Intellectual Monopolists push the limits of irony

From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... [quote] The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. [/quote] http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6AK20110325 Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. Classic! -- K. | "Do you have a dot on your head http://slated.org | and are you based in Bangalore?" Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky | ~ flatfish+++ the racist scum. kernel 2.6.31.5, up 41 days | http://tinyurl.com/flattyracistscum

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:47:06 +0100, Homer wrote: > From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... > > [quote] > The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, > newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. > [/quote] > > http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6AK20110325 > > Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists > who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, > restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall > to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. > > Classic! Things like DMCA, Copyrights, patents, licensing and so forth are in place to keep do nothing freetards like you [Homer] from sponging off the system while ensuring that people are paid fairly for their product or service. And if you don't like it [Homer], move to China. You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements made against the state.

Homer stated in post q5u668-kcj.ln1@sky.matrix on 3/28/11 10:47 AM: > From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... > > [quote] > The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, > newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. > [/quote] > > http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6A > K20110325 > > Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists > who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, The "promote" piracy by trying to prevent it... huh? You are using double-speak. > restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall > to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. > > Classic! -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]

flatfish+++ stated in post 2nbsvq9unrpb$.rcltzyi1ky2p$.dlg@40tude.net on 3/28/11 10:54 AM: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:47:06 +0100, Homer wrote: > >> From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... >> >> [quote] >> The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, >> newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. >> [/quote] >> >> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6 >> AK20110325 >> >> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists >> who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, >> restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall >> to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. >> >> Classic! > > Things like DMCA, Copyrights, patents, licensing and so forth are in > place to keep do nothing freetards like you [Homer] from sponging off > the system while ensuring that people are paid fairly for their product > or service. > > And if you don't like it [Homer], move to China. > > You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come > and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements > made against the state. Homer thinks that what others create should be his. To deny him his "right" to others' property is, somehow (though he never says how), a form of monopoly and is evil. I would love to see him as a teacher - he would celebrate plagiarism, which is just weird. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:28:34 -0700, Snit wrote: > flatfish+++ stated in post 2nbsvq9unrpb$.rcltzyi1ky2p$.dlg@40tude.net on > 3/28/11 10:54 AM: > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:47:06 +0100, Homer wrote: >> >>> From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... >>> >>> [quote] >>> The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, >>> newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. >>> [/quote] >>> >>> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6 >>> AK20110325 >>> >>> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists >>> who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, >>> restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall >>> to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. >>> >>> Classic! >> >> Things like DMCA, Copyrights, patents, licensing and so forth are in >> place to keep do nothing freetards like you [Homer] from sponging off >> the system while ensuring that people are paid fairly for their product >> or service. >> >> And if you don't like it [Homer], move to China. >> >> You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come >> and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements >> made against the state. > > Homer thinks that what others create should be his. To deny him his "right" > to others' property is, somehow (though he never says how), a form of > monopoly and is evil. I would love to see him as a teacher - he would > celebrate plagiarism, which is just weird. It's the old freetard mantra. IOW I want you to give up your property but I'm going to protect mine and if you don't give up your property you are an evil empire. These fools don't realize that by their very actions, IOW freetardery, they are scaring away companies that might actually consider porting to Linux.

flatfish+++ stated in post 1g2fyj0dcmb72$.jebqva08bsjn$.dlg@40tude.net on 3/28/11 12:34 PM: >>> You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come >>> and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements >>> made against the state. >> >> Homer thinks that what others create should be his. To deny him his "right" >> to others' property is, somehow (though he never says how), a form of >> monopoly and is evil. I would love to see him as a teacher - he would >> celebrate plagiarism, which is just weird. > > It's the old freetard mantra. > > IOW I want you to give up your property but I'm going to protect mine > and if you don't give up your property you are an evil empire. > > These fools don't realize that by their very actions, IOW freetardery, > they are scaring away companies that might actually consider porting to > Linux. Very much true... and implied by Adobe's comments about why they have little interest in Linux. They do not believe the Linux community would be willing to pay. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:48:13 -0700, Snit wrote: > flatfish+++ stated in post 1g2fyj0dcmb72$.jebqva08bsjn$.dlg@40tude.net on > 3/28/11 12:34 PM: > >>>> You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come >>>> and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements >>>> made against the state. >>> >>> Homer thinks that what others create should be his. To deny him his "right" >>> to others' property is, somehow (though he never says how), a form of >>> monopoly and is evil. I would love to see him as a teacher - he would >>> celebrate plagiarism, which is just weird. >> >> It's the old freetard mantra. >> >> IOW I want you to give up your property but I'm going to protect mine >> and if you don't give up your property you are an evil empire. >> >> These fools don't realize that by their very actions, IOW freetardery, >> they are scaring away companies that might actually consider porting to >> Linux. > > Very much true... and implied by Adobe's comments about why they have little > interest in Linux. They do not believe the Linux community would be willing > to pay. A major DAW software company had at one point announced they were considering a Linux port. Many people seemed interested and it looked like it was a done deal. After months of not hearing anything it was finally revealed that this company didn't think they could make a profit selling Linux software because the freetards don't like paying for software. They were also concerned about how the Linux community would react to their copy protection scheme. Well we all know the answer to that.... Freetards will be freetards.

On 3/28/2011 1:47 PM, Homer wrote: > From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... > > [quote] > The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, > newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. > [/quote] > > http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6AK20110325 > > Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists > who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, > restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall > to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. > > Classic! Figures you're too stupid to understand the huge difference between the two situations: DRM: 0% censorship - requires approved hardware and/or software for users to access content Govt: 100% censorship - users cannot access content Dumbass.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 17:10:59 -0400, DFS wrote: > On 3/28/2011 1:47 PM, Homer wrote: >> From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... >> >> [quote] >> The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, >> newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. >> [/quote] >> >> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright-idUKTRE72O6AK20110325 >> >> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists >> who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, >> restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall >> to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with censorship. >> >> Classic! > > > Figures you're too stupid to understand the huge difference between the > two situations: > > DRM: 0% censorship - requires approved hardware and/or software for > users to access content > > Govt: 100% censorship - users cannot access content > > Dumbass. I think [Homer]'s overhanging forehead and recessed eyeballs are cutting off the light intake to his retina. http://media.photobucket.com/image/overhanging%20forehead/CartoonMike_album/washout.jpg

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:54:30 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:47:06 +0100, Homer wrote: > >> From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... >> >> [quote] >> The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, >> newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. >> [/quote] >> >> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright- idUKTRE72O6AK20110325 >> >> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists >> who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, >> restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall >> to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with >> censorship. >> >> Classic! > > Things like DMCA, Copyrights, patents, licensing and so forth are in > place to keep do nothing freetards like you [Homer] from sponging off > the system while ensuring that people are paid fairly for their product > or service. don't be so modest flatfish. everyone can partake in sponging off the system. like email to a computer on the desktop. there is no patent on that because those stupid freetards gave the idea away. but email to a computer in a cell phone ... BAM! that is worthy of a patent. think of all the hard work that went into that fresh idea: the computer is inside a cell phone. you bet those idea craftsmen expect to be paid. and no they are not freetards sponging off the work of others. dmca and copyrights. microsoft uses this to justify their eulas. why with these laws they can skirt around local regulations against hiding material facts about a product. you buy a computer preloaded with windows, crank it up ... BAM! a eula pops out. no need to let any suckers know about the eula rules at purchase time. such joyous laws, they even let microsoft determine how the eula may be rejected. yes, you have to accept the eula in order to reject the eula. no freetardism there, no sir! why, the windows xp eula even says you have to accept any bait-and- switch scheme that microsoft pulls. yes sir, these laws are written after careful consideration of the society as a whole. everyone's interests are taken into account. justice is spread everywhere. when microsoft keeps the license money for a rejected eula, that is not sponging off the system at all. not in any way. > And if you don't like it [Homer], move to China. > > You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come > and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements > made against the state. that is right. here in capitalist america you don't have to worry about breaking stupid laws that an oppressive government lays down. no no, we are much better than that. _we_ don't have crimes against the state here, no, thankfully we don't have to worry about that stuff. we have crimes against the corporation.

On 3/28/2011 10:03 PM, voodoo wrote: <snipped the babble> <yawn> You have drunk some of the potion you concocted with chicken claws and two boxes Dulcolax in it, and now you are walking around delirious with your drawls tied around your forehead -- go witch doctor go.

On 29/03/2011 03:03, voodoo wrote: > On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:54:30 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote: > >> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:47:06 +0100, Homer wrote: >> >>> From the "refusing to watch adverts is theft" department... >>> >>> [quote] >>> The United States says China's restrictions on goods such as books, >>> newspapers, films, DVDs and music create demand for pirated goods. >>> [/quote] >>> >>> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/25/us-trade-china-copyright- > idUKTRE72O6AK20110325 >>> >>> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black: Intellectual Monopolists >>> who restrict access to knowledge (and thus promote "piracy") with DRM, >>> restrictive "licensing", and sinister laws like the DMCA, have the gall >>> to berate China for ... restricting access to knowledge with >>> censorship. >>> >>> Classic! >> >> Things like DMCA, Copyrights, patents, licensing and so forth are in >> place to keep do nothing freetards like you [Homer] from sponging off >> the system while ensuring that people are paid fairly for their product >> or service. > > don't be so modest flatfish. everyone can partake in sponging off the > system. like email to a computer on the desktop. there is no patent on > that because those stupid freetards gave the idea away. but email to a > computer in a cell phone ... BAM! that is worthy of a patent. think of > all the hard work that went into that fresh idea: the computer is inside > a cell phone. you bet those idea craftsmen expect to be paid. and no they > are not freetards sponging off the work of others. I'd like to see suggestions from these clowns for any "invention" in recent history that doesn't somehow plagiarise prior knowledge. > dmca and copyrights. microsoft uses this to justify their eulas. why with > these laws they can skirt around local regulations against hiding > material facts about a product. you buy a computer preloaded with > windows, crank it up ... BAM! a eula pops out. no need to let any suckers > know about the eula rules at purchase time. such joyous laws, they even > let microsoft determine how the eula may be rejected. yes, you have to > accept the eula in order to reject the eula. no freetardism there, no > sir! why, the windows xp eula even says you have to accept any bait-and- > switch scheme that microsoft pulls. > > yes sir, these laws are written after careful consideration of the > society as a whole. everyone's interests are taken into account. justice > is spread everywhere. when microsoft keeps the license money for a > rejected eula, that is not sponging off the system at all. not in any way. > >> And if you don't like it [Homer], move to China. >> >> You'll last about a week before the "Internet Police" over there come >> and knock on the door to your hovel and haul you away for statements >> made against the state. > > that is right. here in capitalist america you don't have to worry about > breaking stupid laws that an oppressive government lays down. no no, we > are much better than that. _we_ don't have crimes against the state here, > no, thankfully we don't have to worry about that stuff. > > we have crimes against the corporation.