lying? I'm thinking of Tenenbaum and Thomas-Rasset.

    I'm thinking of Debbie Foster and Tanya Andersen.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records_v._Deborah_Foster
    "Instead of immediately dropping the case against Deborah Foster and suing those they believed were responsible for the alleged infringement, the plaintiffs amended the complaint to add her daughter Amanda Foster, while keeping Ms. Foster as a co-defendant. The RIAA told her that she was liable for any infringement regardless of whether she had shared or downloaded files herself because she was the registered owner of the account."

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/andersen-relentless-in-quest-to-nail-the-riaa.ars
    "But the central piece of Andersen's complaint is the RIAA's conduct in Atlantic v. Andersen. She says that the RIAA could have with very little effort discovered the true identity of "gotenkito@KaZaA," the P2P user observed by MediaSentry, but instead chose to pursue its case against her?despite having "actually already identified the real 'gotenkito'" over 10 months before dismissing the case against her."

  • On the post: RIAA Whines That Google Won't Let It Program Google's Search Algorithm

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2011 @ 12:52pm

    Re:

    Do they not recognize their own face when they look at it in the mirror?

    They don't have reflections.

  • On the post: RIAA Whines That Google Won't Let It Program Google's Search Algorithm

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2011 @ 12:46pm

    Re: Let's be reasonable.

    http://funpics.classicfun.ws/index.php/Funpics/You-Wouldn-t-Download-A-Car

  • On the post: Guy Who Uploaded Early Version Of Wolverine, Which Appears Not To Have Hurt Movie At All, Gets 1 Year In Jail

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2011 @ 08:09am

    Re: Re:

    So obviously "piracy apologist" is the shill term of the day. All I need is a "destroying jobs" and I've got a bingo this week.

  • On the post: Guy Who Uploaded Early Version Of Wolverine, Which Appears Not To Have Hurt Movie At All, Gets 1 Year In Jail

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2011 @ 08:04am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Couldn't have said it better myself.

    Personally, I don't think any form of sharing an infinitely copyable pattern of bits should be a crime. But if it is, then the punishment must fit the crime. Jail time, or civil penalties of millions of dollars, or denying someone their freedom of speech are nowhere near the realm of reasonable. The "victims" must be able to provethat significant harm was done. This is like jail time for a first time offender parking ticket.

  • On the post: Reuters Media Columnist Explains That SOPA/PIPA Are A 'Cure Worse Than The Disease'

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 20 Dec, 2011 @ 04:07pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    The difference would be that I am not "pro-free speech no matter what".

    So you want "partially free speech" then?

    Who gets to decide what is acceptable and what isn't?

  • On the post: Opinion Piece On CBS Says Chris Dodd Should Be Fired For His 'Intransigent' Position On SOPA/PIPA

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 20 Dec, 2011 @ 03:38pm

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

    Thankfully, the politicians are not generally swayed by noisy little groups, especially when they realize that what they are asking for is a complete breakdown of existing laws.

    Two words:

    Tea Party

  • On the post: Opinion Piece On CBS Says Chris Dodd Should Be Fired For His 'Intransigent' Position On SOPA/PIPA

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 19 Dec, 2011 @ 06:08pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Not the most reliable source.

    http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/08/24/zdnets-george-ou-exposed-as-ignorant-microsoft-shill-zoon/

  • On the post: CCIA Slams Congressional Representatives Who Unfairly Attack US Companies For Speaking Up Against SOPA

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 16 Dec, 2011 @ 04:35pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Many of the "pharmacies" were shell corporations that were fronts selling fake drugs.

    I distinctly remember when reading this original story that Google required the pharmacies that advertised to be part of a specific association that verified they were a legitimate pharmacy.

  • On the post: Former DHS Assistant Secretary Stewart Baker On SOPA 2.0: Still A Disaster For Cybersecurity

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 15 Dec, 2011 @ 10:57pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    However, any secure structure needs to allow for regional differences,

    That's new. Also, completely and utterly wrong, at least in the way I think you mean it. Because you know, I am a network technician, and I am in computer security at one of the largest banks in the country.

    Any country with any sort of filtering (I am thinking all of the middle east, much of Asia, some of Europe, etc) cannot use DNSSEC. That is a major strike against it.

    That is a tremendous benefit to it. DNSSEC is specifically designed not to allow anyone (be it a nation state or your 12 year old neighbor who has hacked your router) to break the trust chain between you and the authoritative DNS root servers. If you poke a hole in it to allow country XYZ to intercept or modify the communication between you and the DNS servers, it is by definition no longer secure.

    otherwise the system will never be truly secure and fully adopted.

    No system is ever "truly secure" nor is fully 100% adoption necessary for a determination of success. Not every risk can be perfectly mitigated. There will always be those who do not use standards and work out their own solutions. But those are not good reasons for intentionally designing something with gaping security holes.

Next >>