701–710 of 835 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what does this mean for my extensive library in Plex of DVDs I own?
It means you are not legally allowed to lend them or sell them, even if you lose the original DVD and even though you did have the right to lend or sell the original DVD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Judges do NOT legislate from the bench! That is incredibly anti-democratic, and a collapse of our system. Judges do NOT tell politicians that they cannot make abortion illegal. That right, and yes, it IS a right, is reserved to the electorate. Who gets their will expressed through politicians. Judges judge against the body of legislation (and common law). And, yes politicians LITERALLY have the ability to do anything…
We have rights as individuals, which can’t be infringed by laws. The courts are there to prevent those laws. It’s what abortion and 2nd amendment lawsuits are all about. These right declarations aren’t super clear so the political leanings of the court weight heavily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What actions can Americans possibly take given the captured two party system and drawing back of voting rights? Not to mention the wildly unrepresentative government, wherein for example more people can vote for Trump in California than Texas in 2020 yet each of those person's votes are functionally meaningless, or, republicans can fail for over two decades to win a popular vote and still elect three presidents in th…
Entirely open (at best) question, which no smug hacker news commenter is going to answer. What does one do? (My current longshot hope? Digital democracy, on the backs of open source production economies running on the latest AI for highly-accessible/affordable data processing / labor. If we just start making online group decisions and scale it up, that's a power bloc that can run its own parties and strongarm existin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The current law is broken I think many agree that copyright needs to be shortened, but what does “broken” mean, exactly? I have good feelings for the Internet Archive, but in this case it’s about a handful of books that are being copied and distributed a mere 5 years after initial publication, which I think a lot of people who want copyright shortened would still agree is quite a bit too short. Books frequently get…
Is there really no middle ground between “five years after publication” and “seventy years after the last author’s death”?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The current law is broken I think many agree that copyright needs to be shortened, but what does “broken” mean, exactly? I have good feelings for the Internet Archive, but in this case it’s about a handful of books that are being copied and distributed a mere 5 years after initial publication, which I think a lot of people who want copyright shortened would still agree is quite a bit too short. Books frequently get…
Really the main (even only?) thing "broken" about copyright is the terms. (ADDED: I generally favor orphan works legislation but I also get the argument that this is also more likely to favor corporations than individuals.) And basically all the schemes to make copyright more expensive, difficult, requiring jumping through hoops and paying increasing amounts of money to renew? That just basically screws individual cr…
I only recently learned that the US has a bit of a Berne Convention loophole in the sense that you are required to register works with the copyright office before you can seek damages for copyright infringement (otherwise you can only demand they cease and desist). That fine print seems like it undermines the spirit of the Berne Convention just a bit, and most other countries that adhere do not have this extra hoop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
entertainment venues, museums, restaurants, etc are usually getting an exception here. public transport and emergency services too. can't shut the country down. i am actually curious how they do that in israel where the jewish law not to work on sabbath is taken much more seriously.
And why should they? Why should not those workers get same rights? Are they somehow lesser? Just give them also mandatory time off on same day. And then they like others can take some other time free to go to those places.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused. You act hostile yet you seem to agree with the original comment. The reason Row v Wade was overturned is that the judges don't want to have to decide if abortion is legal or not. They want legislators to be responsible for that. You, the judges, and the parent comment are all in agreement here.
I have no idea what Roe v Wade is about (I'm not American or in the US), but I like GP read the parent comment to theirs as meaning 'these jokers overturned it, that is bad, we cannot rely on them'. Re-reading after seeing your own comment, it is ambiguous really, you could read it either way, but you're probably right (having the context of what it's about) and GP just mistook the meaning as I did. > If anything has…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have rights as individuals, which can’t be infringed by laws. The courts are there to prevent those laws. It’s what abortion and 2nd amendment lawsuits are all about. These right declarations aren’t super clear so the political leanings of the court weight heavily.
You assume "rights" exist in a vacuum. The so called "rights" given to "the people" are clearly defined in the constitution and the bill of rights. Judges compare laws to those documents for conflicts, and err on the side of the constitution and the bill of rights. They do not make rights up as they please.
9th Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people
10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The Constitution does not define rights, rather it defines the limits of the government's power to abridge those rights.
It's weird how a bank can loan out 8-20 times what is deposited, but if I can lend out a single copy of a book I have? The banking system runs the backbone of the economy, but god forbid if everyone has access to all books? What if we use books as a payment method, can we then use the same leverage banks do?