Whatever 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1712)

• On the post: NYPD Wants $42,000 To Turn Over Documents Related To Discharges Of Officers' Firearms

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 05 Nov, 2015 @ 10:05pm

  Something that is missing in all of this is the question of how many documents are involved here. If it's 1000 pages, then $42 a page (including redaction and such) isn't really off the chart.
  
  That may be part of the problem of FOIA requests, which is if the "responsive set" is way too large or the required search too large, then the costs may be way off the charts. It's a really complex problem.
  
  Perhaps if we have a better idea of the size of the documents involved, we might have a better idea if the cost is too high or too low.

• On the post: Copyright Terms And How Historical Journalism Is Disappearing

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 05 Nov, 2015 @ 09:44am

  Re: Re: When in doubt, blame copyright

  One of the great thing about you Paul is that you are consistent. But like someone who always burns toast, that consistency isn't a good thing.
  
  "Which is why it's important to have an independent archive that's in public hands, rather than have historical documents beholden to the whims of the ancestors of whoever happened to buy a copy and keep it."
  
  The thing is, going forward that is pretty much already taken care of. The digital nature of publishing (even print publishing) is such that retaining an archive is merely a question of backup space and nothing more. We are no longer stuck with just the printed page as the only remaining examples of something. From everything I can tell, pretty much every modern newspaper auto archives their stuff, with many of them having archives back nearly 20 years already.
  
  So your solution is to deny a copyright holder their rights, because you think that maybe they may not be able or willing to do this, and that their work somehow has so little value that even in a complete closure of a newspaper that their archive would just be flushed.
  
  See, the problem here is that you are looking at a 50 or 70 year old problem, and using it to try to make rules for current times. It's just out of touch.
  
  As for "I don't care so nobody does", sorry but you are full of shit. I do care, and I know others do care for different reasons. How you draw a conclusion like that just shows how hard you are trying to be a prick about stuff, rather than enter into a discussion.
  
  Welcome to the black hole again, the only "whatever" who will answer you is the fake one that so badly trolled you the other day. Damn, you are a sucker!

• On the post: MPAA Whacs A Few More Moles, Declares Premature Victory While Making Movie Fans Worse Off

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2015 @ 09:42pm

  Re: Re: Re: It's not about the money

  I think that you misunderstand the economics and the politics at play. Copyright defines ownership, ownership allows sales / lending / leasing / income, and income allows for taxation. Governments are almost always motivated by taxation and income.
  
  So strong copyright with a tax on sales of products (even if it's just a VAT / GST / Sales tax) is good. It's not hard to get agreement to make money.
  
  When it comes to the other stuff, the politics kick. The politics of keeping jobs local. The politics of making the sales happen through a local company so you can properly tax them. The politics of preservation of local culture, language, and the like - and the politics of forcing outsiders to work in that language and provide content in that language. It's about the politics of morals and ratings... and yes, for the politicians, it's the politics of control.
  
  They are very quick to agree to ways to generate new tax revenue, they are very slow to agree to release control (and potentially release tax income). It's why there is a big push all over the world for companies to be forced to collect and remit sales tax local to where the buyer is, and not the seller.
  
  It really is all about the money. Agree to a global 20% sales tax (example) of online goods that must be remitted to the government local to the buyer, and you would find many barriers would drop much more quickly.

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2015 @ 07:48pm

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

  Says the anonymous troll. Shoo troll, shoo... and stop posting under my name!

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2015 @ 07:47pm

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

  Gotta love how Techdirt tolerates this. It's a true shame that they allow people to post under a registered name without logging in.
  
  Paul, you have been trolled. Or did you troll yourself? We will never know, because Techdirt doesn't seem able to handle a simple technical detail like blocking people from impersonating registered users.

• On the post: MPAA Whacs A Few More Moles, Declares Premature Victory While Making Movie Fans Worse Off

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2015 @ 07:45pm

  Re: It's not about the money

  I think you run into a bit of a logical problem here. "control" without money is meaningless. Studios never "control" things in a manner that doesn't make money or generate a revenue stream.
  
  Example, when Disney puts videos "in the vault" (aka, makes them unavailable at retail for a while) and them brings them back out for a sales cycle, it's not done for the pure exercise of control, rather it's done for the purpose of making the most money and yes, controlling the distribution to do so.
  
  Control is the power, but money is the scorecard. You can't have one without the other. Otherwise, it's like an NBA game where both teams compete for who has the ball the longest, and not for who scores the most. A zero zero tie at the end of it all would rending the game meaningless.
  
  Geo blocking, release windows, and all those other things have everything to do with making money AND meeting the laws of different countries and areas. It's also about meeting the economic realities of those areas. Talk with your local government about restrictions on movie distribution, on local "rating" systems, local labeling, local language version requirements, and even local ownership of the distribution system. That will give you a bigger idea of the problems involved. Meeting those requirements in order to get a full same day worldwide release is a real challenge, there are just so many different rules and regulations to meet.
  
  Blaming the studios for local laws is just plain stupid.

• On the post: Copyright Terms And How Historical Journalism Is Disappearing

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2015 @ 07:37pm

  When in doubt, blame copyright

  It's pretty fun to watch you guys tie yourselves in knots trying to blame copyright for everything. Gotta wonder if copyright has anything to do with plane crashes and El Nino.
  
  One of the true issues of newspapers is that it was typeset, printed, and boom, the "source" material was gone as the plates were recycled and that was that. Before the age of computers (and even early in the age of computers) very little was archived in a digital format. Much of the archiving instead was printed copies, if they were retained at all.
  
  So, like an out of date book, the only copies at this point are rare and in the hands of individuals who may or may not want to share them.
  
  Yes, copyright does play a role here, but I suspect that many newspapers wouldn't have a problem with their old material being archived in a friendly format, especially if it wasn't costing them anything to do - and they could extract value in branding and such. This would dovetail nicely with another problem that newspapers today are a mostly failing business. The costs of having an archiving staff in house is a luxury some are doing without.
  
  I am sure that most papers, given a valid and credible archiving system, would gladly give rights to those archive to store and display old papers. That said, it's very unlikely that a true archive approaching anywhere near all the old newspapers would ever happen. It's just not material that people tend to retain forever.

• On the post: The Judicial System May Be Bad, But The Privatized Judicial System Of Arbitration Is Worse

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 03 Nov, 2015 @ 10:35am

  Re: I think the question of merit is one that would wreck any courtroom

  I think you are getting a wee bit confused here.
  
  This isn't a system to deal with police corruption, hard criminal acts, or anything like that. It's a contract resolution system, one set up to bypass the insanely slow legal system and cut to the chase of getting resolution.
  
  The biggest problem (I think) with the US legal system (and many others) is that there is a near endless number of ways to drag your feet, to appeal, to seek rulings for or against everything in the case, and so on. Yes, it's good to have these options, but the system itself is slowed so badly by them that a good many cases either never make it in front of a judge, or one or the other party gives up and walks away licking their wounds and settling out of court. That isn't a good system either, it's based on who spends the most money and is most willing to wait out the insanely long, drawn out process, followed by an insane, long, and drawn appeals process.
  
  it's pretty reasonable to have a system that can handle, in a relatively short amount of time, disputes based on a signed contact.

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 05:56pm

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

  I prefer the scenario where bad guys go to jail, and that they don't use kids as human shields to stop law enforcement from doing their job. The criminals are the one causing the problems, or are you too busy ignoring their actions to just slam the police (again)?
  
  Stop projecting your personal issues onto me, nozzle.

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 05:54pm

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

  I don't excuse it either. I just think you are blaming the wrong people here - blame the people who are willing to sell drugs or hide out in a house with kids.
  
  What's the other choice? Let every criminal knock out a few kids so they always have one around so the police cannot take action against them? Don't arrest them in front of the kids, those kids might get a complex!
  
  I know the local deal is "blame the cops for everything" but damn, people need to accept their own responsibility as well.

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 05:52pm

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

  Yes, I said that to make a point - which is this is exactly what some people appear to do here. The downvote / DMCA feature on Techdirt is abused by people who are not reporting spam, but rather are saying "I don't want to hear your opinion, you have less rights". If we want to play that game, I can register 50 accounts, and use TOR to blast anyone into oblivion in here.
  
  Free speech? Well, some people around here think that free speech is shutting other people up. Even the site operators seem to be okay with it. Free speech generally seems to mean free speech for them, not for everyone.

• On the post: Democrats Screw Over Larry Lessig To Keep Him Out Of The Debates; Forces Lessig To Drop His Campaign

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 05:36pm

  Re:

  His campaign was all but non-existent. His campaign platform was a single skinny plank about campaign reform. His political profile so low as to be nearly invisible.
  
  Of course the Democrats "clarified" the rules to make sure he's not in the debate, because he was trying to use the debate to further "brand Lessig" and not about any true aspiration towards being President. He tried to build himself up at the cost of the Democratic party, and instead has wasted a million dollars of other people's money.
  
  Oh wait, another way Lessig is like Nina Paley: people very good at spending others people's money.

• On the post: The Judicial System May Be Bad, But The Privatized Judicial System Of Arbitration Is Worse

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 09:13pm

  " The problem is in the reality. In cases between businesses and individuals, businesses win nearly 97% of the time. "
  
  Great story. The 97% number is quite misleading however, because it doesn't reflect the question of merit. It would be more informative to see how many of the cases actually involved an actual problem that did not have a clear resolution within the contract, and how much was just someone pushing to get something the contract did now allow.
  
  It would also be interesting to see what percentage of the disputes were resolved because the complainant didn't actually show up or actively follow through on the cases.
  
  I think that one of the big reasons why the arbitration system has such a high win for the companies is that it quickly and efficiently weeds out the stupidity, which might otherwise end up in a protracted legal action and finally an out of court settlement otherwise. Shortening the cycle generally means you get actual resolution and not a private deal.
  
  Is it any surprise that the results are heavily tilted towards the party that wrote the contact terms to start with?

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 05:31am

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Lies. I never said I agree with police flashbanging babies. I have said that it's unfortunate but there is potential that there are children in a house being raided. Do we really want to encourage criminals to start using children as human shields against police executing a warrant?

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2015 @ 05:30am

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Actually, just forgot to log back in, browser logs me out each time. try again bad troll!

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

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 01 Nov, 2015 @ 06:24pm

  "First of all: the viewpoints of Nina Paley and Larry Lessig are not the same at all. Lessig is not a copyright abolitionist (no matter what copyright maximalists would have you believe). "
  
  Interestingly, the poster missed the point entirely. I didn't say they have the same opinion, only that they both hold extreme opinions, ones that leave little space for anyone or anything else. They both fail very dramatically when push comes to shove, Lessig getting his dick slapped in the dirt for his nonsensical 1st amendment arguments, and Nina sounding whiny because she was unable to raise enough money to license the music she wanted to use - or for being unable to create (or have someone create) new music for her "work". It would have been so much more creative and original to have new music that sounded appropriate to the period and to the cultural references. A missed chance!
  
  So when the poster misses the initial and most basic of points, it's hard to take the rest seriously!

• On the post: EU Parliament Calls On EU Countries To Drop All Charges Against Snowden, Protect Him From Extradition

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 29 Oct, 2015 @ 11:20pm

  Re: Ah the government's favorite logic, 'We weren't doing anything wrong until you revealed that we were'

  I actually think the government was doing plenty wrong, and I don't want to be an apologist for it. However, the hyperbole by which much of it has been reported has turned it from "let's fix it" to "a gunman behind every grassy knoll". It's such that the people have been convinced that every action of government is against them - and thus you see the extreme reactions.
  
  Moreover, most people forget that spying (foreign and domestic) is something that has gone one since long before the US was even a thought in history. Technology makes it easier and perhaps more widespread, but not particular different from the past.
  
  "You don't blame the one who exposes wrongdoing, you blame the one who's doing it."
  
  Cuts both ways. Snowden had to break the law in a significant way in order to expose the wrong doing. He violates his security clearance and pretty much did a very treasonous thing, to provide all the documents of US actions around the world to everyone, including the enemies. It should come as no surprise that Russia has been resurgent against the background of all of this.
  
  The public's vocal desire for privacy doesn't match up with their actions. Social media and electronic devices mean we are more visible than ever, we allow ourselves to be tracked by ad companies, social media sites, cell phone companies, credit card companies, banks, and a whole host of other services and companies that on a day to day basis compile your activities, hopes, and desires in order to "serve you better" with offers, ads, and promotions that suit your desires and activities. Don't think so? Just go search Google for something you never buy or search for, say like "VoIP routers" or something like that, and see what your ads online look like. Or shop Amazon, similar effects.
  
  The public's claimed desire for privacy doesn't match their actions, plain and simple. The outrage about what the government has been doing is at least in part hype and hysteria stoked by online media pundits trying to drive page views. Not very good!

• On the post: EU Parliament Calls On EU Countries To Drop All Charges Against Snowden, Protect Him From Extradition

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 29 Oct, 2015 @ 05:41pm

  Re:

  "Snowden has, in my opinion, done more for the people of the planet than any government has done."
  
  Yup, just like a terorist, he has given birth to a world full of people paranoid, worried about the actions of police and government, and generally wasting their time in a constant state of panic and concern about their privacy... all while posting "just back from our guys night out hooker party" on Facebook.
  
  He has greatly contributed to making the world less stable and less safe. Hats off to him.

• On the post: Right To Be Forgotten Now Lives In Australia: Court Says Google Is The 'Publisher' Of Material It Links To

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 29 Oct, 2015 @ 11:09am

  Re: Well if that's all it takes...

  "Now then, did I just 'publish' three books(in which case who knew it was that easy to become a published author?), or did I merely point you to where they can be found and include excerpts from them as additional identifying info, chosen as 'automatically'(first and last paragraph) as possible?"
  
  Neither. You publishes excerpts from these books, using editorial control to decide what to publish, and provided a link to the. You didn't publish a book (and nobody said you did) but you certainly did publish SOMETHING... after all, your post isn't just a link, is it?
  
  "Claiming that an algorithm, that returns links and excerpts for better information, with no direct human input or choice regarding the link or excerpt is the same as the person or group who created and/or posted the site that the link points to, and the content on it, is absurd. "
  
  The operation of the algo is created by someone - the company in question. They set the parameters and they make the choices. They have control over the process. If they can black hole or sandbox a site for piracy, they can sure as heck do the same for defamation...
  
  The argument is weak. Every excerpt is something published. It's a choice to do it. Google could provide links without a text clip, and they would not have to worry about re-publishing lies, slander, or libelous statements from others.

• On the post: Right To Be Forgotten Now Lives In Australia: Court Says Google Is The 'Publisher' Of Material It Links To

  

  Whatever ( profile ), 29 Oct, 2015 @ 08:25am

  Re: If I publish a directory of where to buy a certain book . . .

  No, however, if you also post up sections from the book, there is a point where you have "published" something. Not the book, but most certainly you have provided editorial content and control over your own website.
  
  Since Google provides more than a link... you know the answer (and apparently does at least one Australian judge).

Next >>