M. Alan Thomas II 's BestNetTech Comments

Latest Comments (216) comment rss

  • On the post: Senate Quickly Says 'No Way' To Mitch McConnell's Cynical Ploy To Add Bogus Cybersecurity Bill To NDAA

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 15 Jun, 2015 @ 08:14pm

    I hear that even CISA proponents didn't want it attached to the NDAA because the NDAA is under veto threat and CISA therefore stands a better chance by itself.

  • On the post: Did Letting Section 215 Expire Completely Change USA Freedom Without Anyone Noticing?

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 08 Jun, 2015 @ 11:43pm

    If it comes before a court, the canons of statutory interpretation are quite clear on avoiding absurd results. While we might argue that they don't always observe this canon—although the documentarian in me would argue that a fish is a document when considered as evidence*—there's no real alternative here. We all know what they meant and there's no real alternative.

    *This was an actual case. The usual library school reading about what constitutes a document uses the example of a different animal and, among other situations, a zoo.

  • On the post: Insanity Rules In Ireland: Media Ordered Not To Report On Parliamentary Speech

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 31 May, 2015 @ 10:41am

    We often complain that the Westminster-style countries often lack constitutional protections for speech. This is not 100% correct, as there IS usually a privilege to report on what is said in Parliament, often derived from the right to say anything in Parliament without it being punished elsewhere. (You will note that the U.S. is among the countries that inherited that underlying privilege.)

  • On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 27 May, 2015 @ 10:46pm

    Re: Re:

    I don't think a unique photo publicly shared as creative expression is in the same space as a utilitarian, mass-produced object never before presented as creative expression. He's not trying to reclassify something from A to B, he's trying to reclassify something from A to high-class-A-because-now-it's-mine.

  • On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 27 May, 2015 @ 02:15pm

    I'm not sure that a single comment, sometimes consisting entirely of a few emoji, really recontextualizes or comments on the original work sufficiently to create anything new. If he had altered the photos themselves, I might agree that he had a point. If he reproduced them not for sale but purely for the purpose of comment or reporting (however insignificant his contribution), I'd agree that that was okay. But to reproduce them for the purpose of selling them and adding little besides his signature, with no recontextualizing à la Duchamp's Fountain (which took a supposedly ordinary, mass-produced thing and elevated it out of everyday life), feels insufficient to me.

    But it's not as if any of these images on their own would be seen as worth that. It is -- for better or worse -- the fact that Prince chose to highlight them that suddenly made them worth so much money.
    By that logic, every hit song that's a hit purely because a studio exec decided to make it a hit through marketing should be royalty-free. If someone paying attention to a work and thinking it's worth money was the dividing line, any publisher could simply decide that they like an unpublished manuscript or online essay, slap an epitaph on it, and declare that they could now sell it without being encumbered by the original copyright; that's roughly the level of highlighting and commentary being applied here.

  • On the post: Godzilla Sues The Godzilla Of Copyright Trolls, Voltage Pictures, For Copyright Infringement

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 21 May, 2015 @ 02:29pm

    Re:

    The Mazinger pic is interesting, because I'm not aware of any official source that could be from. I have some inquiries out now.

  • On the post: The First Amendment, The Second Amendment And The 3D-Printed Gun

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 08 May, 2015 @ 01:59pm

    I'm wary of dismantling the Second Amendment purely because I'm worried about giving the First Amendment's opponents a useful precedent.

  • On the post: FBI Hands Over 5000 Pages Of Stingray Info To MuckRock, Redacts Nearly All Of It

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 01 May, 2015 @ 06:37pm

    STEP 2
    Turn StingRay system on.
    What is step 1, "Take it to the site"? "Plug it in"? And that's too sensitive to tell us?!?

  • On the post: Law Enforcement's Cluelessness On Display In Congressional Hearing On Undermining Encryption

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 01 May, 2015 @ 04:58pm

    Secure backdoor encryption is not putting a man on the moon; it's making one plus one equal three. Anyone who does it is not a genius, they're displaying their ignorance of the subject at its most basic level.

  • On the post: Can You Sue For Copyright Infringement Before It's Actually Happened?

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2015 @ 06:27pm

    Re:

    Porn is copyrighted. Sex is not.

  • On the post: Can You Sue For Copyright Infringement Before It's Actually Happened?

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2015 @ 06:26pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    As has been well-established by a certain photo, humans can receive copyright for doing things that monkeys can do just as well.

  • On the post: Can You Sue For Copyright Infringement Before It's Actually Happened?

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2015 @ 06:25pm

    Re: Re:

    Until and unless sports broadcasts become slavish copies containing the entire field in 3D, leaving all other options up to the viewer, the broadcasters are making at least the bare minimum decisions of zoom, framing, angles (especially as they cut from one to the other), &c. Not to mention, y'know, the commentary.

  • On the post: Can You Sue For Copyright Infringement Before It's Actually Happened?

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2015 @ 06:31pm

    There are plenty of things that you can sue in advance of, given certain evidence and circumstances. Speech is not one of them: that's called "prior restraint."

  • On the post: California Bill Would Require Libraries Post Scary Warning Signs Not To Do Infringy Stuff With 3D Printers

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2015 @ 04:09pm

    Re: Re: Is this infringing?

    It would be sensible, but there's actually a way of indemnifying libraries through (optional) signage; this is not it. C.f. 17 U.S.C. 108(f)(1) and my other comment on this post.

  • On the post: California Bill Would Require Libraries Post Scary Warning Signs Not To Do Infringy Stuff With 3D Printers

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2015 @ 04:08pm

    Re:

    Yes and no and I wish. Let me explain:

    Yes: The signs you're thinking of are due to federal law, specifically 17 U.S.C. 108(f)(1), which explicitly indemnifies libraries if they post those signs. But it only applies to copyright. It also doesn't apply to copy shops, which is why they sometimes don't have those signs; they're still potentially liable.

    No: The California proposal does not explicitly indemnify the libraries if they post those signs. It's not clear that they would have that effect absent an explicit indemnification in the statute, so this proposal doesn't necessarily do what you think it does.

    I wish: I know some of the lawyer-librarians who have been talking about the issue of 3D printing liability, and we've discussed the signage idea before. Quite frankly, most of us would be happy with a 17 U.S.C. 108(f)(1)-style liability shield, but it would have to be done like the federal copyright version and not this California proposal.* Interestingly, the copyright law only refers to "reproducing equipment," so libraries can presumably escape any theoretical copyright liability on 3D printers that way; our problem is more with patent law, printed guns, &c.

    *Defending copyright law as the rational option is . . . disconcerting.

  • On the post: Another Reason To Deploy Encryption Widely: Spiking China's 'Great Cannon' Attack

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2015 @ 10:19pm

    Re: Great Cannon

    The Grand Cannon series (I through V) were strategic weapons in the Macross universe. /geek

  • On the post: Another Reason To Deploy Encryption Widely: Spiking China's 'Great Cannon' Attack

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2015 @ 10:22pm

    It will also spike Comcast's ability to inject popups into people's browsing in the event of detecting network-utilizing malware / copyright strikes.

  • On the post: CNBC Worries About Poor, Helpless Multinational Corporations Who Are Being 'Cyberbullied'

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 31 Mar, 2015 @ 06:30pm

    I sense a market need for a rapid-response social media firefighting unit.

  • On the post: When Analyzing Cord Cutting Options, Most TV Analysts Continue To Pretend Piracy Simply Doesn't Exist

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 31 Mar, 2015 @ 12:08am

    Re: OMG..

    I agree on the what-is-this-talking-about; even without an investment beyond a cheap HD antenna, I still get at least one of each of the major broadcast networks, including PBS, and DVRs still exist.

    I'm also confused by how there's a roughly one-third drop in price between the high-end option and the low-end option and this is seen as somehow meaningless. Like I wouldn't enjoy an extra $480/year in my life.

    Of course, I have the anime fan's problem of many shows being picked up for streaming in the U.S., often simulcast with the Japanese release, with no availability on broadcast or cable. And half of them won't even see a physical media release; if I want a copy to keep, I need to pirate a copy from the streaming service I'm already paying for because there is literally no other option (and unlike broadcast/cable, I can't legally tape it).

  • On the post: Senator Wants To Know Why The US Marshals Asset Forfeiture Division Is Blowing Money On $10,000 Tables

    M. Alan Thomas II ( profile ), 25 Mar, 2015 @ 10:19pm

    Clearly the AFD has acquired some of its property and money in a manner not consistent with the law (or at least internal rules and regulations). They should have all of their ill-gotten gains seized by Congress.

Next >>