Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

Guys, the intellectual property laws aren't targeted at your stash of adventure time and porn.  They're targeted at the way that Asian businesses ignore american copywrite, particularly in software.

[nenjin]

Guys, the intellectual property laws aren't targeted at your stash of adventure time and porn.  They're targeted at the way that Asian businesses ignore american copywrite, particularly in software.

I'd imagine, too, the level of enforcement in Russia.

[mainiac]

There's money in them thar emerging software markets.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Guys, the intellectual property laws aren't targeted at your stash of adventure time and porn.  They're targeted at the way that Asian businesses ignore american copywrite, particularly in software.

Yeah, we swear we won't use those provisions against you! Promise!
We've NEVER exploited broadly-written regulations to maximize profits, oh Nonono. :^)
And we promise foreign internationals won't either! 


So, what exactly do businesses & corporations talk about that has nothing to do with consumers?

And forgive me, but aren't China & Russia the two biggest perpetrators of copyright violations & such?
You know, the two countries that are noticeably absent from TPP?

[mainiac]

If we start using slippery slope for this, pretty soon we'll start using slippery slope everywhere.

[wierd]

The problem with that argument though, is that slippery slope does exist, and is one of the reasons why we have ethics committees for research proposals.

Try not to inject your own biases Mainiac.

Proactively limiting the power of legislation is a good thing, unless your actual goal is to abuse the legislation later.

Some will state that too tightly defined legislation is impotent later. I agree, and consider that a useful feature, not a detraction. It necessitates frequent re-visitation of past legislation, and keeps bureaucrats honest.

Since you have self identified as a bureaucrat (in the past, elsewhere), I can understand why you would not wish to be fettered by such red tape. That's why I caution you against your inherent bias. What is good for you, is not necessarily what is good for everyone.

[mainiac]

Try not to inject your own biases Mainiac.

I'll try to remain as unbiased as this:

Yeah, we swear we won't use those provisions against you! Promise!
We've NEVER exploited broadly-written regulations to maximize profits, oh Nonono. :^)
And we promise foreign internationals won't either! 

[Zangi]

So, are we assuming that all the corporations that have a stake/interest in this copyright stuff will follow along the spirit of the treaty and not find loopholes to abuse?

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Except it's not a slippery slope.
They ARE after our stash of adventure time & porn, they've tried passing this kind of copyright/IP stuff before but have been rebuffed.
This lets them do the same kinds of things, (Or so I've heard), this is just their next attempt to do it again.

[mainiac]

The corporations failed to get it in the past so they will fail to get it at all points in the future.  Congress showed themselves unwilling to go down that route.  So congress will always show that ability.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Do you have a link to the text?
I'd like to look through it.

The corporations failed to get it in the past so they will fail to get it at all points in the future.  Congress showed themselves unwilling to go down that route.  So congress will always show that ability.

Are you..that is not the case at all. Amendments and bills that are defeated can and often are brought up again. Especially contentious issues. Bills that have been passed can be repealed, bills that lost a battle don't always lose the war.
Nothing is ever permanent, even the constitution could be re-written.

So long as there's money in it, they will keep bringing it up until we demonstrate it is a waste of their time & money to do so, and the last fight I saw over this was far from conclusive.

[mainiac]

It was sarcasm, I was worried that the sarcasm was so thick the joke would be no good.  Apparently the sarcasm wasn't thick enough for you.

[Frumple]

When it doubt, remember that georgia is the sarcasm font. It's helpful for when ambiguity is undesirable.

[mainiac]

When did we agree on that?

[Frumple]

A while ago. Embrace the utility.