Josh in CharlotteNC 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (2290) comment rss

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

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 15 Dec, 2011 @ 10:33pm

    Re: Collision

    looking to force SOPA through and make Hollywood happy.

    Hollywood will never be happy, at least until the internet is dead or turned into a locked down broadcast medium they control. If SOPA passes, we'll go through this all over again in a few years, with something that makes SOPA look moderate.

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

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 15 Dec, 2011 @ 10:28pm

    Re: Re:

    It's not all that clear that Google did anything morally wrong, even if what they did was technically illegal

    Since all the Canadian pharmacies were selling authentic name brand and generic drugs, at a lower cost so that those who could not otherwise afford life saving medicines could purchase them, Google was in fact morally correct. It's the US government that was (and still is) morally wrong by preventing or limiting access to those medicines.

  • 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 @ 12:29pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    and the bill to maintain the sky would be way lower than it is to maintain roads.

    Perhaps, but your flying car insurance will cost so much that you'll beg to go back to paying for roads. The reason flying cars are not workable for the foreseeable future is a human issue.

    It's not generally in use, and there is little movement towards using it.

    You're wrong about that. There has been tremendous movement in the past year or so to really get it working. It's like the transition from IPv4 to IPv6. There's so many things that can go wrong when you're changing one of the fundamental pieces of an incredibly complex system (the internet). So the prudent approach is to test, retest, and implement slowly, monitor, and make sure it works the way its supposed to before moving on to the next bit.

    I am confident that a modified DNSSEC style protocol will exist that will allow for local exclusions, while maintaining security.

    If you can give a detailed overview of exactly how that would work, even in theory, I'll listen. Otherwise you're just wildly speculating on something you know nothing about.

  • 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 @ 12:17pm

    Re: So when will DNSSEC be available?

    Why has it taken 16 years to implement a feature that sounds like it should be easy to implement?

    You might as well ask why its taken Microsoft the same amount of time to come out with an OS that both works well and is relatively secure. That sounds easy, right?

  • On the post: Megaupload Sues Universal Over Questionable Video Takedown, As Will.i.am Says He Sent Takedown Too

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2011 @ 11:00am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Please see Online Policy Group v. Diebold.

    While I agree that this doesn't happen anywhere near as often as it should, its mostly because no one contests them.

    MegaUpload has contested and sued UMG over its takedown request.

  • On the post: Megaupload Sues Universal Over Questionable Video Takedown, As Will.i.am Says He Sent Takedown Too

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2011 @ 10:51am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    So you want them to lie down and take it in the ass?

    So you want them to fight a completely unwinnable battle, as you pointed out yourself, in which they are wasting time, money, and the goodwill of everyone they even remotely interact with?

    To put it in a meme: "When fighting piracy, the only winning move is not to play."

    Or, you know, they could adapt reality and compete in the real market, and very likely make even more money than they used to under the old way.

  • On the post: Megaupload Sues Universal Over Questionable Video Takedown, As Will.i.am Says He Sent Takedown Too

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2011 @ 08:53am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    He can't, which is why he's ignoring that issue and keeps pivoting back to the talking points.

  • On the post: Megaupload Sues Universal Over Questionable Video Takedown, As Will.i.am Says He Sent Takedown Too

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2011 @ 08:51am

    Re: Re: Re:

    No matter what the labels did (legal action or nothing) they end up looking bad.

    They could look good by releasing a press statement that was along the lines of:

    "Hey everyone, we admit we screwed up. We didn't understand this internet thing until now. We'll stop suing our customers, stop treating our artists like crap, stop lobbying Congress for draconian laws and copyright extensions, and release some real services that are what our customers want and are reasonably priced."

    Oh, and then they have to go and do that stuff.

  • On the post: Megaupload Sues Universal Over Questionable Video Takedown, As Will.i.am Says He Sent Takedown Too

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2011 @ 08:27am

    Re:

    Will.I.Am may not be able to consent to being in the video,

    That's still a contractual issue between will.i.am and his label - will.i.am signed the contract with MegaUpload - and if his label is unhappy with that, it can sue will.i.am for breach of contract.

    will.i.am still does not own the copyright to the video, or any part of it. Which makes this a bogus takedown, and gets either him or his lawyer in trouble under the perjury clause of the DMCA.

  • On the post: Congressional Investigations Into Dajaz1.com Censorship Begin

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2011 @ 12:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I think that's normal for an ongoing criminal investigation, and I don't think it's a Due Process violation.

    I think you've gone completely off the rails there. How can there be secret court rulings that even the attorney representing Dajaz1 cannot see or talk to the judge about? I'll agree that in some narrow national security and espionage cases, secret rulings make some sense. But this is a copyright infringement case. There is zero chance of any physical harm to anyone, zero chance of national security secrets falling into the hands of a foreign government, and near zero chance that the defendant would flee the country.

  • On the post: Universal Music Issues Questionable Takedown On Megaupload Video That Featured Their Artists [Updated]

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 09 Dec, 2011 @ 09:56pm

    Re:

    Candidly, I suspect UMG may be looking over its contracts with these individuals for possible breaches of their terms.

    If one of the artists in the video violated their contract with UMG by creating something with another company, then the only legal option UMG has is to sue the artist for breach of contract, not issue false takedown notices to a third party about a video which they do not hold the copyright to.

  • On the post: Paul Vixie: SOPA/PIPA Would Be Good For My Business, But I'm Still Against It

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2011 @ 11:47pm

    Re:

    That isn't the intention. It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy, and the public's access to pirated materials.

    Well, then SOPA has already failed. Before the bill was even up for a debate in Congress, there was a massive public reaction against it. The public's view is well beyond "tipped" - it is overwhelmingly against increased effort to censor the pirates away.

    They can pay for it, or they can easily obtain it through pirate sites

    Yes, I can easily obtain it through pirate sites. You are absolutely wrong in that I can pay for it if I choose to. Please name for me just one single recently released movie from a major Hollywood studio that I can buy a quality, DRM-free, download in a convenient format at a reasonable price.

    Now, if you move 10 - 20% of the current pirates back to being legal consumers,

    Wait. You want to put tremendous regulatory burden on nearly every bit of the internet, and still not solve 90% of what you think is the piracy problem?

    Let's put some hypothetical numbers out there. Let's say that in the western world there are currently about 1 million hard core pirates who you'll never get to pay, and there are 20 million casual pirates who do it when its easy, but pay when its not. Now, your stated goal is to convert 4 million casuals into paying customers. Say you pass SOPA or something similar everywhere. Well, you got your 4 million, so time to celebrate, right? Nope. You've just converted 16 million into hard core pirates (plus the existing first 1 million) who actively tell their friends and family how to get around the blocks, and now there are 100 million casual pirates. Don't believe it'll happen? Look at the history of every time you stamped out one way to infringe, and how its successor became even more popular, easier to use, and harder to track than the last.

    But if it makes it harder for pirate sites to operate in the open, if it makes the pirate choice less palatable to consumers, then over time things change.

    Half right. Instead of trying to make pirate sites go underground (which has never worked in the history of the internet, by the way - in fact every time you've tried to stop it is has actually gotten easier), why don't you focus on making your product more palatable to consumers? It is easier. It is cheaper. There will be no collateral damage to the rest of the internet. It will make you more money. It will bring your customers back (and more than 10-20% of them).

    Why are you so against adapting to reality and actually giving your customers what they want?

  • On the post: Breaking News: Feds Falsely Censor Popular Blog For Over A Year, Deny All Due Process, Hide All Details…

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2011 @ 10:25am

    Re: Re:

    No, that's just the best he can do without marching orders.

    Notice how late any of the usual trolls were to this post?

  • On the post: Breaking News: Feds Falsely Censor Popular Blog For Over A Year, Deny All Due Process, Hide All Details…

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2011 @ 10:21am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sourcing

    Also, repeating an attorney's position as the gospel truth (especially without disclosing that that's what your doing) doesn't strike me as reasonable.

    If you support SOPA/PIPA, argue or lobby for any of the companies and interest groups that are for it, think the many debunked studies are reputable, then you have won the irony of the year award.

  • On the post: Breaking News: Feds Falsely Censor Popular Blog For Over A Year, Deny All Due Process, Hide All Details…

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2011 @ 10:15am

    Re: Re: This story needs to spread....

    Awww, man. I totally went there and couldn't buy any pitchforks or torches.

    I am sad.

  • On the post: MPAA Tries Its Hand At Comedy With A Top 10 List In Favor Of Censoring The Internet

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2011 @ 10:08am

    Re: You haven't explained what could replace copyright.

    You haven't explained what could replace copyright.

    I have not, and will not, read your comment. If your subject line sums it up, let me reply:

    Nothing.

    Nothing needs to replace copyright. Everyone, from ordinary people, to large companies, would be able to freely use infinitely reproducible content, ideas, and expressions. Content creators will be able to adapt and make money by selling scarcities, official versions, and hundreds of other ways which we cannot yet imagine without relying on a crutch.

  • On the post: Breaking News: Feds Falsely Censor Popular Blog For Over A Year, Deny All Due Process, Hide All Details…

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2011 @ 09:54am

    Re: Censorship and Seizure.

    or? Start the revolution.

    Sign me up.

  • On the post: Mythbusters Crew Accidentally Fire Cannonball Through Suburban Neighborhood… Quickly Start Deleting Tweets Of The Evidence

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2011 @ 05:09pm

    Re:

    Someone must have known next to nothing about firing cannonballs

    They've fired cannons and cannonballs on at least 5 previous episodes.

    They were firing the cannon at a bomb range.

    Why the hell do people live close enough to a bomb range for this to happen?

  • On the post: Supporters Of SOPA/PIPA Make Arguments That Make No Sense

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2011 @ 12:19am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @ Mike Masnick

    So many here seem to be so fixated on the "artists" that they overlook (perhaps even ignore) that it costs money to make a product, and there are far more people involved in the process than just the "artists", not to mention those nasty things that we call overhead costs (rent, insurance, utilities, equipment purchases/rentals, maintenance, etc.).

    We don't ignore those costs. In fact, we repeatedly point out how the internet has made them much lower. The same recording studio that 30 years ago would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars can now be done for a few thousand in someone's garage.

    After a while it becomes clear that the inevitable two sides to every story are not tolerated here.

    No, what isn't tolerated here is bullshit. If you're being deliberately misleading, or can't support your views with real evidence, expect to get called out on it. And there are almost never only two sides of a story. There are dozens of different sides on pretty much any copyright discussion here at Techdirt.

  • On the post: Why Adversarial Hearings Are Important: Rulings Change When The Other Side Is Heard

    Josh in CharlotteNC ( profile ), 06 Dec, 2011 @ 03:35pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Justice Delayed = Justice Denied

    Just because the judge got it wrong the first time does not mean he failed to do his job.

    If the judge is keeping up with what is happening all over in regards to these types of cases, then he clearly should have looked deeper or waited to rule until he had all the facts.

    He can only render rulings based on the evidence placed before him, and the evidence at the time, at least to him, pointed in favor of a TRO prior to a hearing on the merits.

    Thank you for proving the point.

    If you want to hold all people and all websites responsible for everything that happens on the internet, then the judge clearly screwed up for not keeping up with the relevant happenings in the law.

Next >>