It was all changed in the TOS from Class action or lawsuits to Arbitration. Where you guessed it, companies, who pay the bill, win most of the time. Yes more and more rights seem to vanish poof!

Read this for more nfo.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/04/scotus-rules-att-can-force-arbitration-block-class-action-suits/

You seem to be confusing me with someone else, i have never denied that some filesharing is illegal in some countries under certain circumstances? Again, if there is a comment from me that you have interpreted in such a manner, please quote that comment and i will help you read it properly, so you can understand what it actually wrote.

> “I don’t do “meaningless” accusations..”

When you accuse someone of something without clearly identifying what you refer to, the accusation is empty.

> “I’m merely pointing out observations made in respect of posts you have made and continue to make.”

Yes, and when asked to what you refer, you come up with nothing, which makes the accusation empty.

> “The primary difference between you and I is that I don’t post aspirations as unfounded tenets or interpretations of law in an attempt to impress gullible individuals.”

Which i have not done. Again, if there is a comment from me which you have interpreted in that manner, please quote it and i will help you read it properly so you can understand what i actually wrote.

But you can’t seem to be able to do that for some reason..

> “I don’t pretend to know the opinions or actions of others as intimately as they themselves might do (your reference to Peter above refers) in an attempt to assuage some need to appear “connected” or self important.”

You claimed that Peter had shown a “total disregard for the rights of others and their business models will” and “shows disdain and contempt for the rights of others by advocating the free sharing of their IP and copyrights.”

Those are out right lies, and when this was explained you you in great detail you could no longer come up with anything. You did refer to an article, but in that article Peter in fact expressed the direct opposite opinion of what you accused him of.

When you got defensive and instead of explaining yourself , asked than what was the Pirate Bay all about, you got the following answer to that question, which made you completely drop the entire argumentative thread and your initial accusations.

> Pirate Bay is a search engine where people can use their free speech and human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information through any media and regardless of frontiers, through legally uploading, indexing, searching for and downloading fully legal non-copyrighted torrents. That does not equal sharing of someone’s IP or copyright, nor does it equal advocating copyright infringements.

Lastly, helping you with your misconceptions by pointing out well known facts about Peter Sunde and Pirate Bay is not the same thing as trying to appear connected or self important.

> “I’m familiar with the proportionality principle thank you. I asked “where can I read these “rules for drafting legitimate legislation” that you refer to?” not “Where can I read the overarching principle of proportionality or someones opinion on legislative quality bars”.””

As i said, the proportionality principal and it’s rules are clearly stated in among other things the European constitution, and the human rights, which all laws much obey under. That you call them overreaching principles does not change that fact.

> “Time permitting I’d be delighted to debate with you or anyone else on matters pertaining to copyright or legal reform of same. Let’s try that, shall we?”

No point in discussing such reform with someone who dont understand the basics about copyright, which you proved that you didn’t with the following comment:

> “There are any number of interviews with Peter where he openly shows disdain and contempt for the rights of others by advocating the free sharing of their IP and copyrights.

You can not share someone’s IP or copyrights. Had you known the basics about copyright you would have known this.

Nor would i discuss anything with someone who continuously makes empty accusations towards me, without being able to clarify what’s he’s talking about.

To say nothing about how it would completely cripple any IT infrastructure meant to be used for general purposes. The NSA have such setups, as does embassies and certain secretive government agencies dealing with sensitive topics. No one else.

Meaning every ISP would need to hire ten more techs for each one they have right now, for a start. It’s been pretty well established what it costs to run an intranet of that type. No corporation can really afford it. Let alone private subscribers who would bear the costs.

And that still doesn’t solve the problem that any 13 year old will still – at will – use your connection unless you hire even more techs to maintain and diagnose both the security of the connection and the computer of the individual subscriber.

For four years in a row you have now proposed “solutions” which assume black magic exists in the field of IT. How can that be given that you often used to claim you had long experience in information technology. Experience as in “sitting in long frustrating calls with the nice people in tech support whose answers and questions you could not understand you mean?”