Facebook! Huh! What is it Good For?

This is Irreverently Irrelevant,Written on Feb 13, 2012

An open letter to Facebook. This fellow does a good job honing in on the actual usefulness of Facebook:

For you, my network can only grow in one direction: bigger. We don’t meet fewer people as we get older. We meet more people! And if we know more people, our “Friends†list should grow accordingly. We don’t forget people do we? If we’ve met them, they belong in our Facebook network.

You seem to think that Facebook is the only network I’ll ever need; that instead of adding and removing people as your features and my real world networks evolve, I should just move them into smaller groups and manage a massive number of impossible-to-understand privacy settings. Because for you, my identity and how I interact with the people that make up my life are as straightforward and comprehendable as the blue in my profile.

via Jake Levine.


What’s He Even Know About Football?

This is The Digital Age,Written on Feb 7, 2012

Tom Brady, a football player of some minor renown, led his team to the Super Bowl this year, where they lost (again) to the Giants (again) after only scoring 17 points (ha ha ha. Last year, he led an even more shameful existence: the life of a pirate!

Here are his reported words: “Last year I was rehabbing my foot in Costa Rica, watching the game on an illegal Super Bowl Web site. And now I’m actually playing in the game. So, it’s pretty cool.”

Cool, Tom? Is it really cool to steal from the livelihood of hard-working NFL players like Eli Manning, winner of two Super Bowl rings? Is it really cool to steal a broadcast just because there’s no good legal option? Probably. But read the rest of the earth-shattering confession of Tom Brady: I watched last year’s Super Bowl on illegal site on CNET.


Wil Wheaton Says

This is The News,Written on Jan 18, 2012

Continuing on the SOPA thing, Wil Wheaton makes fun of the MPAA like I did. But he does it better.

When you complain that opponents didn’t “come to the table to find solutionsâ€, do you mean that we didn’t give NINETY-FOUR MILLION DOLLARS to congress like the MPAA? Or do you mean that we didn’t come to the one hearing that Lamar Smith held, where opponents of SOPA were refused an opportunity to comment? Help me out, here, Chris Dodd, because I’m really trying hard to understand you.

Read the rest of the vaguely-titled post Today the US Senate is considering legislation that would destroy the free and open Internet, and have a good laugh. Or cry. Laughcrying is the best medicine.


Just a Stunt

This is The News,Written on Jan 17, 2012

In case you haven’t heard, Wikipedia is planning to follow-through on its promise to shut itself down for a day in protest of the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act.

On January 18, 2012, in an unprecedented decision, the Wikipedia community has chosen to blackout the English version of Wikipedia for 24 hours, in protest against proposed legislation in the United States — the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and PROTECTIP (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate. If passed, this legislation will harm the free and open Internet and bring about new tools for censorship of international websites inside the United States.

For a site with roughly 80 hojillion unique visitors, this will cause some disruption tomorrow. And it’s actually already caused a commotion! For instance, the MPAA is mighty butthurt (PDF link).

“Only days after the White House and chief sponsors of the legislation responded to the major concern expressed by opponents and then called for all parties to work cooperatively together, some technology business interests are resorting to stunts that punish their users or turn them into their corporate pawns, rather than coming to the table to find solutions to a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging.

It is an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services. It is also an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today. It’s a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests.

A so-called “blackout†is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one, designed to punish elected and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals. It is our hope that the White House and the Congress will call on those who intend to stage this “blackout†to stop the hyperbole and PR stunts and engage in meaningful efforts to combat piracy.â€

Translation: we spent millions of dollars lobbying for a draconian copyright policy, and now that we’ve been even vaguely rebuked, we’re very sad that you nerds keep rubbing it in.

The best part is where the MPAA complains that Wikipedia has a responsibility to its users to provide its service free from the influence of corporate interests. That would almost sting if the MPAA didn’t spend so much energy coming up with inventive new ways to treat its customers like criminals. I mean, at least Wikipedia talks to its users; the MPAA just throws money at Congress and makes the ads on DVDs unskippable.

I’ll take the ones that talk to me like adults, please.


About

I went to law school, and cataloged/mocked my experience on Twitter and on this blog. Now I've graduated; I use this site to explain legal theories and break down the law for non-lawyers. Also, I post a lot of silly things.

twitter

Stopped back at my office after dinner. There's a massive Minecraft LAN going on in the kitchen. Best office ever?

Greatest Hits

The Reasonable StormIn which our hero explains to a doctor what negligence means to a hospital. Awl's Fair in Loving SwartzI clear up some of the finer legal points about Aaron Swartz's indictment. Bueller, BuellerEnumerating the many crimes of Ferris during his Day Off, as seen on TV. Lights, Camera, Transaction!Why a recent tax ruling is not an outright attack on documentary filmmakers. Net Things I Hate About YouIn which our hero explains internet architecture and Net Neutrality re: Comcast. When You Say 'Dangerous'On aggravated assault with a rigid feminine pleasure device. Yes, really.

Copyright

Barely Legally is published under a Creative Commons license. Please read the fine print before infringing on my copyright. Use common sense. Wash behind your ears. Don't take candy from strangers. Never pet a burning dog. Measure twice, cut once. Call your mother once in a while. Look both ways crossing the street.

feeds

Disclaimer

None of the statements on this site are intended to be factual statements. None of the information on this site is legal advice. The contents of this site represent the opinions of the author and no one else. I am not authorized (and I do not claim) to speak on behalf of anybody but myself: not my school, not my employer, not my roommates, not my grocery store, not my neighbors, not my imaginary friends, not my mayor, not my alien overlords, not my favorite band, and not my high school prom date.

Barely Legally is powered by WordPress. Both of them are awesome. Coincidence?


You are viewing a mobilized version of this site...
View original page here

Mobilized by Mowser Mowser