Free speech or Censorship

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Hardly. You admitted it yourself that you disagree with that material being censored. I have not lied.

You justify it by saying our right to this material trumps the rights of abused minors. I'll say it again until the mods step in and censor this whole exchange. You are sick.

So I've come to the conclusion, that banning the male reproductive organ was done before. Yep, they banned Hermes, Pan, Osiris, a few others, the Djinn( rub it and magic happens), and namely Shiva the Destroy...her!!!

Who else am I forgetting...o yea Lucifer and Satan. Banning and burning of books, images, and the whip for cursed words. It almost... unveiling it self really...like it happened before.

a reply to: nightbringr

You justify it by saying our right to this material trumps the rights of abused minors. I'll say it again until the mods step in and censor this whole exchange. You are sick.

More lies. I never said anyone had a right that material, nor did I say it Trumped the rights of abused minors. Again, lies.

a reply to: Specimen

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Censorship doesn't meddle with paint that way, my fcked up ancestors used to burn the "entartet" stuff entirely. Not those old masters nude pics though, which is kinda funny with regards to your black tesa initiative right there.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Censorship doesn't meddle with paint that way.

Sure it does. People call and petition for the removal of art all the time.

Other than that I do not understand a word you're saying.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

This is true of all acts of censorship. Not one human being has come under death, injury or corruption because he happened to hear certain combinations of words and sentences deemed dangerous by some censor or bigot...

Ohboy. You haven't read details about the Albigensian Crusade and Crusades against the Cathars or any number of religious wars.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Rights afforded by governments and laws are not quite the same as the fundamental rights we are born with. "Right" is a dubious term, though.

What rights are you born with?

I wouldn't mind hearing one.

Copyright infringement.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

People call and petition for the removal of art all the time.

Yeah. That's what art does to people, with different reactions.

But those lame activists don't go about their day with black tesa stripes, that's the politicized stiffs on their hunt for titts and dicks in advertisement and entertainment. Or gubmint agencies going over documents before they're released in a FOI request. For national security reasons, of course...
Looks kinda double-tap suspicious on your black tesa stripe initiative now, doesn't it?

Other than that I do not understand a word you're saying.

We can solve the riddle together, Mylady. It will probably escalate to mockery quickly, but feel free to give it a shot with a more precise line of inquiry?
Frankly, I start to see Beatrix von Storch in your avatar already. Don't get your hopes up too high there.

a reply to: introvert

Copyright infringement is a good example of free speech being curtailed. Under the guise of protecting some speech it is used to stifle dissent or opposing views or exposition of cults as in Scientology for example.

www.techdirt.com...

We've pointed out repeatedly in the past the problems you run into with copyright law once you realize that, fundamentally, it violates the First Amendment. While courts have tried to get around this simple fact with convoluted reasoning, and claims that fair use and the (often ignored) idea/expression dichotomy, if you are being intellectually honest, at some point, you need to admit that copyright law and free speech are in conflict. Now, that said, it's perfectly reasonable to then claim that this is an area where it's reasonable to make exceptions to free speech, but I would think that would require a pretty strong burden of proof -- one we have yet to see.

a reply to: introvert

Well said.

But No. We could just show them ladies our nice hard cocks in the public space whenever we want to! Some of our sick but horny brothers might even find new ways to share their candy with the kids! Kinda nasty way to bring that up again, but... I really don't wanna understand why proud 'n free dicks should be a problem in the first place.

Try to argue with that?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Copyright infringement is a good example of free speech being curtailed. Under the guise of protecting some speech it is used to stifle dissent or opposing views or exposition of cults as in Scientology for example.

As with anything, copyrights can be abused for many reasons, but the point still remains that someone can infringe upon another person's private property rights through speech.

Your own source makes that important point.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Try to argue with that?

It would be kind of...hard...

a reply to: introvert



Touché, I guess.

Let's simply leave it with that, I'll send you folks an invite to the first of many free dick threads to ... come?

a reply to: introvert

Copyright infringement.

I known this will be too far for even free speech advocates, but I don’t know why one would want to lay claim or right to “intellectual property”. The beauty of thought and language is that no one can own it, and it is only the truth, not punishment or sanction, that can set matters straight again.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

Copyright infringement.

I known this will be too far for even free speech advocates, but I don’t know why one would want to lay claim or right to “intellectual property”. The beauty of thought and language is that no one can own it, and it is only the truth, not punishment or sanction, that can set matters straight again.

Copyrights are not just about laying claim to thoughts or the use of language. It also allows people to retain rights to their work. One cannot steal someone else's personal property for the sake of profit and claim freedom of speech in their defense.

Their right ended where someone else's began and protecting those rights is not an act of censorship.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

Copyright infringement.

I known this will be too far for even free speech advocates, but I don’t know why one would want to lay claim or right to “intellectual property”. The beauty of thought and language is that no one can own it, and it is only the truth, not punishment or sanction, that can set matters straight again.

As someone who owns and manages copyrights, that's our time there.

Artists (writers, etc) don't usually have a day job. We earn income when we are producing art/music/film/literature. This is not a paid hourly gig. If we go to the bathroom, no work is done during that time and we (literally) aren't earning any money.

No one is willing to pay most of us a living wage for the time spent in our profession (I"ll give you an example from comic books. It takes me about 4 hours to pencil a 6 panel page, another 2 hours to ink it on the computer, an hour to letter it, and 4 hours to color it... about 1 1/2 days per page and that's pretty much standard industry speed. When we put the whole thing together in a 32 page book, you're seeing almost 50 full days of hard work there... and it's selling for $4.00.

Copyrights (the right to copy our work for tee shirts, etc) are valuable and I can sell those (world rights, individual country rights, film rights, tv rights, video rights, Youtube rights, etc, etc) for money, allowing others to use my products in return for money (often simply a percentage of the profits ... or if it's a tiny usage (making some keychains of my character), taking merchandise in exchange.

That's how it should work.

In this "information should be free" environment, there is absolutely nothing to prevent Harry Halfthief from scanning those pages and putting it together in a Kindle format and selling it on Amazon. There's a lot of stolen work like that on Amazon. If we catch it, we can ask Amazon to remove it but Harry's just as likely to offer it on Bittorrent, and stopping Bittorrent hosting is impossible since you have to deal with countries that did not sign off on the International Copyright laws and are not really interested in policing someone who's paying them for their services.

So your not having a problem with this is similar to my saying, "you know, I have no problem with someone going to your workplace and showing up and claiming your paycheck as their own.... because you should be working at your profession simply for exposure and experience, and by the way, you charge too much for your work. Can you do the same work for me for around $1.00?"

I disagree with anybody saying we need to rid of freedom and free speech you wanna be a racist whether that's a Black man who hates White's, to White man who hates blacks that's your problem to look like a scum bag but I am not gonna censor you for it same goes to religions to cartoonists. I draw the line at physical altercations then you deal with the law. Peace and have a good day.✌️

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

All I can say is, great timing on this thread.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

All I can say is, great timing on this thread.