What is Free Republic all about?

Free Republic | 12/08/01 | Jim Robinson

[elfman2]

…If we merely posted links they'd be broken in short order, making research an impossibility…

Well, not likely an impossibility, just a big inconvenience. I think there are almost always ways to find an article in a back issue. So were back to a "conflict" between property rights and convenience.

[6ppc]

Bump for JimRob.

[AAABEST]

My "intent" at causing you to lose money by publishing your book is irrelevant. I may just claim it was so great a book that I want to share it with the world. You can't prove that's not what I'm thinking.

Go back and read my post with some comprehension. My point isn't what JR intent is, it was what the LAT and WP's intent is.

My knowledge of law is limited, but I know that in order to collect damages, the aggrieved party must prove they are damaged in some way.

If the court ordered FR to cease and desist, your "tree in the forrest" argument might be halfway valid. The fact is a leftist Clinton judge (who's nomination was held up by republicans which the LA Times railed against in several editorials) ordered 1 million in damages awarded.

Gee, what a nice round number with no factual data whatsoever to support it. A cool million should be enough to flush a disabled vet's not-for profit forum down the toilet, no?

The whole purpose of our courts is to provide justice, not provide a staging area for political gauntlets. Nobody is being hurt and nothing is being damaged here except the leftist agenda.

Can I interest you in one of these?

They're great for driving carraiges. Unfortunately they've become completely useless since the invention of the automobile.

Bottom line is that all of this is a moot point. The hand wringing controllers are not going to have their way with the internet, it's going to have it's way with them. No matter how many Free Republics or Napsters they put down, the cat is out of the bag. They need to get that through their thick skulls.

[GOPJ]

Will this site become part of the history of our time? I'd bet on it.

[headsonpikes]

Your Post #8: "Simply put, this is the greatest web site on the internet...It is."

And more.

You are fighting the good fight and we know it.

My hat's off to JR!

[EdReform]

** "JIMBO...$5 month service charge? Who'd pay it? We all would. Do it. Those who wouldn't aren't true Freepers." **

* "As Jim Robinson has pointed out many times, the moment he does that, FR is no longer a "non-commerical" enterprise, and the fair-use defence goes out the window." *

The simplest solution is to join Grampa Dave's team and donate $5 per month via credit card (see reply numbers 81 or 82 above for the link to the secure server).

See Grampa Dave's 5,000 Freepers who care are needed now! thread.

An excerpt from Grampa Dave's Free Republic Lifeform post:

"This is a wonderful description of what Free Republic really is. It is a living and evolving Life Form to battle the left wingers and those who would destroy this country!...

Free Republic needs a constant infusion of cash to keep the Free Republic Life Form alive, viable and to grow. If we believe in Free Republic, we must donate each month or quarterly to keep this incredible life form alive... Good stewardship is what this world needs, not good intentions. Good conservative stewards will insure that the Free Republic Life Form continues to grow, be viable and thrives!"

The Free Republic Life Form continues to grow -- A $5 per month contribution will make a difference!!

[EdReform]

Bump!!

Bump!!

[unamused]

...and that we should continue and that we should fight for our rights.

Well we did.

And we shall continue...all together....

Freerepublic must continue to fight for the free expression of thos who are "politically incorrect." It is the voice of the stifled majority...
FR must never give in to the political pressures to stop a forum of free speech, and have us all back with our heads down, contentedly munching the grass....
We have a forum for freedom here, and must defend it as vociferously as necessary. FR must never kneel to PC.
(Don't make me give out no brass-knuckle head noogies...)

[elfman2]

Sorry, My ISP (DirectTVDSL) has been down so I couldn't reply sooner.

I also don't know the law well enough to be certain who's going to prevail. I only have a pretty good sense for what's objectively right and wrong.

I spend 1-2 hours/day on FR, but I visit more papers from the 5-10 minutes that I look into Drudge's linked headlines. The more news I get off of FR, the more banner ad revenue papers lose from my absence. Perhaps I'm unique is some way, but I doubt it.

Point taken regarding the focus of your "intent" comment. The WP, LAT and the judge's ruling were probably highly influenced by politics. The same could be said for defending Kuwait from Iraq or Israel from Hamas, but it's still the right thing to do.

"No matter how many Free Republics or Napsters they put down, the cat is out of the bag. They need to get that through their thick skulls."

I think you overestimate the security of stray cats. There are ways of making it difficult to run warez sites, but there's no political motivation to implement them. It's similar to the law of diminishing returns while hunting terrorists. Simply because taking down that last 10% is cost prohibitive doesn’t mean that the terrorists are going to win. But if you're willing to surrender to lawlessness, maybe you'll be interested in this:

Anarchist Yellow Pages

[The REAL Capt. MORGAN]

Thanks for not buckling under the knuckles of "terrorist" liar-lawyers.

[an amused spectator]

I have found that a newbie is anyone who was not one of the orginial members.

Actually, you're only a newbie on Free Republic till some of the other Freepers decide you're not. ;-)

[harrowup]

Actually, you're only a newbie on Free Republic till some of the other Freepers decide you're not. ;-)

Now, about my probationary status...?

[an amused spectator]

Anyway, that is why I hate to see FR doing a downhill slide into chat rooms, football scores in breaking news and vanities that have nothing to do with Conservatism.

Free Republic article posting is sinusoidal. This kind of thing has gone on before, and will again. This place is our fortress and home base against a foaming and ascendant liberal enemy without the walls. It's gotten quite comfy over the years. ;-)

[an amused spectator]

Just like free speech doesn't include a right to be published against the will of the publisher, I think free speech doesn't include a right to republish creative works against the will of the author (or his publisher).

I think that it's been conclusively proven that free speech includes a right to republish creative works against the will of the author (or his publisher) ONLY IF YOU'RE A LIBERAL. (Right, nnlb?) ;-)

[StoneColdGOP]

Thanks for this, Jim!

[an amused spectator]

Watch it, newbie! ;-)

[an amused spectator]

So we're back to a "conflict" between property rights and convenience.

I believe that AAABEST had it nailed when he said "It's because the other periodicals don't feel they're losing revenue and the intent of LAT and WP is to put FR out of business, not to recover lost revenue."

So there is no "conflict" between property rights and convenience, rather "property rights" are being used as a "convenience" to put FR out of business. All the evidence points to this fact.

[mlocher]

thanks for the post and for creating this forum. i have learned a lot about the conservative americans and their opinions on this forum. i have also been able to more adequately articlate the bias specifically in news stories and generally in the media.

i must disagree with some of your statements on free speech. congress, as you mentioned, is forbidden from passing laws that stymie free speech. the first amendment, however, does not state who can profit from someone's free speech. in fact, copywright laws have been written to ensure that profiteering by the wrong parties does not occur.

to draw an analogy, i have been warned at work about copying on a xerox copywrighted materials. further, i cannot take an article from time magazine and publish it without time's permission.

unfortunately, our ability to create and utilize technology is greater than our ability to pass laws moderating its use that is consistent with the constitution. (technology is amoral; how it is used defines its morality, but that is a different discussion). hence the courts get involved.

my hat is off to you for pushing what you believe is moral and within the law, and doing it within the system that is defined for us. this is a grey area and i am not so certain of the outcome.

[elfman2]

"So there is no "conflict" between property rights and convenience, rather "property rights" are being used as a "convenience" to put FR out of business. All the evidence points to this fact."

The two aren't mutually exclusive. (Addressed in #130)