The same people who generated content in the thousands of years before copyright came to be. Most of the art developed by humankind came before copyright, my good sir, and it could be argued that the quality of art has dropped considerably as copyright became stronger.
They "facilitate" copyright infringement, which is not a crime in most countries unless it is done for money, about as much as Google or any search engine. The fact is copyright is an obsolete system that has to go, and it will go because people don't want it any more, and that is not Piratebay's fault or any entity's fault. The blame is on the system that cannot possibly work anymore.
There is a clear distinction. The threat level of a unexpected raise in the population awareness is considerably higher than the threat level of any external threat.
The more they push for control the more things slip through their fingers. It is a fight they can't win. Yes, they can make bitcoin illegal, but sooner or later it will be replaced for something even harder to shut down.
Wikileaks "attacked" many governments, still only US government in its drama Queen complex went postal about it, and not because the truth was revealed to "the enemy" but because it was revealed to its own population.
The only objective to ban plastic bags was to minimize the costs to supermarkets. It was a disgusting lobby with an "eco friendly" excuse. There is no chance in hell they will distribute paper bags or any non re-utilizable bag.
Sure, but very little from Spain income comes from IP, and a huge part of US income comes from IP. Furthermore Spain depends very little on US at all. It could very easily say fuck off and let US do its worst. US would be the more damaged party by far if this went all the way to commercial sanctions.
In short term that may be the case. In long term, if US economy kept being hurt, US ability to maintain military equipment and personnel, and its ability to invest in military action would diminish significantly.
In any place where the choice is to have them or to have bodies I will always choose the former. If you want to solve these problems you focus in eliminating the reasons that force people to submit to these jobs, If you succeed forbidding or not becomes irrelevant.
I guess it isn't a revolution or anything of the sorts, as you have pointed, but still it is good in the sense that it brings a well established dealer to the market of Llinux games, thus helping to consolidate the indie practice of making Linux versions and making it easier for them to distribute.
Ironically those women who were against porn, like Andrea Dworkin, were horrendously ugly themselves. Dworkin in specific was even against any type of sex at all. She thought the sexual act itself and the penetration in specific degraded women. She was a very pathological case of a person disgruntled about what she could not have.
I do agree with you in almost everything you wrote, but what is questionable is if any democracy as they are implemented in the real world is really the rule of the majority. It is more like the apathy of the majority and the rule of money.
Censure always restricts civil rights. in this case the freedom to watch, commercially or not, porn, for example. Which is akin to restricting the freedom to read erotic stories, for example. that was so common in countries with strong religious ties in the past.
There are instances of women doing these things because they cannot find anything else legal, that can give them the money they need to survive. Those women make up a grey area.
And I am certain it is much better to let them starve instead of allowing they to do what they can to survive, right?
The company did legally maintain the trademark. They were within the expiration period when they decided to use it, which is completely within their rights, as written in the law and as decided by the justice.
Whatever. The right was still theirs, and Apple should have consulted before. Now they are in a very bad position and will have to pay a lot to settle this.
If you think you already know something there is no hope for you to learn it. All that remains to me is pitying you for your pathetic ignorance and willingness to hold to it. Now go back to your cave Mr. Troll. You aren't even entertaining enough to be considered good sport.
Slashdot Mirror
The same people who generated content in the thousands of years before copyright came to be. Most of the art developed by humankind came before copyright, my good sir, and it could be argued that the quality of art has dropped considerably as copyright became stronger.
As is the majority of the content linked by Google.
They "facilitate" copyright infringement, which is not a crime in most countries unless it is done for money, about as much as Google or any search engine. The fact is copyright is an obsolete system that has to go, and it will go because people don't want it any more, and that is not Piratebay's fault or any entity's fault. The blame is on the system that cannot possibly work anymore.
There is a clear distinction. The threat level of a unexpected raise in the population awareness is considerably higher than the threat level of any external threat.
The more they push for control the more things slip through their fingers. It is a fight they can't win. Yes, they can make bitcoin illegal, but sooner or later it will be replaced for something even harder to shut down.
Wikileaks "attacked" many governments, still only US government in its drama Queen complex went postal about it, and not because the truth was revealed to "the enemy" but because it was revealed to its own population.
The only objective to ban plastic bags was to minimize the costs to supermarkets. It was a disgusting lobby with an "eco friendly" excuse. There is no chance in hell they will distribute paper bags or any non re-utilizable bag.
Sure, but very little from Spain income comes from IP, and a huge part of US income comes from IP. Furthermore Spain depends very little on US at all. It could very easily say fuck off and let US do its worst. US would be the more damaged party by far if this went all the way to commercial sanctions.
In short term that may be the case. In long term, if US economy kept being hurt, US ability to maintain military equipment and personnel, and its ability to invest in military action would diminish significantly.
In any place where the choice is to have them or to have bodies I will always choose the former. If you want to solve these problems you focus in eliminating the reasons that force people to submit to these jobs, If you succeed forbidding or not becomes irrelevant.
I guess it isn't a revolution or anything of the sorts, as you have pointed, but still it is good in the sense that it brings a well established dealer to the market of Llinux games, thus helping to consolidate the indie practice of making Linux versions and making it easier for them to distribute.
Even if you are right, indie games are far better and more creative anyways. We can live pretty well without big labels.
How is the speed measured?
GPS.
Ironically those women who were against porn, like Andrea Dworkin, were horrendously ugly themselves. Dworkin in specific was even against any type of sex at all. She thought the sexual act itself and the penetration in specific degraded women. She was a very pathological case of a person disgruntled about what she could not have.
And lets not forget men earn just a small fraction of what women earn in porn.
I do agree with you in almost everything you wrote, but what is questionable is if any democracy as they are implemented in the real world is really the rule of the majority. It is more like the apathy of the majority and the rule of money.
Censure always restricts civil rights. in this case the freedom to watch, commercially or not, porn, for example. Which is akin to restricting the freedom to read erotic stories, for example. that was so common in countries with strong religious ties in the past.
There are instances of women doing these things because they cannot find anything else legal, that can give them the money they need to survive. Those women make up a grey area.
And I am certain it is much better to let them starve instead of allowing they to do what they can to survive, right?
The company did legally maintain the trademark. They were within the expiration period when they decided to use it, which is completely within their rights, as written in the law and as decided by the justice.
Whatever. The right was still theirs, and Apple should have consulted before. Now they are in a very bad position and will have to pay a lot to settle this.
The illegal import in iPhones, which is not very significant, won't likely be affected at all.
Please keep me up to date about the results of your efforts to irritate a necklace. Your journal will be fascinating.
Apparently you can't differentiate irony from sarcasm, and couldn't recognize either even if they bit you in the ass.
You explained yourself why the statement does not make sense. Keep reading what you wrote yourself and maybe you will get it.
If you think you already know something there is no hope for you to learn it. All that remains to me is pitying you for your pathetic ignorance and willingness to hold to it. Now go back to your cave Mr. Troll. You aren't even entertaining enough to be considered good sport.