Comments on: Google and nasty pages

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:58:52 +0000

@Jakykong:
Yup. When you already know the deck is stacked, there’s very little incentive to play the game.
: (

By: Jakykong

Jakykong — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:24:36 +0000

Wouldn’t it be nice to start a country with a representative government, where elected officials are elected by popular vote only, are not allowed to violate the constitution, and judges cared about the good of the people, not whatever it is they care about right now? Of course, it’s just a dream. No land left to start a country in. But it’d be a great place to live.

Every time I think about our government, and how screwed up it is to allow judges to ignore this sort of contradiction, I think “when will the revolution start?”. I’m not in favor of fanatical actions, but I wish it were possible to get enough people to vote together to get some of this crap outlawed.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:07:09 +0000

@ all…
I already knew the answer, of course.
I just put the question up there, because I think others should ask it to the right people.
; )

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:42:02 +0000

@ DA:

Presactly.

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:03:29 +0000

“Why donât contradictions like these just ssscrreeeeeam at judges??”

Because they are part of a well-oiled machine that doesn’t care about justice. If it did, it wouldn’t tolerate the stalling and bully-boy tactics that are shown by the pigopolist’s money-spooging law teams.

A system where you are unable to represent yourself because the terms being used are of a “legal nature” is elitist and is no longer relevant in this modern age.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:36:04 +0000

So, in this scenario, Google gets to say it like it is: Google can’t be responsible indexing content that is still “out there”.
Yet, when the same point is brought out in regards to TPB, it gets scoffed at.

Google also gets to say “if the one who puts out the page is doing something against the law, get a court to agree with you and force the webpage to be removed or changed.” Wasn’t there a statement by the RIAA during the PB trial that Google is “cooperating” and removing infringing content from its index?!

Why don’t contradictions like these just ssscrreeeeeam at judges??