Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29

Eustis, FL 1 edit Mr Matt Member Unfortunately the fascists are winning! Ordinary citizens no longer have a voice in our corrupt government. Lawmakers are bought and paid for by corporate payoffs in the form of campaign contributions. Copyright control agencies have the power to roll out celebrities with unlimited financial resources to influence lawmakers. The RIAA and MPAA do not want a public forum because all of these issues would be pointed out when the rules are actually scrutinized.



Americans seem to accept the new scheme like traffic signal cameras where holding the owner of the vehicle responsible for a violation of a law rather than the actual perpetrator. Why should the owner of a car receive a citation for running a red light if they are not driving it. It is my opinion that the big ISP's accepted these draconian rules simply because they wanted to get off the hook so they would not be held responsible for copyright violations perpetrated by their customers. The only way to resolve this matter is through court challenge of the law. Ordinary citizens no longer have a voice in our corrupt government. Lawmakers are bought and paid for by corporate payoffs in the form of campaign contributions. Copyright control agencies have the power to roll out celebrities with unlimited financial resources to influence lawmakers. The RIAA and MPAA do not want a public forum because all of these issues would be pointed out when the rules are actually scrutinized.Americans seem to accept the new scheme like traffic signal cameras where holding the owner of the vehicle responsible for a violation of a law rather than the actual perpetrator. Why should the owner of a car receive a citation for running a red light if they are not driving it. It is my opinion that the big ISP's accepted these draconian rules simply because they wanted to get off the hook so they would not be held responsible for copyright violations perpetrated by their customers. The only way to resolve this matter is through court challenge of the law.

openbox9

Premium Member

join:2004-01-26

71144 openbox9 Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! said by Mr Matt: Americans seem to accept the new scheme like traffic signal cameras where holding the owner of the vehicle responsible for a violation of a law rather than the actual perpetrator. Why should the owner of a car receive a citation for running a red light if they are not driving it. said by Mr Matt : The only way to resolve this matter is through court challenge of the law. It's not difficult to challenge the fine if you weren't driving...at least in the jurisdictions that I'm aware of.What law?



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt to Mr Matt

Premium Member to Mr Matt

said by Mr Matt:

Why should the owner of a car receive a citation for running a red light if they are not driving it.

the red light corp. is a seperate problem, and needs supervision.

WA state has a couple tolled (more coming) roads and recently changed contractors on the tacoma narrows bridge... after alot of problems the tool commision gave the contractor 90 days to correct errors, and then charged the full cost of all incorrect tickets against the contractor.

The next likely payer will be the company who was supposed to start tolling on the 520 to prepay for the replacement ($4Bil+) but has repeatedly failed the state tests for acuracy.( this one needs to correctly read liesces plates in the dark, in high winds with waves breaking over the bridge) if the can't pass by september they will pay the missing fund (millions per monoth) and likely lose the contract and equipment.

It's fine to use contractors, UNDER state law enforcement supervision. Because too many (of the offenders) register their cars in the name of a friend, aging parent, etc. what the law needs(here we have it) is a chance for the owner to come forward and identify the driver/who they loaned it to... don't do that and YOU pay the fine (lose the car in the case of drugs/alcohol/crime) it makes they owner/insured RESPONSIBLE and hopefully think twice before they loan out their car.the red light corp. is a seperate problem, and needs supervision.WA state has a couple tolled (more coming) roads and recently changed contractors on the tacoma narrows bridge... after alot of problems the tool commision gave the contractor 90 days to correct errors, and then charged the full cost of all incorrect tickets against the contractor.The next likely payer will be the company who was supposed to start tolling on the 520 to prepay for the replacement ($4Bil+) but has repeatedly failed the state tests for acuracy.( this one needs to correctly read liesces plates in the dark, in high winds with waves breaking over the bridge) if the can't pass by september they will pay the missing fund (millions per monoth) and likely lose the contract and equipment.It's fine to use contractors, UNDER state law enforcement supervision.

Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29

Eustis, FL Mr Matt Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! Owner brought car in for routine service. Mechanic took car out for a test drive, ran a red light with camera. Weeks later owner received a citation. Fortunately owner retained bill for service which showed check in and check out time. Unfortunately when service manager was confronted the finger pointing started. Owner had to go to court to with receipt to have fine dismissed. If they did not have receipt they would have had to pay fine. Owner brought car in for routine service. Mechanic took car out for a test drive, ran a red light with camera. Weeks later owner received a citation. Fortunately owner retained bill for service which showed check in and check out time. Unfortunately when service manager was confronted the finger pointing started. Owner had to go to court to with receipt to have fine dismissed. If they did not have receipt they would have had to pay fine.

openbox9

Premium Member

join:2004-01-26

71144 openbox9 Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! Ok, but the process worked

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04

Sugar Land, TX WernerSchutz Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! said by openbox9: Ok, but the process worked

The shitty "processes" should NOT put excessive burdens on people to prove their innocence.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! So how would Werner, work to discourage red light runners, to limit the danger to the public?

A auto cam can be an effective tool for a number of situations, and obviously getting a ticket (and maybe having to fight it) is a lot cheaper way to find out SOMEONE (wife, kid, brother, mechanic, babysitter, etc.) you allowed to drive your car is not being the careful, law abiding user you hoped, then waiting for an accident.

Like a lot of law enforcement, most of the effectiveness is in getting you the violator to pay attention. The laws came about to save lives, not just to be a pain in the ass.

Red light cameras only came about because it is a constant problem/danger to others

kerya666

join:2002-12-20

Valrico, FL kerya666 Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! My son at USF just recently defended his PhD with a case study that goes against that. In short form what he has gathered: red light cameras actually increase collisions (mostly rear-end) and have only a minuscule(2-3%) influence on reduction of T-bone collisions. And that people after getting cited usually simply avoid said intersections and find a way around instead.



They did however find that, if the intersection's yellow light was extended by 1 to 2 seconds there was a huge drop in wrecks and better management of consecutive light timings ( you do not have to speed to make the next light); in addition to this that red light cameras made over $790k in just 6 months for a city of 70k people. Not to mention of the unwillingness of the red-light monitoring company to testify in court or release recordings of crashes for case studies.

As I see it, it's solely for money and nothing else, but in the pretense of safety. I put it in the same group as "it's to save the children" laws.



So in the end with laws like mentioned in the story, you are guilty unless you want to spend time and money to prove otherwise..AKA BS.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! I know about the rearender effect. the problem being if they make the yellow too long or out of proportion with the local standards (everywhere starts with the fed standard and adjusts up or down as they see fit, but the idea is crossing a 2 lane road takes x time plus y to recognize the yellow plus 2 seconds, so crossing a six lane the yellow is longer than a 4 lane and so on.) that most people can't percive that this is a 'fast' or 'slow' intersection and than don't react correctly.



However I've seen the video of monitored (but as yet uncamera'd) problem intersections and seen the not just accidental crossings, but those that accelerate (believing that they'll clear the inersection faster)

Repeatly it is the same cars and same profiles (mostly young male thrillseekers) these also match the reckless/agressive/impaired driver profiles.

in fact no enforcement is perfect, but ignoring the problems, leads to the"I can outrun them" attitude,and leaves 10,000's of injured, 1,000's of dead every year.

The idea that ordinary citizens, should stay off the road/out of the way of the "fearless" few, is repulsive to me and many others.



sivran

Vive Vivaldi

Premium Member

join:2003-09-15

Irving, TX sivran to tshirt

Premium Member to tshirt

quote: Red light cameras only came about because it is a constant problem/danger to others of a desire for more revenue. Fixed that for you. Fixed that for you.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! said by sivran: quote: Red light cameras only came about because it is a constant problem/danger to others of a desire for more revenue. Fixed that for you.

Fixed that for you.

You fixed it for you, I refuse to subscribe to your teabagger FUD. You fixed it for you, I refuse to subscribe to your teabagger FUD.



sivran

Vive Vivaldi

Premium Member

join:2003-09-15

Irving, TX sivran Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! Teabagger? Thanks for the laugh.



FUD? Hey, I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

openbox9

Premium Member

join:2004-01-26

71144 openbox9 to WernerSchutz

Premium Member to WernerSchutz

Excessive burden? What exactly is excessive about proving you weren't driving a vehicle that committed a moving violation?

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04

Sugar Land, TX WernerSchutz Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! Presumption of innocence, the burden of proof should be on the accuser to show that you were.

openbox9

Premium Member

join:2004-01-26

71144 openbox9 Premium Member Re: Unfortunately the fascists are winning! The authorities obtain an image of the accused's vehicle. That's enough to start the process. Defending a case is also important in any legal proceeding. One would be foolish to simply rely on the plaintiff to prove one's guilt.

gorehound

join:2009-06-19

Portland, ME gorehound to Mr Matt

Member to Mr Matt

I do not accept their bullshit.Now the RIAA/MPAA does not get a dime of my money.I will never buy a new product or go to a theater again.i do not care either and am missing nothing.

if i do really want a film i buy it used.

if i still am alive when their is no physical media i will find it free.



and i suggest for those who hate the system it is time to fight back.do not vote for the current players and find indie one to vote for.



Metatron2008

Premium Member

join:2008-09-02

united state 1 recommendation Metatron2008 Premium Member What kind of input are we asking for here? Input from law abiding citizens, or input from people who want pirate laws to not exist because they want free goods online?



Asking a lot of people on here for input is like asking a common thug if the 5 finger discount should get them locked up



Alex J

@jillyred.net Alex J Anon Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? And right...because some of the people included in a discussion might say things you don't like -- that's a good reason to have no public input whatsoever....



Metatron2008

Premium Member

join:2008-09-02

united state 1 edit Metatron2008 Premium Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? said by Alex J : And right...because some of the people included in a discussion might say things you don't like -- that's a good reason to have no public input whatsoever....





With that said, the thug will be slanted towards breaking the law, and unfortunately for criminals, the law is MADE (not always used properly though) with the intentions of upholding the law, not giving thieves a get out of jail free card.



If you have an opinion, by all means say it. Just don't expect that the opinions here (Which alot simply just want free pirated goods) would go well with law enforcement. That would be Against people's rights. Just like it would be against a common thugs rights if they couldn't give an opinion to the government.With that said, the thug will be slanted towards breaking the law, and unfortunately for criminals, the law is MADE (not always used properly though) with the intentions of upholding the law, not giving thieves a get out of jail free card.If you have an opinion, by all means say it. Just don't expect that the opinions here (Which alot simply just want free pirated goods) would go well with law enforcement.

Rekrul

join:2007-04-21

Milford, CT Rekrul Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? said by Metatron2008: With that said, the thug will be slanted towards breaking the law, and unfortunately for criminals, the law is MADE (not always used properly though) with the intentions of upholding the law, not giving thieves a get out of jail free card.



If you have an opinion, by all means say it. Just don't expect that the opinions here (Which alot simply just want free pirated goods) would go well with law enforcement.



Just laws work because the majority of people believe in them. Most people believe that it's wrong to hurt or kill someone, so they have no problem with those laws. On the other hand, if they were to pass a law that made it illegal to wear a hat, there would be a hell of a lot of people breaking the law.



When a majority of the people don't agreed with a law, it's time to think about changing the law.



You'll probably twist this to say that I want everything to be free. What I want is for copyright to be restored to the way it was originally intended to work. I want the power taken away from the giant corporations. I want our government to start being more concerned with people's rights than with who bribes them with the most money.



Maybe when the law is actually balanced, rather than completely slanted in favor of the corporations, most people will once again respect the law. But don't give the corporations the power to piss on the little guy and expect that they're just going to take it. Just because something is law, doesn't make it right. At one time slavery was legal, that didn't make it right. After slavery was abolished, black people were still discriminated against. That was legal, but it wasn't right. The US tried to ban alcohol, you can see how well that worked out.Just laws work because the majority of people believe in them. Most people believe that it's wrong to hurt or kill someone, so they have no problem with those laws. On the other hand, if they were to pass a law that made it illegal to wear a hat, there would be a hell of a lot of people breaking the law.When a majority of the people don't agreed with a law, it's time to think about changing the law.You'll probably twist this to say that I want everything to be free. What I want is for copyright to be restored to the way it was originally intended to work. I want the power taken away from the giant corporations. I want our government to start being more concerned with people's rights than with who bribes them with the most money.Maybe when the law is actually balanced, rather than completely slanted in favor of the corporations, most people will once again respect the law. But don't give the corporations the power to piss on the little guy and expect that they're just going to take it.

WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04

Sugar Land, TX WernerSchutz Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? Fascism is not easily corrected from within, as history shows.

rradina

join:2000-08-08

Chesterfield, MO 920.3 39.3

·Charter

rradina to Alex J

Member to Alex J

The article said ISPs, MPAA, RIAA and the government was involved in this plan. To quote the great Abe Lincoln, the government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people. So if the government was involved, what does the EFF mean by PUBLIC input? Even if we tried to ask everyone for their opinion, I don't think we'd get a reasonable answer.



Some people believe that if the copyright holder doesn't offer it for sale, that means they can then copy/acquire it for free. Their rationale is that they are doing no harm because they aren't causing lost sales since it isn't for sale anyway.



Some people believe that when a work is offered for sale, what's being sold is the physical media. If they copy it, the original remains and they haven't taken anything of value. Furthermore, if they cannot acquire it in this manner, they still wouldn't buy it because it just costs too much. Thus, no harm because their copy doesn't represent a lost sale.



Some people justify their theft because they believe the recording/production company and distribution channel are simply making too much money. They might pay the artist their cut but since they can't, they feel the just thing to do is prevent the egregious rip off forced on the public by evil corporations.

The Antihero

join:2002-04-09

Enola, PA The Antihero Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? said by rradina: To quote the great Abe Lincoln, the government is supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people.

supposed to be. As for what actually is, change "people" to "corporations." Yeah,As for what actually is, change "people" to "corporations."



djtim21

It's all good

Premium Member

join:2003-12-22

Lake Villa, IL djtim21 to Metatron2008

Premium Member to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008: Input from law abiding citizens, or input from people who want pirate laws to not exist because they want free goods online?



Asking a lot of people on here for input is like asking a common thug if the 5 finger discount should get them locked up

Might want to think about that - Just posted to /. : Suppressed Report Shows Pirates Are Good Customers: » yro.slashdot.org/story/1 ··· ustomers



Metatron2008

Premium Member

join:2008-09-02

united state Metatron2008 Premium Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? said by djtim21: said by Metatron2008: Input from law abiding citizens, or input from people who want pirate laws to not exist because they want free goods online?



Asking a lot of people on here for input is like asking a common thug if the 5 finger discount should get them locked up



Might want to think about that - Just posted to /. : Suppressed Report Shows Pirates Are Good Customers: » yro.slashdot.org/story/1 ··· ustomers Does that mean they are now free to break the law?

Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29

Eustis, FL Mr Matt Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? I agree that those violating copyright should be subject to sanctions if there is irrefutable proof of the violation. All accusations should be subject to judicial review because in the past ISP's have connected the wrong IP address to a customer. Why should a customer have to shell out $35.00 to protest a mistake on the part of an ISP. On the other hand the record labels and movie producers want the good old days where the customer paid to see a lousy movie or poor quality audio recording and were stuck with it. There are some that use Netflix to view movies and determine if they want to add the movie to their collection. The movie and record industry should be more creative.



Metatron2008

Premium Member

join:2008-09-02

united state Metatron2008 Premium Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? Creativity? That day is long gone. At least we still have games...



I agree with what you said. I'm totally against pirating, but I have not bought a music cd in ages...



I believe since 2005.

Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29

Eustis, FL Mr Matt Member Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? It's your fault and the fault of the millions of other citizens that are not buying Compact Discs. You have given the psychotic copyright weasels a reason to claim that pirates are destroying their business, because sales have declined.



Unfortunately the music industry lacks the intelligence to recognize the fact that the economy is in the toilet and citizens just do not have the discretionary income to buy luxuries. The decline in sales does not mean that the lost sales are caused by pirates.



I remember reading in an audiophile magazine, in 1981, during a recession, the music industry lamented that most department stores were closing their record/cassette departments. The music industry claimed the cause was home taping, the copying of copyrighted material because little Joey was copying his friends latest record on his cassette recorder. Their solution was to demand copyright protection systems on consumer recorders. Fortunately they never came up with one that worked.



What saved the music industries ass was the introduction of the compact disc. They sold like hotcakes because so many Audiophiles wanted to replace their vinyl with CD's. There was such a demand for compact discs that music stores sold CD's for about $4.00 above the manufactures MSRP. That resulted in a lawsuit around 1984 for increased compensation for composers and performers. Why? The composers and performers compensation was based on the $12.95 MSRP not the actual $16.95 sale price of the CD. It's your fault and the fault of the millions of other citizens that are not buying Compact Discs. You have given the psychotic copyright weasels a reason to claim that pirates are destroying their business, because sales have declined.Unfortunately the music industry lacks the intelligence to recognize the fact that the economy is in the toilet and citizens just do not have the discretionary income to buy luxuries. The decline in sales does not mean that the lost sales are caused by pirates.I remember reading in an audiophile magazine, in 1981, during a recession, the music industry lamented that most department stores were closing their record/cassette departments. The music industry claimed the cause was home taping, the copying of copyrighted material because little Joey was copying his friends latest record on his cassette recorder. Their solution was to demand copyright protection systems on consumer recorders. Fortunately they never came up with one that worked.What saved the music industries ass was the introduction of the compact disc. They sold like hotcakes because so many Audiophiles wanted to replace their vinyl with CD's. There was such a demand for compact discs that music stores sold CD's for about $4.00 above the manufactures MSRP. That resulted in a lawsuit around 1984 for increased compensation for composers and performers. Why? The composers and performers compensation was based on the $12.95 MSRP not the actual $16.95 sale price of the CD.



NormanS

I gave her time to steal my mind away

MVM

join:2001-02-14

San Jose, CA TP-Link TD-8616

Asus RT-AC66U B1

Netgear FR114P

NormanS to Metatron2008

MVM to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008: Creativity? That day is long gone. At least we still have games...



I agree with what you said. I'm totally against pirating, but I have not bought a music cd in ages...



I believe since 2005.





I do like performers, such as , and , and composers such as, , and (better known as, ).



RIAA is complaining that their revenues are down, and blaming the pirates. But I am still spending my money; just not on the RIAA. I have not bought a Hollywood produced CD in over a decade. I have bought music CDs, as recently as last year; just not from U.S. artists.I do like performers, such as , and , and composers such as, , and (better known as, ).RIAA is complaining that their revenues are down, and blaming the pirates. But I am still spending my money; just not on the RIAA.



djtim21

It's all good

Premium Member

join:2003-12-22

Lake Villa, IL djtim21 to Metatron2008

Premium Member to Metatron2008

My point of posting is - Any of the *IAA's do not have the right to do what they are trying to do. All copyright infringement is a civil matter period.



In saying that - to AVOID all this crap that you see right now it would be as simple as allow a better type of digital product, extended previews, non-restricted viewing. What you get in the end is folks willing to pay if the product is good (hence the article I posted).



I've used torrent sites in the past - just to check out movies, to listen to music to see if it's worth the cash that I make and spend it on a quality product. If I liked it, I either went to a theater, rented it or purchased it out right.



Even to answer your direct question "Does that mean they are now free to break the law?" - Prove that people are stealing - in court with all the protections required by the Constitution and judicial system. Don't scare them into paying blood money (guilty or not) because of financial ruin and the possibility of frogs raining from the sky.



There is a balance here - what is going on behind closed doors is not balance, is not fair or right for any consumer for any product.



Noah Vail

Oh God please no.

Premium Member

join:2004-12-10

SouthAmerica Noah Vail to Metatron2008

Premium Member to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008: Does that mean they are now free to break the law?

I'm genuinely curious if you still stand by that equivocacy.



and



Rekrul

I'll repeat his effort this way:



Do you stand by historical decisions to imprison abolitionists who were breaking the law by helping slaves escape to free states/territories?



Or if you prefer: imprisoning people who taught black families to read and write where the law prohibited it?



These are people who knew the law and chose to break it.

They were punished for their crimes.



Do you speak in favor of their punishments or against?

I'd be grateful to hear your unambiguous response to these points.



NV Aren't you the user that once equated copyright violations w/ murder?I'm genuinely curious if you still stand by that equivocacy.andRekrul brought up a salient point concerning slavery. You seemed to ignore it.I'll repeat his effort this way:Do you stand by historical decisions to imprison abolitionists who were breaking the law by helping slaves escape to free states/territories?Or if you prefer: imprisoning people who taught black families to read and write where the law prohibited it?These are people who knew the law and chose to break it.They were punished for their crimes.Do you speak in favor of their punishments or against?I'd be grateful to hear your unambiguous response to these points.NV



Oh_Noes11

@phonoscope.net Oh_Noes11 to Metatron2008

Anon to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008: Input from law abiding citizens, or input from people who want pirate laws to not exist because they want free goods online?



Asking a lot of people on here for input is like asking a common thug if the 5 finger discount should get them locked up



Anything the RIAA or MPAA has a problem with is a civil matter and they have no right to regulate/restrict the internet.

Customer are not paying for RIAA/MPAA restricted internet.



A customer's privacy should be very important to ISPs. ISPs should never keep logs and should never give out any customer information without a court order. They also should not forward anything without charging a forwarding fee to the RIAA or MPAA.



ISPs are forgetting they work for the customer and they should leave any civil actions up to the courts.



Also not every country has laws against things that the RIAA and MPAA are bitching about and the internet is not bound to any country. Hell your downloading could easily be going through outspace or the bottom of the ocean. It does not matter.Anything the RIAA or MPAA has a problem with is a civil matter and they have no right to regulate/restrict the internet.Customer are not paying for RIAA/MPAA restricted internet.A customer's privacy should be very important to ISPs. ISPs should never keep logs and should never give out any customer information without a court order. They also should not forward anything without charging a forwarding fee to the RIAA or MPAA.ISPs are forgetting they work for the customer and they should leave any civil actions up to the courts.Also not every country has laws against things that the RIAA and MPAA are bitching about and the internet is not bound to any country. Hell your downloading could easily be going through outspace or the bottom of the ocean.



NormanS

I gave her time to steal my mind away

MVM

join:2001-02-14

San Jose, CA TP-Link TD-8616

Asus RT-AC66U B1

Netgear FR114P

NormanS MVM Re: What kind of input are we asking for here? said by Oh_Noes11 : ISPs are forgetting they work for the customer and they should leave any civil actions up to the courts.

ISPs such as AT&T and Comcast are also content providers, and they work for the content producers.

Rekrul

join:2007-04-21

Milford, CT Rekrul to Metatron2008

Member to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008: Input from law abiding citizens, or input from people who want pirate laws to not exist because they want free goods online?



Why shouldn't there be penalties for falsely accusing a person of infringement? If there isn't, what's the incentive for the entertainment industry to make sure that their evidence gathering methods are accurate?



Why should the subscriber have to pay to prove their innocence? The law says that people are innocent until proven guilty. Is this why the entertainment industry wants a private deal between them and the ISPs, rather than taking these cases to court? Because they're too hard to prove?



Why shouldn't the Entertainment industry have to open their methods up to scrutiny to make sure that they're accurate? The RIAA has a history of suing old people, dead people, children and in one case, a networked printer.



Why do they get to dictate what defenses you can use? Have you ever seen a court case where the judge hands the defendant a list of the defenses that they'll be allowed to use? For example, I don't see a defense of downloading a mis-named file on there. Does that mean that nobody ever mis-names files on the Internet?



Contrary to corporate opinion, it isn't illegal to leave your wireless router unsecured for others to use. Yet this agreement treats it as if it is, by allowing subscribers to use that as a defense once. Then they expect everyone to lock off their routers like good little sheep.



You don't think that normal people should have been allowed a voice in this agreement, but let me ask you this; Would it have been fair to let the public decide on these rules while excluding the entertainment industry? No? Then why was it ok for the Entertainment industry to exclude the public? What's wrong with any of the suggestions in the linked article?Why shouldn't there be penalties for falsely accusing a person of infringement? If there isn't, what's the incentive for the entertainment industry to make sure that their evidence gathering methods are accurate?Why should the subscriber have to pay to prove their innocence? The law says that people are innocent until proven guilty. Is this why the entertainment industry wants a private deal between them and the ISPs, rather than taking these cases to court? Because they're too hard to prove?Why shouldn't the Entertainment industry have to open their methods up to scrutiny to make sure that they're accurate? The RIAA has a history of suing old people, dead people, children and in one case, a networked printer.Why do they get to dictate what defenses you can use? Have you ever seen a court case where the judge hands the defendant a list of the defenses that they'll be allowed to use? For example, I don't see a defense of downloading a mis-named file on there. Does that mean that nobody ever mis-names files on the Internet?Contrary to corporate opinion, it isn't illegal to leave your wireless router unsecured for others to use. Yet this agreement treats it as if it is, by allowing subscribers to use that as a defense. Then they expect everyone to lock off their routers like good little sheep.You don't think that normal people should have been allowed a voice in this agreement, but let me ask you this; Would it have been fair to let the public decide on these rules while excluding the entertainment industry? No? Then why was it ok for the Entertainment industry to exclude the public?



Bor

@telus.net Bor to Metatron2008

Anon to Metatron2008

Yes because people who believe in due process and the presumption of innocence and all that other rights crap are all a bunch of dirty pirates. Same goes for all those free love hippy pirating communist proles who think citizens out to have some input into the way that the country is run.



FFH5

Premium Member

join:2002-03-03

Tavistock NJ FFH5 to Metatron2008

Premium Member to Metatron2008

said by Metatron2008: Input from law abiding citizens, or input from people who want pirate laws to not exist because they want free goods online?



Asking a lot of people on here for input is like asking a common thug if the 5 finger discount should get them locked up

And the ones commenting on new procedures to catch the pirates will be the pirates themselves and the groups that always defend criminals at the expense of law abiding citizens.



zalternate

join:2007-02-22

freedom land zalternate Member Laws with flaws The slave masters and their employee's surely want people to forget a basic principle of Law, ""People are innocent until proved guilty in a court of Law(with a real Judge) and shall not be accused or punished without factual and accurate evidence of guilt, in a trial, in a Court of Law""(roughly) . If you say I stole something? Do you have court admissible evidence to back it up? Or are you just looking for a quick payout(via extortion), without bothering with the courts? Or are you a little piece of shit who is going to rob me by saying what I have is yours? Well I will kick your ass all the way down the winding road of the Courts and make sure your ass is the one going to jail for your abuse of the Law and abuse of my Rights.



The other problem with this bull shit is that people are having to spend money(without a refund for a false accusation) to defend themselves against ""accusations"" of doing a crime. And what it all will come down too, is the ISP is going to get a butt load of lawsuits against them for violating peoples Rights. That $35 user filing fee will easily turn into a $1,000 court Judgement for the ISP to pay, for violating each persons Rights.

Ricanlegend

join:2011-05-18

Bronx, NY Ricanlegend Member Re: Laws with flaws There's so much flaw with this it becomes insane, I can easily hack all the wifi around me and download and upload my torrent using there ip and guess what those people will have to pay $35 FOR WHAT ? Even if you pay how can you prove you didn't download it ? Are they going to ask you to give them every Mac address for every internet ready device ? I ll keep doing me if cablevision starts acting up there always VPN service that i can get for a pretty good ,price and have 100% total privacy from my ISP

Kamus

join:2011-01-27

El Paso, TX Kamus Member So on the one hand... So on the one hand we have the US government giving credit to the internet for freedom in the middle east.



On the other they now think people have too much freedom and are willing to punish consumers for the sake of the RIAA and the MPAA.



In the end they'll still lose, but not with out proving us what we suspected all along about them.

gorehound

join:2009-06-19

Portland, ME gorehound Member Re: So on the one hand... that this government is a piece of shit ruining our great country.we have the proof of that one.

republicans and democrats are a bunch of children playing with our lives and behind our back taking whatever money comes their way.

brown nosed sold out cowards your day will come.

axiomatic

join:2006-08-23

Tomball, TX axiomatic Member ISP=suckers Man the RIAA and MPAA won this one big time. They reap the benefit and the ISP's pay for the effort in time and labor for the media cartels.



What a bunch of suckers. If I were a shareholder in these ISP's I would be reinvesting elsewhere ASAP.

old_wiz_60

join:2005-06-03

Bedford, MA old_wiz_60 Member Why in the world... would the public have any involvement? To the RIAA/MPAA that would be like convicted murderers being involved in plans for new laws regarding murder.



The ISPs are simply doing what the RIAA/MPAA is paying them to do, plain and simple.



The law has changed by the way, it's now "Guilty until proven innocent", NOT "Innocent until proven guilty."