Posts by Mark Harris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Point made, Roger. Give it away now before you get boring.
-
Yup, and law based on anecdata = bad law.
-
I might be (even more) loopy otherwise.
The mind truly boggles at the threat to society inherent in that otherwise innocent remark...
-
Especially since... you're assuming a solution to a practical problem you and Mark have declared to be intractable: to fairly distribute said internet tax to those who've had material copied, we need a system that tracks downloads- that knows what people have copied. Otherwise it's just a guesstimate bunfight- and assuming "independents" will win that is naive.
Yup. To be fair, that's how some collection entities operate now (e.g. CCL) with regard to photocopying, as it's not feasible to collect data on every copy made by every machine (and let's not even discuss scanners). They will also collect on behalf of authors who have not consciously subscribed to their scheme. Their response, when I questioned this practice of collecting without authorization, was "nobody ever complained about getting a cheque".
BTW Don't assume that Don and I are joined at the hip on these matters. While we share some perspective on the technology involved and the likely impacts of current practices, we don't necessarily speak with one voice, you know ;-)
I'm still looking for facts and figures on whether anybody has been actually impacted by downloading/filesharing.
-
the Passion of the Veitch
Best line of the thread, Joe
-
Just in passing, call me cynical but I agree with phillipmatthews - timing is everything in PR.
-
It seems it's not just apalling legal advice he's getting.
-
Surely he's pretty radioactive right now.
Just as surely, it's all self-inflicted. What a dick.
-
it's just a shame that the judge can't overturn her original sentence
The answer is likely to be "no" but a question occurs: If the judge feels that the court was misled by the material presented on Mr Veitch's behalf (and Devoy and Currie seem to be saying that they were misled as to the nature of the references and therefore the material is out of context), and the judge's comments indicate that the references carried great weight in the decision on sentencing, can she order a review? Or is that the end of the decision unless the Crown appeals the sentence?
-
"It used to be only movies, now even verdicts are out before the official release."
heh, seems only appropriate.
I'll be interested to watch the appeal.