That is an excellent analogy.It would be like arguing that storing something in a safe deposit box was an automatic forfeit of your property rights for anything in that box. Bullshit.
Kim Dotcom is easily one of my favorite people of my generation.And Kim Dotcom to the rescue.
http://techreport.com/news/23836/kim-dotcom-teases-new-mega-site
Offshore hosting, 100% encrytped (unable to even be accessed by their own employees), sharing for "easy online collaboration." Yo ho.
Includes an SDK for using said encryption in 3rd party apps.
The more you tighten your grip, the more slip through your fingers.
THIS. Fucking this.The EFF is trying to campaign for inherent property rights to digital bits but you can't have it both ways:
Either bits can be owned, and thus you are stealing when you copy a song, but you can get your 'property' back when a service is seized, OR bits cannot be owned, only licensed and copyrighted, and thus they are only protected insofar as contract and copy rights allow, but no theft occurs when bits are copied, only broken contracts and copyrights.
I don't actually know the term megaupload had but if they where the regular protection against being sued if we lose the data then the governments claim is BS and would set up a really bad precedent.What the prosecutors brief _probably_ states is that since the service provider claimed enough rights to the material, and disclaimed liability for loss, then by taking ownership of the property they need not provide terms above and beyond what the original provider did. Further, the data is no longer in a state where they could possibly provide any one individuals data back without turning on the whole service, which would of course then restart distribution of illegal content.
Because you touch yourself at night.EDIT: Why does it show GB's avatar when i'm quoting steinman?
And to continue the analogy, this bank has an office complex that can store 30 billion items for 50 million customers and has 500,000 workers to manage the copying and distribution of those items.The data wasn't irretrievably, or even a little lost. To continue the box analogy, it would be like if the bank didn't insure your stuff against theft, but it didn't get stolen, the government just arrested the bank people for fraud and then got to keep all the stuff you had in the bank because it was there... if this was about a physical object the very idea would repulse most people.
I keep forgetting to log out of my gasbandit alt when I post, so sometimes I post as him, then delete it, and repost as myself. If you reply quickly enough before I delete it, then it'll look like it came from my gasbandit alt.EDIT: Why does it show GB's avatar when i'm quoting steinman?
So what's the effect for when i touch myself during the day?Because you touch yourself at night.
And if that was the argument they where making it wouldn't have been a problem (ignoring the whole illegal raid the kiwi government actually appoligesed over etc.) for most people.And to continue the analogy, this bank has an office complex that can store 30 billion items for 50 million customers and has 500,000 workers to manage the copying and distribution of those items.
The data may still exist, but as I said before there's no way for the government to retrieve the data for any individual user on a large scale. If it was one user, then sure, they can have one computer expert poke into the databases, find the items of interest, have the analysts and legal people determine the infringing nature of the items, and then return those items that the one person requested.
But it doesn't scale. They can't accept claims from everyone that was legally using the service for legal purposes (and no, that's not redundant), and thus they cannot accept the claims for even one person.
Not without employing those same workers using the same distribution policies and system, which, as they allege, would make them criminals for allowing the illegal copying and redistribution that they shut down in the first place.
I keep forgetting to log out of my gasbandit alt when I post, so sometimes I post as him, then delete it, and repost as myself. If you reply quickly enough before I delete it, then it'll look like it came from my gasbandit alt.
I dropped my JCM alt years ago, and more recently ZenMonkey and Shego. I know a lot of people are sad the forum is shrinking, but it's not actually losing people, i'm just writing less.
I took no pleasure in my chaz identity, but I thought it was necessary to keep people on their toes. To some degree I'm glad the forum ejected that alt - it did leave a sour taste in my mouth when I posted as him.
I know. Me too.I think everyone agrees that we'd rather have your Shego alt then your stienman, or at least the ZenMonkey...