Pages: 1 2 3

 

2007-03-27 20:00:59
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

TrollmeaT wrote:

What's wrong with capitalism & getting paid for what you do instead of some mooch stealing your goods, selling them & then sue you because your trying to protect yourself & your interests?!
They do own him but they pay him well for the product he provides, what is wrong with that?
This is just another attack on Americas way of life & Colbert had the guy pegged as a criminal thug.
I mean what more do you want, the guy told him he was going to rip him off. I surprised he didn't leap across the table. That is Colbert's livelihood.
Bullshit...  he was making fun of intellectual property laws.  That's not ruining anyone's livelihood.

Hell, downloading music off the internet is more of a threat to industry than this guy was.
He is not just "making fun of it". He is suing Viacom for protecting their investment. It is the reason we have trademarks, copyrights, and patents. I cant's see how it is acceptable to sue someone for taking back what is rightfully theirs. This guy is just looking for money and he is using someone else's talent to get it.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 20:03:47
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

TrollmeaT wrote:

That's like saying it's difficult to believe in reality & reason. I know  a couple charmed life people as well & you are correct they know nothing about adversity but I do.
Reason and capitalism are quite different.  Reason is a basis for thought.  Capitalism is just one of many economic philosophies, and while it works better than many alternatives, it cannot sustain a free society alone.  Some socialism must accompany it for the sake of modern amenities.

I would also suggest that capitalism is far from moral.
2007-03-27 20:05:27
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


I mean what more do you want, the guy told him he was going to rip him off. I surprised he didn't leap across the table. That is Colbert's livelihood.
Bullshit...  he was making fun of intellectual property laws.  That's not ruining anyone's livelihood.

Hell, downloading music off the internet is more of a threat to industry than this guy was.
He is not just "making fun of it". He is suing Viacom for protecting their investment. It is the reason we have trademarks, copyrights, and patents. I cant's see how it is acceptable to sue someone for taking back what is rightfully theirs. This guy is just looking for money and he is using someone else's talent to get it.
I didn't say I agreed with the lawsuit.  I agree with the principle.  He was testing Colbert to see if he practices what he preaches.

If Colbert can make a career out of parodying O'Reilly, then someone else should be able to do the same of Colbert.
2007-03-27 20:17:22
TrollmeaT
Aspiring Objectivist
+492|7101|Colorado
The current state of it is and will continue to degenerate as it is broken down into warped forms of socialism, we will never have the perfect system unless we fix the mistakes of the past {rulings of the supreme court that have taken away some of our freedoms},{social programs implemented by presidents} & implement a laissez faire type of capitalism.
2007-03-27 20:20:08
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Bullshit...  he was making fun of intellectual property laws.  That's not ruining anyone's livelihood.

Hell, downloading music off the internet is more of a threat to industry than this guy was.
He is not just "making fun of it". He is suing Viacom for protecting their investment. It is the reason we have trademarks, copyrights, and patents. I cant's see how it is acceptable to sue someone for taking back what is rightfully theirs. This guy is just looking for money and he is using someone else's talent to get it.
I didn't say I agreed with the lawsuit.  I agree with the principle.  He was testing Colbert to see if he practices what he preaches.

If Colbert can make a career out of parodying O'Reilly, then someone else should be able to do the same of Colbert.
I'm betting you understand this difference between mimicking someone and rebroadcasting their televised production.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 20:24:29
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

TrollmeaT wrote:

The current state of it is and will continue to degenerate as it is broken down into warped forms of socialism, we will never have the perfect system unless we fix the mistakes of the past {rulings of the supreme court that have taken away some of our freedoms},{social programs implemented by presidents} & implement a laissez faire type of capitalism.
I've mentioned this before, but I used to be a Libertarian and even somewhat Objectivist until I figured out something very important: corporations can be equally if not more corrupt than governments.

Government and Big Business must be put into continual conflict to prevent them from colluding and oppressing the common man.  Unfortunately, this collusion has already been occurring for quite some time.

The best that we can hope for is the decentralization of federal government, but this means social programs will need to be administered by the state and local branches of government.
2007-03-27 20:26:24
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


He is not just "making fun of it". He is suing Viacom for protecting their investment. It is the reason we have trademarks, copyrights, and patents. I cant's see how it is acceptable to sue someone for taking back what is rightfully theirs. This guy is just looking for money and he is using someone else's talent to get it.
I didn't say I agreed with the lawsuit.  I agree with the principle.  He was testing Colbert to see if he practices what he preaches.

If Colbert can make a career out of parodying O'Reilly, then someone else should be able to do the same of Colbert.
I'm betting you understand this difference between mimicking someone and rebroadcasting their televised production.
I'd like to hear your take on this...  As far as I can tell, the parody didn't cross any legal lines.  Again, the lawsuit is baseless, but the principle remains.
2007-03-27 20:37:05
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I didn't say I agreed with the lawsuit.  I agree with the principle.  He was testing Colbert to see if he practices what he preaches.

If Colbert can make a career out of parodying O'Reilly, then someone else should be able to do the same of Colbert.
I'm betting you understand this difference between mimicking someone and rebroadcasting their televised production.
I'd like to hear your take on this...  As far as I can tell, the parody didn't cross any legal lines.  Again, the lawsuit is baseless, but the principle remains.
Parodies are legal, if they weren't Saturday Night Live would have been taken off the air years ago. What you can't do is take someones personal work that they have created themselves and distribute it. This especially holds true if you are doing it for profit, which to my understanding Youtube is doing. If you make money off using someone else's copyrighted material you leave yourself wide open for a lawsuit since that company can seek to recoup the money it could have lost.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 20:45:10
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6958|Global Command

Turquoise wrote:

jonnykill wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

You know...  this is sad...  I used to like Colbert.

He's just like all the rest of them.  Owned.  by big business....   At least, he admitted it though.

The respect I once had for a man that made fun of Bush to his face is now showing his true colors as just another shade of corporate greed.
Who ISN"T owned period? You lost respect for a guy who says he has a boss......
Corperate greed? Last time I checked money is money. Without money you have nothing.
...and it is because of that thinking that we exist in the desperate state we are in now.

You may enjoy exploiting your fellow man, but I do it grudgingly.
Your advocating moveon.org be allowed to exploit intellectual property only because you agree with their agenda. LOL you'd be all over Colbert if he made money spoofing Micheal Moore.

Typical neo-marxist/liberal thinking.
2007-03-27 20:47:48
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

jonnykill wrote:


Who ISN"T owned period? You lost respect for a guy who says he has a boss......
Corperate greed? Last time I checked money is money. Without money you have nothing.
...and it is because of that thinking that we exist in the desperate state we are in now.

You may enjoy exploiting your fellow man, but I do it grudgingly.
Your advocating moveon.org be allowed to exploit intellectual property only because you agree with their agenda. LOL you'd be all over Colbert if he made money spoofing Micheal Moore.

Typical neo-marxist/liberal thinking.
Did you notice that the guy on the clip mentioned that he's Republican?  I have no idea what a Republican is doing at moveon.org, but the fact remains, I'm defending a guy that is probably someone I would normally disagree with.  We just happen to agree on this issue.
2007-03-27 20:49:54
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6958|Global Command

Turquoise wrote:

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


...and it is because of that thinking that we exist in the desperate state we are in now.

You may enjoy exploiting your fellow man, but I do it grudgingly.
Your advocating moveon.org be allowed to exploit intellectual property only because you agree with their agenda. LOL you'd be all over Colbert if he made money spoofing Micheal Moore.

Typical neo-marxist/liberal thinking.
Did you notice that the guy on the clip mentioned that he's Republican?  I have no idea what a Republican is doing at moveon.org, but the fact remains, I'm defending a guy that is probably someone I would normally disagree with.  We just happen to agree on this issue.
Sure. I can call myself a Martian. Don't mean I am.

If you don't respect property rights you are at the most a RINO.
2007-03-27 20:51:03
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

ATG wrote:


Your advocating moveon.org be allowed to exploit intellectual property only because you agree with their agenda. LOL you'd be all over Colbert if he made money spoofing Micheal Moore.

Typical neo-marxist/liberal thinking.
Did you notice that the guy on the clip mentioned that he's Republican?  I have no idea what a Republican is doing at moveon.org, but the fact remains, I'm defending a guy that is probably someone I would normally disagree with.  We just happen to agree on this issue.
Sure. I can call myself a Martian. Don't mean I am.

If you don't respect property rights you are at the most a RINO.
Does that mean that Democrats don't believe in property rights?
2007-03-27 20:52:40
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


...and it is because of that thinking that we exist in the desperate state we are in now.

You may enjoy exploiting your fellow man, but I do it grudgingly.
Your advocating moveon.org be allowed to exploit intellectual property only because you agree with their agenda. LOL you'd be all over Colbert if he made money spoofing Micheal Moore.

Typical neo-marxist/liberal thinking.
Did you notice that the guy on the clip mentioned that he's Republican?  I have no idea what a Republican is doing at moveon.org, but the fact remains, I'm defending a guy that is probably someone I would normally disagree with.  We just happen to agree on this issue.
He said he was republican but he sure as hell sounds anti-business. I don't buy it. How can you be republican and represent moveone.org ?...lol
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 20:54:28
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


I'm betting you understand this difference between mimicking someone and rebroadcasting their televised production.
I'd like to hear your take on this...  As far as I can tell, the parody didn't cross any legal lines.  Again, the lawsuit is baseless, but the principle remains.
Parodies are legal, if they weren't Saturday Night Live would have been taken off the air years ago. What you can't do is take someones personal work that they have created themselves and distribute it. This especially holds true if you are doing it for profit, which to my understanding Youtube is doing. If you make money off using someone else's copyrighted material you leave yourself wide open for a lawsuit since that company can seek to recoup the money it could have lost.
I haven't seen the clip that the guy made, but I understand that it was a parody.  So, how can a company demand that a parody be taken down?  If the company owns where the clip is hosted, then I understand how.  If not, then...  how?
2007-03-27 20:56:03
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

ATG wrote:

Your advocating moveon.org be allowed to exploit intellectual property only because you agree with their agenda. LOL you'd be all over Colbert if he made money spoofing Micheal Moore.

Typical neo-marxist/liberal thinking.
Did you notice that the guy on the clip mentioned that he's Republican?  I have no idea what a Republican is doing at moveon.org, but the fact remains, I'm defending a guy that is probably someone I would normally disagree with.  We just happen to agree on this issue.
He said he was republican but he sure as hell sounds anti-business. I don't buy it. How can you be republican and represent moveone.org ?...lol
Paleoconservative...  anti-BIG business.  Pat Robertson is a good example of this kind of Republican.  Honestly, Pat seems like a more sincere version of a Republican in my book.  I greatly disagree with his social views, but his distrust of big business is well founded.
2007-03-27 20:56:29
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

No it wasn't a parody of Steven Colbert... It was clips from The Colbert Report.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 20:57:15
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6958|Global Command

Turquoise wrote:

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Did you notice that the guy on the clip mentioned that he's Republican?  I have no idea what a Republican is doing at moveon.org, but the fact remains, I'm defending a guy that is probably someone I would normally disagree with.  We just happen to agree on this issue.
Sure. I can call myself a Martian. Don't mean I am.

If you don't respect property rights you are at the most a RINO.
Does that mean that Democrats don't believe in property rights?
In the end, the are socialist.
And no, they don't.
Each according to his needs, etc...
2007-03-27 20:59:27
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

ATG wrote:


Sure. I can call myself a Martian. Don't mean I am.

If you don't respect property rights you are at the most a RINO.
Does that mean that Democrats don't believe in property rights?
In the end, the are socialist.
And no, they don't.
Each according to his needs, etc...
Or maybe they just think this "Intellectual property laws are mostly a sham.".
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 20:59:33
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

No it wasn't a parody of Steven Colbert... It was clips from The Colbert Report.
Then, why is that when I look up more on the story that this relates to, it talks about a parody that had to be taken down?

If this is actually about reproduced clips with no parody element, then I relent.  The way that interview and some related stories explained it, it seemed to involve a parody.
2007-03-27 21:00:41
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Does that mean that Democrats don't believe in property rights?
In the end, the are socialist.
And no, they don't.
Each according to his needs, etc...
Or maybe they just think this "Intellectual property laws are mostly a sham.".
Well then..   I guess you're violating those laws right now by putting Libraries are hiding something in your sig.  Should Viacom sue you?

Last edited by Turquoise (2007-03-27 21:01:07)

2007-03-27 21:05:41
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7029|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

In the end, the are socialist.
And no, they don't.
Each according to his needs, etc...
Or maybe they just think this "Intellectual property laws are mostly a sham.".
Well then..   I guess you're violating those laws right now by putting Libraries are hiding something in your sig.  Should Viacom sue you?
That is the point of it being in there. You can't just say "It's now copyrighted". They were joking at that point in the interview. But if Viacom had the appropriate copyright on it I would take it down and guess what?.. I wouldn't turn around and try and get money out of them for making me do so.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-03-27 21:07:04
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6958|Global Command
https://i19.tinypic.com/2a7787d.gif
2007-03-27 21:10:13
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6834|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


Or maybe they just think this "Intellectual property laws are mostly a sham.".
Well then..   I guess you're violating those laws right now by putting Libraries are hiding something in your sig.  Should Viacom sue you?
That is the point of it being in there. You can't just say "It's now copyrighted". They were joking at that point in the interview. But if Viacom had the appropriate copyright on it I would take it down and guess what?.. I wouldn't turn around and try and get money out of them for making me do so.
But don't you think it's rather stupid that someone can copyright a phrase?

If you're copyrighting a book, an invention, a drug, or a new product of some other kind, then I understand.  There are other things that I think shouldn't be able to be copyrighted.

Also, when companies like Disney can continually lobby to extend copyright law tenures, then it gets rather ridiculous.  How long do we have to wait before Mickey is public domain?  200 years?
2007-03-27 21:10:16
Velker
Accused aimbot user
+31|6702|Ohio
I personally applauder Colbert. The guy he was talking to probably thought that Colbert was going to just sit there and casually discuss the terrible way that the man's company was trying to sue Viacom. Colbert, being the funny and witty guy that we know him to be, came out and exploited the idiocy in the man's logic and totally took him off guard. I can't believe that some people in this blog are making the argument that Colbert was showing his true colors, that he is nothing more than a crony of a larger corporation. Clearly his statements about working under Viacom were a joke. While he does work for Comedy Central I imagine that they pretty much let him roam free with creativity (within television limits that is) from what I've seen . Give the man a break.
2007-03-27 21:13:59
jonnykill
The Microwave Man
+235|7108

Turquoise wrote:

jonnykill wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

You know...  this is sad...  I used to like Colbert.

He's just like all the rest of them.  Owned.  by big business....   At least, he admitted it though.

The respect I once had for a man that made fun of Bush to his face is now showing his true colors as just another shade of corporate greed.
Who ISN"T owned period? You lost respect for a guy who says he has a boss......
Corperate greed? Last time I checked money is money. Without money you have nothing.
...and it is because of that thinking that we exist in the desperate state we are in now.

You may enjoy exploiting your fellow man, but I do it grudgingly.
What desperate state are you tal;king about? I'm owned , your owned and Steven Colbert is too.
Soo ummmm, WTF are you talking about? Exploiting my fellow man? I'm saying I'm feeling his pain, your sayinfg he's a sell out. Your not making any sense.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard