Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)OS
Posts
0
Comments
280
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • The only change I've seen in this regard is a dramatic reduction in people's willingness to tolerate these people. They've always been here and always been like this, but we as a society used to just let them have their way to make them go away.

    So I see articles like this as being nothing but good news.

  • Ya gotta remember that at its inception, at least in the US, copyright had 2 things going for it:

    The duration was limited to 14 years, not the death of the author +95 or fucking whatever it is currently, and that much of that duration would need to get burnt up in duplication and distribution of the work, all of which had significant costs associated with it. Hundred year long guarantees with unlimited instant reproduction of a work and instant mass distribution functionally for free would have been anathema at the time, and this kind of abuse of the system goes directly counter to the original as-written intent.

    Too bad those 'originalists' in the courts only use that concept to suppress women and minorities instead of maybe picking up a small W with it here.

  • One of these days a Corp is going to push hard enough they get their rights stripped away for not meeting the 'to promote the progress of science and useful arts' part of the copyright clause and i'm starting to wonder if the big N is going to be the winner.

  • The correct answer in that scenario is C should be paying for it, as in the stated scenario C's traffic would be exceeding the peering arrangement with B and/or A, but there were/are a number of reasons that breaks down in the real world.