From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 17 17:29:17 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF91106564A for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:29:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mikel.king@olivent.com) Received: from mail.olivent.com (mail.olivent.com [75.99.82.91]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81858FC0C for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:29:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.olivent.com (Kerio Connect 7.0.0 patch 1) (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher AES128-SHA (128 bits)); Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:29:13 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: mikel king In-Reply-To: <20111117171750.GB44779@guilt.hydra> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:29:13 -0500 Message-Id: References: <201111161924.54727.lobo@bsd.com.br> <20111117070532.1c7c9350@scorpio> <201111170928.57489.lobo@bsd.com.br> <20111117075502.74f9dbd2@scorpio> <20111117171750.GB44779@guilt.hydra> To: Chad Perrin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: FreeBSD Subject: Re: [OT] but concerns all of us X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:29:17 -0000 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