On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:59:57 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Oh, come on - I think there's a bit of a difference between "you can't
>> post material you don't have the rights to" and "you can't speak out
>> against your government without risking your life".  Again, let's get
>> some perspective, please.
> 
>   Soon we will be in a situation where you really can't speak against
> your government (about certain issues) without being fined or jailed,
> which in many cases is effectively almost as bad as risking your life.
> 
>   You know, there are certain issues which are becoming more and more
> a taboo, and which are overriding freedom of speech. Not too unlike what
> has happened in China where, for example, speaking about the Tiananmen
> Square events is taboo and will get you fined or jailed.

I'm just speechless, Warp - that you'd equate protecting copyrights to 
the Tienemen Square massacre....well, like I said, I'm at a loss for 
words.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:59:57 -0500, Warp wrote:

> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> >> Oh, come on - I think there's a bit of a difference between "you can't
> >> post material you don't have the rights to" and "you can't speak out
> >> against your government without risking your life".  Again, let's get
> >> some perspective, please.
> > 
> >   Soon we will be in a situation where you really can't speak against
> > your government (about certain issues) without being fined or jailed,
> > which in many cases is effectively almost as bad as risking your life.
> > 
> >   You know, there are certain issues which are becoming more and more
> > a taboo, and which are overriding freedom of speech. Not too unlike what
> > has happened in China where, for example, speaking about the Tiananmen
> > Square events is taboo and will get you fined or jailed.

> I'm just speechless, Warp - that you'd equate protecting copyrights to 
> the Tienemen Square massacre....well, like I said, I'm at a loss for 
> words.

  I was not talking about copyrights.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> Wasn't saying they should - it just sounded quite the opposite of what
> you were saying.

I was speaking of the "regional monopolies" granted local-loop 
communications companies in most areas. You really don't have a choice 
of who provides the wires and pipes to your house.

> As for looking at it from a moral perspective - I have no idea. 

I can see it both ways too. You don't want the government taking over 
and putting businesses out of business simply because the government 
doesn't actually have to follow rules of accounting. You also don't want 
to deny the government from improving things that are best improved by 
having buy-in from everyone.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

>> If that's the worst (or best?) you can come up with, I think we're safe 
>> with
>> being free to express our opinions :-)
>
>  You are being the perfect example of the type of mentality which allows
> freedom of speech to be limited more and more.

I think that making derogatory comments about certain people will have got 
you punished far worse than what happens today since a very long time ago. 
It's nothing new, if anything I see in recent times people being allowed 
more and more freedom without being punished.  You give some people an inch 
though and they take a mile.

Post a reply to this message

>> Publishing derogatory comments, especially when generalising about a 
>> certain group of people is a very dangerous thing to do,
>
> No it's not.  It's *words*.

Try telling that to a newspaper editor!  They can't go publishing things 
like I suggested without risking being sued or having some fine.  Ditto for 
people on the radio.  There are all sorts of laws that you can break using 
just words - it's nothing new.

Post a reply to this message

>  Fine, refuse to believe that people are being sanctioned for simply
> expressing their opinion, with absolutely no violence involved.

I'm not refusing to believe it, I just think that in each case there is 
always something more than you are trying to say.  There is no way in this 
world any police officer would even look twice at me if I told him how bad I 
thought the goverment was.  However if I start telling him about how I don't 
believe in the holocaust, or how I want to try and convince everyone to 
become Nazis, or if I start making insulting comments about people or groups 
of people, or if I even swear at him while telling him how stupid I think he 
is, of course that is going to cause trouble and likely get me carted off to 
the police station.  There's a difference, and if you're too dumb to realise 
when you're going to cause trouble by expressing your opinion in such a way 
then that's your own stupid fault for getting arrested or whatever.  Normal 
people don't have this problem.

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> >> If that's the worst (or best?) you can come up with, I think we're safe 
> >> with
> >> being free to express our opinions :-)
> >
> >  You are being the perfect example of the type of mentality which allows
> > freedom of speech to be limited more and more.

> I think that making derogatory comments about certain people will have got 
> you punished far worse than what happens today since a very long time ago. 

  The problem is that what is considered "derogatory" is being expanded more
and more nowadays with the political correctness religion. This is going so
far that people are suggesting that *official* statistics be censored if
they put certain groups of people in bad light. (In other words, what matters
is not the truth, but political correctness.)

  Also nowadays presenting criticism of certain official policies are being
considered "derogatory".

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> There is no way in this 
> world any police officer would even look twice at me if I told him how bad I 
> thought the goverment was.

  Actually that might not be the case if you criticize *certain* policies
the government is imposing.

  For example, if you express your opinion that "the <your own country>
government has a way too lenient immigration policy" you are already
touching a taboo subject.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>  For example, if you express your opinion that "the <your own country>
> government has a way too lenient immigration policy" you are already
> touching a taboo subject.

But certainly where I'm from, and where I live now, saying such an opinion 
would not cause any legal trouble, in fact it is frequently been a subject 
discussed in the media here since they completely opened the border between 
Germany and the Czech.  You are not going to get arrested or fined for 
making such comments.  Again, maybe Finland is different?

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> >  For example, if you express your opinion that "the <your own country>
> > government has a way too lenient immigration policy" you are already
> > touching a taboo subject.

> But certainly where I'm from, and where I live now, saying such an opinion 
> would not cause any legal trouble, in fact it is frequently been a subject 
> discussed in the media here since they completely opened the border between 
> Germany and the Czech.  You are not going to get arrested or fined for 
> making such comments.  Again, maybe Finland is different?

  Write enough about the subject, and get known enough, and you may. It has
happened.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message