I noted here (https://facebook/nskinsella/posts/10152636954878181:66) that: This Charlie hebdo thing is just an extreme case of copyright if you think about it. Everyone went crazy about this (quite legitimate) comparison. As I noted on a related thread (https://facebook/nskinsella/posts/10152636954878181:45): Copyright is worse--it is what the state is using as an excuse to police the Internet, which is the greatest potential tool for human freedom, the greatest tool to fight the state, of all time. Anything that threatens internet freedom is an existential threat to the human race. Copyright is that. Its far worse than random acts of crime or terrorism in the extent of damage it poses to humanity. Thus, I am re-evaluating my previous ranking of IP as #6 or so among the most evil state laws (c4sif.org/2012/03/selected-supplementary-material-for-against-intellectual-property/) -- I think it may be #1 (I think I must disagree here with libertarians who say copyright is not a big deal). It is the most insidious since it poses as a property right, unlike all the other major state policies (taxation, drug war, war, government schools, central banking). And it uniquely threatens Internet freedom, and given the signal importance of the Internet in the cause of liberty, anything that restricts Internet freedom is an existential threat to the human race and human liberty (this also includes upcoming things like the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, or TPP, and upcoming Net Neutrality regulations to be imposed by OBamas FCC).
Posted on: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 08:08:51 +0000