Slashdot Mirror
Australian ISPs Reject Calls To Police Their Users
jon_cooper writes "After recent setbacks in the RIAA's lawsuits, the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) has decided to try a different approach in Australia - they want ISPs to do their dirty work for them. Australian ISPs, though, have soundly rejected calls from AFACT to slow down or terminate user accounts that AFACT has determined are being used to distribute copyrighted works. Telstra (one of the larger ISPs in question) had this to say: 'We do not believe it is up to the ISPs to be judge, jury and executioner in relation to the issue when the content owners have any number of legal avenues to pursue infringements.'"
And here I was thinking that 'multi' (ie. 'multiple') just meant "more than one" ( eg. http://www.answers.com/multiple&r=67 ). Just because 'bi' means "two" doesn't mean that 'multi' can't be two as well.
Otherwise where do you stop? I don't know for sure, but I would guess that technically there is a way to refer to any number in that way ("bi", "tri", "quad"...) so if you can't use 'multi' when you can also use 'bi' then when can you use it, exactly?
Of course it makes them multinational. Just like the airport here calls itself an international airport because it has a couple flights to Canada.
I look at it this way
It's not a matter of opinion. Your own private definition of "multinational" could be "has a name that rhymes with "banana" for all the relevance it has. When you communicate with other human beings, you operate with the definitions the rest of the people using your language use. If you disagree, then I should inform you that my private definition for "I look at it this way" is "I, Attila Dimedica, am a fool and acknowledge that I am totally wrong".
Quite frankly, your argument is just an asinine exercise in word games to try to placate the embarrassment you feel at having such an awful international reputation as egocentric idiots. Multinational means "pertinent to multiple nations" to the entire rest of the world and anybody with multiple brain cells. You don't really believe that it means anything else, you just want an explanation for the disagreement that doesn't involve Americans looking egocentric. Face facts: the OP was a typically self-centred Yank and you are his apologist because you don't want it to be true.
The same for companies operating in multiple countries, if a company operates in the US and Canada (or Australia and New Zealand), it is not multinational. There is nothing in its current operations that makes it significantly easier to operate worldwide than for a company that operates in just one of those countries.
Of course there is. Operating world-wide involves dealing with multiple legal systems, multiple cultures, multiple languages, multiple tax codes, etc. If a company operates in multiple nations, then it's vastly more likely that they already have experience dealing with these issues.
Now if on the other hand, it operates in say the US and France (or Australia and Japan), it is already operating over a greater distance and in significantly different business cultures
Spoken like somebody entirely culturally ignorant of the rest of the world. Yet more reinforcement of the USA stereotype. Just because North America is incredibly homogeneous, it doesn't mean that physical proximity means similar business cultures. For instance, Western European business cultures are often more similar to American business culture in many ways than Eastern European business cultures.
Spoken like somebody entirely culturally ignorant of the rest of the world.
That doesn't resemble me in the slightest though. What can you point to in what I am saying that suggests otherwise? I pointed out exactly what I think is culturally ignorant. Repeating my words back to me doesn't work unless I'm being culturally ignorant too.
It really feels good to tout out the stereotype of how Americans are so stereotypical of other countries, doesn't it??>
It's the exact opposite. There are some American family members of mine that are very dear to me. That's why people like you feeding the stereotype piss me off; my family members unfairly get lumped in with fuckwits like you who are ruining the USA's reputation.
You don't really believe that it means anything else
It's ludicrous to try to throw that back in my face, because I'm not the one trying to redefine "multinational" to mean something other than multiple + nation. This isn't a playground. "That's what you are, but what am I?" isn't an argument.
you are a typically self-centred(sic) Yank hater.
Guess what else is part of the Yank stereotype? A persecution complex. You act like a twat, then blame it on me hating Yanks when I actually hate twats like you who are giving Yanks a bad name. Oh, and more of that stereotype? Arrogance. You know perfectly well self-centred is spelt correctly. It's like you are intentionally propagating your stereotype.
I think it's quite sad that reasonable Americans have a bad reputation because loud-mouthed idiots like you feed this stereotype. Stop it, for the sake of all the reasonable Americans. You are an embarrassment to your country.