Slashdot Mirror

The charges and the character assasination were ALL bullshit.

No they weren't. By your own words you were a drug addict who lost control of themselves and used tannerite on at least one piece of property that you did not own. Not just "took a plea" you made actual statements about yourself. You admitted to the charges and assasinated your own character. This doesn't sound like an innocently targeted man at all, can you refute any of this? I am not intentionally being derisive; rather I hope you would respond with a statement to exonerate you of this all, be it hearsay or otherwise.

See also this. Did you not consent to be interviewed? You even posted a review of the book this excerpt is from on slashdot!

and what about this? Of course the statements that your anger and gun issues were escalating is pure hearsay; who knows what kind of person you are? But you really glossed over the use of tannerite didn't you? That's WAY more serious than you made it sound. Another article here

Sadly, I agree with everything you say about our overly intrusive gov't and the erosion of out rights, so it's unfortunate that your case doesn't back up those positions. By attempting to be an example of a problem, you are supporting their cause. Please stop.

More here and here. You'll want to read the last couple of comments on this one, bruce. The posters sound like old friends of yours that want to get back into contact with you. This guy too.

That's funny, since Jack Valenti (President of the MPAA until 2004) has claimed repeatedly that there's no such thing as fair use.

They were making copies of the work in its entirety and distributing it to employees because they thought they might be interested in it because the movie was about them. The only reason they had access to the material in the first place was because it was submitted to be rated, and they control the ratings process. IANAL, but I don't see how they'd squeeze a fair use defense out of this.

Remember, this is a movie that was being submitted for rating, so it hadn't been released yet. The MPAA has supported legislation that would have made this kind of copying a felony punishable by jail time.

I would love for this to go to trial and have the MPAA use a fair use defense. I want them on the record as saying distributing a small number of copies for purposes other than financial gain. I want an MPAA executive under oath stating what that number is. Hell, I just want them to submit to the court, in writing, a document that acknowledges the existence of the fair use exceptions.

That was a short, almost pointless article. Basically amounted to "use standard security practices."

I found this article about "darknets" that I found informative, even though it's a book ad.

Well, only 3 comments posted, and the link is already hosed.
As reported by Darknet dot com, a darknet is nothing more than a place where illegal communication (filesharing/hacking talk/speaking badly of the US president) can take place.
I don't see how darknets will make things any different. For years we've had gopher, IRC and other communication channels that have been below the vision of the management elite.
I think lawyers are starting to learn that techies can't be bullied as easily as most, because techies are able to build new infrastructures. Instead of giving up, techies take threats as a challenge or motivation to dive further and further away from public vision.

Google appears to be purchasing dark fiber optic

building its own alternative parallel internet

  I think we should call it Darknet. No . . . no , wait maybe that's not so good . . . Shadownet, that sounds better.

You could get a job as a tech columnist in a major magazine/site by being a troll...

CC is not really a hard concept to understand.

As the creator of a work, I can actively choose which "license" fits how I wish my content to be re-used. One excellent example of how this can come into play is how Cory Doctorow used the developing country license for his latest sci-fi novel.

If picaso had the option to use a CC license for his work, maybe you wouldn't have the problem with copyright all these years later... (example from the article)

The difference between CC and regular old copyright is that with CC the artist has some choice/say in the matter of how they're work can be redistributed.

Speaking of fair use, how well does the current system work? See this example of a person who contacted 7 movie studios to try and get clearance for some clips for a noncommercial home movie project (seemingly well within fair use?)

e.

- jd (the author)

- jd (the author)

It's partly because newspaper and magazine people don't understand what's at stake here, and probably partly because they don't like writing about changes occurring that threaten their livelihood. Still, I expected better.

Those who've read it uniformly say it's a fair account without taking the sort of didactic positions of those at the extremes of the debate. So, conspiracy nut? I think not. :~)

More than 30 bloggers have agreed to review or blog it as part of the Darknet Blogger Book Tour. Just fyi.

- jd (the author)

some parts seem to be copied almost verbatim...