The jury seemed to decide that accusations qualify as infringement

However regrettable, it's easy to understand how that can happen.

The jury could have just been told testimony that "we saw xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx was seeding our movie" (with screenshots of MPAA's torrent client showing a seeder at that address and the packets they got from that address correctly matching the torrent's checksum). Meanwhile, Cox wouldn't have any evidence refuting it (even though the assertion isn't proven; the "screenshots" could have been made in GIMP for all we know). And then the jury might have ruled based on "preponderance" of evidence.

Kind of like 3 cops saying "the perp resisted arrest" and the perp saying "no I didn't" and a criminal jury (where the bar is much higher) still deciding that the perp resisted arrest. Sigh. You know that happens.

Had Cox ratted their customer out (or gotten a DMCA counternotice from them), then the customer could have been sued instead, and raised doubts by saying "I have an open wifi" or something like that. But Cox didn't, and they certainly aren't going to say "we have an open wifi" since they're in the network business so of course they don't offer free networking to strangers. It sounds like a difficult situation for Cox.

The story is light on details so I ass/u/me some things. The copyright infringement was likely due to torrents, i.e. from the internet's point of view, addresses owned by Cox were publishing/hosting content (under the hood: really Cox's customers seeding torrents).

So if I were an MPAA/RIAA -member company, I'd send Cox a DMCA notice ("Cox, stop sharing my copyrighted work") which really means "Cut that customer off or otherwise make them stop, or else get a DMCA counternotice from them, so I can go after them instead of you." And if that's what happened, then it sounds like Cox said no (didn't make it stop and also didn't pass the buck to their customers. So they sued Cox instead of Cox's customers.

But that's based on assumptions and speculation, hence my question. But yes, I know what a DMCA notice is and I think that mechanism was likely in involved at some point in the story.

So what that he encouraged or developed something, he is not the person who had actual access to this information, he never worked for any agency in USA where he would have to promise not to disclose information, to him (or anyone who doesn't work for such agencies) status of any 'secret' information is completely irrelevant, as it should be.

For example, if I egged on some general to disclose top secret information about some project and then he did disclose it, it would be on the general, not on me or anyone who encouraged him. HE IS THE ONE WHO PROMISED NOT TO DISCLOSE IT NO MATTER WHAT, not me, not anyone else.

I am not a 'right wing', I am not a 'left wing', I am a libertarian, anarcho capitalist, it puts me completely outside of what is considered to be normal politics in the USA by the way and I say that Assange has done nothing wrong at all and he is being terrorized because he embarrassed people who have power.

*this* is what "proves" it? Not the kidnappings, the torture, the murders? )

Yeah, you don't understand what will actually happen. What will actually happen is just more terrorism by the government that is already terrorist in nature. Kadyrov is a murderer, torturer, terrorist, his fame to claim was that he murdered his first russian at the age of 16. Today he routinely murders anyone who opposes his rule in any way, real or imaginary. His son kidnaps and beats a kid who posts something online that Kadyrov finds offensive. People routinely disappear, never to be seen again. People get tortured for anything that Kadyrov doesn't like.

At the same time Chechnia's economy only exists because putin provides Chechnia with billions of dollars every year from the russian budget.

You don't understand what is actually happening there. They don't care about law or whatever, if they hear something they don't like, you'll disappear and be raped and tortured and killed and that's about it. This entire thing about the music is really nothing at all, it just means that if someone *hears* music that is not Chechen they will report you and you will be gone.

It's unclear from the articles whether or not this happened: did the record labels send DMCA notices to Cox, which Cox blew off (thereby becoming liable in place of the original suspected infringer)? Or did the record labels just sue 'em first?

Prior to 1998 they wouldn't have been liable (just like Western Digital and Seagate aren't liable for whatever I may be suspected of doing) but DMCA makes hosting services (and networks? hmm...) a special case, unlike power utilities, computer equipment manufacturers, etc.

Can Musk even define "intelligence"?

You are correct. What Canada needs is a 3d printed AI government, which would be a vast improvement over Trudeau.

It's important to note that Weird Al seeks the approval of the artists he is parodying. Technically it's not likely in many cases he has to, since US copyright law generally protects parody, but he's a good faith actor who understands not everyone is going to want to be parodied. Still, the fact that he does seek permission gives him an extra layer of protection.

1st of April was 2 days ago, was there an editing delay? In any case, there is only 1 Matrix movie, it was released in 1999 and I went to watch it in the theater 7 times. I have heard rumors about sequels but only that, they don't exist, whatever exists is not the Matrix, to make a movie like that one needs balls...

Many of us on this website dream of a day when humans no longer have to perform backbreaking or mind-numbing labor. Our spirits are assaulted whenever we hear politicians hatefully brag about how they will create more jobs instead of leading us toward the Star Trekkian paradise of less soul-crushing or injurious toil.

I thought Amazon was one of the few good guys, working to help create a world of 100% unemployment. I know it's only an ideal to strive for (we'll likely never free everyone from having to work) but they seemed to be trying.

How many times have we been promised "I'll replace you with a script" or "AI is coming for your job?" Empty words. Lies. To find out they were secretly saddling innocent humans with computers' jobs, is an insult to both of our races.

It's absolutely ridiculous to claim these anecdotes mean computers suck.

These computers which initially worked and then turned against their owners all had one thing in common: they run proprietary software, made to serve the manufacturer's interests at the expense of the owners' interests.

So stop saying "smart devices are bad." The obvious conclusion is that "proprietary smart devices are bad."

Yes, training AI on Nazis at Truth Social will be much more effective.

I wanted a weekend driver and got myself a 2014 Boxster, no way in hell that would have been an automatic, that car is for fun and has nothing to do with any 'retro' crap. I wouldn't be caught dead driving an EV though.

I run a number of companies, I am not under illusion that my companies are here forever, however I also am against government bailing out my companies should they fail. They should be then restructured or shut down, whatever. I haven't worked for someone permanently since 2000, so I don't understand this idea that there shouldn't be unemployment or emoyment should be at 100% and I am against government setting that up as well, as it means unnecessary money spent on jobs that shouldn't exist. Yes, I am against government bailing out anyone, I am against government taxing work, income of any kind, preventing businesses from making their own decisions What exactly do you think a government drone knows about running any business, mine or yours or whatever business? However they can bail it out and create amazing amounts of waste dojng it.