Bnesaladur 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (75) comment rss

  • On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 23 May, 2011 @ 05:26pm

    Re: YouTube

    This is exactly the kind of thing that pisses me off. Howard perhaps you should stop infringing on music you created yourself and have not sold the rights too. Its against the law apparently. WTF has it come too.

  • On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 23 May, 2011 @ 05:26pm

    Re: YouTube

    This is exactly the kind of thing that pisses me off. Howard perhaps you should stop infringing on music you created yourself and have not sold the rights too. Its against the law apparently. WTF has it come too.

  • On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 23 May, 2011 @ 11:16am

    Re:

    First off, while I do disagree with you on some level I appreciate a argument that both sides can express their opinions without throwing around insults as their primary argument. I think this was a well written post and you are right, both sides have been spending a lot of time tossing around criticisms that seem hardly relevant and in cases such as the MPAA guy being called a child molester, probably completely made up (and if it isn't it is still not relevant to the argument at hand.) On behalf of those on my side who don't post but agree with me, I still hold my view but apologize for any lies and excessive insults, realistically some will come out but we can at least try to be civil otherwise we get nowhere, used from the people in my camp.

    Again it is true too much diatribe goes before the decision makers. As for infringing, my personal opinion is as follows. People who create products should be compensated thus; however, for one, attempts to hinder technology can be counter productive as well. For instance, laws have been pushed to ban torrents and that is simply a bad idea. Many legitimate uses for torrents exist, for example World of Warcraft updates, although I do not play the game it does have a large player base. For myself I need torrents for any large download or I simply can not download it, for example Open Office and any linux distro, both of which are distributed free of charge.

    Secondly if a problem is occurring with the current system one can look at it two ways, spend lots of money on lawyers to fight the problem or look at ways to adapt so the problem works in your favor. For example, I know a guy in a band and they post download links to all their songs and lyrics on their website. It has encouraged people to try their stuff and it works for them. People are willing to give money to things they feel are worthy of it. That is the basis of fund raising. Instead of arguing that they shouldn't have to fund raise consider that any time you go to work you are fund raising for yourself, if you are not worth the money you are demanding you will not get paid. In short, quality of the products are declining while costs of the products and quantity of products are rising, all this in a declined economy. The math does not add up.

    Something has to be done to help ensure that the creators of the products get paid but something also has to be done to ensure it is a good solution for all parties involved, including the purchaser, current laws/constitutional rights, and the technological backbone supporting the whole structure. Any law has to take the whole picture into account. I simply do not feel that is the case, I think both sides have major and minor proponents ignoring certain aspects. I also feel that the average citizen is being largely ignored by their governments in favor of major corporations bottom line. I think for most people that is one of the biggest problems.

    As for the definition of infringing, it is not stealing, it is a breach of contract. Theft is larceny, which is different. But both are illegal. Stop trying to convince people otherwise and focus more on showing people how infringement hurts people, and please try and keep it realistic if your side will. I would also like contracts that are simple for the average consumer to read and understand.

    Thanks Buck Lateral for your time, I expect a intense rebuttal ;)
    Take care,

    Bnesaladur

  • On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 22 May, 2011 @ 06:03pm

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

    I would suggest, in the future, forget directing insults at me as I have yet to find any insult that fails to make me laugh. It sort of seems counter productive on your part. If you feel you want to waste time directing your anger issues at me, that is fine, as I said I think its funny. I just feel you should probably devote more effort to coming up with a solid response versus verbal attacks that really just make everyone here think you are trying to over compensate for personal issues.

    As for whether or not I get insulted, I really do not care either way. I am just trying to offer you some constructive criticism and a view into how I think you are perceived as a result of your actions.

    On the other hand, if this is just a tactic to make people think those who support the PROTECT IP laws are ignorant and throw insults around as a cover, nice strategy. It is working.

  • On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 22 May, 2011 @ 02:26pm

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

    Dear Mr. Buck Lateral,

    You have the right to make your views known and I do not contest that right, however, please keep in mind you lose credibility when you resort to cursing and/or making fun of people you do not agree with. You may think you are a defender of justice but this type of action is synonymous with school yard bullying. In the future I recommend you take this into consideration before clicking submit. Thank you for your time and have a good day.

    Bnesaladur

  • On the post: Gene Weingarten Shows How To Respond To Bogus Trademark Threats: Stetson(R) Hats Suck

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 22 May, 2011 @ 01:05pm

    Re: Re: Re: Stetson's are cool

    I wear a Fez now! Fezzes are cool!

    Gotta love the reference to the Doctor. I bet the Doctor doesn't get his shirt in a knot over little r's in circles.

  • On the post: Reminder To Parents: Online Kid Filters Don't Really Block All That Much

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 18 Jan, 2011 @ 04:43pm

    Parents should also realize filters are easy to bypass

    While my little bro was in school he was supposed to do internet research into a assigned topic. Of course the filters are set to really strict and he couldn't look up anything related. I can't remember what it was but needless to say, it shouldn't have been blocked. I think it took a day, one day, and we had figured out a simple way to completely bypass the entire system. Sure they don't do the entire job, but in this case it was easily made to not block anything at all, and that without admin access.

  • On the post: Sony Deletes Feature On PS3's; You Don't Own What You Thought You Bought

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 15 Jul, 2010 @ 08:38pm

    ImaFish, Im late but your wrong

    Ima Fish, I see your point of view but your continually stating that SONY doesnt have to add functionality but they do. Then you seem to be stating this gives them the right to remove functionality. Have you actually thought about this?

    Consider this, a company makes a product, say SONY with their PS3 or Toyota with their cars. Now consider its broken, bad programming or brakes that fail, it is the responsibility of said company to fix the problems. Failure to do so results in severely damaged credibility and potential lawsuits.

    Now lets consider a company that makes a product, say a PS3 or an XBOX. Perhaps one company keeps it up with new features and the other fails to do so. Any guesses which will die and which will thrive? The one which adapts and expands will thrive, the one which ignores its users will die.

    Finally let us consider a product which is marketed as one thing and then the buyer discovers it is another. We call this false advertising. Removing the feature against the will of the buyer would be considered vandalism. Forcing the buyer to remove the feature, by whatever means, including the one used in 3.21, is blackmail.

    Do not think your schooling makes you right, and do not consider your apparent weak middle of the road approach makes you right either. What has been done is wrong. It is wrong not because I want this feature. It is wrong simply because it is wrong. Because this isn't fixing a problem, it is false advertising, vandalism and blackmail.

    If SONY doesn't want to support this feature, fine. If SONY doesn't want to continue this feature, changes its advertising and removes it, fine. Systems with it already, however, should not have it removed.

  • On the post: AP Convinces Newspaper That Watermark Will Stop Mythical Evil Copiers

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2009 @ 10:15am

    "Honestly, I'm still trying to figure out who believes this myth that copying news content is some massive problem." - Mike Masnick

    I am gonna go ahead and say the AP, most major news conglomerates, probably a fair share of lobbyist and perhaps some smaller groups. ;)

  • On the post: Prosecutors Subpoena Tons Of Info On Student Journalists Who Provided Information To Reopen Murder Case

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2009 @ 10:11am

    I would firstly find this offensive, as stated why does this matter. Secondly, however, I would not be intimidated. I would have the state's Attorney counter subpoena a list of all cases that resulted in a guilty verdict of all the Prosecution Attorneys. I could gain this by other means and still would but this puts up a fight. I would then take this list and begin investigating every one. Hopefully more errors would be uncovered but even if they weren't it would be irrelevant. The fact that every case you were involved in was under investigation should be enough to shut them up. If they tried more lawsuits Im bulletproof. This is allowed. Just make sure I break no laws in the process.

  • On the post: Monster Energy Drink Hires Trademark Bully To Go After Beverage Review Site

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2009 @ 12:43am

    IDK, to me this shouts "HEY WE ARE GOING BANKRUPT SOON! SELL OUR STOCKS!" I think if you cant get by selling your product, you sue people for weird stuff. Record labels suing dead people for infringement / record labels having market and money issues. See where I am going with this.

    STOCK TIP: Sell Hansen's/Monster Energy

  • On the post: UK Parliamentary Group Blames Entertainment Industry For File Sharing Problem, Opposes Kicking People Off The Internet

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2009 @ 12:33am

    HOPE IN OUR GOVERNMENT! //////

    WOW! A emotion/feeling I thought was completely lost.

    To the 'All Party Parliamentary Communications Group' of the United Kingdom, I thank you for realizing that bowing to the media is not the way to go. Reason can perhaps still prevail.

    Kudos, I speak for a a lot of people when I say thank you once again.

  • On the post: Will Political Ads On Google Need To Include: 'This Ad Paid For By…

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2009 @ 12:29am

    If I was him I would not really care if my ad cost 250 bucks more. The amount of coverage makes it worth it. I know people ignore ads online a lot but he took it out hopefully knowing that. Good investment on his part I think. $250 bones, that makes me laugh.

  • On the post: Comes With Music… But No One Cares

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2009 @ 12:25am

    That is funny. I am sorry to hear Nokia is getting hurt on this but I think it is worth it to see Big Media getting their crap thrown back at them. You know how it will get spun though, It must be Nokia's fault some how, maybe we can get money out of them for hurting our music industry.

    We are losing profits from this, see here on this line my four year old drew on some graph paper? Yeah the line under the red thing that looks like a house? No, ignore the yellow thing that looks like a sun and the brown thing that looks like a horse. Those are highlights. Its the green thing that looks like a hill we are worried about.

  • On the post: Anti-File Sharing Propaganda Back To Focusing On That Horrible Malware You'll Get

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 15 Oct, 2009 @ 07:34am

    Oh come on Mike. Do you even remember those comic books? When I was a kid I think they were about dental floss. The school picks a day and hands them out to everyone who is breathing and in the school. Sounds like an amazing plan to indoctrinate anyone right? The only problem is NOT ONE KID reads them. Personally I burnt them. I lived on a farm, we had some people over or didnt and cooked hotdogs over the fire started by the comic. Most kids just threw theirs on the ground outside. They gotta know it will happen but instead of doing anything productive they just contributed to littering. No attempt was made to curb it or clean it after. All their doing is giving some garbage to New Zealand.

  • On the post: Court Says No To Feds Attempt To Delay Handing Over Lobbying Info On Telco Immunity

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 14 Oct, 2009 @ 07:46am

    You know what would be funny? Hold the president in Contempt of Court and have him arrested. See what happens, if the WhiteHouse is playing that game, why not play it back.
    You know the beauty of Contempt? The judge can hold you indefinitely, but usually only holds for no more than 30 days. Sorta like the crap that the White House did to get themselves here in the first place.

  • On the post: What's Illegal About Using Twitter To Organize Protests?

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2009 @ 04:26pm

    What's illegal about organizing protesters?

    Doing it online.

    Something must be copyrighted, some patent infringed, a trademark infringed or perhaps someone got bullied a bit. Please save us from hurting ourselves because some heartless #$@ is insulting our sensitivities. We must be losing money too because of this. Help me!

    This protest against copyright is copyrighted.

  • On the post: Creative Web Destruction: Sites Go Away

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2009 @ 04:20pm

    Or people concerned about things like this could start their own website and link to it where necessary. Also there is this fabulous thing called the archives.

    But who cares, Geocities was so useless when looking for anything, I am not sad to see it go. Forever any site that linked to it for some information or other got the inevitable, Geocities specific,page not found errors, pissed me off.

  • On the post: Professors Claiming Copyright Over Their Lectures

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2009 @ 09:45am

    Copyrighability is a interesting word... Now to my comment

    If the two parts are separate, individual copyrights over the notes AND the lecture, are not the notes the copyright of the student? If so, how long before students sue each other for having the same notes? Copying notes off the guy in front of you could lead to massive University/College costs. So far it hasn't though because either the students havent realized this yet, or more likely, they aren't @$$holes.

  • On the post: California Court: Only Reveal Anonymous Commenters If They're The People This Guy Thinks They Are

    Bnesaladur ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2009 @ 12:38pm

    If the Third Party were a private investigation group with the authority provided by law to gain a warrant than perhaps this might work. Some issues do arise however.

    First: Getting the proper laws and organizations in place.
    This could take quite some time. Is the lawsuit willing to wait?

    Second: Who is in charge of ensuring they do not get out of hand?
    A group like this could be used instead of lawsuits to gain immediate access to ISP's and Identities, providing a loophole to needing proper working of law in regards to the internet.

    Third: How far does their authority extend?
    If the ISp is out of state can they have jurisdiction? If so that is worrisome all the more.

    Forth: How many Identities are they allowed to provide and once they try are they allowed to try again?
    If they are allowed unlimited or even large amounts of Identities, this part of the idea is pointless as mentioned earlier. Multiple attempts allowed is essentially the same thing.

    Fifth: Once information has been gathered what is done with it?
    A firm is hired, they gather an ISP, the Identities match, then what? All that is handed back over?
    I think they should be required to give up no more than the Identity and that only in front of a judge.
    A firm is hired, they gather an ISP, the Identities DO NOT match, then what? NOTHING SHOULD BE GIVEN BACK EXCEPT NO RESULTS AND ALL INFORMATION PERTAINING TO ISP'S AND IDENTITIES GAINED DESTROYED. THE LIST PROVIDED FROM THE HIRING SOURCE THEN HANDED OVER TO THE OVERSIGHT PEOPLE TO ENSURE LIBEL IS NOT BEING DONE.

Next >>