Taken a small step further, if the slutty girl doesn't sleep with you, is that "exclusion"?
*rolls eyes*
Careful there, pal, all those straw men can be a fire hazard.
This guy days being bullied made him stronger. Maybe they want to make us weaker?
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/12/05/gay-teen-jonah-mowry-says-bullying-made-him-stronger/
Well, that's my problem then.
See above.
Also, make a profile with name, or I will. ;-)
Maybe I'm reading the wrong "Trollz for teh lulz" book, but mine explicitly states that if you don't use the exact preapproved phrases, it doesn't count.
I'm using the third edition.
-2 pts for not mentioning "broad brush".
-5 for not using the term "apologist"
-10 for not going for the obvious "for the children"
+ 25 for your name.
So, if I then upload the free song to tpb, have I committed copyright infringement? Am I lost potential sale?
What I mean to say is that, sure, copyright infringement might (might!) reduce potential sales, but it also has other potential benefits. So, it is also possible that it's a wash or maybe even a net positive.
I agreed with all your post until you stated as a fact that they make less profit.
Netflix doesn't create anything, it's simply in middle between producers and public, skimming off both.
How would you describe the record labels, with respect to the artists and the public?
What does happen is that they make less profit. Let's at least get real about that
You state this as a fact, when it's not even popular opinion. Citations/work?
1. Between you and me, those 7 words being banned by the FCC is not long for this world. Interesting side note: cable TV has no such restrictions, by law, but angry soccer moms make it a business decision to not use those words.
2. In times of high volume, text messages get lost or delayed here in America, where there is no censor overhead. If you're suggesting that adding a find and reject routine to a system that already fails won't make it more prone to fail, then you're ignorant.
3. I'm glad "woosh" isn't a banned word, or I wouldn't be able to snarkily explain that you've missed the entire point.
I want a story using all of the words on the list, using the smallest amount of total words.
Go.
"Just made mean comments at gov brownback and told him he sucked, in person #heblowsalot."
I'm usually pretty caught up on the lingo, but who, or what, is "heblow salot"?
/s
This is an already debunked logical fallacy. They don't have to react this way. No one is forcing them to fight piracy instead of working around, or with, it. Their mistakes belong only to them.
Aka collateral damage.
Proof that there are several all-you-can-eat music services that make piracy unneeded.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The logic error here is that child pornography is illegal, in and of itself. On the other hand, the music and movies and such are not, in and of themselves illegal. There is no "fair use" for child porn, no danger of suppressing free speech.
So, maybe I'm less than a third grader, but I can easily see a difference between the two.
As an aside: If you're cracking down on child porn sites by simply hijacking the domain name, you might as well not waste your time. The damage to some child has already been done at that point, and all the site blocking in the world won't stop it. The idea would be to prevent the CP from being made, not just from being viewed. So, to me, it seems to be a better idea to keep the sites up and catch the sickos uploading the videos.