The Infamous Joe 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1677)

• On the post: Just As Many Musicians Say File Sharing Helps Them As Those Who Say It Hurts

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 28 Jan, 2013 @ 09:01am

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Name one right that copyright grants an author that he can't do without copyright.
  
  Note: Avoid "rights" that take away someone else's right.

• On the post: Carmen Ortiz's Husband Criticizes Swartz Family For Suggesting Prosecution Of Their Son Contributed To His Suicide

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 16 Jan, 2013 @ 09:05am

  Re:

  However they should be held accountable because they played a fairly big role in putting a huge pressure upon Aaron and we can assume quite accurately that this was one of the factors that weighted in his decision to take his life.
  
  Held accountable how? What law would you charge them with?

• On the post: CNET Reporter Resigns Over CBS Interference In Dish CES Award

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 14 Jan, 2013 @ 11:59am

  Re: Re: Interesting!

  The Hopper: Some bigwig CEO doesn't want you to have it, so you know you need it.

• On the post: Court Gives Canadians More Time To Fight Copyright Troll Voltage

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 14 Jan, 2013 @ 11:29am

  It's aboot freedom?

  Every time I read an article about Canadian Copyright Trolls seeking mass IP addresses of ISP customers for allegedly downloading something illegally, I'm shocked that they have electricity in Canada.
  
  ;-)

• On the post: RIAA Lawyers Trying To Rewrite History Of Copyright Clause Through Shoddy Scholarship And Selective Quotation

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 20 Dec, 2012 @ 10:37am

  Re:

  Maybe I'm confused. How can it be a natural right if it requires a government for it to exist?
  
  Perhaps I don't understand what a natural right is, but I thought it was a right that needed no government to give it.

• On the post: NRA's Plan: If We Blame Video Games & Movies For Sandy Hook Massacre, Perhaps People Will Stop Blaming Guns

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 19 Dec, 2012 @ 10:07am

  Re: Re: As a general rule

  It's obvious that he means that we shouldn't make decisions when we're all emotionally polarized.
  
  Unless you knew that, and just wanted to dismiss his perfectly valid point.

• On the post: NRA's Plan: If We Blame Video Games & Movies For Sandy Hook Massacre, Perhaps People Will Stop Blaming Guns

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 19 Dec, 2012 @ 10:05am

  Re: A question

  Postal, and Postal 2?

• On the post: WIPO Celebrates Chinese Patent Explosion, Pretends That It's Innovation

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 17 Dec, 2012 @ 08:04am

  Re: Re:

  They also provide tools for protecting a market, and are especially useful for reigning in small agile innovative companies ...
  
  You don't say? Well, that sounds exactly like what we want! Something to slow down innovative companies!

• On the post: WIPO Celebrates Chinese Patent Explosion, Pretends That It's Innovation

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 17 Dec, 2012 @ 07:40am

  Holy Shit

  Move over, Religion! Intellectual Property is the new imaginary thing that people believe in without any data or critical thinking!

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2012 @ 05:52am

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

  can't legislate morality*
  
  Edit function for Christmas, Mike? Oh! Make it something you have to pay for, like the Crystal Ball thingamajig.

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2012 @ 05:46am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  That seems to be the general consensus. How do you feel about these fines, personally? (aka, not as a law student) It seems obvious to me that those fines weren't meant to exist in a world where copyright infringement is difficult to avoid; where an 8 year old can infringe on 1000's of works before breakfast for damn near no cost.
  
  I think there needs to be an exception for personal use-- anywhere the infringing files aren't being sold directly. I know that idea makes a copyright maximalist's head explode, but it seems to be the only option that makes any sense. (Keeping in mind that you can legislate morality. See: US Prohibition)
  
  If you want to make someone buy your non-scarce product instead of copying it from an unofficial source, you have to make them *want* to; you can't scare them into being a customer.

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2012 @ 05:35am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  You're thinking too transiently.
  
  Death. Any infraction, no matter how small, results in being put to death. There, no more crime!! /s

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 12:53pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  Right, but they're not asking for a hypothetical, are they? They're not saying "Well, if she was hit with the maximum, would it be constitutionally legal?" They're asking if there is a constitutional limit to the amount someone can be charged for copyright infringement. That's not hypothetical. They could very well say yes, but the amount be greater than what JT has to pay.
  
  I think they now know that JT was a bad case to be a champion, so they're trying to get whatever they can out of it, so when the next case goes to court maybe a little more sanity can be used when figuring these amounts.
  
  I think that's why they're asking their question, and not yours.

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 11:58am

  Re:

  I don't know, they might be asking the right question. If they asked your question, if the damages in this case exceeded the limit, it could be viewed that their answer could only apply to this case.
  
  If they ask if there's a limit at all, then it applies to everything, including this case.

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 09:53am

  Re: Re:

  You have proof she shared it with 10,000+ people, or are you a liar?

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 07:46am

  Re: Bizarre disconnect.

  You are progressing well-- congrats on that.
  
  The ad homs at the end ruin it, but at least you're coherent.
  
  Also, so-called piracy is a form of anti-corporatism.

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 07:43am

  Re:

  Says someone who arbitrarily made up the odds of being caught being 1/100,000.
  
  Where did that number come from? Like speeding, you're odds of being caught are quite high, if the police bother to enforce the law 100% of the time. Since they selectively enforce the law, you're odds appear to go up, but that's not because you're hiding it better, it's because they don't have the manpower to catch everyone.
  
  They can attempt to download everything on a torrent site and harvest every IP address, and then the odds of being caught go up dramatically.
  
  Put another way, if they hired one guy with a 20 year old computer on a dialup modem and told him he was the only guy trying to catch people infringing on copyright-- the odds of getting caught would be astronomical, and they could sue the one in a billion person for eleventy gazillion dollars for downloading one $1.29 song.

• On the post: Jammie Thomas Asks Supreme Court: How Much Is Too Much For Copyright Infringement?

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 07:35am

  Re:

  No. They know she shared it because they downloaded it from her. So, they've got her on the hook for 1 time.

• On the post: MPAA To USTR: More Shutdowns Like Megaupload, Please

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 06 Dec, 2012 @ 09:05am

  Re: Mike always sides with pirates. That's a fact.

  Android ROMs? That's what I used it for.

• On the post: Kim Dotcom Cleared To Pursue Case Against New Zealand For Illegal Spying

  

  The Infamous Joe ( profile ), 06 Dec, 2012 @ 08:50am

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

  Very well, since you expect me to believe you weren't mad or crazy when writing that mad, crazy post, I'll expect you to believe that I have never once met a psychology major that wasn't at least moderately bat-shit crazy. My theory is that deep down they know they're crazy, so they have a subconscious desire to know how "normal" people behave, so they can attempt to emulate it.
  
  You have reenforced my theory.
  
  Apple.

Next >>