Terry Hart 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (59)

• On the post: The 19 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 18 Nov, 2010 @ 09:21pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: COICA is not Censoring the internet

  There is due process *for some* parts of the bill, not for all.
  
  What parts are lacking due process?
  
  Furthermore, even the process you describe above almost certainly violates the First Amendment and the concept of "prior restraint" in that it takes down an entire website, rather than narrowly targeting specifically infringing works.
  
  You may want to look up the meaning of "prior." A "prior restraint" stops speech before it is made. And copyright infringement is not protected by the First Amendment. This bill is limited to domains where the entire site is dedicated to infringement.
  
  Determination, not trial. I know you know that, but it's not clear from the way you stated it.
  
  A determination as a result of a trial.

• On the post: The 19 Senators Who Voted To Censor The Internet

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 18 Nov, 2010 @ 02:12pm

  Re: Re: COICA is not Censoring the internet

  There is due process. The AG has to serve notice to the person who registered the site and serve notice by publication when it initiates the in rem proceeding. Then, it has to go through court, where anyone with an interest in the domain name can make an appearance. The bill also provides for an administrative appeal procedure.
  
  Only after a judicial determination can the domain name be seized or an injunction be issued.

• On the post: The Day The WSJ Attributed My Quote To Someone Else

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2010 @ 05:33pm

  Re: Re:

  Sorry, I hadn't meant to imply that the mistake was yours - indeed, a quick google search shows that the large majority of sites hadn't noted the follow-up correction.

• On the post: The Day The WSJ Attributed My Quote To Someone Else

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2010 @ 01:24pm

  Cool. This seems like a good time to point out that you need to update your story on Valdosta University, as the article stating that the school was going to report P2P users to the police was entirely incorrect. :)

• On the post: Judge Orders Limewire To Shut Down; Limewire Pretends It Can Still Exist

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 28 Oct, 2010 @ 03:02am

  Re: Re: Sorry Mike

  What creator rights are you for, Mike?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 04:13am

  Re: Re:

  All those examples exist, so how did copyright stifle them?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 02:59am

  It's "assumed" that authors do not create value in a vaccuum. Is there less creation now then at some time before? Are musicians making less than before? Is the movie industry making less than before? How has increased copyright duration effected this? Has there been a noticeable dropoff in creativity since the CTEA? Have we seen less new works, or less revenues since the Sonny Bono Act?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 01:23am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Examples

  Why would you want to?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 12:38am

  Re: Re: Examples

  You said Disney refuses to let other people make new works from their own works.
  
  It's not a legal trick to ask you to provide an example. It's simple logic: if you say x, the burden is on you to provide evidence of x.

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 12:30am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Examples

  You agree that creativity stopped when Disney created Mickey Mouse?
  
  I can name plenty of speech in the last 70 years that Disney hasn't prevented.
  
  Creators have managed to get around the troubling "Mickey Mouse" problem. Kurt Vonnegut did it; George Lucas did it; Bob Dylan did it.

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2010 @ 12:24am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Examples

  What's your point? Can you provide evidence that Disney lobbied for this law for copyright reasons?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2010 @ 11:16pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Examples

  According to one of the sources in the Wikipedia article, "Disney would not have lost the right to use Mickey Mouse, would not have lost any rights in the modern Mickey Mouse, and would not have lost any of its trademark rights to control the commercial use Mickey Mouse."
  
  Do you have another example?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2010 @ 11:09pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Examples

  That article doesn't name one piece of litigation by Disney; try again.

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2010 @ 10:40pm

  Re: Re: Examples

  If they are the single most litigious company in existence, you should be able to name at least one example of litigation.

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2010 @ 10:37pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Examples

  Is it? If it was stupid, I'd expect one example to be mentioned.

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2010 @ 10:04pm

  Re: Re: Examples

  That's gotta be rough for creators. I mean, you can't make a story with Mickey Mouse, what else is really left in the world?

• On the post: Authors Do Not Create Content In A Vacuum… So It's Too Bad Copyright Often Pretends They Do

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2010 @ 09:28pm

  Examples

  What are some examples where Disney has refused to let others build off their works?

• On the post: Would Copyright Work Better If It Was Treated More Like Property?

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 16 Oct, 2010 @ 02:51am

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

  First of all, there's a distinction between "real property" and "personal property". "Real property" is land. Second of all, if you're only talking about tangible property, that's great, but there's no such distinction at law, and hasn't been for hundreds of years.
  
  Second of all, tenure and licenses are most certainly treated as property in certain contexts. You're mistaken in that "property" must mean the same thing in every context it's applied.
  
  Finally, "you cannot plug the analog hole" is flawed, if by that you mean "we shouldn't recognize property rights in something that can be accessed by defeating limits on that access." Every safe can be cracked, every lock can be broken. But we still recognize the property relationship between the 'things' under the lock and the person who controls the lock. It is no different conceptually from recognizing the property interest between the thing protected by 'DRM' and the person who made the DRM.

• On the post: Would Copyright Work Better If It Was Treated More Like Property?

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 16 Oct, 2010 @ 12:32am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  There's plenty of property that can't be possessed: future interests, security interests, commercial paper, financial instruments like stocks and bonds, etc.
  
  Within the substantive due process realm, there are intangibles which can't be possessed that are certainly treated as property interests: tenure, certain licenses, etc.
  
  "The fact that X can't be possessed so it can't be treated as property" is an idea that hasn't had favor for hundreds of years.

• On the post: Would Copyright Work Better If It Was Treated More Like Property?

  

  Terry Hart ( profile ), 15 Oct, 2010 @ 09:57pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  "Intellectual property" isn't kept in the head either; it's kept in tangible copies of the expressive work.
  
  The rights to intellectual property don't concern possession ; they concern reproduction, distribution, public performance, etc.
  
  The idea that one can "possess" intellectual property is neither here nor there.

Next >>