346 replies to this topic

[Rusty]

Honestly, I wish they bring SOPA back, and sustain ACTA. They actually sound good.
And why would they take control of the internet in the first place?
What do they get by that?
That hypothesis just sounds silly.

Stand for the National Anthem:

[greep]

-.- they really need like a sarcasm smiley. I thought he was serious for a second.

[ihato]

I have said my opinion and you can think what ever you want.
And yea, you're pretty right greep.
It probably would have been abused if it was alive.

[Rusty]

-.- they really need like a sarcasm smiley. I thought he was serious for a second.

Nobody is that stupid. Don't feed the troll.

[ihato]

@Rusty
You are really hard trying to start a flame war aren't you. -.-

Edited by ihato, 05 February 2012 - 01:19 AM.

[greep]

Yeah let's tone it down I'm sure he just didn't know the full extent of SOPA's allowances (much like congressmen before the protests hit )

[Rusty]

@Rusty
You are really hard trying to start a flame war aren't you. -.-

Nowhere near as hard as you are.

[ihato]

You know what? You are trolling right now.
And you have been reported for that.
Now please go away and stop trolling.

[Rusky]

I understand that silent congressmen weren't listed. But I think it's unfair to label supporters of "altered versions of SOPA" as being just as bad as supporters. After all, we don't really know what those "altered versions" look like. It some cases, they might resemble OPEN -- as proposed by Senators Wyden, Moran, Cantwell.

Why not just say they support OPEN then? It has been around since May and the SOPA Opera thing less than a month. Supporting an altered version of SOPA but but not OPEN kind of ruins your theory.

[chance]

I understand that silent congressmen weren't listed. But I think it's unfair to label supporters of "altered versions of SOPA" as being just as bad as supporters. After all, we don't really know what those "altered versions" look like. It some cases, they might resemble OPEN -- as proposed by Senators Wyden, Moran, Cantwell.

Why not just say they support OPEN then? It has been around since May and the SOPA Opera thing less than a month. Supporting an altered version of SOPA but but not OPEN kind of ruins your theory.

The reason may have more to do with personal politics than policy. Most of us are reluctant to jump between positions too quickly -- even after we realize our first decision was flawed. With important decisions, we want to appear "very deliberative" -- instead of just flitting from one idea to another. Good or bad, large governing bodies often work this way.

And on a personal level, if they've supported another congressman's bill at one point, they may be reluctant to abandon him too quickly (even after they decide not to vote for it). This may sound hypocritical... but most of us have done this in our own relationships. Even when we develop misgivings about a friend, we often move away slowly rather than just abandon him for someone better.

These factors are always present in our lives, so I'm speculating they were at play here with some of the "skeptical supporters". Speculating, mind you.

But as you've shown, SOPA still had a large number of hardcore supporters. So you've made a convincing argument that it may have passed if not for pubic outcry.

Either way, policy trumps personal politics in the end. So I think OPEN will get support, or SOPA will evolve slowly to embrace OPEN's approach.

.

Edited by chance, 05 February 2012 - 01:41 PM.

[Catelf]

Literally everything that required groups of strangers working together? Impossible.

Literally, that is not something that is dependent on copyright at all.

Edited by Catelf, 06 February 2012 - 10:40 AM.

[greep]

Without copyright someone could simply immediately steal your ideas while forming a group, then exclude you from said group. Or am I incorrect here?

[Anzkji]

Can we lock this topic?

[NakedPaulToast]

Without copyright someone could simply immediately steal your ideas while forming a group, then exclude you from said group. Or am I incorrect here?

You're incorrect. Copyright doesn't protect people from stealing ideas, only the the implementation of ideas.

Can we lock this topic?

If you feel this topic should be locked than report it and state why you feel it should be locked.

Why are you even clicking the topic. One of the reasons I found SOPA do distasteful is the censorship and limiting people to express free thought. I find your post equally distasteful.

[Rusty]

Without copyright someone could simply immediately steal your ideas while forming a group, then exclude you from said group. Or am I incorrect here?

You're incorrect. Copyright doesn't protect people from stealing ideas, only the the implementation of ideas.

Not exactly true, ideas are not protected by copyright, only works such as sprites, game design documents and such. Ideas being protected by copyright is like trade marking a thought.

[NakedPaulToast]

Without copyright someone could simply immediately steal your ideas while forming a group, then exclude you from said group. Or am I incorrect here?

You're incorrect. Copyright doesn't protect people from stealing ideas, only the the implementation of ideas.

Not exactly true, ideas are not protected by copyright, only works such as sprites, game design documents and such. Ideas being protected by copyright is like trade marking a thought.

I never said ideas were protected by copyright. That's why I said copyright won't protect ideas. Sprites documents and such are the implimentation of the idea.

[Rusty]

Without copyright someone could simply immediately steal your ideas while forming a group, then exclude you from said group. Or am I incorrect here?

You're incorrect. Copyright doesn't protect people from stealing ideas, only the the implementation of ideas.

Not exactly true, ideas are not protected by copyright, only works such as sprites, game design documents and such. Ideas being protected by copyright is like trade marking a thought.

I never said ideas were protected by copyright. That's why I said copyright won't protect ideas. Sprites documents and such are the implimentation of the idea.

Yes but the copyright does not come into effect if you came up with the idea and I made the sprites. The copyright of those sprites would belong to me unless I gave them to you or signed them over to a project.

[Sirosky]

Edit: nvm

Edited by Sirosky, 06 February 2012 - 08:30 PM.

[chance]

Yes but the copyright does not come into effect if you came up with the idea and I made the sprites. The copyright of those sprites would belong to me...

That's exactly what NPT is telling you. Copyright applies to (i.e. protects) the implementation.

.

Edited by chance, 06 February 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[Rusty]

Yes but the copyright does not come into effect if you came up with the idea and I made the sprites. The copyright of those sprites would belong to me...

That's exactly what NPT is telling you. :tongue: Copyright applies to (i.e. protects) the implementation.

.

Look chance, you haven't been arguing with me lately, so if I choose to misunderstand a comment so I can create some false conflict for my own satisfaction then I can. If you didn't want me to go and fulfil my needs elsewhere, then you should have tried harder with this relationship. This is your fault. Your fault.

And yes, I have realised that NPT is saying the exact same thing as me, but in a different way. I apologize, I was playing Assassin's Creed and only half reading any comments made on the GMC, multi-tasking on a forum is never a good thing.