3 ms·
No. The point is if Obama tweeted it. The owner works be like meh. But cos it’s the norm to hate trump. Oh I don’t like trump so I’ll issue a copyright claim. T
by philliphaydon 6y ago
No. The point is if Obama tweeted it. The owner works be like meh. But cos it’s the norm to hate trump. Oh I don’t like trump so I’ll issue a copyright claim. The point is people selectively deciding when to invoke a copyright claim just because they dislike a person.
- incompatible 6y agoI support abolishing copyright law, if that's the solution you are looking for.
- AlexandrB 6y ago> The point is people selectively deciding when to invoke a copyright claim just because they dislike a person. I honestly don't understand what's wrong with that. Unless you're suggesting that copyright must be enforced maximally, like trademarks? Even then, I could selectively choose to give licenses to people I like and withhold them from people I don't. How is this different from "voting with your dollars" as a consumer?
- philliphaydon 6y agoI don’t actually have an opinion on the matter. I’m just saying this is what I think the person was saying.
- perl4ever 6y agoThe Obama campaign did receive one or more questionable DMCA takedown notices for their ads circa 2008: https://www.eff.org/pages/election-2008-dmca-takedowns https://www.eff.org/pages/election-2008-dmca-takedowns There was also this: https://www.wired.com/2011/01/hope-image-flap/ https://www.wired.com/2011/01/hope-image-flap/
- duxup 6y ago>people selectively deciding when to invoke a copyright claim Isn't that the right of the copyright holder?