4 ms·
So you'd rather be protected by the feudal lord (Google) than stand on your own? Make no mistake that's what you're saying.
by jchrisa 17y ago
So you'd rather be protected by the feudal lord (Google) than stand on your own? Make no mistake that's what you're saying.
- jdminhbg 17y agoNo, I'm saying it's highly unlikely that the "king" is going to shut down the "feudal lord" and then let me, the "peasant," do whatever I want to.
- jchrisa 17y agoYou shouldn't be able to do whatever you want. Unless you only want to do good things. Law isn't perfect but it is meant to be applied impartially.
- Semiapies 17y agoWhat about the things that aren't "good", but aren't harmful to anyone - things like lolcats and blog posts about how the whole web should be running out of home servers? Shouldn't people be able to do those?
- kelnos 17y agoWe're not talking about Italy's hatred of a lolcats video. We're talking about a video of 3 kids taunting an autistic kid. If someone put that video on their home server and showed it to the world, they'd (hopefully) be just as liable as if they put it on YouTube. If Italy is fine with lolcats on YT, presumably they'd be fine with lolcats on my home server.
- Semiapies 17y agoYour reply isn't actually to what I said, but I'll respond to you: The video is not the harm; the original taunting is. If it's a manner of protecting a minor, we can talk about pulling the video down. If the kids were selling the video and making money off it, we can talk about prosecuting them.
- kelnos 17y agoWhy is making money off of something the threshold for prosecution? Is the video (or the act itself) somehow less harmful to someone when it isn't commercially viable?
- janl 17y agoYour freedom to swing your arms ends in front of my nose.
- Semiapies 17y agoAs a question, that would be a correct paraphrase of what I just asked.
- archgoon 17y agoI don't think that I would describe Google as a feudal lord, what with it not having the power to really do anything to me except deny me it's services. I have sworn no vows of fealty that force me to wage war on their behalf, with execution for dereliction of said vows. Even if I were an employee of theirs, I would still be allowed to quit. Now, am I happy to let Google fight legal battles that I agree with that I can't fight on my own, due to lack of resources and standing? Yes.