vivaelamor 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1585)

• On the post: US ISP Suddenlink Claims The DMCA Requires They Disconnect Users

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 26 Sep, 2010 @ 01:31am

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  "Yes, we do.... which is something that Anonymous missed. This can be held as 'breach of contract' because the ISP is not waiting until a COURT DECISION before cutting off service."
  
  Kinda funny, because if they had just cited their TOS then they'd probably get away with it (despite most TOS' being oh so one sided and potentially unfair contracts).

• On the post: US ISP Suddenlink Claims The DMCA Requires They Disconnect Users

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2010 @ 02:53am

  Re: Re:

  "Any private company in the US has the right to refuse service. So the only way you could sue is if you proved in your lawsuit that their disconnection was discrimination based on gender, race, age, or sexual orientation (and not based on evidence you were pirating)."
  
  The US doesn't have law protecting private individuals from breach of contract? Those poor people.

• On the post: Football Helmet Maker Drives Competitor Into Bankruptcy With Patent Lawsuits

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2010 @ 02:50am

  Re:

  "Seems to be a bit simplistic opinion given the article, which appears to indicate that the company was already in financial trouble for other reasons. Additionally, the article does not mention what type of bankruptcy was filed. Liquidation? Reorganization? The former is going out of business. The latter in significant part includes the restructuring of debt."
  
  Neither are nice. Would it have been so hard to Google 'Schutt Sports bankruptcy' to find out that it was Chapter 11?
  
  "A lot of assumptions are being made here for which pertinent facts are missing from the article."
  
  So far the only assumption seems to be the one you have made that Mike was suggesting Schutt Sports are going out of business. Perhaps you could list the others?

• On the post: Football Helmet Maker Drives Competitor Into Bankruptcy With Patent Lawsuits

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2010 @ 02:38am

  Re:

  "is it just me, or is techdirt getting lazy lately?"
  
  Not half as lazy as the trolls.

• On the post: Obama Comes Out Against Censoring The Internet; Will He Veto Leahy/Hatch Censorship Bill?

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2010 @ 02:31am

  Re: It's only censorship when they stop you from expressing yourself, not copying someone else's expression

  'Seriously now. This has nothing to do with censorship. Okay, maybe I would agree with you if there were some blogger out there writing reviews of torrent sites with phrases like, "an insouciant collection of late 80s TV dramas with hints of berries and clovers." '
  
  You were given examples of how this is censorship in a previous article, but chose to ignore them. Here are some more you propose to censor: Die Beauty; The Corporation; Self Helpless; pretty much everything on Vodo, including The Lionshare and Pioneer One.
  
  By the way, what torrentfreak does (writing original articles), should definitely be covered by free speech rights. Your apparent suggestion that it shouldn't is shameful.
  
  "But that's not what's going on. Some big machine is helping jerks get rich by selling access to other people's hard work and the jerks don't pay the real workers anything. If ISOHunt, Pirate Bay or the USENET site du jour tried to copyright their bitstream-- a very ironic act-- they wouldn't even pass the Feist test for creative contribution to the world. "
  
  Selling? None of your examples sell access to anything. Perhaps you should be more concerned about the jerks getting rich by selling access to peoples hard work while pretending to work for them.
  
  "This kind of First Amendment argument hurts the cause because it lumps together the real people who are censored with a bunch of losers who are too cheap to share their cash with people who actually create content. "
  
  The cause is being harmed by people like you not willing to recognise that real people are censored when you deny First Amendment rights to 'a bunch of losers'.
  
  "While you're on your censorship/First Amendment kick, why don't you check out this case from Baltimore where one of the people convicted of murder just helped hire the hitman. Sounds just like the torrent sites that always claim that they're not actually infringing, they're just pointing people to the infringement which is like totally okay, dude. "
  
  I'm sorry, you're suggesting that copyright infringement is akin to murder? Further, you're suggesting that torrent sites are akin to the person hiring a hitman, rather than say, a legal service they happened to use to hire a hitman? Astounding.
  
  "So go ahead. I dare you to say that the courts are censoring the hitman's tracker."
  
  I'd rather say that you have very little regard for logic or reason if you are going to argue that a torrent site is analogous to someone hiring a hitman.

• On the post: Backpage Tells Attorneys General That They Won't Give In To Censorship Demand

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 24 Sep, 2010 @ 03:12am

  Re: Free speech and human rights.

  "The only people who would want to fight hard for this cause are those that take advantage of those services, or who profit from it.. "
  
  Or those who understand the issue. Please Darryl, stop embarrassing yourself.

• On the post: Backpage Tells Attorneys General That They Won't Give In To Censorship Demand

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 24 Sep, 2010 @ 03:03am

  Re: Re: Dumb people...

  "If they wanted to do that, they would bring pedosexuality and prostitution out into the open and legalize them"
  
  Just to clarify, I would presume that you mean legalise the attraction to children (which is currently considered an offence in itself), rather than anything physical. Although I can see an argument for looking at the whole age of consent thing too. You have to marvel when the age of consent in the UK is lower than in the land of liberty. At least they have their guns..

• On the post: Latest ACTA Negotiation Kicks Off By Making It Difficult For Consumer Rights Groups To Attend

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Sep, 2010 @ 03:36am

  Re: sheesh

  "This level of multinational shady corporation-as-government deal sounds like the sort of thing that belongs in a sci-fi dystopia, not the real world."
  
  Welcome to the information age. I don't believe that these shenanigans are new, just easier to spot.

• On the post: Judge Recognizes Separation Of Idea & Expression; Rules That Disturbia Didn't Infringe On Rear Window

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Sep, 2010 @ 03:33am

  Re: Re: Idea vs expression

  "The difference between an idea and its expression, is similar to the difference between what a word represents, and how it, (the word and what it represents), is used and applied within the language. If, for instance, you could copyright what a word actually represents, then the number of words you could use to represent that thing, would be severely limited, (and if you also copyright the use and application of it on top of that...), whereas if you only copyright how a specific word is used in a very specific way, then it can not only be used in other ways, but also allow for different words to represent the same thing, and maybe explore different ways of doing so."
  
  In your example, a word can be substituted for any other assortment of letters. In literature, you cannot pick any other assortment of words and equally express the same idea. In cases where you can then you are still limited in the number of expressions available. The issue is not whether a distinction can be made, but whether one is practical or useful.
  
  If you also apply the theory of copyright maximilists that the term is naturally unlimited then you are destined to exhaust all possible expressions and end up with melancholy elephants.

• On the post: Former Child Prostitute Sues Village Voice For 'Aiding & Abetting' Via Sex Ads

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 23 Sep, 2010 @ 03:09am

  Re: Re: re: Research

  "Finally someone who gets it. Isolate the sex on a seperate site and monitor it. If they we'rnt so greedy, they would hire several research teams in every state they post in to police their site."
  
  If that's your principle, that anything related to sex should be segregated and monitored, then let's discuss its consequences and how it applies to other service providers.
  
  One consequence may be that by agreeing or stating that they are monitoring anything, they risk admitting liability for both anything they let through that they shouldn't (negligence) and anything they block that they shouldn't (discrimination).
  
  Your principle should surely apply equally across all providers offering services related to sex that may be used illicitly in some way:
  
  Dating services.
  Chat services.
  Anything facilitating the selling of 'sex accessories'.
  Common carriers (postal service, telephone service).
  Adult forums.
  
  I'm sure there are many more I haven't thought of. How will non commercial entities adhere to the principle? Your principle is pretty pointless if all people have to do is set up a non profit service that imitates Craiglist. Who will pay for monitoring non commercial services? If you only apply it to commercial services, then what is the point?

• On the post: Former Child Prostitute Sues Village Voice For 'Aiding & Abetting' Via Sex Ads

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 21 Sep, 2010 @ 12:07am

  Re: research

  Mike - do you ever research stories you write about? Just a thought. I have a personal policy to investigate before I open my mouth (or type) about an issue."
  
  I guess you already know that Mike isn't a journalist then. Whoops.
  
  "I've been on Backpage with other people who are trying to solve this problem. The stuff we found was unreal. I won't link to it here. I will simply ask you to please research before you state your opinion. "
  
  I can't seem to find anything like what you say on backpage.com myself. Apparently even the FBI haven't found much and I'm sure they spent longer than 5 minutes googling:
  
  "In the last two years, Backpage.com has had 58 million posts, of which 6 million were adult. In this vast exchange of information, law enforcement agencies have asked for our testimony in precisely five underage cases."
  
  
  "Yes, there are kids. There are pregnant women high on drugs. Plus, a bunch of other stuff I won't get into. Just like Craigslist, BP has an obligation to monitor their site."
  
  No, they have political pressure. If they had an obligation then everyone would have to check everything that was posted on a web site. I trust that you report everything you find to the authorities anyway (although I do wonder why they need things reporting when the whole site is indexable by Google).

• On the post: School Agrees To Pay Student $33,000 After Teacher Dug Through Her Phone To Find Private Nude Photos

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 04:11pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ZOMG NAKED BOOBIES!!

  "Statutory rape actually has nothing to do with consent, only age."
  
  It is based on the premise that sufficient consent is not possible due to age. Hardly "nothing to do with consent". Regardless, I don't see how the distinction effects my point?

• On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 04:06pm

  Re:

  "No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part."
  
  Nailed it.

• On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 04:02pm

  Re: Just my $.02 worth

  "From the comments I've been reading it seems like the consensus is that the DDoS attacks were "ok" because it was against the RIAA and MPAA."
  
  If anyone thinks that then it would seem to be more because of the 'reap what you sow' angle than general hatred for the targets. Why anyone sane enough to hate the RIAA and MPAA would want to stoop to their level is beyond me.

• On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 03:58pm

  Re:

  "And Mike, who's to say a DDoS attack had no real effect? They got you to write about it, didn't they? They got a lot of folks to cover it:"
  
  Mike said point, not effect. Regardless, was that the first and only idea they managed to come up with to generate press? I'm confident that you can generate better press in less stupid ways even if you really don't have anything constructive to say.
  
  "Just because folks like yourself fail to quantify its effects in a nice paragraphs post the morning after, doesn't mean it was worthless, or all for nothing."
  
  What was it worth? For the few sites that covered this and didn't cover the original story of the anti pirate outfit DoS attacking, I can't imagine that the coverage was a good thing.

• On the post: US Senators Propose Bill To Censor Any Sites The Justice Depatement Declares 'Pirate' Sites, Worldwide

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 03:38pm

  Re: First Amendment?

  "The First amendment doesn't protect many kinds of expression. There are already many exceptions to it like libel, slander, incitement to violence, and to a lesser extent pornography especially child pornography."
  
  Explain how any of those is analogous to banning websites with a link to unauthorised file sharing. The First Amendment protects all kinds of expression with limited exceptions, not the other way around.
  
  "And I think it's a mistake to invoke the first amendment here. If the law is applied the way it is written-- always a big if-- it won't affect anyone's ability to create their own content."
  
  Lets look at some examples:
  Torrentfreak - news site devoted to reporting on torrent related activities. Regularly gives top lists of unauthorised content.
  
  Fanfiction sites - considered by US courts and many artists to be copyright infringement, see The Catcher in the Rye sequel and Anne Rice vs her fans for examples.
  
  Mashup sites - should be fair use, may be considered infringing.
  
  The Pirate Bay (and co) - presumed targets of this law, often used to publish authorised content. See The Yes Men Fix The World on EZTV for an example.
  
  Add to that the fact infringing content can still be protected speech (especially if it is political) and you will see a strong First Amendment issue at hand. Look at precedent in trying to restrict free speech on the internet for the purpose of 'protecting' children and confidence grows that this would be laughed out of court as unconstitutional.
  
  "And don't hold up the old fair use canard and pretend that the Feds are going after someone who shared one too many paragraph from a long article. They're going after people who are circulating complete or near complete copies."
  
  And don't give me accounts of what the 'Feds' may or may not do, considering we only have to look at their past actions to prove you wrong.

• On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 10:59am

  Re:

  "My 2 cents: I think you guys are on the same side on this, with different techniques, and you shouldn't fight. "
  
  Having one thing in common does not make a good argument for agreeing with something else. I have no qualms about infringing copyright, that's my choice. I'd not expect Mike or anyone else to cut me any slack just because we both disagree with the current system.
  
  "Last, I think this is a good teaching moment."
  
  There's a trite phrase I could stand to see copyright protected.

• On the post: Denial Of Service Attacks On RIAA & MPAA Are A Really Dumb Idea

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2010 @ 10:50am

  Re: @14

  "we have allowed you for ten + years to try and solve these morons only to have them continue to harm the greater societal mantra."
  
  What time frame is that? From the time you started caring until now? Get some perspective, your arrogance is frightful.
  
  "YOU consider it vandalism when protesters gather and block off a road?"
  
  I'd consider it manslaughter if they flooded the road so that one person died due to lack of access. You have no way of knowing what effect a denial of service attack may have as collateral damage; for all you know the websites share a pipe with a doctors surgery. An unlikely scenario but not as much of a stretch as comparing a denial of service attack over the internet to blocking a road. The people blocking a road are at least there in person to take responsibility for their actions.
  
  "YOU sir need your head re examined
  and i will say it.
  if your not with us you are against us. THE time for being nice has ended."
  
  You try to justify denial of service attacks as being harmless. I hope routers become sentient and drop all of your packets out of disgust.

• On the post: When You Realize That Copyright Law Violates Free Speech Rights, You Begin To Recognize The Problems…

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2010 @ 12:59pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The "balance" delusion

  "LOL! That whole s/z thing never made much sense to me. Why don't you guys just give it up and use the z? :)"
  
  Because then Cambridge and Oxford would have one less thing to argue about, I guess. Mostly I think it's just because we're averse to change. Despite metric practically being the law we still use imperial measurements out of habit. I also rather think our decision to not join the Euro was based less on economic policy and more on a sense of national identity. Hell, we still have our royal family and plenty of people accept that seemingly on the basis that it'd be too much trouble to change things. Personally I think our tourist trade would do better without all the extra security needed to protect a bunch of people with no actual power or responsibility. How's that for a tangent? I should just move countries.

• On the post: School Agrees To Pay Student $33,000 After Teacher Dug Through Her Phone To Find Private Nude Photos

  

  vivaelamor ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2010 @ 12:45pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ZOMG NAKED BOOBIES!!

  "Considering her guilty of child porn for having naked pictures of herself makes as much logical sense as my being guilty of copyright infringement for making copies of my own book and putting them on my iPad."
  
  Your example of copyright infringement is flawed for the same reason as your rape example. Rape is about consent, copyright infringement is about authorisation. Doing either to yourself is impossible because authorisation/consent are inherent in the fact that you committed the act (in sane people at least, I guess you could come up with some potential scenarios for schizophrenics!).
  
  AFAIK, the laws about child porn aren't analogous as they refer mainly to the possession or distribution and don't consider anything like consent or authorisation. This might not be an issue if the courts weren't so keen to apply a tenet of strict liability to child porn cases.
  
  "How can she be both the perpetrator and victim of the crime?"
  
  I don't think child porn laws are as much about the victims as some people would like to believe. Regardless of the intent, we have plenty of laws that supposedly protect us from ourselves. Possession of drugs is the first example that springs to mind.

Next >>