MPAA Asks If ACTA Can Be Used To Block Wikileaks 322
An anonymous reader writes "With the entertainment industry already getting laws to block certain sites, it appears they're interested in expanding that even further. The latest is that at a meeting with ACTA negotiators in Mexico, an MPAA representative apparently asked if ACTA rules could be used to force ISPs to block 'dangerous sites' like Wikileaks. It makes you wonder why the MPAA wants to censor Wikileaks (and why it wants to use ACTA to do so). But, the guess is that if it can use Wikileaks as a proxy for including rules to block websites, how long will it be until other 'dangerous' sites, such as Torrent search engines, are included." Note: TechDirt typically has insightful commentary, but make of the original (Spanish) twiiter message what you will.
Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:5, Insightful)
Did they ask if it could be blocked because they wanted to, or because they think it could mean backslash for using ACTA as a censor tool instead of enforcing copyrights?
I'd imagine the MPAA and government have similar interests in forcing ISPs to block certain websites. The MPAA is probably making a calculated move to suggest they would be the watchdog going after Wikileaks if such a censorship method could also be used to protect their copyrights.
Frankly, it looks like they're trying to show to the government that they have aligned interests. As the TechDirt article notes, the MPAA could merge The Pirate Bay with Wikileaks in the eyes of the government and then from there it's guilt by association. Personally I think this is the MPAA fishing for how extensive they can make ACTA by appealing to the United States government's emotions. Think back to the DMCA and Patriot Acts and how following their passage into law we all sat around scratching our heads wondering WTF was going on with some of the prosecution that was falling under those acts. Wouldn't be surprised if the MPAA ran a campaign saying that passing ACTA into law worldwide will stop terrorists, child porn, small arms traders, drugs, wildfires, Satan, etc.
I'm guessing the MPAA would love to prosecute cases of copyright infringement under the same law (and maybe even penalties) as cases of threats to national security.
Web censorship at its best (Score:5, Insightful)
Ever notice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ever notice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Shhh. Most people think freedom of speech is there to protect what they agree with.
I can think of two reasons... (Score:5, Insightful)
I can think of at least two reasons:
1) Wikileaks has leaked details of draft ACTA proposals, and these have somewhat politically embarassing to the politicians who are doing MAFIAA's work.
2) MAFIAA hates it when people singing songs with lyrics like "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" and they really hate that funky sequel that begins with "6692d179032205".
Because the US Gov't is interested in WikiLeaks (Score:5, Insightful)
The MPAA (probably) isn't asking about WikiLeaks for its own interest -- it's asking because it wants the US government on board, and the US government is far more concerned about WikiLeaks than movie pirates.
This is a lesson to all you slashdotters about how to lobby - convince people that you have the solution to their problem. (If it solves your problem, great!)
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:3, Insightful)
I was thinking something along the same lines. Proposing that maybe this would be possible.. and if it isn't possible, why not - and how CAN they make it possible? After all, ACTA is being negotiated with quite a few other nations and it would be nice for the U.S. government if they can invoke that agreement to shut down sites within/access to sites from other nations as well; as a side-benefit, all the funny business about piracy would get accepted as well. Like a 'rider' attached to a bill.. except that riders are used to 'ride along with' the general consensus on the bill.. and this would almost be the reverse case.. pushing through ACTA -because- it'd then allow the shutdown of e.g. wikileaks, not because of its original intent.
Re:Ever notice... (Score:0, Insightful)
Shhh. Most people think freedom of speech is there to protect what they agree with.
And whenever you say "Shut up, you're an idiot, people protest that now you're the one suppressing their freedom of speech" which of course they use to justify silencing you.
Funny how that works.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm guessing the MPAA would love to prosecute cases of copyright infringement under the same law (and maybe even penalties) as cases of threats to national security.
Why shouldn't copyright infringement and national security come under the same law? They're both tools for stopping the spread of information built around assumptions that have long ceased to be even half true.
Re:Web censorship at its best (Score:5, Insightful)
If you for a moment believe that isn't really the US government asking, using MAFIAA as a mouthpiece, you live in a happier world ...
The US government isn't using the MPAA as a mouth piece, the MPAA wants to use/abuse this power and will turn around to ask other governments around the world, US included, to help them get what they want.
Re:Ever notice... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is worse, they've come up with a very neat way to do it - it is called "international agreements".
The ideas that would be opposed at home get floated at the IFPI, WPO, WTO, etc. Then a number of small, spineless or otherwise dependent countries are made to support those. Then the idea is re-branded as "the international consensus". Then it is heavily marketed and accepted by the European Commission and the US whatever representative, who work hard to sell it to the respective national legislatures.
Then it becomes a binding treaty, and is fast tracked at the various national legislatures, usually sweetened with some pork. Job done, consumer raped again.
International cooperation at its best.
Re:Did they (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok. Now Party A is your doctor/hospital worker, Party B is a data mining company, and the information is your personal health files.
By your definition, it's censorship too, right? It's all just 1s and 0s?
People have rights over certain data, and protecting them isn't censorship. If authors should have rights over their creations - even at the expense of others' rights - is another matter.
Re:I can think of two reasons... (Score:5, Insightful)
3) The US government has figured out that people are so accustomed to the MPAA buying laws, they put them up to it so it could slip under the radar.
The MPAA gets the stuff they wanted in ACTA. The government gets carte blanche.
While I don't really believe that the US government is behind this, they do actually gain more from this than the MPAA does. I think more plausibly, the MPAA is trying to use this as a wedge so they can shut down anything which infringes on information they would like to retain control of or how to circumvent copyright -- such information gets effectively equated with sedition or somesuch.
Either way, the outcome of ACTA allowing for the shutting down of web sites "because we want to" basically means that the world is now fucked, and all signatories to ACTA are enforcement arms for multi-national companies ... with the US wielding a stick over everybody else.
This awful treaty is going to propel us into a future ran even more by corporations, and they keep adding more shit to it every time there's a leak.
Re:MPAA wants to write its laws in secrecy (Score:5, Insightful)
Every government wants to make politics so "boring" that the masses ignore it. Every government wants to make a country with rights that are never exercised.
The ideal state for a government is where the people are cattle, a cow doesn't feel imprisoned, after all he can walk around this whole big pasture, and if he really wanted to he could jump the fence, but why jump when there is all this free food...
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:5, Insightful)
Then I realized that some dickhead would probably just take the videos, put them up on Piratebay and I would be left poor and broke after spending a crapload of time and money on this project so I said fuck it.
I agree completely. This is a reasonably accurate evaluation of the market conditions for video content and a sound business decision based on that evaluation. What I don't understand is why the MPAA members don't seem to do this.
Re:Ever notice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ever notice how governments actively seek to forbid citizens from actually -using- their rights?
In spite of the name, "rights" is a game of subtraction, not addition. A person not under the domain of any government or any other higher power has no restrictions on their actions at all. Government and law add new restrictions (do not kill, do not steal).
The Bill of Rights and all related articles are there as a desperate attempt to stop this from getting out of hand, explicitly for those times when it seems like going down that slippery slope seems appropriate. It was never adding anything, because it was never capable of adding anything. People knew it was necessary to include it because they knew times like these would happen.
It's up to us as a country to make sure we don't disappoint the wonderfully insightful gentlemen who included those provisions as part of the nation's Constitution by allowing them to fade on our watch.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh boo hoo. The world doesn't owe you a living. The world doesn't owe you anything. If I make a table and no-one wants to pay for tables, I've just wasted my time effort and resources. Sunk costs are sunk costs. Go do something else, I won't cry for you.
End the MPAA (Score:2, Insightful)
It's high time the citizens of the U.S. work to dissolve the Motion Picture Association of America. This is an organization that actively works against the best interest of all Americans. It must be destroyed. The freedom and liberty of all Americans -- even much of the world -- is under attack by this organization.
END THE MPAA
Re:I can think of two reasons... (Score:3, Insightful)
How many left wingers would have made a deal about "BUSH/CHENEY" if this was 4 years ago? How many right wingers are going to claim this is a Obama thing?
Libertarians realize that it doesn't really matter (D or R), government is too powerful now, and need to be reigned in. It doesn't matter "who" is in power, they abuse it. And it doesn't matter what the reason is (save the children,environment,rights,minority,tatas), there is always a nefarious outcome.
Liberty is not just for select few, it is for all. Either it applies to all equally or it is the steps to tyranny. Guess which way we're headed now? AND it doesn't matter who is in power, we keep moving that direction.
First Wikileaks... then the next 'Dangerous Site' (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a slippery slope when free speech is censored.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:5, Insightful)
Make the videos anyway. If you market it to the right crowd, and it's actually worth it, it will sell.
I don't imagine car mechanics and car enthusiasts are like you average college student, downloading everything in sight. Chances are your target audience would be more than willing to pay a fair price. People who work on cars for a living should be used to the idea of buying materials/manuals, and similarly for people who have the time/money to routinely work on their own cars.
Wrong fraudster fingered (Score:5, Insightful)
While I mostly agree with you, I think you lay the blame at the wrong feet.
The UN itself has done no such thing. The ones defrauding the US public of their constitutionally guaranteed rights are the elected representatives in the US government, and by extension their financial masters (a.k.a. "donors"), using the UN and other international groups as cover to get what they want. Though given the state of voting in the US (black-box hackable e-voting machines [blackboxvoting.org], gerrymandering [google.com], overly large constituencies [thirty-thousand.org], etc. etc.), the term "elected" might not hold much meaning here.
Cheers,
Re:Ever notice... (Score:3, Insightful)
Last time I checked, international agreements on their own did not carry the force of law within a sovereign country. Unless a treaty is ratified or subsequent law is passed by the legislature, I don't see how a government could prosecute anyone unless they already have the power discussed in the agreement. Look at the E.U.--when they decide on a policy, their member nations each pass laws that comply with the EU policy, but aren't necessarily dictated by the EU itself. If they don't, there may be consequences, but folks are usually loathe to exercise sanctions on their trading partners. If ACTA is attempting to alter the legal structure of the U.S. without going through Congress, I would like to see that stand up in court.
IANAL, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I may have missed this bit in the whole ACTA debate, but it seems relevant to me.
Re:Web censorship at its best (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, no, I don't think the US government is using the MPAA as a mouthpiece. What I DO think is that the MPAA came up with the idea, and the US government is going "Fuck, why didn't WE think of that? Give them another couple hundred million."
Re:censorship and publishing control 450 years ago (Score:4, Insightful)
And the revolution already came and is called the Internet. I've started to not care about ACTA and how it'll mandate capital punishment for file sharers. The bird has flown, the horse has left the barn, the cat is out of the bag, time can not be turned back. They can just make copyright infinity - 1 day already and I still won't care. I still won't think it's wrong. So they can shut down Wikileaks, will it really matter? I mean seriously, in how many kazillion copies is the HDCP master key now? We could do the same with anything wikileaks wanted to publish, there's no way they can win over a huge number of people spreading it over a huge number of channels. They can try legislating away reality and reality will laugh at them.
Their copyright == theft campaign is a huge failure. Despite the Pirate Party not making a good election, the percentage of Swedes who think so is down to 30%, down from 38% last year. They've lost 8% of the public opinion in one year. There's not been a single round of mass copyright lawsuits, nobody wants to take another shot at taking down The Pirate Bay, they get services like free Voddler that is very close to a giveaway. They're not even in fight mode anymore, they're in damage control mode so it doesn't spark the copyright revolution and they can keep making money in the rest of the world. It's really too bad that the Swedes don't have a public referendum system like in Switzerland, or it would already have happened.
Re:Ever notice... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's up to us as a country to make sure we don't disappoint the wonderfully insightful gentlemen who included those provisions as part of the nation's Constitution by allowing them to fade on our watch.
Actually many of the founders were against the Bill of Rights on the grounds that they saw that it could be used by some future generation to try to deny rights to the people because they weren't explicitly stated in the Bill of Rights. This perversion that they foresaw has been shown to be true in such examples as how right-wingers try to claim there is no right to privacy since it isn't explicitly enumerated in the Bill of Rights.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, I appreciate that you might not want to do that for free. Back in the day, when I ran a BBS, I incurred a lot of hard costs to do so and I did not charge for access, while many of my contemporaies did. I had a P.O. box for registration, which ensured that I at least had a valid address, and many people sent me unsolicited money. I sent it back. My point is, you are under no obligation to undertake a risk that, to you, would be a loss. To many people, giving is enjoyable. At least it was for me.....
Don't Worry Guys! (Score:5, Insightful)
But here is the possible up side. The MPAA have been around since 1922. And by my calculations that means that their copyright on evil will run out by around 2200. At which point mad rioters can burn down all the CEO's homes slaughter them like pigs and give them as a blood offering to Satan.
So at least there is something to look forward to.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:2, Insightful)
Then I realized that some dickhead would probably just take the videos, put them up on Piratebay and I would be left poor and broke after spending a crapload of time and money on this project so I said fuck it.
What's a reasonable price to you?
$2 per video on iTunes?
Seriously, there is always the possibility some 'dick' will steal. You can have a mechanic shop, tomorrow or 10 years from now some dick can smash the window and steal things.
The attractiveness of anyone pirating is minimal. As far as I know, it's primarily popular commercial titles that get uploaded and actually stay available. One person can't really upload it and provide availability for it; if there aren't multiple seeds or lots of downloaders, noone's getting it at a reasonable speed.
In the media industry, the possibility of piracy is part of the cost of doing business.
If the content is good enough and appeals to a large enough audience, people will buy it. Most people don't visit TPB by the way. Of course there are people who download from TPB, but not everyone, and you might get exposure to your content by people who would never find you anyways.
If there would be enough interest in it for people to pirate en masse, then there would almost certainly be enough interest for you to publish and profit from advertising, if that is what you expect.
Publish low-quality almost-full-length preview versions on Youtube, with significant amounts of advertising for the real thing plus paid ads.
With HD "extended versions" for sale on DVD / iTunes, and all DRM to boot.
Is what I would say the winning strategy would be. Assuming such videos would even have people interested in the subject (lack of interest is a more likely reason for failure of media than piracy -- notoriety is almost always economically beneficial for someone).
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:3, Insightful)
Because, historically it is two completely different realms of law. Copyright is civil law -- conflating it with national security is a he'll of a bad idea.
Commercial interests can't drive national security issues, or we will go to war with whoever is pirating the most videos.
They don't belong in the same law.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you're overlooking the fact that you're more likely to get ripped off from bigger companies than piracy. For instance, you could go out of your way to make your instructional films, do an excellent job with them, only to find that a large publisher, such as Haynes, would rip your idea and force you out of the marketplace entirely. Your brand is totally unknown while Haynes is well known and respected. You don't really have a fair shot at making it.
Say what you want, but piracy is a market leveling function. While not ethical, it forces larger outfits to chase "mysteriously lost profits" from people who weren't going to buy there product anyway while the smaller outfits focus on building a quality product for their customers. People are constantly pointing to the music industry and their staggering profits as being in disarray, but if you ask any artist out there, all piracy did was help destroy the old brick and mortar and CD model, and gave even the smallest indie band an opportunity to level the playing field. Artist are now fighting for Social network friends and followers because selling a CD in a store for millions is a thing of the past.
The MPAA doesn't represent the interest of independent film makers. They're not going to go after people who illegally distribute Jaleel White's "Fake it of Make it' web series that he produced himself. But let someone distribute Family Matters, and they're all over it. Anything that you see come from the MPAA or the RIAA isn't in the best interest of anyone except large studios and their shareholders. Everyone else: fuck 'em. Now if you seen this kind of message come from the WGA, then there might be some legitimacy to this want to add into law. Otherwise, take it like a grain of salt in the sea.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:2, Insightful)
I forgot to mention the bigger risk is not BT or TPB.
The bigger risk is someone else sees you selling videos, and sees how they sell (if you are successful), and gets the idea about doing the same thing, to compete with you, since you don't have a robust competitive advantage -- many mechanics would be capable of making those sorts of videos.
People would not necessarily buy from you just because you are first -- you would have to differentiate your product, you would have to be better, which is extremely difficult, since they would be making their product after seeing yours.
Cost and time equipment costs may be significant for you, but the equipment is not that expensive, not prohibitive enough to prevent copycats.
Time requirements are huge, but there are other people who have that too, esp. if they think they can 'follow in your footsteps' and make/sell similar videos (though at your expense)
Although it's a fascinating concept. For all I know, there are already people doing this, anyways......
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
It wont work anyway so why bother? (Score:3, Insightful)
If they block the Wikileaks site then some volunteer will post the information on 4chan and then they'd have to block that, and a whole bunch of other sites because volunteers can basically post the information to random websites. This is a complete and utter waste of time.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:3, Insightful)
Hollywood might overcharge and not provide a distribution model that the people agree with, but there are a lot of other legit businesses with honest hard working people that are not getting their honest pay for the work they did. The spread of "information" could be something YOU spent years working on, then you'd be pretty bitter too.
You said it yourself, the MPAA and RIAA are simply not interested in getting a fair amount for their work, they are interested in greater than fair returns (such is the stigma of capitalism). Furthermore, since the volume of works from those represented by the MPAA and RIAA dwarf the small number of "legit" people you describe, and the MPAA and RIAA are not interested in "legit" people's rights, you pretty much have a non-argument.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't be a bitch. Those are the exact same conclusions he came to, and that's exactly what he did.
Re:Did they (Score:1, Insightful)
Not really. No license is as free as public domain, but the BSD license is way more free than the GPL. Of course a lot of semi-literate people will claim that the BSD license allows code to be "closed", but it doesn't. Once BSD licensed, the code remains BSD licensed, even if it gets used in a proprietary project. The GPL is more a spite move than a real freedom move. It's just a way of "sticking it to the man", i.e. "if they wanna use this they have to forget about making their software proprietary". That isn't real freedom.
Re:Did they (Score:2, Insightful)
Nonsense. Code that is BSD licensed stays BSD licensed, even if it gets used in a proprietary system. When Microsoft chose to use the BSD networking stack in XP it didn't affect the BSDs. When Apple chose to base OS X largely on BSD same. So please stop repeating that canard, it's not helping.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:5, Insightful)
Anonymous troll much. Mechanics video, somebody will do it for free http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=change+oil+filter&aq=f [youtube.com], http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=change+transmission+fluid&aq=0 [youtube.com], http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=how+to+change+differential&aq=7m [youtube.com], etc etc etc.
Don't you people know when you are being trolled by a marketdroid dickhead.
PS it ain't stealing and it never will be, it is copying, the mechanics knowledge wasn't stolen, it wasn't vacuumed from their head, they are not wandering around the landscape sprouting nonsense like some zombie marketdroid.
Of course the MPAA and the pigoploists given the opportunity will not just demand copyright protection of the video of changing the oil filter but also the idea of creating a video about changing an oil filter and even a licence fee from anyone who ever changes an oil filter because they might have seen the video or spoken to someone who has seen the video.
The problem is the continual extension of copyright, its duration, scope, power, criminal penalties, invasion of privacy and control of the public. It is even worse, copyright has led to the direct corruption of the whole political process, as a result of it largely being run by psychopaths with narcissists as their puppet front people.
Re:MPAA wants to write its laws in secrecy (Score:1, Insightful)
How the fuck is this even modded insightful. It doesn't even make any sense.
Every government wants to write their laws in secrecy, hence why international "treaties" have gotten so popular. Every government's dream is to control every aspect of their citizens' lives without the citizens realizing it.
Actually I just don't understand why this would be any governments dream. Why would they give two flying fucks about controlling every aspect of my life. This is just an idiotic statement.
Sure, the government extols the "right to free speech" in every high school classroom but dreams of a world without it. The government loves movements like the tea party that while saying they want to reduce the government's power but give the government power over subjective things like morality and things that are "un-American", any government would take a "loss" of some tax dollars to be able to control something like that (and with fiat currencies, they can just print more worthless notes).
There's a little bit of sensibility in this statement, but it's so drowned out by the rest of your fear the man post that it's barely even relevant.
Every government wants to make politics so "boring" that the masses ignore it. Every government wants to make a country with rights that are never exercised.
I hardly think the big, bad, government made politics boring.
The ideal state for a government is where the people are cattle, a cow doesn't feel imprisoned, after all he can walk around this whole big pasture, and if he really wanted to he could jump the fence, but why jump when there is all this free food...
And what the hell are you saying here? That if your government provides you with everything you need, they are somehow doing you an injustice? GTFO.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:4, Insightful)
There is a difference between not wanting to pay for tables, and not wanting tables. I would imagine that, were GP to do what he says, a lot of people would find it quite useful. But quite a few of those people would figure that they don't really need to pay for it, under the usual excuse of "well, I wouldn't buy it otherwise, anyway". Which is bullshit, because the mere availability of the free option already affects one's reasoning for the "buy / don't buy decision", even if subconsciously.
Re:Did they (Score:5, Insightful)
OS-X may be based on BSD code, it's now closed-source and highly protected. You may not redistribute it, even though a lot of it is based on BSD coded. Those parts may be redistributable, however that will not result in a working system. And forget about having a look at the source code.
So a lot of freedom has been lost: the freedom to look at the source, the freedom to modify the software, the freedom to distribute it.
Otoh look at Android: this system is based on the GPLed Linux kernel. Therefore the Android kernel is still GPLed which means you can get the source code for the Android kernel, and that you can redistribute it. No freedom has been lost there.
Re:Did they (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop being pedantic. GPL is just as much a copyright license as Microsoft's EULA.
Re:Hand in hand (Score:3, Insightful)
Vote, encourage others to vote - for anyone, just get out and vote. Don't buy into the bullshit that is often repeated: "my vote does not matter, anyway" - this phrase is music to radical-wing political parties ears for it means that their small band of supporters, who will certainly be voting, will have a great piece of the smaller voting pie. With voting rates trending lower [wikimedia.org] as laws get more draconian - the media of various countries has sold their populations on apathy (more on this here [wordpress.com]).
Create websites to profile politicians, track what politicians say vs what they (and gov employees) actually do on the ground. Make funny viral video "ad's" encouraging young people to vote, how it is their one and only opportunity every few years to actually change shit. Instruct and show people how easy it is to vote.... the list of creative things that can be done is long here.
Apathy is the enemy and the mainstream media has helped to paralyzed the population well with it... making yet another public forum to discuss it will get you lost endlessly debating hypotheticals. Instead, pick a well defined task like the ones I have suggested above, start the project and try to get others to join up to help.
Re:Did they (Score:3, Insightful)
No, you have missed the point. OS X contains some stuff based on BSD code and some stuff that was developed in-house at NeXT or Apple. You may distribute all of Darwin, which includes some Apple extensions to BSD code. This does, contrary to your claim, result in a working system. You can take the code from Darwin, modify your kernel, libc, or any of a number of other libraries or programs (e.g. libdispatch, Launchd), and then replace the ones that were included with OS X with your modified version.
You can not, however, modify the stuff at the GUI layer. You are correct when you say that, however you are incorrect in claiming that this stuff is based on the BSD code. If Apple had used Linux and glibc instead of XNU (with code from FreeBSD) and a modified FreeBSD libc, then the situation would have been exactly the same.
Re:Erroneously Aggregating Enemies (Score:3, Insightful)
We're not dealing with stupid people here. Just imagine the thought process: "I want to block Piratebay and other copyright-infringing sites. But the politicians won't cooperate."
- "Well why don't we take advantage of the War on Terror. Instead of asking to block Piratebay, let's ask to block wikileaks and other sites. The politicians, even Øbama, would jump all over that." - "But for what purpose?" - "Once we have the power to shutdown wikileaks, we'll also have the power to shutdown Piratebay, just by accusing them of being terrorist-supporting organizations. Or by showing how they are being used to spread Wikileaks documents. It's brilliant."
Seriously I think it's time We the People (that's us) declare war on the RIAA and MPAA.
Yes with bullets. They have turned into tyrants and tyrants deserve only one outcome.
Re:Twitter message (Score:1, Insightful)
twiiter message
And after careful analysis - no, wait, the merest glance - I've concluded that "editor" timothy is utterly fucking incompetent at editing.