As we learned (though were hardly surprised by) this week, the MPAA doesn’t take kindly to the suggestion that it should have to consider fair use when sending DMCA notices. The irony of this was not lost on anyone, and indeed both of our most insightful comments of the week came from that post, both of them making the same point. First up, Tim K‘s opening salvo:

Difficult for MPAA to differentiate between infringing and non-infringing material, but everyone else should still easily be able to know immediately what’s infringing.

And not far behind, reinforcements from Jesse:

Interesting. If it’s ISPs magically waving away infringement, it’s really easy to figure out infringement from non-infringement. If they have to do it, it’s too hard.

It’s certainly a point that bears repetition. But there’s another important point to be made on that same story, in response to the MPAA’s claims that they need to send millions of DMCA notices. So our first editor’s choice goes to Rikuo for covering that base:

No they don’t. There’s a myriad of other tactics they can use. There is no requirement that they absolutely, positively have to send DMCA notices.

For our second editor’s choice, we head to our post about Eric Holder, who is also making bold statements about intellectual property. This time, it’s the idea that piracy funds terrorism, which made a different Eric (I assume) wonder what exactly he’s saying:

So if I understand this correctly:

1) Infringement is all over the place, thus making it difficult to monetize content, which leads to the need for these laws
2) Terrorist are able to fund themselves via monetizing this infringing
3) Which leads to the final logic that terrorist are able to monetize content that is available everywhere better than the producers of the content???

On the funny side, we’ve got a pair of winners from two different posts about major players in the Prenda saga. First up, when we asked whether Paul Duffy’s wife admitted that he was engaged in interstate extortion, Arsik Vek anticipated Duffy’s response:

Duffy’s next comment: “I’m not sure who that woman is. She may or may not be my wife, but I have no direct knowledge of any relationship.”

That would be true to form. Up next, in response to Mark Lutz’s ongoing evasion in the face of scrutiny, an anonymous commenter was inspired to put Prenda’s tenacity to good use:

You know, I’ve always wanted to dig to China. I think I’ll hire these guys.

For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with our post about the new and disappointing live streaming service from Disney’s ABC. An anonymous commenter summed up the likely customer response to this lacklustre offering:

“Where can I sign back up for my monthly $50-80 cable bill so I have access to these wonderful services”

-No one. Ever.

And finally, since we’ve been oh so serious and scathing today, we’ll finish things off with something a bit sillier. In response to our post about people not turning off their devices when they fly, one anonymous commenter dissented, but for pragmatic reasons:

I generally do. I just don’t have the coordination to flap my arms and mess with my smartphone at the same time.

This is the way the post ends: not with a bang but a groan. See you tomorrow, folks!

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story