The eejit 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (6384)

• On the post: Court: Fining Jammie Thomas $9,250 Per Song Infringed Motivates Creative Activity

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 12 Sep, 2012 @ 01:26am

  Re: if sharing is so bad

  Finity. Or rather, the lack of it.

• On the post: Court To Twitter: No Time For Appeal, Hand Over Info Or You're In Contempt

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 12 Sep, 2012 @ 01:15am

  Re:

  Well, with the advent of eink, it's still written, just on electronic paper.

• On the post: Is It Better Or Worse That GoDaddy's Massive Downtime Wasn't The Result Of A DDoS Attack?

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 12 Sep, 2012 @ 01:08am

  Re:

  You haven't seen some of the crazy shit that Sysadmins need to do sometimes to get things to work.

• On the post: Two Copywrongs Don't Make A Right, But We Still Need A Way To Combat False Takedown Notices

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 11:42am

  Re:

  You'd probably geta visit from the 4Chan Party Van for "Fear party making".

• On the post: Disney Claims House Of Mouse Built With Copyright, Ignores Public Domain Foundation

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:55am

  Re: Re: Re:

  No, it did do something for Disney - that's not in dispute. But the company saying that everything they did was soilely for copyright is misleading. It was founded on other people's ideas. The now-iconic Steamboat Willie was adapted from a 1920s comkic, IIRC.

• On the post: Disney Claims House Of Mouse Built With Copyright, Ignores Public Domain Foundation

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:52am

  Re: Re: Re: Toy Story

  Yep. It's remarkable just how much Pixar are responsible for in the modern age.

• On the post: Do We Really Want The UN In Charge Of Cybersecurity Standards?

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:50am

  Re: Re: Re:

  Why would you want laws against murder and theft? That would be silly!

• On the post: Disney Claims House Of Mouse Built With Copyright, Ignores Public Domain Foundation

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:49am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Well, yes. It also, however, displays the hypocrisy of some content holders: Disney made a talk that said one thing (that copyright was the reason behind the company's existence). But without tall the expenditure on producing and using works in the public domain, they profited from the domain.

• On the post: Disney Claims House Of Mouse Built With Copyright, Ignores Public Domain Foundation

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:46am

  Re:

  The reasoning for taking Song of the South out of being purchasable is down to some of the supposed messages within the film as being racist.
  
  See here for more information.
  
  So in that particular case, there was a reason for it not being available, at least in the US.

• On the post: Disney Claims House Of Mouse Built With Copyright, Ignores Public Domain Foundation

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:42am

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Of course it is! Just imagine the dreck they would have put out if they hadn't been able to steal from the Brothers Grimm so much!

• On the post: Two Copywrongs Don't Make A Right, But We Still Need A Way To Combat False Takedown Notices

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 09:41am

  Re: Bogusity

  Nope, they should just have all works they hold made PD, because the company wiull have provent hat they cannot be trusted to make a genuine notice.

• On the post: Industries Dependent On Copyright Exceptions Contribute $182 Billion To Australian Economy

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 05:46am

  Re: copyright

  ...you've never heard fo the Association Press?
  
  Or Warner Bros?
  
  Or Sky Broadcasting?

• On the post: Do We Really Want The UN In Charge Of Cybersecurity Standards?

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2012 @ 05:45am

  Re: No

  No, No, No, No
  No, no, no, no
  God NO
  GOD NO
  GOD NO!
  
  Yeah, it would take about 150 gajillion years before there'd be an actual plan so no. Around 3/4s of all security problems are down to human stupidity of one form or another.

• On the post: EU Telcos To UN Regulators: Divert More Money Our Way And No One's Internet Gets Hurt

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 09:23am

  Re: Democrats?

  No, just money-grabbing fuckwads. Not that you can tell the difference between a money-grabbing fuckwad and a politician most of the time anyway...

• On the post: White House Preparing Executive Order As A Stand-In For CISPA

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 07:39am

  Re:

  Dud, it's the government. IF they didn't ignore the people's wishes all the time, and got things done in a timely manner, it would STILL be claimed as a victory for the "FREE-MARKET!"

• On the post: Judge Says Sniffing Unencrypted WiFi Networks Is Not Wiretapping

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 07:38am

  Re: Secure by default

  Hobo with an iPad?

• On the post: White House Preparing Executive Order As A Stand-In For CISPA

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 07:37am

  Re: Re: Re: executive order

  Frankly, I'd prefer someone fiscally Keynesian, but that's about as popular in the US as a Satanist running for election.

• On the post: Russia (Yes, The Country) Looking To Enter The Tablet Market

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 06:06am

  Re:

  No, but it is a call to arms for the company claiming it against the hackers. "Come try hacking into this! WE think it's unhackable!"

• On the post: White House Preparing Executive Order As A Stand-In For CISPA

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 06:05am

  Re: executive order

  The Executive of the Government is making a Order that circumvents the typical lawmaking process.
  
  The closest analogy I can think of is to Sharia law and fatwas, which are religious edicts from the Islamic Council.
  
  So yes, this is NOT a good thing in this case, but it can be a useful tool used wisely.

• On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

  

  The eejit ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2012 @ 06:02am

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Not always. There's a genuine discussion here. However, your insistence that it is morally wrong, even if there is no-one willing to sell in a market, is not only asinine, but it's also bad business practice. If you're not capitalizing on every market, then you aren't performing to the best of your market's sustainability.
  
  That fact that there are a small minority who insist that there is nothing but "piracy apologism", with such eloquent quotes as "fuck off and die, you lying sack of shit", adds nothing to the debate.
  
  Let me assure you, there could have been a place for progressive IP laws. But that is not what's going on the the US and UK - you get treated worse for copyright infringement than you do for rape and grievous bodily harm. That's for linking to supposedly infringing content which has not been proven in a court of law without tainted evidence.
  
  For someone who insists that the rule of law is above all, you sure seem to have no concept of the history of IP, and copyrights in particular, where that laws always seem to be inadequate for a small minority who employ proven fraudsters, embezzlers and perjurers.

Next >>