DJ 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (757)

• On the post: Wolverine, Box Office Results… And Piracy

  

  DJ ( profile ), 04 May, 2009 @ 12:49pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  It's, admittedly, not as good as Iron Man, but still far better than the Hulk and Daredevil; apparently Elektra was so bad that I've mentally blocked it's existence.

• On the post: Wolverine, Box Office Results… And Piracy

  

  DJ ( profile ), 04 May, 2009 @ 12:45pm

  Re:

  And Donald Trump lost money in some stocks last year when the market crashed. But he still ended up MAKING money in other stocks.
  
  Profit is profit. If the industry was actually coming out in the red, AND it was DIRECTLY because of "piracy" I'd agree with you, but they're not; and I'm living proof that just because there are leaks, doesn't mean that EVERYONE saw it.
  
  Also, movie theaters offer an environment that [most] home systems just can't compete with. So even if someone saw the "pirated" version, that doesn't mean that they ARE NOT going to see it in the theaters. It could even be argued that doing so actually HELPS the industry, because someone who wouldn't have gone to the theater, now wants to BECAUSE of the "pirated" version they saw.
  
  They're just bitching because their profit is (supposedly) not AS HIGH.

• On the post: Wolverine, Box Office Results… And Piracy

  

  DJ ( profile ), 04 May, 2009 @ 12:35pm

  Re: Re:

  "Go ahead and wait until after the credits roll. What you'll find is completely retarded on more levels than I can explain."
  
  Then you don't know who that character is (character's name withheld intentionally).
  
  I liked the movie. And that's all I'll say since this isn't a movie review site.

• On the post: Inducement Standard For Section 230 Could Put A Significant Chill On Innovation

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:42am

  Re:

  Some states allow you to re-sell the tickets, as long as you are not doing so within a certain distance from the original ticket booth; but Matt's right.

• On the post: Inducement Standard For Section 230 Could Put A Significant Chill On Innovation

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:39am

  Re: Re: Re: Delusions

  "it's the PRINTERS of the tickets"
  
  Well then isn't it really the manufacturers of the equipment that THOSE companies use who are to blame? Which, naturally leads us all the way back to Johannes Gutenberg.... Hell let's just sue the cavemen for writing on the fucking walls while we're at it. If those damn cavemen hadn't drawn on their walls, we wouldn't be scalping tickets on street corners in comfortable shoes, now would we?
  It's THEIR fault!

• On the post: Inducement Standard For Section 230 Could Put A Significant Chill On Innovation

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:34am

  Re: Foolish

  Some states actually DO prosecute. It's fucked up.

• On the post: Inducement Standard For Section 230 Could Put A Significant Chill On Innovation

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:32am

  Re:

  Common Sense, UNK-2009, RIP http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517354,00.html

• On the post: Hybrid Vehicles Are Quiet — Maybe Too Quiet, According To A Couple Of Lawmakers

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:21am

  Re: Noize

  True. Governmentally mandating a decibel MINIMUM makes no sense.
  The best solution is education. Educate the blind to properly use crosswalk buttons/seeing-eye dogs/whatever. Educate drivers to be more aware of pedestrians in general. It's a simple solution, the processes are already in place, and -- here's the clincher -- the government stays out of it.

• On the post: Hybrid Vehicles Are Quiet — Maybe Too Quiet, According To A Couple Of Lawmakers

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:15am

  Re:

  mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm baaaaacon

• On the post: Hybrid Vehicles Are Quiet — Maybe Too Quiet, According To A Couple Of Lawmakers

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:13am

  Re: Re: Custom Noises

  We found them!

• On the post: Hybrid Vehicles Are Quiet — Maybe Too Quiet, According To A Couple Of Lawmakers

  

  DJ ( profile ), 01 May, 2009 @ 11:10am

  Re:

  Didn't your mother teach you to look both ways...?
  The topic is keeping blind people safe, not well-seeing joggers.

• On the post: Minnesota Is The Latest State To Try To Force ISPs To Block Gambling Sites

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 03:42pm

  Re:

  "...there are so many ways for it to be circumvented." What?! NO!! Government control is absolute!

• On the post: Minnesota Is The Latest State To Try To Force ISPs To Block Gambling Sites

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 03:39pm

  Re: Re: Good law?

  "[If] that law still has the common backing of the people...", AND it is considered, by the highest appropriate court, to be "just", then NOBODY has an argument; regardless of how valid you may THINK your argument might be.
  
  So the question here is twofold:
  1)Does this law that MN is trying to pass have the common backing of the citizens of MINNESOTA (NO OTHER STATE MATTERS)?
  2)Is this law considered, by the highest appropriate MINNESOTA STATE court, to be "just"?
  
  If either answer is "No", then (and no sooner) it needs to be addressed BY THE PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA (catch the theme yet?)

• On the post: Get Overly Aggressive With Your Trademark… And Watch Your Reputation Fall

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 01:41pm

  Re:

  You're not THE Zero Cool are you?

• On the post: Get Overly Aggressive With Your Trademark… And Watch Your Reputation Fall

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 01:38pm

  Re: Actually, Jeffers' reputation isn't in that much trouble.

  depends on how/where you land.... (sorry "J")

• On the post: Get Overly Aggressive With Your Trademark… And Watch Your Reputation Fall

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 01:37pm

  Re: Re: And this is why I stay the hell away from reviews.

  I tell you what!

• On the post: Get Overly Aggressive With Your Trademark… And Watch Your Reputation Fall

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 01:35pm

  Re: Hmm

  Lawsuit-five!

• On the post: A Look Back At The History Of The Word 'Pirate'

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 12:42pm

  Re:

  It's not so much that they'd be ok with it, but more that they'd be too afraid to do anything about it.

• On the post: A Look Back At The History Of The Word 'Pirate'

  

  DJ ( profile ), 30 Apr, 2009 @ 11:47am

  Re: Re: And?

  "A copyright is a government granted monopoly."
  
  Ummm....no.
  Mono: prefix effectively equating to "there's only one"
  Poly: derived from "polis", which is greek for city.
  
  So I understand the confusion. However, a copyright is the [government granted] exclusive right to make copies, license, and otherwise exploit a literary, musical, or artistic work, whether printed, audio, video, etc. (dictionary definition).
  
  While on the surface one might think the two are synonomous, there are not. A monopoly --in business-- is where a company or product is THE ONLY choice for consumers; whereas you may have MANY companies or products which offer similar services, etc., each of which has a copyrighted symbol or whatever.
  
  If you're going to accuse people of improperly generalizing terms, don't do it yourself.

• On the post: Movie Critic To Movie Industry: Wake Up, Start Giving Consumers What They Want

  

  DJ ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2009 @ 03:45pm

  Re:

  "...you can still view, hold, smell, etc..."
  
  If you steal my identity, it's still mine, you're just using it without authorization. So, to a degree, I understand their point. If it's against the law (aka illegal), there's no gray area; it's illegal, end of story.
  
  The problem is the fact that it IS illegal. Like King said, it's an industry problem. If the industry changes what they allow, then the law can stay the same and everyone moves on.
  
  Back in the day, when a kid jumped over your white picket fence because it was a shortcut to the ball field, the worst you did was yell at him. If he kept it up YOU made a change to make both of you happy.
  In the 80's/90's, the fist time that kid jumped the fence, you sued him for assault on helpless lifeforms (grass), and then you sued the parents for negligence.
  Nowadays you sue the fence manufacturer for not making the fence high enough, and the painter for not using scuff-proof paint, and the contractor for not recommending chain-link.........

Next >>