Added: 1 month ago
From: tooltime9901
Views: 2,516
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (64)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Matter of brand dilution. Much like Zenimax vs. Mojang.

  • I think copyright is getting obsolete. That means also books. Books are just an elaborated idea that needs to be shared for free. But then that's the case with patents also. We have to evolve beyond this. Internet is the first step.

  • The patent system in it's current form needs to go away. All it does is stifle technological progress and create jobs for lots of useless lawyers.

    Right now it's only used as a business tool for large companies to clobber each other with frivolous lawsuits and keep away competition from smaller companies. Like Apple trying to prevent Samsung from selling their latest Android phones shortly before xmas... It's all a big steaming pile of shit!

  • Saw my highest rated comment on the stickman video? Now I'm back.

    Thanks man for posting some good video finally! :-). Love you! :*

  • The 'fate' I see if the SOPA (& PIPA?) gets passed is the elimination (?) of the civil court. In the civil court, I could legally sue you for speaking at all ... true, no judge would even APPROVE HEARING such a case; but it's still legal.

    Intellectual Property is THE OWNER'S (not the government''s) RESPONSIBILITY. I can't even BEGIN to tell you how much Intellectual Property I've had "stolen" because I set it down and someone else picked it up and registered it!

  • This just one of many reasons that everybody - EVERYBODY should get behind Anonymous.

  • thanks for sharing a critique and actually doing the research instead of just jumping on the bandwagon like thousands of others, claiming that everything will be shut down and censored. As we allow the government in and give them an inch they may push for a mile... there is footage posted of congress discussing the bill, claiming that they should bring in 'nerds' to help identify the terms. this goes to show that they are legislating over issues they don't really fully comprehend.

  • made a vid reply

  • Has anybody heard of ACTA? I don't know if it's in the US or not but it's basically SOPA and PIPA on steroids. Do a youtube search for it. User VarmitC has a mirror of it on his site.

  • What it's going to come down to is that if anybody uses copywrited materials (even if it's just a little bit and would be safe under the DMCA) then the people would be sued and even punished under SOPA. It would virtually remove the DMCA and nobody would be safe.

  • SOPA makes kitty sad.

  • MegaUpload was shut down, and they were big timers.

  • I really don't like labeling this stuff "intellectual property" since it conflates a bunch of separate protections (copyright, trademark, patent) and invokes our own intuitions about how physical property works. Yet physical property is categorically different because it is a scarce commodity. Bits meanwhile are designed to be easily copied with high fidelity.

  • As a part-time programmer, the IP rights I own to my software, I think are very tangible. Sure you can't hold it in your hands, but most of the products you actually use today you can't hold in your hands.

    Sure, you may have a smart phone, but what the fuck is a smart phone without Apps and the Internet? Think of all the services and products you use on a daily basis that you can't place in your fingers.

    I don't like SOPA, but IP exists for a reason.

  • @BusinessIDBAI As someone who has been making and publishing material on the internet for the last 14 years, I accept that my control over my work ends, in practice, the second I've published it. The only situation where I could see that my intellectual property should have any protection, is if someone tries to make use of unpublished material or tries to literally steal my thoughts, which, as far as I know, belongs to the realm of science fiction.

  • @SAsgarters

    That was a terrible argument.

    Because your control over your property ends the moment you're no longer touching it. So, people should be able to take whatever you are no longer touching and it should only be considered stealing when they try to pry it from your hands.

    Are you a troll or was this seriously your thoughts? Makes no sense at all.

  • @BusinessIDBAI Well, you sure didn't hesitate to start calling people trolls and strawmanning them. Can you think of one good reason why I should waste my time on anything you just wrote?

  • @SAsgarters

    Question, why are you important?

    You responded to me, with an argument that was vacuous. I said so, and asked if you're trolling, because your argument didn't make sense.

    Then you respond, again, saying your ignoring my statement. Therefore, I conclude your a troll. Have a good one.

  • @BusinessIDBAI No, I'm afraid it was your argument that was vacuous and apparently you'e not even going to try to argue the issue. I think we both know which of us is the troll.

  • @SAsgarters

    Okay, have a good day.

  • @BusinessIDBAI I will. I'd make the same suggestion, but then I'd be infringing on your intellectual property rights.

  • I'd like to think Google's blackout had less to do with concern about business and more to do with concern about the censorship of free speech

  • Intellectual property is retarded. Ideas are not physical things. The reason we have private property laws is because physical objects are scarce - if I take something from you, you no longer have it. Ideas are not scarce. If I make a copy of an idea/song/artwork, the idea/song/artwork has not been stolen.

    SOPAs not really about intellectual property, it's about censorship. It's almost identical to what China and other censorship happy tyrannies like to use.

  • "Sooo, being one of those people who gives their opinion about stuff..."

    Lol, great introduction.

  • Well if SOPA comes back we could always just post links to The Pirate Bay on senate dot gov, forcing them to shut down their own website.

  • @onpon4

  • Chik fil a is nasty brown ass rubber chicken.

  • Copyright is an incredibly grey area of morality and law, but I think that over all the law should be skewed in favor of the consumers. Incredibly liberal fair use especially when copy cat isn't profiting, limited copyright of say, 12 years, and the producer has to jump through hoops. Hollywood makes money from copyright infringement and piracy. You are only stealing ideas first of all, not physical material. Plus most of these people wouldn't have bought the album anyway, but they increase...

  • @TheRepublicOfUngeria ...the albums popularity for people who would buy it and that leads to more sales. Plus we are moving out of the physical medium here. We don't need people to make CDs and mass produce shit, electricity already does it. CDs are obsolete, even paper for books is obsolete.

  • This comment is sponsored by Coca Cola... What is the cat supposed to represent?

  • I don't know about trademarks, but copyright laws are laughable. Honestly, copyrights shouldn't last as long as they do; maybe 10-15 years, not *checks* 70 years after the author's death.

  • @onpon4 Everything should be public domain after the author/creators are dead.

  • @onpon4 Lasting the entire life of the author is reasonable. They wrote it, they should get a copyright that lasts at least the term of their natural life. However, 70 years is kind of ridiculous, at that point, you're lasting about their natural life, and the natural life of their children. But more so is the problem of copyright when dealing with corporations, which do not die. How long should their content last? I think a maximum 50 years should be fine, but corporations don't see it that way

  • @puellanivis Actually, since corporations, while counted as people, are not technically the creators, if they are considered the copyright owner, I believe it's a fixed amount of years instead, which IIRC is 120 years.

    Corporations being counted as "people" does cause a lot of problems.

  • @onpon4 it is true that a corporation cannot be consider the "creator", however, if a work is done for-hire during the regular employment for a corporation, then the corporation is considered to be the "author" for the purposes of copyright, and as a legal person, the term is yes, a fixed duration.

    Corporations being counted as "people" allows them to hold property and be sued... so, while it does create some interesting legal arguments, it solves a lot more problems than it creates.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @FlowCell You mean as ethical as religion? Religion obviously exists, so I assume you're referring to the ridiculous religious claims that there is some kind of magical creator of the universe.

  • My comments are copyrighted. Including this one.

  • another thing!!! kim kardashian sued, or tried to sue old navy because they were using a spokes girl who "looked like kim kardashian" apparently they were using that cunts likeness. which is foolish and unfair to the girl who did the commercial for old navy.

  • @RaabBlog

    really? that is ridiculous.

  • @coolbeens21 yea it is, i wish i knew the girls name it would make it more verifiable but if i remember it ill def post it. she was a guest on the joe rogan podcast

  • Way better video than the last ^^

  • im a musician, rapper/producer to be specific, the most ego driven money boasting and power hungry musician of them all. however all that matters to me is that people LISTEN to my music. once ur on torrents uve made it lol. thats how i see it. artists arent losing money. they make plenty off tours. another thing, if an artist puts out a good album people will buy it. if theres 1 good song and 14 fillers, be prepared to ship wood and hopefully u can sell that 1 song on itunes. good vid!!

  • tooltime video:

    hmmm, this is getting interesti... END

  • It gave the entertainment business the right to sue any Search engines and block anybody they wanted. As well as get rid of Google's plausible deniability when Someone post something with Copyright tags under Google's radar. Google said it best when Viacom sued them, There's just to many users for use to keep check on. Viacom didn't listen, sued Google anyways, and when the won the case they tried to get a list from Google's database, and fond it was to much for Viacom to handle.

  • Peter it's not about going after piracy sites.

    Who do you think distributed the piracy software to literally hundreds of millions? The companies that lobbied and supported SOPA.

    It's a giant act of hypocrisy. What they want is control.

  • Intellectual property is the biggest lie ever sold.

  • The thing is that this IP stuff isn't about "protecting authors and singers" and all that garbage. It's because Hollywood and the music industry don't like, and never have, that anyone can ever experience their stuff for free. If they had their way, we wouldn't be allowed to sell or buy used content or even loan it to friends, because they see that as "lost revenue".

  • @inuyashaxx

    "...Hollywood and the music industry don't like... anyone can ever experience their stuff for free."

    And so what? Call me crazy, but I dont actually have a problem with them wanting to be paid for their work. I admit I havent paid for a CD since '99 but if an artist makes it so I have no choice but to buy it, I wont be outraged as it were my RIGHT to it in the 1st place.

  • @inuyashaxx If they had their way they'd charge us per listen or view. 

  • @inuyashaxx: If the MPAA and RIAA and their like had their way, you would not be able to access the web at all except via their services. Since EVERYTHING that comes through the web is effectively copyrighted by *someone*, somwehere, they would control the web. They also want to do away with libraries, too. Only non-recordable media (that might also have a limited lifespan) would be sold.

  • Ah the return of our warlord!

  • I doubt YouTube opposed SOPA because they feared being shut down, but rather they opposed it because they would be held liable for content uploaded by their users and they could lose money from users uploading copyrighted content. YouTube can hardly regulate the content uploaded as things are and people get away with abusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act all of the time. I don't think YouTube could function in its current state if SOPA passed.

  • The placement of ownership on ideas is soon to come.

  • @NihilismSauce21 Say it in terms everyone understands: Thought Police. SOPA and PIPA were really about making the government into thought police.

  • @bamboo4tameshigiri Acta is following suit

  • @NihilismSauce21 I know. Organize. Fight. 

  • 115,000 sites changed for SOPA.

  • 100 hours of video is uploaded to youtube every 30 minutes (or there abouts)

    Youtube would have to make sure every second of that wasn't against copyright

    that would kill youtube.

  • oh thank god, a tooltime video that isn't those silly stickmen

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more