SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
posted by
takyon
on Wednesday April 08 2015, @10:30AM
from the I-have-a-vision-for-SIGNAL-LOST dept.
from the I-have-a-vision-for-SIGNAL-LOST dept.
Not too long ago both Rand and Ron Paul were pushing a copyright maximalist agenda. Today the chickens have come home to roost. Rand Paul's presidential announcement has been blocked by a copyright claim from Warner Music Group due to a clip of a song used in the announcement. Even more apropos of the (less and less as time goes by) libertarian-leaning Republican candidate, it wasn't a DMCA takedown raining on his parade, but the purely private ContentID system that Youtube put in place in order to appease the copyright cartel.
Here is a transcript of Rand Paul's announcement.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Rand Paul Censored by Youtube ContentID Copyright Enforcement System
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 99 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
A Smith & Wesson beats four aces.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Wednesday April 08 2015, @06:46PM
Sigh...when are people gonna learn that "libertarian" is a codeword for "I'm against anything that impedes my generation of wealth by any means, no matter who it hurts". Since copyrights allow them to generate more wealth with minimal effort? Its 100% doubleplusgood.
Go look up "Stefan Molyneux" on YouTube to see how far that idea gets carried, he has even gone so far to tell libertarian listeners to divorce their families [molyneuxrevealed.com] just like a fricking cult...of course cult leaders generally make money hand over fist so it fits the codeword definition of libertarian to a T. The Pauls sadly aren't really any better, if you look at the platform Ron and Rand stand on anybody with half a brain can see the end result would be a return to the early 1800s, I mean for fucks sake Rand has even said in the past any store should be able to put up signs that says "niggers aren't allowed" and as long as its a private business its okay as "the free market" will fix it....yeah anybody think that would have worked in 64? Hell anybody not think if we allowed that shit today we wouldn't end up in a similar situation to 64 in a couple decades?
As much as I cannot fricking stand Hillary...if the current crop like Cruz, Paul, and Fiorina is the BEST that the right can do? I think everybody better get used to saying President Hillary because nobody is gonna vote for these uber rich blowing, poor stomping, trickle upon yahoos!
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 08 2015, @09:19PM
Wow, Mr. Harry Feet, I was wrong. You must not be a paid Microsoft shill since MS would never have approved your message above.
But, you have a really odd like of Microsoft-- even odder, an extreme like of Microsoft... I guess you are just weird.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 09 2015, @12:27AM
Why is liking MS that bad? I have made an *excellent* living from their software stack. They are douchebags. But douchebags that make me money. I am however, going to change stacks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 09 2015, @01:59AM
Word that are associated with the "will do anything for money" meme: mercenary; whore.
That a company doesn't have a "won't do business with unrepentant convicted criminals" policy speaks volumes about that company.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 09 2015, @02:53AM
OMG!
GEWG AND HAIRY ARE ON THE SAME SIDE!!!!!
AHAHHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHHAHHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Thursday April 09 2015, @02:11AM
Sigh...when are people gonna learn that "libertarian" is a codeword for "I'm against anything that impedes my generation of wealth by any means, no matter who it hurts".
Never, because it's not true. Libertarian straw men are some of the saddest straw men on the internet.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Thursday April 09 2015, @09:42AM
Congrats on using the No True Scotsman fallacy, even though pretty much every major self anointed libertarian going all the way back to Ayn Rand and her followers have been EXACTLY this. Care to throw any other fallacies our way? I can wallpaper the page with citations if you like, its really not hard to find so called "libertarians" going against the philosophy if it affects their bottom line, just as we see here with Paul and IP, again its really not hard as they ain't giving up a single buck, beliefs or no.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 09 2015, @12:25PM
Congrats on using the No True Scotsman fallacy, even though pretty much every major self anointed libertarian going all the way back to Ayn Rand and her followers have been EXACTLY this.
Rand wasn't a self-annointed libertarian. In fact, she was opposed [aynrand.org] to libertarianism as it was then (in 1972) practiced. Take this quote:
Above all, do not join the wrong ideological groups or movements, in order to “do something.” By “ideological” (in this context), I mean groups or movements proclaiming some vaguely generalized, undefined (and, usually, contradictory) political goals. (E.g., the Conservative Party, that subordinates reason to faith, and substitutes theocracy for capitalism; or the “libertarian” hippies, who subordinate reason to whims, and substitute anarchism for capitalism.) To join such groups means to reverse the philosophical hierarchy and to sell out fundamental principles for the sake of some superficial political action which is bound to fail. [“What Can One Do?” The Ayn Rand Letter, Vol. 1, No. 7]
And you are simply wrong about your assertion in the first place.
I can wallpaper the page with citations if you like
Go for it. We could use the entertainment.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 09 2015, @02:51AM
gracious. and furthermore lordy!
just when i think i got you pegged you come out with this.
wow. there might be hope for you yanks yet.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 09 2015, @01:16PM
As much as I cannot fricking stand Hillary...if the current crop like Cruz, Paul, and Fiorina is the BEST that the right can do? I think everybody better get used to saying President Hillary because nobody is gonna vote for these uber rich blowing, poor stomping, trickle upon yahoos!
Because Clinton isn't an "uber rich blowing, poor stomping, trickle upon yahoo" either? Having said that, Fiorina is a remarkably bad choice for anyone just due to her history. Surely, the Republicans can find a woman who hasn't seriously damaged two major companies.