The Obama supporters love to paint disliking Obama as being racist. Its not. Its supporting your freedoms and the constitution of your goddamn country.
They have good reason to believe many YouTube viewers are viewing content illegally. Because Google refuses to tell them who, they've convinced a judge to give them all the content. The fault isn't Viacom's but either those breaking the law or Google for not handing over the relevant information.
Actually you give permission for Google to give your private information to ANYONE. I don't see much difference in Google handing over info because they were forced to in a court of law and because they paid to in some office.
I don't have any problem corporations knowing what I view on YouTube, so it certainly isn't a risk for me. Then again I don't go around viewing pirated content.
I chose to redistribute something that was free because the person, despite many attempts, couldn't access the file and the website admin didn't feel the need to fix it in a timely manner.
Well we had a politician called Mr Johnny Howard who liked bush so much we became the 51st state of America. Our new state leader who replaced Howard was suppose to undo much of the damage Howard did, but he hasn't even begun.
All you do is convict everyone and eventually they'll admit their guilt.
This suggests that Reiser is innocent and has only now confessed because he was convicted, not because he really is guilty.
Except he somehow knew where the body was. If he's innocent AND now only knows where the body is because he was convicted, that's magic. And thus if there is magic, there must also be a god.
IMO 15% is an estimate based on them expecting very few people to donate money. The more people that donate, the more they make, the lower they can make their cut. Assuming of course they're not greedy capitalists.
Well the RIAA had evidence that someone using her internet connection was uploading music. They questioned her, they claim she lied, they have now recently gained evidence that she lied and have also learned the evidence they need to continue the case was thrown away by a relative of the defendant.
I'd say someone has definitely been dragging this case on, but if the RIAA's claims and evidence are truly accepted then it clearly wasn't them for once.
I don't know a number plate on a car seems analogous of an IP address, ASSUMING correct records are kept by the ISP on what computer was assigned what IP address at what time. If the ISP doesn't keep proper records (and IMO there's no reason they should feel they must) then that's another story.
However simply turning up with a customer address based on an IP address from a proper database isn't "purely speculative" and I feel shouldn't "be laughed out of court."
Just as I may not have been using a computer at a particular time, I may not have been using a car that was registered to me. Funnily enough the courts uphold a photograph from a speed camera as enough evidence for the police to send me a fine (I could of course defend myself with an alibi and challenge it in court). And criminal proceedings require much higher standards then civil ones.
They've finally learned that the evidence they need was thrown away before they learned of it due to the defendent's lying and stonewalling.
This is of course assuming the RIAA's letter is accurate, which while not a good assumption at all, IMO feels right based on the posts by NewYorkCountryLawyer. He has repeatedly said (and even says it again) that the defendant hasn't ever touched a computer. And while possibly true simply means that someone else using her internet connection (because she DOES have one) could have pirated the content. I've felt that a big possibility from the start and it seems the RIAA has finally gotten real proof (not the fake one they routinely throw around) that this is true. Something the defendant said (and continues to say) didn't happen.
I eagerly await to see if the RIAA's proof does hold up in court and if the court will impose sanctions. Although I have a feeling if it does happen, NYCL won't be posting about it;)
But its torture he's volunteering for. If he's willing to task that risk, then who are we to deny him the possibility of life, simply because it could be painful?
Slashdot Mirror
The Obama supporters love to paint disliking Obama as being racist. Its not. Its supporting your freedoms and the constitution of your goddamn country.
How many times have you not voted? Has the result changed yet?
Left-wing crazy that thinks we should nationalize the energy industries
This gets called crazy in America? Wow.
In other words the Mars Lander performed as programmed. News at 11.
They have good reason to believe many YouTube viewers are viewing content illegally. Because Google refuses to tell them who, they've convinced a judge to give them all the content. The fault isn't Viacom's but either those breaking the law or Google for not handing over the relevant information.
Actually you give permission for Google to give your private information to ANYONE. I don't see much difference in Google handing over info because they were forced to in a court of law and because they paid to in some office.
I don't have any problem corporations knowing what I view on YouTube, so it certainly isn't a risk for me. Then again I don't go around viewing pirated content.
I chose to redistribute something that was free because the person, despite many attempts, couldn't access the file and the website admin didn't feel the need to fix it in a timely manner.
I am in America and I still can't view it despite having broadband internet :(
Well we had a politician called Mr Johnny Howard who liked bush so much we became the 51st state of America. Our new state leader who replaced Howard was suppose to undo much of the damage Howard did, but he hasn't even begun.
Is he being offered a job or money in return for signing the contract?
If he isn't, then that isn't corrupt, its democracy. Although I understand why the corporate-owned media works at trying to confuse people.
All you do is convict everyone and eventually they'll admit their guilt.
This suggests that Reiser is innocent and has only now confessed because he was convicted, not because he really is guilty.
Except he somehow knew where the body was. If he's innocent AND now only knows where the body is because he was convicted, that's magic. And thus if there is magic, there must also be a god.
If I'm innocent I can show people where a body is? Wow. There must be a god to have that sort of magic exist.
So I was wondering if there'd be any decent music on the site. Bands I like:
* Cat Stevens
* Bee Gees
* Queen
Bands I dislike:
* My Chemical Romance
* Metallica
* AC/DC
How many of those are actual legal torrents from either site?
I could say the same about commercial music as well.
IMO 15% is an estimate based on them expecting very few people to donate money. The more people that donate, the more they make, the lower they can make their cut. Assuming of course they're not greedy capitalists.
I refuse to visit torrent sites that mainly deal in illegal goods.
Well the RIAA had evidence that someone using her internet connection was uploading music. They questioned her, they claim she lied, they have now recently gained evidence that she lied and have also learned the evidence they need to continue the case was thrown away by a relative of the defendant.
I'd say someone has definitely been dragging this case on, but if the RIAA's claims and evidence are truly accepted then it clearly wasn't them for once.
I don't know a number plate on a car seems analogous of an IP address, ASSUMING correct records are kept by the ISP on what computer was assigned what IP address at what time. If the ISP doesn't keep proper records (and IMO there's no reason they should feel they must) then that's another story.
However simply turning up with a customer address based on an IP address from a proper database isn't "purely speculative" and I feel shouldn't "be laughed out of court."
Just as I may not have been using a computer at a particular time, I may not have been using a car that was registered to me. Funnily enough the courts uphold a photograph from a speed camera as enough evidence for the police to send me a fine (I could of course defend myself with an alibi and challenge it in court). And criminal proceedings require much higher standards then civil ones.
They've finally learned that the evidence they need was thrown away before they learned of it due to the defendent's lying and stonewalling.
This is of course assuming the RIAA's letter is accurate, which while not a good assumption at all, IMO feels right based on the posts by NewYorkCountryLawyer. He has repeatedly said (and even says it again) that the defendant hasn't ever touched a computer. And while possibly true simply means that someone else using her internet connection (because she DOES have one) could have pirated the content. I've felt that a big possibility from the start and it seems the RIAA has finally gotten real proof (not the fake one they routinely throw around) that this is true. Something the defendant said (and continues to say) didn't happen.
I eagerly await to see if the RIAA's proof does hold up in court and if the court will impose sanctions. Although I have a feeling if it does happen, NYCL won't be posting about it ;)
Wow I saw MS in the URL and assumed it was about Microsoft.
Some wooden instrument is a work of art? I see post-modernism existed long before anyone invented cans of soup, let alone made a painting of one.
But its torture he's volunteering for. If he's willing to task that risk, then who are we to deny him the possibility of life, simply because it could be painful?
Fuck off! We're the Front of Judea's People.