Intellectual property

why is it that leftists only oppose copyrights when it suits them?

Other urls found in this thread:

gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html.
torrentfreak.com/mpaa-banned-from-using-piracy-and-theft-terms-in-hotfile-trial-131129/).
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

why don't you fuck off to Sup Forums

...

muh leftists
muh sjws

>>>/reddit/ all of you

>anyone who wants Sup Forums to stay in Sup Forums is a redditor!!!!!
you have to go back

Fuck off, shitstain.

>the worker is wroth his labor
Dropout garbage detected.
A student is worth his grade, and a worker is worth his quality of work.
Only dumb fucks believe that work for the sake of work is a value onto itself even when it doesn't produce adequate results. Dumb fucks and human garbage filled with diarrheic shit for brains.

This isn't politics, intellectual property pertains to technology.

Useless people need a way to justify their existence.

>implying you can have a reasonable debate about such subjects on Sup Forums

>hurr libruls
>hurr libruls are gommies
>huru hurr hurr
Braindeads need not post on Sup Forums.

>coppying elections is stealing
Nobody who follows WL is buying that book, nothing lost.

>wikileaks
>leftist

OP wants a hugbox to bash his leftist strawmen so just fuck off to Sup Forums

Reported for shitposting and off-topic spam.

Whoumst'd've are you quoting?

can they at least have the discussion somewhere else if they're going to have blatant right wing bias? if you look at any thread with Sup Forumsacks you'll notice they rarely contribute to actual discussion and prefer instead to stir shit and insult people they disagree with.

>and prefer instead to stir shit and insult people they disagree with.
Sounds like Hillary supporters as well.
There's a reason it's also called lefty/pol/

>leftists bla bla bla
Fuck off. You have a binary mental capacity. You literally deserve the label "right wing retard", by your binary understanding of reality.

>Sup Forums Technology

sage goes in all fields

Is Wikileaks a warez site now?

>why is it that leftists only oppose copyrights when it suits them?

Don't be stupid. You know they are hypocritical as shit and will happily defend their double standards.

I'm not white and stopped falling for that "we're you're friends, they're your enemies; vote for us" trick long ago.

>millions of dollars

You're talking about centrists.

Look for the black and red. Those are the leftists.

This was a dick move by wikileaks. This book isnt fucking classified, it isnt suppressed, its on bookshelves. If you're going to leak something, leak the audio recordings proving/disproving the statements in the book

This. WikiLeaks is getting more and more dickish. This does not help their credibility.

back to /r/the_donald brainlet hick

How? They have yet to lie about anything to date.

Why do this though? It's just piracy.

>Hillary supporters
topkek nobody gives a shit about that we're just sick of trumplets infesting every other board with their inane comments
take that shit back

Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as “intellectual property”—a term also applied to patents, trademarks, and other more obscure areas of law. These laws have so little in common, and differ so much, that it is ill-advised to generalize about them. It is best to talk specifically about “copyright,” or about “patents,” or about “trademarks.”

The term “intellectual property” carries a hidden assumption—that the way to think about all these disparate issues is based on an analogy with physical objects, and our conception of them as physical property.

When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial difference between material objects and information: information can be copied and shared almost effortlessly, while material objects can't be.

To avoid spreading unnecessary bias and confusion, it is best to adopt a firm policynot to speak or even think in terms of “intellectual property” (gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html.

Why do you hate White civilization so much?

Frankly, I have no idea.

Publishers often refer to copying they don't approve of as “piracy.” In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions more complete.)

If you don't believe that copying not approved by the publisher is just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word “piracy” to describe it. Neutral terms such as “unauthorized copying” (or “prohibited copying” for the situation where it is illegal) are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as “sharing information with your neighbor.”

A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that“piracy” and “theft” are smear words (torrentfreak.com/mpaa-banned-from-using-piracy-and-theft-terms-in-hotfile-trial-131129/).

...

Why not? Fuck corporatism. If the book is so important to getting Trump out of office then release it for free instead of trying a quick and easy cash grab on a hot topic. The author is just another greedy sack of shit

How is wikileaks leftism?

Because people, in general, like to not look selfish, even though they totally are. Best way to do that is to cite an altruistic or larger motive than "this isn't good for me" because than others will do the work for your lazy ass.

Both left and right sides do this.

Also, IMO, her comment is really more about the labor theory of value than copyright.

tl;dr - stop being a whiny little bitch about it and ignore the cunt.

Literally what has this got to do with technology you dumb poledditor?

Easy cash grab on a hot topic is how the entire US publishing industry works. This is a way of undermining Trump criticism by denying the author an income. Regardless of how you feel about Trump or his critics this is not what Wikileaks' mission is supposed to be.

aaah yes, " one pirated book/song/whatever = one lost sale ", I missed that one

We're not talking about torrent trackers here.

The statements are true, Bannon has confirmed it.

>m-muh hillary though!!!
nobody fucking cares about the establishment robot, you just don't want to accept that nobody likes Sup Forumsyps shitting up threads

>Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are boldly untrue. These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book
this is what the author said about his own book

That doesn't make the statements fictitious. They did happen. We don't need the recordings to know that because Bannon has confirmed it. Of course, it doesn't mean what the statements said are facts, but they were still real.

doesn't matter, he's using the same fallacious argument in his tweet
if you just want to jack off to polshit there's a whole board for that

I see this as a good thing overall. People that want to support the author should buy the book themselves if they care that much about it. People that are blind supporters of Trump might benefit from seeing something other than propaganda for a change.

This is a lie, I oppose copyright always.

You'd be surprised.

The law pertains to literally everyone, that doesn't mean you can shitpost political threads on any board you want. Until there's a /law/ board, you need to go back to

>Sounds like Hillary supporters as well.
So you admit you sound like the people who get you all salty? This should trigger some introspection, if you have two brain cells to rub together. Both parties sound like raving lunatics these days. Wanna make America great again? Rise above this petty bullshit, be the better man, and have some fucking dignity for fucks sake.

Karma is a bitch.

good job wikileaks

>This does not help their credibility.
Well? WTF is it? Is Assange a Clinton hater or a Trump hater? Because both groups have been making claims for months now. It seems to me, that if there's any dirt to be found, then WikiLeaks is going to expose it. That's a good thing.

>they stole millions of dollars from this author
>millions of dollars
>stolen
>by posting bits online
Makes me process information.

Assange is going insane from buyers remorse since Trump has shown 0 interest in letting him off the hook

>they killed millions of lives
>millions of lives
>killed
>by starting a chain chemical reaction
Makes me almonds activate.

If this doesnt tell you that wikileaks is compromised then you are beyond saving at this point

>It seems to me, that if there's any dirt to be found, then WikiLeaks is going to expose it
unless that dirt is damaging to the Kremlin, in which case WikiLeaks declines to publish it

Nobody stole money from the author.

Fuck off shill. The more people get their on this the better. Trying to claim that putting something so important behind a paywall is helping criticism is just beyond stupid, it's downright malicious. I actually applaud wikileaks for sharing it and telling the greedy jackass to go fuck himself

There's no dirt to uncover by providing a pirated copy of something that's already been made public.

I'm not defending or demonizing piracy. But people wanting to read books for free shouldn't be turning to Wikileaks for that.