5 ms·

This offers no helpful information. It's not even an argument really. Comparing examples of ridiculous 200 year old laws to what's going on today without any c

This offers no helpful information. It's not even an argument really. Comparing examples of ridiculous 200 year old laws to what's going on today without any concrete examples aside from a half-assed list of proposals in parenthesis is not an argument. It's preaching to the converted. Torrentfreak is to copyright issues what Fox News is to Repiblican politics. It just serves to start a discussion where everyone pats each other on the back for agreeing with each other. Isn't there a list of domains that aren't allowed to be submitted and if so why hasn't Torrentfreak been added to it yet?

pjdorrell 13y ago
It's true that Rick Falkvinge is "preaching to the converted". But his preaching is slightly more coherent than the excesses of Fox News, and his target audience is an intellectual audience. I don't know what it is about Hacker News that guarantees a front page appearance for every article written by Falkvinge, but he is obviously getting the required votes. Perhaps many Hacker News readers are members of "the converted". Perhaps the moderators of Hacker News are among the converted. I would recommend against "censoring" Falkvinge. But his writings do deserve to be carefully analysed and refuted, line by line if necessary. I would like to start with the term "Copyright Monopoly". There is no Copyright Monopoly. Each copyright is one monopoly, so there are many "copyright monopolies" (and economically, those monopolies are a bad thing). But there is no "Copyright Monopoly". There is a recognisable "Copyright Industry", and perhaps also a "Copyright Enforcement Industry", and there are various political lobbyists and interest groups associated with those "industries". But not actually a single "monopoly" in the technical economic sense of the word.

5 ms·

This offers no helpful information. It's not even an argument really. Comparing examples of ridiculous 200 year old laws to what's going on today without any c

by bpatrianakos 13y ago

pjdorrell 13y ago
It's true that Rick Falkvinge is "preaching to the converted". But his preaching is slightly more coherent than the excesses of Fox News, and his target audience is an intellectual audience. I don't know what it is about Hacker News that guarantees a front page appearance for every article written by Falkvinge, but he is obviously getting the required votes. Perhaps many Hacker News readers are members of "the converted". Perhaps the moderators of Hacker News are among the converted. I would recommend against "censoring" Falkvinge. But his writings do deserve to be carefully analysed and refuted, line by line if necessary. I would like to start with the term "Copyright Monopoly". There is no Copyright Monopoly. Each copyright is one monopoly, so there are many "copyright monopolies" (and economically, those monopolies are a bad thing). But there is no "Copyright Monopoly". There is a recognisable "Copyright Industry", and perhaps also a "Copyright Enforcement Industry", and there are various political lobbyists and interest groups associated with those "industries". But not actually a single "monopoly" in the technical economic sense of the word.