Hoi,
What effective claim has been made against Kim Dotcom and, THAT is your
argument.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 1 January 2014 12:21, ??? <wiki-list(a)phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 01/01/2014 07:41, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
When you go the way of comparing to Kim Dotcom to make a point, you will
have to recognise that the government has been shown to act illegally.
Consequently your argument is without real merit.
Thanks,
GerardM
The first thing that is wrong with the above is that copyright holders are
not the Government.
On 31 December 2013 20:45, ??? <wiki-list(a)phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 31/12/2013 15:01, Yann Forget wrote:
>
> 2013/12/31 ??? <wiki-list(a)phizz.demon.co.uk>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Isn't that the attitude that got Kim Dotcom into trouble?
>>>
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/us-unveils-the-
>>> case-against-kim-dotcom-revealing-e-mails-and-financial-data/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> This is a typical trolling. Comparing Megaupload with Wikimedia Commons?
>> Don't you have better (constructive) arguments?
>>
>>
>> I'm comparing your attitude that rather than fixing the known copyright
> issues upfront one should await complaints before addressing, to be
> similar
> to that exhibited by megaupload. An attitude that is essentially one of
> "We'll get away with it for as long as possible, until someone
> complains."
> Meanwhile falsely advertising that the content is free to use.
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>