| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)Posted May 17, 2007 14:30 UTC (Thu) by NigelK (guest, #42083)In reply to: Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) by lysse Parent article: Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)
One of the faithful speaks... and quickly demonizes the critic, too, swiftly distorting the opposing view.
Non-infringing videos on GooTube are irrelevant to Viacom's case. How can they be? Viacom have no claim to them, and neither do they make a claim.
PJ's highlighting the fact that there are non-infringing videos on GooTube, implying that weakens Viacom's case, is a strawman.
And, BTW, just because someone has legal training doesn't automatically mean that their stated position is correct. There are lawyers on both sides of any case.
(Log in to post comments)
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Posted May 18, 2007 4:53 UTC (Fri) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] > One of the faithful speaks... and quickly demonizes the critic, too
Hypocrite.
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Posted May 18, 2007 5:08 UTC (Fri) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] No, actually, I want to expand on that.
You describe me as "one of the faithful". Which is funny, because I don't know the first thing about this case, and I very seldom actually read Groklaw. About the only thing I do know for sure is that you despise the FSF and everyone who has anything to do with them with an almost evangelical fervour; and now I learn that you'll slander anyone who disagrees with you at the drop of a hat.
Fine. Drop me a line at lwn.id@tierveil.co.uk and give me something I can check out, and I'll do the same. Hey, I'm just some clueless nobody; I have nothing to hide. But dammit, you owe me an apology; and I think it's high time you put your cards on the table and told us who NigelK *really* is.
> just because someone has legal training doesn't automatically mean that their stated position is correct.
But it does make their opinion rather more likely to be correct than that of some random layperson, doesn't it? Which is why I asked for your qualifications to speak authoritatively about the US legal system. We already know PJ's. Without such disclosure, the only available conclusion is that the full extent of your qualification to speak on this case is your certainty that anyone criticised on Groklaw must be in the right.
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Posted May 18, 2007 9:28 UTC (Fri) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link] As much as I'd like to exchange emails with an angry loon with a bruised ego, poor reading comprehension skills, and the urge to protect FSF-related personalities at any cost, I think I'll pass. I have more important things to do with my life, like clipping my toenails.
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Posted May 18, 2007 13:11 UTC (Fri) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] ...I've been eaten by a troll, haven't I? Sorry, LWN.
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Posted May 18, 2007 13:29 UTC (Fri) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link] Sigh... no... You just have to accept that the people you respect are wrong sometimes.
Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) Posted May 18, 2007 23:59 UTC (Fri) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] But the problem I have with you is that you've reduced that to a binary choice. You think your former heroes are wrong, so you attack them without pause or mercy, or necessarily even consideration, making exactly the same accusations in thread after thread, regardless of circumstance. When someone disagrees with your assessment of their faults, you charge them with being an unthinking supporter. That's how you're coming across.
My problem isn't with your opinions; it's with your reduction of the world to a couple of either/or choices, your apparent refusal to consider that there might be shades of grey or perspectives that haven't occurred to you, your tendency to treat your fallen idols in a manner I can only term despicable, and your dismissal of those who criticise you as "one of the faithful", or the like, apparently unaware that all you are dismissing is your own reflection.
So I'll try this once more, and after this I'm done. Listen, and please try to understand. *These people are not my heroes*. (I don't *have* heroes, as such - never have.) Where I think they're wrong, I'll say so; where I think they are right, it's because they are voicing my principles, not because I've adopted theirs; where I don't know enough to comment, I'll (try and) keep my mouth shut. My respect for the goals and actions of the FSF, and for its founder, is premised only on the fact that they seem to value freedom as much as I do, and if I thought that they were faltering in that I'd say so; as I've mentioned, I don't even pay much attention to Groklaw or PJ. If I wanted to put in the effort, I might be able to compile a list of mistakes I think they've made, or of points of disagreement - but *they're just not that important to me*.
It's not about them, or me - it's about *you*. These people are *your* heroes, and your behaviour toward them is that of the celebrity-stalker - irrational, creepy, manipulative, dishonest, self-abasing; ultimately the actions of someone who has no existence of their own. If you have a shred of empathy inside you, or an ounce of insight into your own soul, please consider what I've said, mourn the loss of your role models, and let them pass from your life. Because right now, your obsessions are consuming you; if you don't escape them, there will soon be nothing left... but I fear you have already passed that point. Delight me - prove me wrong.
|
|
||||||||||||