You impress yourself, I am sure. Me, I am not impressed, I can type for hours as well and make vague, nonsense comments like yours.

Basically, you didn’t say anything, except that you apparently are the site’s version of Miss Cleo able to see the future (and we know exactly how real she is!).

I will say one thing, you make Rick look logical and well attached to the planet. That takes doing.

Nothing of the lies and empty words you just wrote, and nothing ignorant you eventually write in a response to this comment will change the indisputable fact that the ECHR, the highest court of the biggest economy in the world, who among other things rules on Human Rights issues and the EU implementation in ECoHR, has already ruled in a final decision that sharing copyrighted works between private individuals as people filesharing does indeed fall under free speech and freedom of expression, and that there is indeed a conflict between some current copyright monopolies and free speech, freedom of expression and people’s human rights protected freedom to seek, receive and impart information through any media and regardless of frontiers.

That you maybe because of ignorance wasn’t aware of this well known fact is one thing, but that you pretended to know for a fact that the opposite was true makes you a lier, a troll, and a person completely lacking integrity.

Btw, your two comments are indeed filled with Ad Hominem attacks on Rick. You see, when you phrase things in the following way:

> “Mostly the usual combination of wishful thinking and preaching to the members of the cult, and not much else.

..they do indeed constitute an Ad Hominem attack. I highlighted the relevant words, that makes it a personal attack. When you claim that a person usually resorts to wishful thinking, and that he’s “preaching to the members of a cult”, that’s three uses of Ad Hominem at once.

But i guess because of your now well proven ignorance, you weren’t aware of that either.

> “Rick forgets about the reciprocal nature of the world, that copyright
and respect for artists / creators rights doesn’t exist in a vaccuum.”

That’s another use of Ad Hominem, claiming that a person forget without actually proving that one single phrase of his ignores or forgets about an actual underlying premises.

> “Outside of a few truly rogue countries (here’s looking at you North Korea), very few
would have any interest in finding themselves standing out in the cold losing trading partners because they cannot follow basic concepts of respect.”

First of all there’s nothing disrespectful about changing a legal monopoly, so that it is less intrusive on the free market and returns to being evidence based.

Secondly, The US is a weaker economy than the EU, and they are more dependent on trade with EU than what EU is with the US. The US are in no position to threaten the EU with any trade sanctions. Ask the CIA if you don’t believe me, they have already clarified that fact.

Thirdly, cutting back on the copyright monopoly so that it returns to being evidence based and non-intrusive on free speech, freedom of expression and people’s human rights protected
freedom to seek, receive and impart information through any media and
regardless of frontiers, doesn’t cause any problem for neither the UN, Wipo or the US. Nor the UN, Wipo or the US complain about those countries where filesharing is already legal, or where there is no copyright monopoly at all, because there are no binding treaties in the world that demands that a nation must have a copyright monopoly in the first place, or that it must regulate non-profit filesharing if it does exist.

Btw, are you aware of the fact that the only growing, and one of the biggest parliamentarian groups in the parliament of the worlds biggest economy already have adopted the political copyright program of the political pirate parties, with legalized filesharing and a big cutback on the other free market restrictions in the copyright monopoly, and that in the upcoming 2014 EU elections the number of political pirates in the parliament of the worlds biggest economy is about to grow by a factor of ten to twenty, since they will instead of just running candidates from one single country, which they did last time which easily got them two seats, they will now run from 29 countries, of which several holds no lower threshold to get parliamentarians elected?

Rest assured, the copyright monopoly will be more than cut in half in the words biggest economy within the next three years, and there’s nothing the weaker economy of the US can do about it. All they can do is prey that the EU and China won’t grow tired of their bullying and decides to bankrupt them once and for all.

“It’s why Rick is amusing to read but so hard to take seriously!”

I think the problems lies in your inability to understand what the discussion is actually about, in combination with your rather huge ignorance on the topic, which you have already proven thoroughly.

… and no, there is no adhom in there. It’s my opinion and the opinion of many others, and is shown just by reading through Rick’s site. You will find a total lack of “day after” consideration for the demands he puts on the table.

Respect is a two way street. Nobody is trying to limit free speech, nobody is trying to limit private communication. The real issue is that some people believe that copying and distributing someone else’s work is free speech, which is most certainly is not.

You have all your rights to free speech, provided they don’t infringe the rights granted to others. Your free speech rights do not trump the law, they do not trump the rights of others.

It’s pretty simple, really.

Essentially you can gut copyright as practiced by most of the west without even touching what the international treaties are agreed on.

ACTA tried to make that different by extending the international agreements and locking them down…and that’s why ACTA failed.

And because the copyright cult doesn’t take him seriously is why people such as your own low self immediately have to bring a failed refutal consisting of ad hominems and failed supposition to the debate?
Must be tough. You can’t admit what he says makes sense while at the same time you are desperate to refute him before anyone starts listening to what he has to say.

Rick isn’t forgetting anything. You people conveniently keep forgetting that in order for that “respect” you mention to exist, the entire concept of private communication and freedom of speech must first be abolished. Which, as you are well aware, he has already argued successfully quite a few times.

And that’s not even mentioning that copyright in itself is a big gaping hole in the entire concept of “ownership” to begin with.

Robert King, their savior and anti-cyberlocker crusader, best known for his graphic displays of how wrinkled old men get head by the barely legal.

Disbarred lawyers, ambulance chasers, confirmed psychopaths, and porn kings. The heroes standing tall among the poster boys of the MPAA and RIAA’s

Rick forgets about the reciprocal nature of the world, that copyright and respect for artists / creators rights doesn’t exist in a vaccuum. Your country ignores copyright, then our country makes it so that your people need a visa to enter, cannot fly through or over, have all of their goods subject to huge tarriffs… whatever. Outside of a few truly rogue countries (here’s looking at you North Korea), very few would have any interest in finding themselves standing out in the cold losing trading partners because they cannot follow basic concepts of respect.

It’s why Rick is amusing to read but so hard to take seriously!