Comment Re:Fee Fees Hurt? (Score 1) 270
Indeed, who is going to tell what constitutes "serious emotional distress"?
DMCA notices come to mind.
Indeed, who is going to tell what constitutes "serious emotional distress"?
DMCA notices come to mind.
I know I'd like my rocket to be safe from trolls.
some Freedom Fries with that?
Please reply if you think eternity getting their guts ripped out by demons and being force-fed their own excrement and piles of flaming coals, while being skull-fucked by enraged hell-bears (or whatever it is, I never paid much attention to mythology,) is inadequate for copyright trolls, and write-in what YOU believe would be a more appropriate comeuppance. Thanks!
No -- copyright trolls are doing us a very important service. The people who need to have their guts ripped out by demons etc are the assholes who wrote the laws that have these horrible abusive provisions which the intellectual property trolls are so elegantly demonstrating.
Then seal arrest records six months after a person leaves custody.
I remember playing with some liquid metal. Call me crazy, but I prefer my things made from solid metal.
A knowingly false DMCA claim is perjury. A copyright owner that cries wolf with the big megaphone of the DMCA could be looking at doing hard time.
Breaking news! Mrs Clinton does a good job representing someone she was supposed to represent... in light of that, who'd want her to represent US?
Microsoft Clippy should be glad he wasn't around back then...
I don't think Prenda Law holds any copyrights. The interesting question is whether they had permission to publish the things they published.
Why not? Suing them seems totally appropriate unless they are making adequate pre-purchase disclosure, and ensuring that the prospective purchaser is aware of the characteristics of the thing they are purchasing.
Disagree? Re-read Adam Smith.
I think the idea is that too many Carols and Bob ought to lose the right to cry wolf against Alice.
But again, the scene speaks for itself in that it has:
...copyright strikes from a game's publisher against a league for broadcasting the league's matches.
That's the one big difference between physical sports and electronic sports: electronic sports are almost always non-free. See "Why Nintendo can legally shut down any Smash Bros. tournament it wants" by Kyle Orland.
Activision Blizzard owns the exclusive rights to its games [...] Publishers [can] deny a license entirely and shut down a tournament's stream. [...] By contrast [...] Baseball leagues independent of MLB have existed and continue to exist.
that is different from professional sports in what way?
I just explained that. In professional sports, no entity has a government-granted exclusive right that lets it act as a gatekeeper for that sport. MLB has no power to prohibit another league unaffiliated with MLB from forming, playing baseball, and selling tickets to watch the match or stream matches on Twitch. Nor did the USFL and XFL need the NFL's permission to commence operations. Broadcast a video game, on the other hand, and expect a copyright strike.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
