Thought the.first: technically as a writer, I am a copyright holder (check the swirl down low…) Thought the.second: as a copyright holder (under these proposed US laws) I have a right to protect my content Thought the.third: in order to protect my content I am (again, under these same laws) permitted to ravage the HDD of anyone I suspect of hoarding said content Thought the.fourth: I suspect a lot of people — in fact anyone with an internet connection — must therefore be hoarding my content Thought the.final: I just granted myself free licence to ravage any computer on the internet. cool. Funny thing is — the law works both ways right? It if doesn’t it’s not a law. |
|
Tired of your anonymous pic? Put a face to your comment.
Comment avatars can be set up at en.gravatar.com.
It's free, fun, and secure. And then we'll all know who you really are!
copyright >> Opening up the old copyright debate again: my further digging rounded up a story on some new US anti-pirating laws whose scope should finally suck the life out of the few remaining freedoms that are held by we pitiful citizens of Earth.
on copyright >> Despite all my rants long ago and long exhausted on the relevance of copyright in the recording industry, I still insist it is wrong to steal. Yes, we all know by now that downloading mp3s in Canada is still mostly legal,
a few days ago… >> Steve writes: (a few days ago, now) I don't know which way to treat the copyrights on works. If I claim full copyright on my emails, retaining all rights, I get the special privileges that all (American, apparently) copyright holders would get.
Bill see. Bill see six one. One six one! >> The result of sending a letter with your concerns about copyright to your member of parliament and various other influential ministers in federal government is NOT that they listen to your concerns, but rather that they put you on their mailing list
