![]() |
Quote:
how does that apply when copyright holder is the one stripping the innocent site of his right to exist? |
Quote:
Once SOPA is in place, if it is put into place, it is just another step. They will keep stepping for some time to come until a little order is restored. I wouldn't worry so much about SOPA. Instead worry about what they are going to push through on the back of SOPA down the line. |
I agree with SOPA, but is the internet kill switch still part of it?
Because if so....then I'm against it solely for that purpose. |
Quote:
You're not innocent if you're using content you didn't create, or didn't pay for, or weren't otherwise authorized to use. :2 cents: |
Quote:
I put my first websites online in January 2001. My exact code, images, layouts and even pictures of my wife were on 100+ domains (I quit counting) by the middle of 2001. I have owned a design company, sold software and have even been accused of stealing my own script because someone stole it and sold it from their own website. The problem that you and many others are running into is that images and videos of girls fucking are worth a lot less than they were several years ago. Way too much available, technological advances that don't mesh well with your dwindling business model and less people to sell your "same old shit" to for a whole host of reasons. I don't download shit. It wouldn't matter if I downloaded 5000 copyrighted works per day. No law is going to be the magic bullet that saves you. You will be just as bitter next year as you are right now and you won't change the fact that you are talking out of your ass about those that don't back you up no matter how cool you sound to equally bitter knuckleheads. Cheers :glugglug |
Quote:
I didn't realize it before... but you've changed my mind. You've really helped me see the light. The fight is no longer worth it. |
Someone that files a false claim should be charged with a misdemeanor or felony. removing their copy write doesn't help anything, it only devalues other copywriters content who have done nothing wrong.
|
Quote:
|
hey gallery. explain your obsession with false claims. What do you produce, who are you afraid of.
i got it. You run a torrent. you make money using other peoples creations. you convinced yourself your all encompassing definition of fair use gives you the right to do it. & you think anyone who SOPAs your sorry ass will be making a false claim. Somehow in your Wallyworld, the government will agree with you & turn over the "false" accusers copyright to you, or the public domain, whatever. What...a...fucking...clown. :1orglaugh |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
this is the kind of shit i am talking about when i say innocent or this http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharing...gement-111223/ Quote:
The first was clearly fair use, the second they had zero promotion as a way to get content without paying. |
Quote:
http://gigaom.com/2011/12/12/universal-vs-megaupload/ not one second of universals copyrighted material existed in that song yet they still used the youtube takedown process to get rid of the content when asked to justify it they said that it was consent to appear issue (which is not a copyright issue and therefore outside of the scope) They fucking admitted it wasn't a DMCA takedown. |
Quote:
How many copyright holders should a pirate be allowed to totally wipe out of exist before your allowed to sue them for statutory damages? How many innocent companies should you have a right to destroy before you suffer the same damages you want to inflict on pirates ? Why is there a difference between those two numbers? |
Quote:
Are you hysterical because in your mind everything that could happen might happen to you? If I were you, don't borrow anyone's car because your ex boy friend who hates you "might" see you in it and "might" claim to the police the car is his and have you sent to jail. :1orglaugh (as IF the police would not ask for proof of ownership, duh.) Police: "You know why we pulled you over?" Me: "Nope" Police: "This car was reported stolen. Do you know who owns this car?" Me: "Well I find that hardly credible, my friend Steve lent me this car. It is his car." Police: "So Dave does not own this car is what you are saying?" Me: "That's correct, run the registration and see if it belongs to Dave, you $12.00 an hour idiot pig. Did you eat a second bowl of stupid-flakes this morning you jackass?" That leads me to ask, are you really fucking stupid and truly believe this type of false-accusation happens every day? Or, are you just crying like a bitch about one little ridiculous issue of what could be... Using this as a smoke screen to hide your true agenda. Here's an idea...... if you don't own it in the first place, mind your fucking business and let the owner deal with it. Who the hell are you to be claiming anything if you yourself are not the factual owner of the IP in question? Get off of it. Stop playing the role of "stupid kid". :2 cents: |
Only absolute retards would think giving the govt more power is a good thing.
|
Quote:
1. the car analogy was his x bullshit analogy, the fact that law doesn't allow that kind of shit is exactly the point X wants the copyright laws to let you get away scott free when you pull that shit in the copyright world 2. i am visible minority, you would be surprised the number of times i have been pulled over because i was "driving while black". |
Quote:
I can imagine competitors do some pretty low-ball shit to each other in the name of competition, that's a fact of life. Unfortunately in particular, the adult industry is full of children and mental-midgets who fire off at the mouth without thinking. The business is infested with drama from people's idiotic mouths. As I understand, SOPA has a built in deterrent for competitors using SOPA as a tool to shut down competitors. But that deterrent is flawed because placing ANY content in public domain diminishes value of all like products. I really hope you do not have solid faith in any argument that says that placing anyone's copy right protected IP into public domain as penalty for a wrongful accusation will ever be good for anyone in business. Here's another analogy. A concert venue full of hot sweaty kids at a heavy metal concert are thirsty. Coke is selling at the grandstands for $5.00 for a shitty 8 ounce cup loaded up with ice. Nestea a few months earlier threw the dice and tried to use legal channels to block distribution of Coke, and they were found to be unfounded and malicious, and therefore lost their copy right protection (actually patent law but applicable in spirit) over the formula so therefore any person can now not only mass produce Nestea but they can also give it away for free under the Nestea label and a bunch of people are doing just that at this concert... now who is going to pay $5.00 for that little cup of watered down coke? No one. So of course it devalues and reduces the demand for Coke, and also Mountain Dew, and 7-Up, and whoever else is trying to sell cold drinks to that audience. Whoever came up with that stipulation is stone-cold retarded. Porn is an impulse-buy, much like buying a cold drink is to a lot of people. The consumer is thirsty, and most will usually place his purchase with whatever catches his eye first based on impulse. But placing anyone's property in public domain is the same thing as handing out free ice cold drinks to a hot market that is thirsty and just wants a cold drink NOW. "FREE" catches the eye of any consumer a hell of a lot faster than anything else on the menu. And I know what you mean about being a visible minority. I am white and I used to live in the US. :winkwink: :winkwink: |
Quote:
AOL Boing Boing Creative Commons Daily Kos Disqus eBay Etsy foursquare Grooveshark Hype Machine Kickstarter Kaspersky Mozilla MetaFilter OpenDNS O?Reilly Radar Techdirt PayPal Torrentfreak Tumblr TechCrunch Yahoo! Zynga Scribd YCombinator Wikipedia Namecheap Petzel ICanHasCheezburger Quora Embedly MediaTemple CloudFlare StackExchange (Stack Overflow) Github Linode Hostgator Square The Huffington Post Craigslist ESET Sigh |
heh some of those like scribd are pretty much piracy operations ...
|
Quote:
Also, you included TorrentFreak. You really run the risk of looking like a complete tool including them. I like Ernesto and all but of course the site that sensationalizes every piracy story to be some free speech infringement is going to advocate against it. I'm sure most of Wjunction is against this too, should have included them while you're at it. I know the guys at The Pirate Bay are against this. So are the Vietnamese bootleggers, we need to hear their voice in the matter. SMH |
Not a list of pirates, but a list of companies that have made money of other peoples creative content 100% yes.
An list of wolves being asked how sheep should be looked after. |
Quote:
the problem with your arguement is you fail to see two things piracy creates the same effect the penalty against infringing on coke would still exist that means pirate sites who want to profit could a) choose to pirate the coke and risk the liablity B) take the Nestea give it away and make exactly the same money without any downside c) competition exist based on non monetary conditions I can tell the difference between nestea and brisk, if i go to a restaurant that only serves brisk i will drink water or lemonade rather then buy brisk. I would not even take a free brisk because i don't like the taste of it. Even if 50% of the pirates decide to avoid the risk, that more business for the honest copyright holders. |
Quote:
. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:39 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123