Copyright Troll Quote of the Day

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
"I’m the original copyright troll." Well, at least he's honest....about being a scumbag copyright troll.

One attorney who has made millions from this practice says he is fully aware that everyone hates him. “I’m considered the original copyright troll,” attorney John Steele tells Forbes.com. “At least my wife loves me. When I read about myself on the Internet, I think, ‘Who is this jerk?’”
Click to expand...
 
This guy and people like him require the advocacy of assassinations. Seriously.
 
I like that guy. He's totally realistic and tons of people are jealous of him for his success and monies. Lots of people attempt to become lawyers, but very few of them strike it off as well as this guy. I think we all should applaud his realistic perspective rather than feeling personally slighted and envious over things that generally have very little to do with our day-to-day lives.
 
Everyone takes opportunities... But this guy stepped on too many toes.
 
Hardly the "original" copyright troll. The MPAA & RIAA were using these tactics long before him weren't they?
 
Well, I'm sure his wife loves the lifestyle that comes with that kind of income, but him personally? Doubt it. I will still never understand someone who makes money by adding nothing to society and seems proud about it.
 
Methadras said:
This guy and people like him require the advocacy of assassinations. Seriously.
Click to expand...

2 cents: People who play nasty while playing within the rules are not the problem. The rules that allow them to play that way are the problem. & that is an altogether different issue.
 
jstnomega said:
2 cents: People who play nasty while playing within the rules are not the problem. The rules that allow them to play that way are the problem. & that is an altogether different issue.
Click to expand...

True, but people like that are basically exploiting an obvious flaw. Which they usually promote to stop that flaw from being rectified. Not saying he did that, but I'm not saying he didn't either. I doubt anyone really knows that. But there are definitely others that do do that.
 
SkribbelKat said:
I like that guy. He's totally realistic and tons of people are jealous of him for his success and monies. Lots of people attempt to become lawyers, but very few of them strike it off as well as this guy. I think we all should applaud his realistic perspective rather than feeling personally slighted and envious over things that generally have very little to do with our day-to-day lives.
Click to expand...

I think you have a warped sense of who we should admire. Apparently money is the most important part of your life, which defines your idea of success....but that comes with a price that many would feel ethically unacceptable...I have enough money so I don't see how I could or should be envious of this person.
 
pcjunkie said:
I think you have a warped sense of who we should admire. Apparently money is the most important part of your life, which defines your idea of success....but that comes with a price that many would feel ethically unacceptable...I have enough money so I don't see how I could or should be envious of this person.
Click to expand...

Yaay! I like forum head exams! What else did you find in there? Are there any snacks?
 
pcjunkie said:
Yeah, that's the kind of response I would expect from an immature juvenile. Ask your mom, maybe she bought you snacks today!
Click to expand...

Ruh roh! You're actually upset about this thread, huh? I'm sorry, I was just having fun. I didn't mean to make you mad or anything. :( Let's high five and be friends, okay? :)
 
SkribbelKat said:
Ruh roh! You're actually upset about this thread, huh? I'm sorry, I was just having fun. I didn't mean to make you mad or anything. :( Let's high five and be friends, okay? :)
Click to expand...
LOL-Cat-high-five-face.gif
 
Says a lot about his wife too. Can't blame her though, not many people choose against money. Live a comfortable life or worry about next month's rent payment. Too bad their children will just be as shallow and superficial as their parents are.
 
I have this thing, this theoretical list. On this list are people's names. If for some reason I get some kind of incurable disease, or learn that I have some life-ending cancer; well.... you can figure it out.
 
lilbabycat said:
I have this thing, this theoretical list. On this list are people's names. If for some reason I get some kind of incurable disease, or learn that I have some life-ending cancer; well.... you can figure it out.
Click to expand...

Looks at your name, pictures a little baby cat killing people :)rolleyes:). Remembers seeing this on the internet years ago.

cute-1.jpg


Was this you practicing?
 
lilbabycat said:
I have this thing, this theoretical list. On this list are people's names. If for some reason I get some kind of incurable disease, or learn that I have some life-ending cancer; well.... you can figure it out.
Click to expand...

.. you're going to do all the things on your bucket list because you never lived to begin with?

;)
 
What a tool hope he crashes on his way home and dies. yeah I said it bitches DIES! :mad:
 
trynberg said:
Well, I'm sure his wife loves the lifestyle that comes with that kind of income, but him personally? Doubt it. I will still never understand someone who makes money by adding nothing to society and seems proud about it.
Click to expand...

I wouldnt worry too much, life's not perfect for anyone. I would imagine now that the whole internet knows who he is, and cos he has mouthed off he might regret it. I still remember that thing with Ocean Marketing and the penny arcade guy, and that was only a shitty email exchange.

Still Id rather piss on his grave than leave flowers, harsh maybe but I bet its not rich people he's suing, probably the defenseless and poor.
 
This guy is quite the douche.

His firm never has any intentions of righting the wrong, and protecting his clients. They just threaten and extort people for money because most of the time it pays off. They have no real cases, their 'experts' are just idiots on their payroll who've yet to ever actually prove their methods.

They basically just cast a large net, in the most minimal wage kind of way, and hope to bring in more money than they spend. Numerous judges have called them out on it. Heck, they've even had cases where the defense attorney and this guys' people were in it together.



A real class act. There are scumbag attorneys, and then there's this guy.
 
jynxycat said:
His firm never has any intentions of righting the wrong, and protecting his clients. They just threaten and extort people for money because most of the time it pays off.
Click to expand...

Actually, they just threaten and extort people because some other group of idiots is paying them to do it and becuase the legal system in the US and a number of other first world nations makes it possible to earn a profit doing so.
 
SkribbelKat said:
Actually, they just threaten and extort people because some other group of idiots is paying them to do it and becuase the legal system in the US and a number of other first world nations makes it possible to earn a profit doing so.
Click to expand...

Agreed...its the system that allows these !@#$%^& (or commonly known as lawyers) to live the life of luxury.
 
Did he just publically admit to extortion? No real proof anyone accused committed the crime but he strong arms them anyway.
 
It's bad enough to admitting he's the original copyright troll, but he's so proud of it, as if it's some sort of accomplishment. :rolleyes:
 
jstnomega said:
2 cents: People who play nasty while playing within the rules are not the problem. The rules that allow them to play that way are the problem. & that is an altogether different issue.
Click to expand...

The rub here, is in order to change the rules to not allow every single freaking "immoral" thing will require more laws and bigger government.

At a certain point in a civilized society there has to be some self/mass-regulation. The sad fact is people really don't care as long as it is not in their back yard. Though with a patent troll like this, it is hard for the public to really do anything outside of demanding laws changed.

The above thought and premise is one I find hilarious if spouted by a "small" government conservative, cause at its core it supports more regulation and thus bigger government.
 
SkribbelKat said:
Actually, they just threaten and extort people because some other group of idiots is paying them to do it and becuase the legal system in the US and a number of other first world nations makes it possible to earn a profit doing so.
Click to expand...

That's okay: There's enough hate in my heart for the player, the game, the people who made the game, the refs who maintain the game, and anyone who even hints at liking the game. It's almost enough to make me wish for Cthulhu to come and have his vengeance...almost.

The above thought and premise is one I find hilarious if spouted by a "small" government conservative said:
This isn't necessarily true.

The legal system is already governmental, so altering the rules of litigation one way or another is often neutral regarding the size and scope of government...but you can also address some of the surrounding issues by reducing government. For instance, part of the reason it's so expensive to defend against a lawsuit is due to legal requirements for attorneys to have law degrees and bar certification; this is essentially a medieval guild system set up to bar easy competition and artificially inflate the cost of representation. Eliminate those regulations and allow anyone to act as an attorney as long as they follow court procedure, and you'll go a long way toward cutting costs here.

A lot of the problems related to abusive copyright lawsuits stem from the fact that copyright is itself a heavy-handed government construct: It's a statutory monopoly to reproduce a good, enforcing artificial scarcity under penalty of law. This can only possibly be enforced in the presence of an omnipresent (even if small) government, because it allows for people to be sued by others who they've never even heard of or had any contact with, and career plaintiffs (including corporate ones) can cast a wide net and superficially justify suing dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of people. This aggressive pattern of behavior further illustrates how far "IP" has strayed from ordinary reciprocal codes of conduct necessary for people to live and work in peace (basic, nearly universal laws against murder, rape, theft, arson, fraud, etc.). Those laws have a large number of philosophical justifications (including libertarian justifications) and almost no principled opposition, and they also have a sense of locality about them: If you've wronged someone, you've wronged them directly and you probably know it, because you physically hurt them or their property or actively defrauded them.

Copyright infringement is very different, because there's no direct damage. The only indirect damage involves hypothetical lost sales, and calculating them demands a lot of hypothetical - and usually dishonest - guesswork. Patents are similar government-granted monopolies, and patent infringement is similarly murky, because you can violate someone's patent without even being aware of it...and much (most?) of the time, patents are trivial or prior art exists, but they're awarded relatively freely (if you go through the grueling paperwork process) under the assumption that the courts will work out the iffy ones.

So...basically, any problems resulting from copyright/patent enforcement are problems arising from government meddling, whether or not it's meddling you approve of. You can solve copyright problems in particular by eliminating copyright entirely - which gives you less government - but most people aren't cool with that. The concrete notion of "intellectual property" is a rather new and insidious phenomenon (and directly opposed to physical property rights at times) despite abuses dating back centuries at least (https://torrentfreak.com/and-when-even-the-death-penalty-doesnt-deter-copying-what-then-110807/), but there is a long utilitarian tradition of instituting copyright for the purpose of advancing progress in the arts and sciences, and few have confidence that the world can run without copyright. According to research, the economically optimal copyright length is around 15 years though, and reducing it to that at least would cut down on some and you cut down on some of the issues surrounding all this while having less government.

Anyway, long story short...fixing a broken legal system and overbearing laws does not require "more" government.
Click to expand...
 
Crap, quoted wrong...
dandirk, most of the above post addressed this quote:
dandirk said:
The above thought and premise is one I find hilarious if spouted by a "small" government conservative, cause at its core it supports more regulation and thus bigger government.
Click to expand...
 
You cant remove copyright entirely as big business could simply screw every entrepreneur out of their hard work, as small business/producers do not have access to the capital to compete with big business in production efficiency.
 
flyingears said:
You cant remove copyright entirely as big business could simply screw every entrepreneur out of their hard work, as small business/producers do not have access to the capital to compete with big business in production efficiency.
Click to expand...

Counterarguments are outside the scope of this thread, but don't worry, your opinion has been accounted for:
Earlier Post said:
...but there is a long utilitarian tradition of instituting copyright for the purpose of advancing progress in the arts and sciences, and few have confidence that the world can run without copyright. According to research, the economically optimal copyright length is around 15 years though, and reducing it to that at least would cut down on some and you cut down on some of the issues surrounding all this while having less government.
Click to expand...
:p
 
ARGH. Not only did I have a revision mistake that I refused to triple-post to correct, but I requoted it without fixing it. UJKDASFKLSDAFJSDJFSJFSDJFhkasf GIMME EDIT NAOW! RAAAAAAAGE!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top