This is what a hypocrite looks like : Stefan Molyneux abusing DMCA to censor

[PRB]

For the record, I don't "dislike" Stefan, but the stupidity and dishonesty he is causing to grow in some of his followers is enough to make me dislike him.

i'll say it too, I don't mean for this to be a general attack on Stefan's character, I don't think I completely disagree or dislike him. I made this thread to point out his hypocrisy on the copyright issue, but also as a warning to people that being opposed to copyright or opposed to information being property is an indefensible position.

 

[PRB]

Bad strategy. We have very long memories.

If you want to hang here without being accused of trollish behavior, stop attempting to make us look foolish in our own home ground by pretending to argue libertarian positions using sophistry and every other sort of embarassingly stupid trickery you can devise. Some of us have been dealing with people trollishly trying to make us look stupid by putting up with their presence for seven years and more. I don't know why you think you're better than them...

I've seen some of the 'I can't tell you any good reason why a racist would be a libertarian, but I'm libertarian because I'm racist' trolls that were here when I arrived that you can't hold a candle too--and they were terrible at trollish maneuvers.

can you give me an example of a libertarian position I "pretend to argue"?

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

can you give me an example of a libertarian position I "pretend to argue"?

Neg rep.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Hey knucklehead, Are you going to bet or not?

 

[PRB]

Neg rep.

Here we go again, whenever you can't answer a question, you throw out the neg rep card.

that's gotta be one of the best cards to play, Race Card, Shill Card, Neg Rep card.

 

[acptulsa]

can information be property, yes or no?

You have a remarkable propensity for ignoring all manner of meaningful input and zooming right back in on the most trivial mote on earth. Have you even heard or read anything Molyneux has said on the specific subject of copyright, or are you ranting about your assumption of his hypocrisy?

And ideas can be property, but simple information? Information can be secret. Information about a new idea can be property. But common knowledge surely can't be claimed. Why? Have a point, or do you just ask questions to make people think you can think?

 

[jmdrake]

i'll say it too, I don't mean for this to be a general attack on Stefan's character, I don't think I completely disagree or dislike him. I made this thread to point out his hypocrisy on the copyright issue, but also as a warning to people that being opposed to copyright or opposed to information being property is an indefensible position.

I don't think the misuse of the DMCA makes being opposed to copyright or opposed to information being property an indefensible position. If anything this further highlights the problem with copyright. Without copyright being an issue, Stefan would have had to really make the case that the people he was going after had actually looked up private information about his wife's patients and were harassing them. As it stands he was able to make one case to YouTube (copyright) and an entirely different case to his ancap fans (really it's about "cyberbullying").

 

[PRB]

No, it's 2015.

So did avocadoes.

I didn't see the news about avocados, good to know.

2015 is now, but if I was away for 6 months or a year, it'll get closer to 2016.

You rather be on here weekly so you don't miss your pay.

I actually have more to you lose than you.

You:

1. Have no friends here.

I don't need friends to like being here.

2. Are not liberty minded.

3. Have never made a liberty post.

I am liberty minded and you're free to think my posts aren't liberty oriented.

4. Make nothing but adversarial posts.

so I guess those green bars I have are all stolen?

5. If you really wanted "a little interaction/entertainment/education" from a forum, then you'd take the bet. These forums are a dime a dozen, so you would not lose anything you claim by going to another forum.

give me another example of a forum that's similar enough.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

that's gotta be one of the best cards to play, Race Card, Shill Card, Neg Rep card.

Your strategy of repeating a lie has also worked pretty good in history.

If you tell a lie long enough, then people will eventually believe it. You will even come to believe it yourself.




Oh yeah; neg rep.

 

[PRB]

I don't think the misuse of the DMCA makes being opposed to copyright or opposed to information being property an indefensible position.

It doesn't. I'm saying the positions themselves are pretty much indefensible.

If anything this further highlights the problem with copyright. Without copyright being an issue, Stefan would have had to really make the case that the people he was going after had actually looked up private information about his wife's patients and were harassing them.

Fair enough. I agree copyright law and its enforcement is full of problems, I don't believe therefore throw the bathwater out with the baby.

Maybe it's best put : that Stefan illustrates by perpetuating the abuse problem of DMCA and copyright enfrocement for censorship purposes.

You are right, if there were no copyright or DMCA available, he'll have a hard time taking down a post he doesn't liek, but then we'd be in a whole different world anyway.

As it stands he was able to make one case to YouTube (copyright) and an entirely different case to his ancap fans (really it's about "cyberbullying").

agreed.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

but if I was away for 6 months or a year,...

Yeah, you belong in the pen.

I don't need friends to like being here.

I do have friends here, so I have more to lose than you.

I am liberty minded and you're free to think my posts aren't liberty oriented.

No, your posts are not evidence of that. Another reason you have nothing to lose.

so I guess those green bars I have are all stolen?

Gained under false pretenses. And you're now losing them since you've been exposed.

give me another example of a forum that's similar enough.

Freesteader, Daily Paul, Liberty Conservatives, etc., etc. And I am giving you another neg rep for being both phony and lazy with that question.

 

[PRB]

You have a remarkable propensity for ignoring all manner of meaningful input and zooming right back in on the most trivial mote on earth.

My question was directed at a guy trying to derail my thread by saying it's about property and not information. So I started by making sure he can define his terms before arguing back with him.

Have you even heard or read anything Molyneux has said on the specific subject of copyright, or are you ranting about your assumption of his hypocrisy?

I could dig out more, but I'll post this for now.

Molyneux has gone on record against the DMCA and IP law, saying that "IP must die" as it is an unjustified use of force.[18][19]

↑ http://youtu.be/15wxWLDmnAE?t=1m3s
↑ https://www.facebook.com/stefan.molyneux/posts/242827249085001


He believes this is a universal principle with no exceptions.[20]
↑ https://freedomainradio.com/old-free/books/FDR_2_PDF_UPB.pdf

And ideas can be property, but simple information? Information can be secret. Information about a new idea can be property. But common knowledge surely can't be claimed. Why? Have a point, or do you just ask questions to make people think you can think?

Ideas can be property, thank you.
Information CAN also be property, but not all information are equal.

Any intellectually honest person must acknowledge there's at least 3 types of information, if not more.
1. facts/discoveries/physical laws of nature
2. creative work (art/music/writing)
3. propaganda

Look at just the latter 2, you'll see the biggest contrast. People pay to see/enjoy #2, but #3, the writer pays to have it seen (advertisement, political messages).

So which of them, if any, would the creator have an interest in keeping as property vs giving away or paying people to view/know it? Anytime somebody makes a blanket "information can never be property" or "ideas can't ever be property" he's ignoring at least the facts above, therefore not honest (unless actually stupid or ignorant).

Without this as a premise, you cannot proceed to discuss whether "money is speech" or whether an artist giving away copies of his music is necessarily proof that copyright hurts or helps.

 

[PRB]

Yeah, you belong in the pen.





I do have friends here, so I have more to lose than you.



No, your posts are not evidence of that. Another reason you have nothing to lose.





Gained under false pretenses. And you're now losing them since you've been exposed.





Freesteader, Daily Paul, Liberty Conservatives, etc., etc. And I am giving you another neg rep for being both phony and lazy with that question.

so you admit I've earned them by posting liberty posts, you just don't believe I'm sincere?

I haven't heard the first and 3rd. DailyPaul I haven't been to in a long time, and I don't find it as userfriendly.

Why do you keep sayin i'm lazy? I am asking YOU because I want to know what YOU think. I don't expect Google to tell me what YOU think.

 

[silverhandorder]

It is true. He said the store owners were "victimized" by Eric Garner because he was undercutting their business selling loose cigarettes. Really this is getting old. No matter what evidence people put forward regarding problems with Stefan, his supporters will turn around and say "That's not true" without giving a single shred of evidence or coherent logical argument to back up their claims. Stefan lies to Joe Rogan and denies that his wife got in trouble for advocating "defooing" on his radio show? It must have been because Stefan just didn't understand what Joe Rogan was saying.

Because you lazy and can't be bothered to listen for the context. You can certainly disagree with his assessment but that does not make him somehow not libertarian or confused. Stefan is speaking from the point of view of store owner. No morality is being applied here. They are victims according to the law and their own self interest. IF you were honest you would acknowledge that Stefan said that he would not make these cigarette laws in the first place.

Difference between him and you is that he can remove himself from the picture to give an objective assessment.

Yeah he did. I've posted the transcript of the video that proved he did.



Yeah he did. I've posted the transcript of the video that proved he did.



Yes I have. I've posted the transcript of the video that proves this.



Are you serious? My "claim" is that she got in trouble. Being barred for 6 months = getting in trouble. When Joe Rogan said "Your wife got in trouble for this right?" Stefan said "No." That was a lie. You know that was a lie. My liking or disliking him has nothing to do with this.

I watched Stefan's videos for many years. Listened to a lot of shows where really badly messed up people call in. I never seen him go for DEFOO for not reason. He never suggests that first and never to the extreme you claim. When people call in and say they do not want to see their parents near their kids because of the way they raised them what would you say? I would never want horrible people around my kids relatives or not. When teenagers call in he 100% of the time tells them if their situation is messed up and then tells them to seek therapy and help. So forgive me when I can't trust someone who does not listen to the man accusing him of being a cult leader who tries to separate people from their parents. To put it in other terms you are not telling the whole truth. You are either careless or have an agenda either way I don't have time for that.

He does not owe Joe Rogan any in depth explanation. He does not go around telling people what happened with him and his wife. And that seemed like an ambush. He can choose to keep it private. Then people like you and me can settle this on our own. Some come away with the conclusion that he is a cult leader and spread that all over internet. Others read what happened and decide people like you are crazy. Honestly the only time I ever find this shit is from people who I already do no trust. The guy has a show running for over a decade. Provides great content. Invited to all over the place. Yet you going to have us believe he is some perv or cult leader?

Lastly Ghandi. From his video there was more than just Zulu stuff. You again show how you like to cherry pick stuff because you know someone who never heard of Stefan does not know what you doing.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

My question was directed at a guy trying to derail my thread by saying it's about property and not information. So I started by making sure he can define his terms before arguing back with him.



I could dig out more, but I'll post this for now.

Molyneux has gone on record against the DMCA and IP law, saying that "IP must die" as it is an unjustified use of force.[18][19]

↑ http://youtu.be/15wxWLDmnAE?t=1m3s
↑ https://www.facebook.com/stefan.molyneux/posts/242827249085001


He believes this is a universal principle with no exceptions.[20]
↑ https://freedomainradio.com/old-free/books/FDR_2_PDF_UPB.pdf



Ideas can be property, thank you.
Information CAN also be property, but not all information are equal.

Any intellectually honest person must acknowledge there's at least 3 types of information, if not more.
1. facts/discoveries/physical laws of nature
2. creative work (art/music/writing)
3. propaganda

Look at just the latter 2, you'll see the biggest contrast. People pay to see/enjoy #2, but #3, the writer pays to have it seen (advertisement, political messages).

So which of them, if any, would the creator have an interest in keeping as property vs giving away or paying people to view/know it? Anytime somebody makes a blanket "information can never be property" or "ideas can't ever be property" he's ignoring at least the facts above, therefore not honest (unless actually stupid or ignorant).

Without this as a premise, you cannot proceed to discuss whether "money is speech" or whether an artist giving away copies of his music is necessarily proof that copyright hurts or helps.

LMAO!! An amazing misunderstanding of the nature of property, the creative process, economics, and more! (I am in the creative business, and can tell you this from firsthand experience. All you have is your opinion.)

 

[acptulsa]

can you give me an example of a libertarian position I "pretend to argue"?

Copyright. You can't even say if ancaps and libertarians agree on the subject. Negrep coming; enjoy...

 

[dannno]

Defooing someone because they disagree with you on farm subsidies is never acceptable advice.

This is a subject I'm not always in 100% agreement with Stefan on, but I see where he is coming from and you are still misstating his position as far as I can tell.

He doesn't think people should defoo because they disagree about farm subsidies.. The way he explains it is that once you break all of the components of the issue down, explain the components of theft and how it actually makes people worse off economically and the other person has a long enough time to understand, digest and retool their thought process on the subject, which may never happen or can take years to happen, you can use that opportunity to gain insights to see whether the person is good or not.

If after understanding the subject and the consequences they still advocate top-down rule over people and do not believe in individual liberty, then Stefan believes there is a connection between that and the potential for abusing or hurting individuals within their own sphere. By continuing the relationship with them, you are putting yourself at risk because this person might end up stealing or abusing you.

Stefan talks about how people do risk calculations all the time and that is how people make decisions. So you have to decide whether the potential for abuse from this person is worth keeping them in your life. The state shouldn't put people in jail for pre-crimes, for obvious reasons, but if we can predict whether certain people can potentially become abusive we can use that information in our own lives.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

This is as good of a place as any. If I ever end up becoming a successful author or doing some whatever other thing involving IP and some situation comes up where I have to use IP (I highly doubt it, I am not a very litigious kind of person, but just in case it does happen) I just want to state for the record here and now before any such thing happens that IP is one of the areas that I totally disagree with the bulk of the movement on. If in the highly unlikely event I ever have to rely on IP for something, it will not be hypocrisy, because unlike many in this movement I do not reject IP. At all.

That's not to say I support what Stefan is doing here. I stopped paying him any mind anyway long ago when I noticed he was vehemently anti-parent. I'm just warding off the situation 15 years hence where if I have to sue someone for say...republishing my book under their name...you lot know in advance that I am not one of the liberty types what reject IP.

ETA - you may also note that I am not waiting until I suddenly have IP to decide that IP is OK.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

This is as good of a place as any. If I ever end up becoming a successful author or doing some whatever other thing involving IP and some situation comes up where I have to use IP (I highly doubt it, I am not a very litigious kind of person, but just in case it does happen) I just want to state for the record here and now before any such thing happens that IP is one of the areas that I totally disagree with the bulk of the movement on. If in the highly unlikely event I ever have to rely on IP for something, it will not be hypocrisy, because unlike many in this movement I do not reject IP. At all.

That's not to say I support what Stefan is doing here. I stopped paying him any mind anyway long ago when I noticed he was vehemently anti-parent. I'm just warding off the situation 15 years hence where if I have to sue someone for say...republishing my book under their name...you lot know in advance that I am not one of the liberty types what reject IP.

ETA - you may also note that I am not waiting until I suddenly have IP to decide that IP is OK.

Have you blogged/written about this? I would like to see a credible, logical, rational defense of IP. No one on RPFs (or the interwebz at large, AFAIK) has done it, though they have certainly tried.

If you want to argue that we're stuck in the IP situation because it's the law TPTB have stuck us with ATM...that's a good reason to use it (a sound legal defense against corporations who want to exploit your labor with the regime's help, for example), but not a defense of IP at all.

 

[silverhandorder]

This is as good of a place as any. If I ever end up becoming a successful author or doing some whatever other thing involving IP and some situation comes up where I have to use IP (I highly doubt it, I am not a very litigious kind of person, but just in case it does happen) I just want to state for the record here and now before any such thing happens that IP is one of the areas that I totally disagree with the bulk of the movement on. If in the highly unlikely event I ever have to rely on IP for something, it will not be hypocrisy, because unlike many in this movement I do not reject IP. At all.

That's not to say I support what Stefan is doing here. I stopped paying him any mind anyway long ago when I noticed he was vehemently anti-parent. I'm just warding off the situation 15 years hence where if I have to sue someone for say...republishing my book under their name...you lot know in advance that I am not one of the liberty types what reject IP.

ETA - you may also note that I am not waiting until I suddenly have IP to decide that IP is OK.

I am not sure about IP from a practical stand point. I am on the opposite end however. I don't think IP is a good idea.

However if I were produce work in today's environment it seems that I would have to accept working in this frame. There are certainly examples of people doing well by going against IP but most of the market still structured with IP in mind.

I wouldn't fault you for wanting IP enforced. I think when it's times come it will go away on it's own. Pirates are doing their part in this.