Slashdot Mirror
Senate Candidate Sued By Copyright Troll
The Iso writes "Las Vegas based company Righthaven found two articles from the Las Vegas Review-Journal about Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle reprinted on her web site without permission, so it did what it always does: bought the rights to the articles from the Review-Journal and sued the alleged infringer, seeking unspecified damages."
So because a copyright troll sued a conservative it is somehow benign or OK? What if somebody sued Obama for reprinting a NYT article on his campaign website? What if somebody sued a college professor for reprinting a journal article on his class web page? Either of these actions would be no different in principle, but both would cause slashdot to go into a state of perpetual bloodlust for the copyright troll's head.
Anyways, I'm just saying that it's not right no matter who it is. If the newspaper was really offended, perhaps they should have sent a letter requesting her to take it down before they let some scumbag get the rights to sue her.
Sharon Angle is a nutcase and deserves whatever grief she gets.
Copyright craziness vs. having Angle in the Senate. Tough call...
Not likely. If Angle wins, and that is highly likely, Righthaven can look forward to subtle changes in the law.
I've got an army of flesh-eating Disney lawyers that says otherwise.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
The characterization presented by PyroMosh of the three stories is really a masterpiece of spin.
Sure, if by "spin" you mean "the absolute truth".
As to 'friends' with the media, she doesn't normally talk to media that is likely to do a hatchet job on her words.
Maybe if she wasn't batshit-fucking-insane, that wouldn't happen. Reporting what she said, in an unbiased manner (yes, that's what's happening - just because she's batshit-fucking-insane, that doesn't make the reporters biased) is by definition *not* a "hatchet job".
As to the science issue, I read the wikipedia entry and I just don't see it.
Voting against fluoridated drinking water isn't anti-science? What would you call it? She's a climate change denier, and claims that abortion leads to breast cancer. If you don't call that anti-science, then you're stupider than I first thought.
the flames can begin now.
You're welcome, I wouldn't want to disappoint you.
I am tired of seeing half-truths and plain lies pawned off as facts.
Then why are you defending Angle? The only half-truths and lies are being spread by her.