91–100 of 108 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see that anyone asked him a question...
>> It has a morass of serious issues untouched by these modifications. > Such as..?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Refusing to settle for anything short of perfect is often a bad trait, sure. And that's what the saying means... Especially important for technologists and entrepreneurs.
I realize that's what the saying is supposed to mean but it doesn't really say that. I detest speaking in platitudes when plain english will do fine.
Using a widely-understood word or phrase to express an idea concisely is sort of the basis of language. Most people prefer a terse expression over "plain English" several times the length.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such as..? Not disagreeing, but you're begging the question.
The DMCA takedown procedure still gives too much power to the accuser, without sufficient penalties for improper notices. Since it implements a "guilty until proven innocent" system, there needs to be strong deterrent for false notices. Things especially need to be clarified for the case of computer-generated takedown notices - there needs to be a real person who is at real risk of disbarment or perjury charges when…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The DMCA takedown procedure still gives too much power to the accuser, without sufficient penalties for improper notices. Since it implements a "guilty until proven innocent" system, there needs to be strong deterrent for false notices. Things especially need to be clarified for the case of computer-generated takedown notices - there needs to be a real person who is at real risk of disbarment or perjury charges when…
Can a legitimate copyright holder file a preemptive counter-claim, such that any attempt to remove their work _must_ be forced through a court order to restrain infringement? It would seem that such a tactic would be less than tenable for illegitimate uploaders, while allowing legitimate holders to avoid the onerous downtimes that can be brought on by a false claim.
You can try to preempt things by hosting everything yourself, but they can always go after your ISP. Unless you own the whole internet[1], there's somebody who's not you who can be blackmailed into disabling access to your content.
([1] or otherwise render the rest of the internet ineligible for safe harbor, such as by making them financially benefit in a way directly attributable to whatever activity may be alleged to be infringing.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a hidden agenda in saying that this "fixes the DMCA." It has a morass of serious issues untouched by these modifications.
Such as..? Not disagreeing, but you're begging the question.
If you want this to pass, don't sign the petition, and don't email or write your congresscritter. Call them . Interact with a human being in their office. Anecdotally, that has a much greater impact. (Source: my cousin and his wife were congressional staffers for several years.)
For someone who has never called a politician to lobby for something, what do you say when you call them up? Is it as simple as "I'd like for you back this bill?" Honest question.