Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 27th Nov 2010 10:46 UTC
Legal The US is really ramping up its war on intellectual property infringement, a war which I'm sure will be just as successful, cheap and supported by the people as the wars on drugs and terrorism. The US has started seizing the domain names of various websites through ICANN - not because owners of these sites were convicted of anything, but merely because complaints have been filed against them. Anyone want to take a guess how long it will be before the US government blocks WikiLeaks? Update: The blocks function outside of the US too. In other words, the US is forcing its views upon the rest of the world once again.
Thread beginning with comment 451296
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Correction
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 27th Nov 2010 14:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Correction"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

People are pissed because they got cut off from stolen goods? Color me devastated.


1) It might be illegal in the US to download illegally uploaded content, but it's not illegal in many European countries.

2) Many of these sites do not do anything that should be even remotely illegal, just as much as informing someone you can buy weed in the college district (bloody obvious) should not be illegal.

3) Most importantly, I see that you take the "guilty until proven otherwise"-approach to justice.

Good luck with that.

Edited 2010-11-27 14:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Correction
by jack_perry on Sat 27th Nov 2010 15:09 in reply to "RE[3]: Correction"
jack_perry Member since:
2005-07-06

"People are pissed because they got cut off from stolen goods? Color me devastated.



3) Most importantly, I see that you take the "guilty until proven otherwise"-approach to justice.

Good luck with that.
"

Thom, I've noticed in this and ore comments that you know a lot less about the law than you like to pretend. Your position has been made indefensible by several facts listed by some posters, and now you want to throw out charges of guilty until proven otherwise? Do you know what a seizure warrant implies? Do you know how it's obtained? Do you know what reasonable cause means?

I'm reminded of another thread where you screamed about censorship in the US but clearly didn't know that obscenity has never been considered protected speech. (Or perhaos you knew and you pretended not to, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.)

I agree with another poster that your comments can make a story more lively, but at least try to inform yourself before making them. Otherwise you do no one any favors.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Correction
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 27th Nov 2010 15:11 in reply to "RE[4]: Correction"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Your position has been made indefensible by several facts listed by some posters,


Which facts?

'm reminded of another thread where you screamed about censorship in the US but clearly didn't know that obscenity has never been considered protected speech. (Or perhaos you knew and you pretended not to, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.)


Uhm, it's still censorship. In China, criticizing the government too harshly is not protected speech either - does that mean the Chinese government does not employ censorship?

Edited 2010-11-27 15:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Correction
by kkamrani on Sun 28th Nov 2010 05:38 in reply to "RE[4]: Correction"
kkamrani Member since:
2005-07-08

I am also reminded how often Thom writes passionately about violations of X software licenses/agreements of use, specifically open source software licenses, and how those that don't follow those rules are great villains.

However when it comes to violations of other licenses, such as copyright violations are just and the consequences that follow are injust.

Apologies for any confusion in my explanation but I find a double standard in these two arguments. I wonder if one should respect open source licenses, shouldn't one also respect closed source licenses and the consequences that follow when they are violated?

Disclaimer: I don't know of any cease and desists regarding open source violations. So there seems to be a double standard when enforcing different licenses/agreements of use.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Correction
by MamiyaOtaru on Sun 28th Nov 2010 10:12 in reply to "RE[3]: Correction"
MamiyaOtaru Member since:
2005-11-11

1) It might be illegal in the US to download illegally uploaded content, but it's not illegal in many European countries.

so what. The authorities in this case aren't going after people "download(ing) illegally uploaded content" are they? (as though you could separate downloading and uploading when dealing with torrents anyway).

To quote you again: "illegally uploaded content". welp. I don't feel bad for people being deprived of this content even if it is legal for them to download it. By your own admission it shouldn't have been uploaded in the first place.

A lot of the law needs to change, but you missed the boat with that bit

Reply Parent Score: 2