Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Be careful what you wish for (Score 1) 265

Oh this one's easy. Check Article 29.2 of the UDHR: "In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society." All UDHR Rights, if they were capable of judicial interpretation, are qualified. Besides, in the order of the articles, one can argue that even cultural life takes precedence over copyright.

I would be quite shocked myself that living on your copyright is a fundamental human right of gross importance.

Comment Re:Can you say conflict of interest? (Score 1) 415

Parent may not be accurate in stating that this was a jury trial, but his general point still stands: you can't appeal just because you don't like the law. In common law, there would be a procedure where you have to convince a judge that the appeal is worth hearing by the superior court. You can't raise novel points of law, and appeals are generally slow to overturn convictions unless the judge obviously got the case wrong.

Nevertheless, this tactic of letting the highest court hear cases just because there are new and interesting points of law is stupid. Unless TPB has a lot of cash to burn.

Comment Re:"Safe Harbour" (Score 2, Interesting) 408

As the article already mentions, the case against TPB is very much a moral victory for the MAFIAA. They need to show you can't "get away" with it.

If Google wants to "co-operate" and avoid this kind of shitstorm, they'd enter into agreements with content owners where they'd agree on what kind of limitations is acceptable, in exchange for giving them a break and not pressuring governments to act.

The bad thing would be that this is all settled privately, and not checked by some kind of "rule of law". You might not even be able to tell how they'd modify their search to support such agreements without studying search results all day...

Slashdot Top Deals

It is masked but always present. I don't know who built to it. It came before the first kernel.