This week, our first place winner on the insightful side Stephen T. Stone with a comment about our latest example of brazen DMCA abuse:
To everyone who thinks AT&T dropping OANN is “censorship”: No, this is censorship.
In second place, it’s Samuel Abram, with a comment about the cops who were fired for playing Pokémon Go:
I said this before…
It’s really sad (really more outrageous and infuriating) that playing Pokémon GO! would cause cops to get fired as opposed to killing blacks and Latinxs in cold blood.
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we’ve got a pair of comments from our post about the annoying DRM on Diablo 2: Resurrected. First, it’s That One Guy with the perennial bottom line:
And the ultimate punchline to this and all DRM:
Actual copyright infringers are, as always, completely unaffected.
Next, it’s PaulT with a response to some comments in the blog post that started the conversation about the issue:
“While I understand that this is a way to combat piracy”
But, of course, as already mentioned it’s really not. People wanting to pirate will still do so, and when they do they will still have a better product than the one bought legally. I fact, as often seen, the presence of this DRM is actually a driver for “piracy”, since some people who recognise this fact will download a cracked copy after they buy the legit version, safe in the knowledge that they’re not “stealing” since they paid for a copy, they just want access to the version that doesn’t try to stop them playing the game they bought.
“Or better yet, wasn’t there a better way of implementing it without restricting players who bought it legitimately?”
No, there isn’t. DRM is software whose entire purpose is to try the stop people from running the software it’s attached to. Like all software, it may have bugs or design issues that make it work imperfectly. It can never operate as well as it not being present in the first place for legal owners of the software it’s infected.
Over on the funny side, both our winners come in response to the post about the Pokémon-playing cops. David took first place:
You think firing those officers is a smart move?
Let’s see whether you still think that when Snorlax holds up a bank.
In second place, it’s an anonymous comment:
They’re even wrong about the pokemon
but they insisted they did so… to “chase this mythical creature.”
Your honor, I can assure you that despite claims to the contrary, Snorlax is not a mythical pokemon.
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out on our post about the legal fight over calling cheese Gruyere, where one commenter wondered if they could get away with making a “Champagne Gruyere cheese drink”, and Rocky had the answer:
No, but if you had called it Champagne Gruyere Monster cheese drink on the other hand…
And finally, we loop all the way back around to the beginning, where Toom1275 had a response to the Most Insightful winner:
Thst’s a bit of an awkward statement, seeing as how “AT$T dropping OANN is censorship!” and “thinks” are mutually exclusive.
That’s all for this week, folks!
Go to Source
Author: Leigh Beadon