Is Copyright Only For the Big Guys?(torrentfreak.com)
torrentfreak.com
Is Copyright Only For the Big Guys?
http://torrentfreak.com/is-copyright-only-for-the-big-guys-110828/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Torrentfreak+%28Torrentfreak%29
5 comments
Anyone in a position of responding directly to the public should either know enough to give a reasonable answer or know enough to consult an expert before answering.
Maybe, but that has nothing to do with copyright law or even the BBC's polices regarding it.
The thing is, actions speak louder than words. If the BBC is repeatedly doing things that are clearly against the law -- and in this respect, the evidence shows that they are -- then it is not the ignorant front-line responder who is irrelevant, but the senior spokesman who claims they have a different policy when they aren't actually implementing it.
If you're implying that the social media editor was lying, I'd be curious to hear why you think this is so clear. I can easily believe that the BBC staff would like to do a lot of things that don't fit into their deadlines.
I'm not saying their social media editor was lying about what their policy says.
I'm saying that since they're clearly not following that policy anyway, it doesn't really matter what the policy says.
I'm saying that since they're clearly not following that policy anyway, it doesn't really matter what the policy says.
That's exactly why bringing up the "statement" in the article was a pointless distraction.
[deleted]
My gawd, that page took all my CPU. Bailed.
OK, that's it. There's a sporadic JavaScript alert on that page that asks for confirmation before closing the page, there's a sporadic refresh on load to some advertiser's page (which has a self-starting video ad on it), and now excessive CPU?
They are making a strong case for a spot on my "automatically flag on sight" list.
They are making a strong case for a spot on my "automatically flag on sight" list.
Torrentfreak is also a sensationalist tabloid blog, you won't miss much by not visiting it. Sorry for the negativity.
NoScript FTW.
Exactly. Javascript, in my opinion, is like Flash: it should be used when needed but not anymore than that.
And NoScript is awesome.
And NoScript is awesome.
Two quotes come immediately to mind:
"It's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission" (both emotionally and in terms of effort/bureaucracy) and
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
"It's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission" (both emotionally and in terms of effort/bureaucracy) and
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Print isn't dying like everyone thought. Like music, there is always going to be a place for pay 2 play services.
For instance: it was always perfectly clear that the BBC's "outrageous statement" was the result of contacting someone within the BBC who didn't know what they were talking about. There was never the slightest indication that it was an official position. Quoting it does nothing to further the actual, real point that can be made about the problems a "little guy" faces when attempting to enforce their copyright.