Chris 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1771) comment rss

  • On the post: NY Stock Exchange Claims Trademark On Any Depiction Of Trading Floor, Threatens TPM

    Chris ( profile ), 27 May, 2011 @ 11:11am

    Re: Re: Re: The NYSE Has A Point

    You're talking about defamation, not trademark infringement. And your discussion "fair use" assumes that the picture in question is copyrighted by the NYSE, and therefore would require a defense by TPM.

  • On the post: Dow Jones Sues Texas; Says Taxing The Wall Street Journal Is A First Amendment Violation

    Chris ( profile ), 27 May, 2011 @ 10:56am

    Re: Re: Re: Taxes!

    Yeah, I'd hate to have clean water, clean air, safe neighborhoods, be rescued from a fire, or have safe roads that are in working condition, or let alone a military...

    I take it you're implying that taxes are the only way to have those?

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 11:27am

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

    Why do you feel *you* have the right to dictate to them how *they* should create or who *they* can choose to work with? That's *their choice*, not yours.

    Nobody has said differently, not even the person you're replying to. Artists can create what they want, choose to work with who they want, and release their content how they want.

    Telling someone that their particular method of accomplishing any of the above might not be the ideal method is not "anti-choice". You're pushing a total strawman.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 11:23am

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

    A lot of people want the labels to fail in retribution for their previous legal antics, but how many of them advocate the use of force (laws, firebombs, etc.) to do it?

    Your definition of "anti-choice" is rather unique.

  • On the post: The 18 Senators Who Approve Breaking The Internet To Protect Hollywood

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 10:55am

    Re:

    That "free lunch truck" is actually an NSA van, and the agents inside are currently sorting through your bank records and medical history trying to determine why you feel the need to post anonymously online.

    They say they're only doing it to fight copyright terrorism, of course, so you're probably okay.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 10:43am

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

    Why are you anti-choice?

    Not sure where you get this "anti-choice" thing from. I don't see anyone clamoring to outlaw labels, or prevent (through force) artists from signing up with labels.

    Artists are free to pursue whatever boneheaded strategy they want. If they go out of business because they didn't make the right decision, that's not "anti-choice", that's "reality".

    You could tell me that your new business venture involves digging holes in your backyard and then filling them back in, and I could tell you why that's probably a failure of a business model and why I would suggest you put your hole-digging abilities to a more profitable use, but it would be nonsensical to claim that my criticisms of your approach made me "anti-choice".

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 10:37am

    Re: Re: Re:

    People that take a product without paying, *are*.

    I would never take a product without paying for it. I might copy a configuration of bits from another person who volunteered them up for copying, however.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 10:35am

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

    What a charming person you must be in real life. Loved by so many, I'm sure.

    Anyone who has a philosophical disagreement with IP law is an unlovable troglodyte? Your "arguments" get more pathetic with every iteration.

    (And based on the tone of your responses in this thread, I think I'll just let everyone else be the judge of whether or not they'd rather have me around or you.)

  • On the post: TSA Lies About The Constitution In Defending Pat Downs

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 10:27am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You are all talking a load of BS

    Look at the health care measures alone

    The ones that are going to make healthcare cost more?

    he fact that he saved the financial system.

    You have an odd definition of "fact".

  • On the post: TSA Lies About The Constitution In Defending Pat Downs

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 10:26am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You are all talking a load of BS

    The fact that you parrot any misleading statistic the government puts out without critical thought does you no justice.

    Look at the methodology behind some of the numbers and you might be surprised about how they were reached.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 08:22am

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

    I'm sorry you have such hatred for artists

    Giving artists advice on how to stay relevant and continue to make money in the internet generation is "hate"? IP-trolls are all the same. "Change is hatred!"

    Artists and labels aren't going away.

    Agreed. I think that some labels are going away (the ones who can't adapt), but as Mike has frequently pointed out and as I have pointed out already in this very thread, there is still a role for labels in the music industry. Artists, of course, aren't going anywhere.

    And one way or another, when this is all straightened out, you will be paying if you want to consume.

    Most of my content is purchased, actually, but not because I have a moral duty to (I don't) or a legal duty to (I couldn't care less). I buy when it's most convenient to buy, and copy when it's most convenient to copy. If you want me to buy from you rather than copy from a tracker, cater to my desires as a consumer. Threatening me won't get me to buy your content, no matter what delusion allows you to pretend otherwise.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 07:35am

    Re: Re: Re:

    And the ever-more-draconian IP laws we see daily spring up fully-formed from a senator's desk? You're disingenuously trying to make it appear as if the industry is not the one sponsoring (read: bribing their way into) said legislation, and that they are merely disinterested bystanders, helpless to stop the police from kicking in doors and seizing domain names.

    No one here is buying it.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 07:30am

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

    You started with arguing the philosophy, and now you're arguing the law. That's how you know an IP maximalist is up against the wall in a discussion.

    "Copying is immoral!"
    "No it's not, for reasons X, Y, and Z."
    "Oh yeah? Well I can stop you from copying at the point of a gun!"

    Maybe, but you can make people do a lot of things by threatening them with a gun. Does that prove the morality of an action?

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 07:27am

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

    How much I spent (or claim to have spent) is completely irrelevant to the underlying philosophy.

    That's like making an airplane without wings and then claiming the law of gravity should be suspended for you personally because you spent millions on developing said aircraft, and if it doesn't fly you won't recoup. So what?

    It's not my responsibility to make your crappy business decision return a profit merely because you based your future revenue projections on the fairy tale of "complete cultural control". You don't have that, you won't have that, and any business model based on it is going to crash and burn like a plane without wings.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 07:18am

    Re:

    Why are you people so anti-choice? Yes, the internet provides a way to DIY if you choose, but labels and studios provide services and opportunities if you don't. Why are you trying to force everyone to work in the manner *you* think they should

    As Mike himself has stated many times, labels can be a very useful choice, provided the label understands the market and can bring added value to your work. What we object to here is police power being used to prop up business models via laws about imaginary property. That doesn't necessarily have anything to do with labels, other than the fact that they are usually the worst offenders in this regard. Labels could be relevant without relying on copyright.

  • On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong

    Chris ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 07:12am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You're saying you don't think an artist should have complete control over their own work?

    Once they release it, no. If I tell my friends a new joke I thought up, they absolutely have the right to go and tell it to other people, and I absolutely don't have the right to "control" how it spreads.

    Believing otherwise is "seriously messed up".

  • On the post: Feds Seize More Poker Sites

    Chris ( profile ), 24 May, 2011 @ 02:37pm

    Talk About Spurring On Innovation

    I imagine the number of online poker communities that deal exclusively in Bitcoins will increase in volume very shortly . . .

  • On the post: TSA Lies About The Constitution In Defending Pat Downs

    Chris ( profile ), 24 May, 2011 @ 06:56am

    Re: Re: Re: You are all talking a load of BS

    you seem to be drinking the Kool-aid of insane anti-governmentism

    Disliking the Patriot Act makes one insanely anti-government?

    Who claims to be neutral is just a too much of a coward to choose one or the other, it's as simple as that.

    I'm not neutral. I have a very specific set of beliefs, and neither of the two parties offers me anything to cheer for. In fact, I'd go so far as to say both parties are exactly the same. The stuff Democrats yelled about while Bush was in office are the same things they approve of now that Obama is the chosen puppet, and the stuff the Republicans were so proud of during the Bush administration are now the things they claim to hate about Obama. Republicans were all for Romney's disastrous healthcare plans until Obama suggested they take it countrywide, then suddenly they changed their tune. Democrats were all about transparency in government until Obama decided to be more secretive that Bush.

    It's all bullshit "Go team!" politics with not an ounce of intellectual honesty in it.

  • On the post: Why Operation In Our Sites Is Illegal And Needs To Be Fixed ASAP

    Chris ( profile ), 23 May, 2011 @ 02:43pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: A few extra questions

    Whether and how an IP creator chooses to distribute his or her creative work is entirely up to him or her.

    And everyone else online with that specific arrangement of bits. Give me a reason to come to you for that arrangement instead of someone else, and you're gold. Tell me that I have to come to you or else you'll send goons to my house to beat me up and I'll tell you to get lost instead.

  • On the post: Why Operation In Our Sites Is Illegal And Needs To Be Fixed ASAP

    Chris ( profile ), 23 May, 2011 @ 01:28pm

    Re: Re:

    but we also know from his writing how honest a person he really is(n't).

    Such as?

Next >>