Supreme Court Watch

Status
Not open for further replies.
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
Copyright creates an incentive to make scientific advances, because people like having credit and getting paid for their work. It's the whole reason the United States pulled so far ahead of the rest of the world in scientific breakthroughs and modern inventions.

Compare that to "share and share alike" shitholes like modern China, which can only photo copy the intellectual property of U.S. copyright holders.
Click to expand...
I've pirated nearly everything I can for over 20 years lol get fukt
This includes scientific papers, especially from Elsevier. That whole model is holding us back. The chinks don't care about freedom of information at all; in fact, they're against it: their model is just copying the west. It's disingenuous to say that's anything remotely like abolition of copyright.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Like
Reactions: Nameless One, Bananadana, SSj_Ness (Yiffed) and 1 other person
ks99 said:
I've pirated nearly everything I can for over 20 years lol get fukt
This includes scientific papers, especially from Elsevier. That whole model is holding us back. The chinks don't care about freedom of information at all; in fact, they're against it: their model is just copying the west. It's disingenuous to say that's anything remotely like abolition of copyright.
Click to expand...
How embarrassing, you actually think this is an own.

Copyright is a good thing and always has been, and is among the chief reasons the U.S. is successful along with the First Amendment.

Next you'll say "free speech is holding us back, get fucked" out of petty spite.

There's a reason why China is a subordinate to the U.S.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
  • Dumb
  • Dislike
Reactions: justhereforments, Bananadana, Desu Mountain and 2 others
Overly Serious said:
So do the people making pro-abortion arguments of "it's just a clump of cells" also advocate that a man should have the right to demand an abortion from someone he has gotten pregnant?
Click to expand...
No for obvious reasons, but some of them argue that a man should be able to opt out of fatherhood and have no obligations and no rights to the resulting child whatsoever.

Overly Serious said:
It's the woman's choice because it affects her body? But it affects the man's life massively too.
Click to expand...
This is a bad argument and you know it. Violating a person's physical body fucks him or her up more than anything, and many (most) pro-choicers consider an unwanted pregnancy to be one such violation. (Yes, this is not consistent with their other views, e.g. on vaccines, prostitution, gestational slaves, rape by deception, etc.)

(Child support payments are calculated as a share of the noncustodial parent's income and aren't designed to bring about such hardship that the parent will be at a significantly increased risk of violence. Child support laws are also sex-agnostic, and men get custody 60% of the time.)

Netizennameless said:
It would be peak clown world if feminists arguing "clump of cells" leads to men being granted the right to force their wives and mistresses to have abortions.
Click to expand...
Men forcing their wives and mistresses to have abortions is why the early feminists wanted them banned.

Dave. said:
Okay I’m genuinely fucking curious, why do leftists and pro-choice activists of both genders look like shit? Even the kind of fat pro-lifers still have fair skin and decent complexions with full hair. Do leftists do drugs on the side or something? Or are vegan and soy filled diets really that detrimental to your health?
Click to expand...
Part of the reason is they're reeeeing while pro-lifers are celebrating. People who are reeeeing always look ugly no matter the cause.
Still, even accounting for emotions, the difference is striking. Pro-lifers look decent despite the fact they went to protests/counterprotests and therefore self-selected for being a tad exceptional.
 
  • Informative
  • Disagree
Reactions: Bananadana, JambledUpWords and MarvinTheParanoidAndroid
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
How embarrassing, you actually think this is an own.

Copyright is a good thing and always has been, and is among the chief reasons the U.S. is successful along with the First Amendment.

Next you'll say "free speech is holding us back, get fucked" out of petty spite.

There's a reason why China is a subordinate to the U.S.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's an own to say I'm a pirate and don't give a shit, if that's what you mean.
Copyright laws were great when they were 14 years with a max one-time extension of another 14. Under current law, namely the Mickey Mouse Protection Act, copyright now lasts for the entirety of the author's life, plus 70 years, except for corporate creations which last for 120 years after creation or 95 years after publication (whichever comes first).
1656324211510.png

You can't seriously believe that it's a good thing that Disney can still milk the original Mickey Mouse cartoon, or that 1984 will not be public domain until 2044. That is fucking ludicrous. None of the people involved in making either of those things are benefiting from them, nor are their families recieving any meaningful royalties.
Free speech is not holding us back. (It's quite amusing that you think I would take this position, especially out of spite. I'm guessing you assume everyone is as neurotic as you?) Free speech is fucking incredible. And guess what? Piracy is free speech. Information wants to be free, and it is (and will continue to be) free. There is not a goddamn thing you can do about it, either.
>There's a reason why China is a subordinate to the U.S.
lmao. That has abso-fuckin-lutely nothing to do with copyright law whatsoever. The chinks don't care about copyright law because they just copy everything we make. They're not philosophical copyleftists, they just don't give a fuck.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: justhereforments, Negus, Autistic Joe and 6 others
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid said:
LMAO the manlet who larps as a woman is now larping as a Roman soldier. Millennials are a generation of pretenders.
Click to expand...
That's not all, they got Germanic barbarians too! The amount of salt is never ending and would warrant it's own thread with sheer amount of sperging going on
 
  • Lunacy
  • Like
Reactions: justhereforments, Autistic Joe, madethistocomment and 3 others
Hippopatumus said:
View attachment 3421914

View attachment 3421921

lol.
Click to expand...
Iowa and Nebraska alone has no true accurate records for the total number of gun owners. Its estimated to be over 50%.. That being said I don't know of any one living in the rural parts not armed with at lest a hunting rifle or old pump action. I don't think they understand how things work outside of urban bug hives. Show up in a small town causing problems and disturbing the peace. The local sheriff's office we'll see fit and having you arrested for simply making their job harder. That is if you don't find yourself in armed conflict with some local crazy farmer who wants you to fuck off this property.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Autistic Joe, madethistocomment, Netizennameless and 2 others
Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:
McConnell said they're gonna try for it next time Republicans hold congress.

Let's say they do it.. none of the "MAH STATES RIGHTS" folks are answering the question. Would they be opposed to it? I doubt it. It seems "states rights" folks just want the states to enact their suppressive laws


Nice dodging of the question there. Answer the question and stop dodging it like it's a formal education

Oh, and this isn't /pol/, despite what you may have heard. Stop quoting like it is.
Click to expand...
Why would someone definitively against abortion be against a national ban of abortion?
 
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Titos, +MarkOuttaBat+ and SSj_Ness (Yiffed)
Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:
McConnell said they're gonna try for it next time Republicans hold congress.

Let's say they do it.. none of the "MAH STATES RIGHTS" folks are answering the question. Would they be opposed to it? I doubt it. It seems "states rights" folks just want the states to enact their suppressive laws
Click to expand...
The issue is that it isn't the governors or senators who steer the ship, it's their voter base. Their voter base gives them the power to stay in office. And if they don't give a fuck about consistency then they will inact a abortion ban federally.

This is a double edge sword though because libtards can do the same thing.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Butcher Pete
ks99 said:
I don't think it's an own to say I'm a pirate and don't give a shit, if that's what you mean.
Click to expand...
Then why did you feel the need to brag about it to me?
ks99 said:
Copyright laws were great when they were 14 years with a max one-time extension of another 14. Under current law, namely the Mickey Mouse Protection Act, copyright now lasts for the entirety of the author's life, plus 70 years, except for corporate creations which last for 120 years after creation or 95 years after publication (whichever comes first).
1656324211510.png
Click to expand...
Yes, I know how copyright laws work.
ks99 said:
You can't seriously believe that it's a good thing that Disney can still milk the original Mickey Mouse cartoon, or that 1984 will not be public domain until 2044. That is fucking ludicrous. None of the people involved in making either of those things are benefiting from them, nor are their families recieving any meaningful royalties.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't care, the 70 years after the author is dead is a bit autistic but the copyright status keeps audiences interested in the publication by making its copyright status exclusionary. Nobody gives a shit about most public domain works.

And nice try bringing up the Disney family, Sharon Disney had mismanaged her own children's inheritance and the condition of receiving their inheritance was contingent of proving they had the maturity to handle their family wealth, as determined by her ex-husband and sister whom she had made trustees, that's the reason why they don't receive royalties. Their inheritance had nothing to do with the nature of copyright.
ks99 said:
Piracy is free speech. Information wants to be free, and it is (and will continue to be) free.
Click to expand...
Information is not an autonomous consciousness and has no intelligent will of its own. Its distribution is solely a product of human will.
ks99 said:
And guess what? Piracy is free speech.
Click to expand...
Free speech is defined by expressing yourself, piracy is distributing an intellectual property against the author's will.
ks99 said:
lmao. That has abso-fuckin-lutely nothing to do with copyright law whatsoever. The chinks don't care about copyright law because they just copy everything we make. They're not philosophical copyleftists, they just don't give a fuck.
Click to expand...
How ignorant. I suppose you're not familiar with Mao Zedong and the Cultural Revolution in which intellectuals were mass murdered by the Red Guard? Copyright is pro intellectual, Mao Zedong did everything possible to tear down anyone who could criticize him intelligently. The CCP were copyleft in principle of being communist, that is everything is communal, but only for information they wanted distributed.

On the opposite side, copyright is capitalist and allows the author to pursue their intellectual property without fear of abrogation of their intellectual property, and therefore an abrogation of their freedom of expression. Copyright and free speech are intertwined.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Overly Serious and +MarkOuttaBat+
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back