Air is free
It is reasonable for the public to want their police forces to use some sort of critical judgment in the conduct of their duty.
For example, if a police officer's commander ordered him or her to open fire on group of kids in daycare, I would damn well hope they would tell that authority to go fuck themselves.
What the hell kind of mentality allowed the police to deem the arrest of this woman as appropriate response to her actions?
If all police officers must conduct themselves in this manner due to procedure, then we are better off eliminating the police on salaries and going with full robotic justice.. not even robocop.. just machines. After all just being human might allow for moral considerations, which would have no place in the legal system or its armed forces.
And I'm sure this case I'm spelling out is at least partially true... there no room for "interpretation" on the streets. This is why I fundamentally reject all laws defining "victimless crimes" as hostile to the public they are purported to serve.
I read a story the other day about a guy who was sentenced to life in prison just for "scratching an itch". Can you imagine that? What is this world coming to?
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that his "scratching" involved sex with underage children, but still...
try to give something away free. Then sell it online for $10. You'll notice which one gets a lot more interest, and it's the $10 one.
I agree with you that people tend to miss the value of something if it is "free". It is kind of analogous to the privileged teenager given a car outright by their parents -- everyone has met one of these.. you know the one that cracked up his car the first week he got it by crashing into a pole while doing donuts in a half-filled parking lot.
However I agree with Mike in that simply pricing something does not automatically convey value to that "thing". There still has to be a reason people want, or "need" to make the transaction, and then to get a return transaction they have to believe they got what they paid for.
Before the Internet, a newspaper represented access to information. These days, access to information just isn't the commodity it used to be on a piece by piece basis. It would some excellent journalism to be able to pull in enough subscriptions for an Internet service. That quality of reporting just doesn't exist in most rags, and charging for it is not going to make it look any less a turd than it is when held up to alternate sources.
Using MarksAngel's reasoning, yes.
I stand corrected. MarksAngel is wrong and you are right.
She was arrested for "treating a cold".
That makes all the difference and I now feel comfortable that the law and law enforcement worked to preserve the peace and protect average citizens.
Oppression is oppression. Legal or not. This is an attack on an average, harmless citizen and is inexcusable. The police, the prosecutor, and especially the legislators and corporate lobbyists involved in the creation of this farce of justice deserve to be lynched.
I'd say here actions were probably deliberate
When someone robs a bank to get mortgage money, they aren't arrested for "having a home and needing to make payments", they're arrested for "robbing a bank".
OK, so we have established that this author lived during a time when there was a "public domain".
I'm curious -- does anyone know if by breaking this drug-related law, is this woman is subject to having her rights suspended and her property auctioned off?
These cases of naked aggression by "law enforcement" against average, harmless people make me wonder if there truly is a "moral panic" impetus coming from the people driving this insanity. Or is the perpetuation of legal hostility to the general populace simply the fulfillment of a for-profit business model in public service.
In either case, we (the normal people) are the victims, and the suckers.
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kotos" -- The Simpsons, 1996
Everything Outside the Box Said
Any school found to have photocopied more than 3 times, that is to say one work three times, three works one time each, or one work once and another twice, should be disconnected from the power grid, that they may learn their lesson.
What should we do? Let these uneducated consumers continue to consume stolen information? And let's not mince words, by consuming stolen information they are, in fact, complicit midget thieves. Use of these photocopying devices in the consumer education system can bring nothing but evil, and all of these dubious thingamawhoppers should disconnected from the power grid.
Think of the uneducated midget consumers!
The only differences between schoolyard politics and grown-up politics that I can see is the money, and the propensity for children to call "bullshit" more often.
(Lily Allen's entry and quick exit from the copyright debate is also a palpable analogy to "real" politics)
How does one get the attention of someone outside of their 'clique'? How do we insert ourselves into a conversation between self-absorbed, self-important gibbering teenagers?
The only ground rule that seems to be apparent in the government clique is "money talks".
That means we're kind of screwed until someone can out earn the incumbent interest, or better, put them out of business... which they are trying to prevent.
I am struggling with why some believe that access by "lobbyists" (somewhat of a misnomer since most are corporate employees according the the USTR website) is problematic.
eternal darkness
A chilling supernatural weather system just moved into my cubicle. I was already old when I played that game, and it freaked me out. Good stuff (a little cumbersome later on.. but damn.. they really conveyed the environment well)
"Depends on what country they're in."
The above poster has major issues. His computer just requested the deadweight between the chair and the keyboard be removed.
Oops forgot to sign on. I'll claim the above mess of unsubstantiated opinion.
Re:
++
For pointing the absurdly humorous "catalyst" behind the absurdly humorous story.