Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:29:13 -0500 From: mikel king <mikel.king@olivent.com> To: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> Cc: FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [OT] but concerns all of us Message-ID: <E3A8ABF7-9546-4206-9089-5E7149ECED3C@olivent.com> In-Reply-To: <20111117171750.GB44779@guilt.hydra> References: <201111161924.54727.lobo@bsd.com.br> <20111117070532.1c7c9350@scorpio> <201111170928.57489.lobo@bsd.com.br> <20111117075502.74f9dbd2@scorpio> <20111117171750.GB44779@guilt.hydra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 17, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 07:55:02AM -0500, Jerry wrote: >> >> Laws to protect copyrighted or patented goods certainly exist. >> Unfortunately, they are poorly enforced. There is no universal >> "standard" for copyright infringement, etcetera. The best way to >> protect copyrighted material is stopping its pilferage at the source; >> ie, making every entity in the chain of its illegal usage responsible. > > If there are problems with enforcement, creating new laws will not > magically fix that. > > What SOPA and PIPA do is essentially let people with intrinsic commercial > conflicts of interest to bypass the checks and balances of the legal > system to have competitors and innocent bystanders shut down without due > process or actual proof of wrongdoing. These aren't just poorly worded > bills; they're poorly conceived bills. MasterCard opposes the bill > because its executives and legal staff believe it will legally force them > to cut off millions or billions in revenue generated by perfectly legal > operations every year. Google opposes the bill because its executives, > engineers, and legal staff believe it will require them to *spend* > millions or billions every year in dealing with enforcement of spurious > claims by parties with no actionable cause to make their claims. > > >> >> Theft is theft no matter how a socialist/fascist tries to color it. > > Copyright infringement is copyright infringement -- and not theft -- no > matter how hyperbolic your choice of phrasing. Castigate people for the > unlawful act of copyright infringement if you want to, but please do not > conflate two separate bodies of law by equating one illegal act with > another. This abuse of terms is largely the fault of media conglomerates > and their lobbying organizations (e.g. the RIAA and MPAA). The more you > repeat these abuses of terminology, the more they are emboldened; I think > it was the RIAA representative at the SOPA hearing yesterday who > literally equated copyright infringement with *murder*. > > Don't be like that jackass. > > -- > Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Thanks for sharing your perspective. I could not agree more. Cheers, Mikel King BSD News Network http://bsdnews.net skype: mikel.king http://twitter.com/mikelking
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E3A8ABF7-9546-4206-9089-5E7149ECED3C>