Anon E. Mous’s Techdirt Profile


About Anon E. Mous

Anon E. Mous’s Comments comment rss

  • Mar 25th, 2015 @ 2:29am

    (untitled comment)

    When you are a public official and your position of the office you hold is the top official for that department, then you should bloody well assume that your are speaking on behalf of that office and it's policies.

    The mere fact that a reporter has questions pertaining to legal matters that may be of interest to the public and asks for comment is justified.

    The fact that she provided her cell number and her office numbers to the media is her own problem, so don't act like a child when the media calls to ask you something that you don't want to answer.

    The fact she is having a temper tantrum because she doesn't want to answer some question because she fells she will get ambushed is all part and parcel of life in politics, no one gets an easy ride.

    If she didn't want to answer, why not tell them to contact the media spokesperson for her office (if they have one ) or have her office address it in a press release, but to threaten harassment charges cause she doesn't want to answer on behalf of her office since she is the top dog their so to speak is a joke.

    Obviously she isn't very familiar with abuse of power that some politicians get in trouble for , which I think is where she is headed here. If she can not handle the heat then go get a job doing something else where your not in charge and your not the person who has to answer for your department.

  • Mar 19th, 2015 @ 1:13pm

    (untitled comment)

    Why some see this as the Trolls being allowed the keys to the city so to speak, I do not see it that way.

    Yes Voltage pictures can still move ahead and try to go after Canadian ISP customers with infringement settlement deamnds, but they would have to submit to the court the letter that the ISP's would pass on to the subscriber

    The Letter that Voltage wants to have the ISP's send out needs to be looked over by a judge from the Federal Court and the wording of the letter will have to meet with the Judges approval, if it does not, then Voltage will have to go back to the drawing board and re-submit another letter for approval.

    Voltage Pictures won't be able to get away with quoting the $150,000.00 maximum penalty under U.S. copyright law that they so love to scare U.S. victims of their sham litigation with.

    The Maximum $5,000.00 penalty under Canadian copyright law could be quoted but there are a host of other variables that the Federal Court has already said will come to play that could mean Voltage will get no where near that.

    Voltage Pictures also may have a problem on their hands with any ISP subscriber who decides to fight, it won't be as easy to run away from a defendant who chooses to fight the infringement notice

    So while Voltage Pictures may hail this as a victory, we have already seen where this is hollow. When infringement notices started going out and quoting U.S. copyright law, Canadians started getting on the horn to their politicians and ISP's and complaining loudly, and I expect that trend will continue.

    So while the trolls may see this as a go ahead, I believe the Federal Court has looked at the U.S. troll cases and decided that The trolls will not get an easy ride if they plot ahead with their plans to go after Canadians for copyright infringement

  • Mar 2nd, 2015 @ 10:59am

    (untitled comment)

    This exec from Rogers is crying because private VPN's have ate into a once very profitable segment of Rogers business.

    The whole reason private VPN's are doing so well is because of their pricing of which Robbers -er Rogers hasn't been and isn't that competitive price wise compared to other VPN services.

    I am sure Robbers would love to have private VPN services booted or shut down thru legislation. It would improve Robber's own VPN service as well as their version of Netflix called Shomi.

    Yes Robbers has more than an alternative motive here, Netflix has a good chunk of the Canadian market, so much so that Robbers launched Shomi and Bell launched Crave TV to compete with Netflix.

    Everyone knows there are people who use VPN's not only for private companies to allow their employees to work from home or a job site thru VPN's and tele conferencing, and private VPN's beat Robber's on their price and home users like VPN's for privacy and to avoid some of the country restrictions you will find with services like Netflix.

    The fact that Robbers is using copyright enforcement to whine about having VPN's abolished is beyond a joke. Rogers customers service much like Comcast sucks and they continually rank low in customer service for a reason.

    Rogers is a very profitable business at the expense of their customers, but they are their own worst enemy due to their pricing and the way they treat the customer.

    This guise of using copyright to get rid of competition that hurts their bottom line and just shows you how much they don't like nor have a desire to copmpete and are stuck to the monopolistic way they used to have over their customers

  • Feb 25th, 2015 @ 4:03am

    (untitled comment)

    Yeah cause there isn't enough commercials stuffed into a show's hour or half hour time slot that is annoying so they want to stuff in more.

    And they wonder why people like Netflix and online sources where you don't have to sit thru commercials.

    If you ever wonder why The Networks and big cable were against Dish's box that allowed you to skip commercials, this is why never mind how scared they were that it might come to set top boxes for Cable and Telco customers further eroding their revenues

  • Feb 25th, 2015 @ 3:37am

    (untitled comment)

    A conviction, get ready for law enforcement officials to chime in at what a travesty enacting this will be to Law Enforcement across the state.

    I can hear Law Enforcement protesting this and saying how this will hamper their efforts to fight crime and take away what has been a very beneficial tool to get criminals off the street and taking the profits produced by illegal activities away from criminals.

    Yes Law Enforcement will be crying the blues at the loss of the ability to take your shit without a Judge hearing the evidence that an actual crime and a judgement entered had taken place that would warrant seizure and forfeiture of assets, heaven forbid that a person should have rights enshrined in the constitution and be afforded those rights

  • Feb 25th, 2015 @ 3:17am

    (untitled comment)

    well no sense in breaking tradition now.

    Facebook & Privacy shouldn't even be in the same sentence considering Facebook's whole revenue is derived from mining peoples accounts and what they post, like and share.

    It has and always been about information and who will pay for it. Their is no privacy on Facebook, just the illusion of it.

  • Feb 20th, 2015 @ 10:11am

    (untitled comment)

    "Now, he's looking to make some money by using an algorithm to hunt down "substantially similar" text across multiple websites and serve demand letters to alleged copyright infringers. His new business is called Plfer"

    I think when he named this company, he missed an "i" in the name, shouldn't it be Pilfer, since that is what he is trying to do? Pilfer money from people.

  • Feb 10th, 2015 @ 2:34pm

    (untitled comment)

    Harry Schneider, IMDb’s lawyer, walked Hoang through her tax returns. Without coming out and saying it, he highlighted that Hoang didn’t make very much money from acting, and that she deducted a fair amount of expenses for the amount of money she made. For example, her acting income in 2010 was between $1000 and $2000, but she deducted amounts for hair and makeup ($987), shoes ($318.86) and miscellaneous expenses ($523). The implication was that Hoang's acting was more of a hobby and less of a serious occupation.


    And that is the death of her damages claim right there

  • Feb 10th, 2015 @ 1:04pm

    (untitled comment)

    Why do I have a feeling someone over at the DOJ is frantically trying to get this Cody Coll an offer letter to join the DOJ as soon as his studies are done.

  • Feb 9th, 2015 @ 3:40pm

    (untitled comment)

    Amazing how the U.S. Government's DOJ will flout even a judges ruling to get what they want. First Judge does his job and tells the DOJ point blank your request is to broad, ain't going to happen.

    Does the DOJ narrow their scope to follow the law? Nope, they just play spin the wheel and go to a different judge in a different jurisdiction to get what they want.

    It's painfully obvious how out of control law enforcement connected to the U.S. Government is and the tactics they will use to deceive the court and those who they are trying to get information from, all while misleading the courts and outright lying to Judges.

    And once again this is why if your a defendant, you will be hard pressed to get a fair trial when the DOJ outright leaves out things in disclosure and misleads the court to effect their case.

    Long gone are the days when you are innocent until proven guilty, now it's your guilty unless you can prove your innocence.

  • Feb 5th, 2015 @ 9:53pm

    (untitled comment)

    " In a criminal trial, the burden of proof is on the government. Defendants do not have to prove their innocence. Instead, the government must provide evidence to convince the jury of the defendant's guilt. "

    Yes this is what is supposed to take place, but it hasn't been like this for a long long time now. Now it's your guilty until you can prove your innocent.

    We have the U.S. Government and State prosecutors who routinely hide and fail to disclose how evidence was obtained, fail to provide full disclosure to defendants and their counsel, and Law Enforcement who right out mislead the court to get warrants for searches and surveillance.

    Their is no right to a fair trial anymore, the Government obliterated that years ago. Judge Rakoff knows this is becoming more prevalent and didn't like that the committee he was on to ignore what the DOJ didn't want coming to light.

    That just proves what most of us already know is that the deck is stacked against your from the start. It's amazing how people's rights are being eroded further and further.

  • Feb 4th, 2015 @ 5:44am


    Oh great thanks! Now Chris Dodd is going to be on the next flight out to the Kuerig plant to brainstorm with their product development team to figure out how to get this functionality into DVD Screeners

  • Feb 4th, 2015 @ 5:39am

    (untitled comment)

    When the wife and I were shopping she mentioned the new Keurig machines were on sale and thought we should upgrade. I told her about how Keurig is using DRM on this new machine.

    She said to me what's DRM? So I explained to her what DRM is and does and why Keurig is using it.

    Once I explained to her that her favorite cup's would not work in the machine because of DRM, the idea of upgrading our current machine went out the window.

  • Feb 4th, 2015 @ 1:41am

    (untitled comment)

    Someone wants to do the right thing for once, and that's a good thing, it's too bad others will only see this type of cooperation as a threat to the protection of having their revenue stream threatened.

    Let's hope this is the start of a growing trend.

  • Feb 4th, 2015 @ 1:35am

    (untitled comment)

    Another day a different government using it's spy agency to spy on foreign and domestic communications.

    With all revelations lately of what different governments around the world are doing to spy on citizens and non citizens of their respective countries, I would be of the belief that you may as well assume that where ever you go, count on any form of communication you use to be hoovered up in said countries dragnet.

    While I am sure they will say they are only looking to scoop up conversation of bad entities there is no way they can nor would they want to filter out communications of little billy and grandma discussing what he wants for his birthday.

    While I am sure said government will state they have no interest in those types of conversations, they aren't saying they won't be grabbing them either.

    It's just amazing now how the privacy we all thought we once had is almost non existent now, and these revelations just bring forward how much our right to privacy has been eroded and how the governments employing these methods will fight to keep their citizens from knowing the truth.

  • Jan 22nd, 2015 @ 1:43pm

    (untitled comment)

    I am amazed at how Darconian the IOC will go to make it seem that everyone wants the Olympics in there city, if you ever have seen the contractual language in an IOC agreement, you'd think the copyright trolls looked like amateurs compared to the IOC.

    The Olympics long ago stopped being about the sport and are about how much you will fork over to the IOC to have the privilege to host the Olympics in your city.

    I won't even get into all of the bribes that IOC officials take in during the selection process. Ever wonder what happens to all the money that a city gives the IOC or the money they make from networks to be an official broadcaster, or the money from merchandising?

    It doesn't go to the athletes, it doesn't go to countries that participate to help their sports programs and further the sport and to help the athletes.

    Nope that cash stays gets distributed to key officials in the IOC coffers. The IOC is crooked as they come in my opinion

  • Jan 21st, 2015 @ 10:45am

    (untitled comment)

    The TV Networks hate Dish Hopper because they fear what may come if Dish Hoppe is successful with those who buy the units so they don't have to sit thru crappy ad's to watch their shows.

    The Netwroks fear this will create a boomerang effect that if Dish Hopper is successful with those who buy it, that the success of it wiil move to a set top box for outside of Dish Network that could be used for T.V. service from Telco and Cable providers and diminish their ability in regards to rates they charge for advertising.

    The Networks will stop at nothing to make sure they hang on to what has been a very profitable revenue stream for them. Look for them to keep up the fight thru other avenues much like this one on the basis for copyright inringement.

  • Jan 20th, 2015 @ 5:29am


    I agree with you. I am also of the belief that like musical chairs they just shuffled else where so they can say, " we don't have that database "

    Now this makes me thing what other US. government agencies have a database like this? We know the NSA does, I would bet the CIA and FBI have one as well.

    The other thing I would like to know is how long have the had it and how are they hiding the funding for it? I have never seen mention of this in any budget that is set for the DEA.

    The fact that it does not come up in any budget documents means it's is either blended in with some other item or there is a separate fund set up.

    The other thing that I am wondering is how they got the authorization to collect and retain this data on an ongoing basis?

    I highly doubt a court allowed them to collect and retain data indefinitely.

  • Jan 16th, 2015 @ 10:41am

    (untitled comment)

    I like hearing the Copyright Trolls and their friendS at the MPAA & RIAA repeating the same old mantra of how copyright infringement is killing their business and plundering their profits.

    They just want to go back to the old day's where they controlled distribution and how you got the media they produced. They do not want to have to give anyone a cut of the profits.

    Before you had no choice but to get your media from sources where Hollywood controlled the distribution and they plain out f-ing hate that.

    Hollywood has poured a ton of money into the White House to get the rules shifted back their way to try and get the profits flowing back their way.

    When cassette tapes came out they said that copying would be the death of them, they said the same with VHS and Beta, and governments went and put takes on to that media to compensate them, and this has occurred every time technology has advanced and every time we have heard Hollywood say "woe is me".

    Copyright troll lawsuits are not about protection of their copyrighted work and brand, it isn't about protecting their works, it is about revenue generation and always has been.

    It has been about money and always will be about money, it's not about copyright enforcement, it is about revenue, and they see it as another avenue for revenue.

  • Jan 16th, 2015 @ 5:32am

    (untitled comment)

    Mean while back on Fantasy Island, Tattoo and Mr.Rourke ...

More comments from Anon E. Mous >>