>Stop allowing the perpetrators to hide behind the corporate veil.

Then what's the point of a corporation!? (See my sig. below.)

He'll be schmoozing with the various copyright cartel lobbyists, who'll be blowing smoke up his arse and whispering sweet little lies in his ears.

Recompense will come in the "you scratch our backs, we'll scratch yours" format at some point in the future. That's the way it usually worls: 'favours' for 'favours'.

Finally someone (of note) says what everyone has been thinking (and saying).

Without the ability to challenge, it amounts to totalitarianism.

In 2050 Firefox will be a wood-pulp mill in Finland.

>Hopefully we'll wise up someday and stop caring about the pointless minutiae of each others' lives

We've been scrutinising the minutiae of others lives for millennia; ever since we evolved into social grouping, with all its hierarchical dynamics. It's not going to stop any time soon.

Wat is this utopia of user-slelected privacy controls?

signed,

A reamed-every-which-way-including-Sunday Android user.

I sense a meme...

  GoDaddy is to domain registrars what RyanAir is to the low-cost airline industry.

He was joking. He meant it amounts to being illegal - because they persue and persecute anyone who exposes their wrongdoing - and they use the DoJ et al, to do the persecution.

This is why no Briton is in a position to criticism [sic] the US.

Britons are not party to the nefarious shenannigans of the British state (by and large). Britons who oppose such things should be free to criticise them wherever they happen. As should everyone.

Inddeed. "Threat to the national security" was recently used to quash an investigation into corruption and bribery involved in a deal with Saudi Arabia. Important to have the Saudi royal family on your side, apparently. More important than the law or justice; so the "National Security" card was played and everything got dropped.

This move is about stopping people like Edward Snowden. It what we've come to expect from the Britsh State.

Meanwhile, the government gets up to whatever the hell it likes under the utterly, utterly false boilerplate defence that “all of GCHQ’s work is carried out in accordance with a strict legal and policy framework which ensures that our activities are authorized, necessary and proportionate, and that there is rigorous oversight.”

We live in a country that's little changed from the 18th century in terms of democracy and accountability.

>How about for corruption, embezzlement and all the other ways criminals and terrorists outright destroy the lives of citizens daily?

Yeah, but the politicians themselves are often in on those sort of things, so ...

you're more than likely NOT using OpenSSL on the client side (except say, if you use Firefox on Windows)

That's quite the parabolic sentence there. I hope you didn't give yourself whiplash.

Yep.

Trolls are provocateurs.
There is no proper name for people who just spew bile and hatred.

Because the behaviour of a troll is more nuanced, and the activities of someone engaging in abuse is not, and the latter has no 'internet name' (catchy, unique, widely known) people have misappropriated the word "troll".

What about a written account of a playthough that's published and sold for money? Is that a "derivative work" that's commercialised?

This is the problem with copyright and its continual land-grab of ownership. It has no real-world boundaries and exponentially expands with the greed of a creator being one of its few limiting factors.

The City of London is a defacto city state and an actual corporatocracy.

The City of London police are their hired thugs.