FiniteBanjo

It’s so weird watching the cognitively impaired elderly because they say 98% random left field nonsense and then the fucking 2% profound revelation statements.

A bit hard for you, I’m sure, but the main street thing was a metaphor. An analogy. Main street is Canada, the Walmart is China.

And I recall that your main argument otherwise was that Gaddafi’s slave trade was better than the current slave trade.

You bringing the USA into a discussion of Chinese proponents in Canadian Politics is not “pointing out a double standard”. Furthermore, I cited examples of how the USA isn’t nearly as reprehensible as China and your only reply was to deny any wrongdoing by China and continue to shift the discussion away from them.

Your only defence of the horrible dictatorship is whataboutism.

I’m glad you at least admit that the Chinese attending this Canadian political fundraiser is fucked up, thank you.

You didn’t specify a nation so I’m going to assume you’re talking about the USA?

In that case:

1. Following the civil war, non-prisoner slavery was banned in the USA and reparations began, including the Civil Rights Act of 1873. In 1964 the USA passed a Civil Rights Act outlawing discrimination in employment, housing, and in all publicly accessible facilities on basis of Race, Color, Religion, Sex, or National Origin. It also prevents discrimination based on association with those groups as well as employment discrimination on basis of age, pregnancy, or disability (as long as the individual is still qualified to work).

2. The USA fought the Nazis and the Japanese Empire and won both times, they’re basically Antifa as a nation.

3. That’s fair, the CIA have done some wild shit in the past century as part of the ongoing cold war between USA and USSR/Russia and CCP as well as their proxies such as Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, Indonesia, and others.

4. The USA haven’t claimed land since 1959 when Hawaii joined as a state. They’ve actually given up a lot of territories as places like the Philippines, Cook Islands, Guam, and the Panama Canal were decolonized.

But TBH, the current Trump admin that the Chinese Election Interference helped put in power is an adversary so if you’re from a free nation you should treat their spokespeople as enemies. Furthermore, if my ass walked into Chinese Parlaiment then those authoritarian fucks better damn well treat me as their enemy: because I absolutely am.

$2000 was just for a table at the event. They should have been turned away at the door no matter how much they spent, imo.

Treating the envoys of a nation built upon dictatorship, forced labor, foreign psyops and election interference, and militaristic expansion as enemies is not “shallow”.

If some high profile CCP goons bought front row seats to some basketball and the NBA started singing China’s praises, then people would be fucking talking about that. Rather than the amount paid to attend, a better question is why tf are they there?

It’s probably that the plaster around the outlet when they installed it is mold resistant.

The critique itself is the new content, and the copyrighted image is an accessory to that.

Fair Use at its core requires you are creating something and not making copies. Its an integral part of the conversation. Therefor it is heavily implied.

Well obviously printing copies for free is illegal, thats just how antipiracy laws work, but the courts clearly stated even in that link that if IA had made sure the print to copy ratio was 1:1 or that notable changes to make it considerably transformative then it would have been fair use.

Courts look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and noncommercial uses are fair. This does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below.

On its own, a noncommercial use is fair use, unless other factors get in the way of that. I will ammend my previous comment to be less absolute.

FALSE, THIS USER ABOVE IS LYING.

ALL TYPES OF NONCOMMERCIAL USE CAN ALSO BE FAIR USE. (Until the judge says otherwise and it doesn’t get overruled).

The post title includes “non-commercial”.

In the USA there is a fair use doctrine/clause to copyright laws which excludes noncommercial works. This also stems from the English common law’s fair dealings doctrine.

17 U.S. Code § 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
(Pub. L. 94–553, title I, § 101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2546; Pub. L. 101–650, title VI, § 607, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5132; Pub. L. 102–492, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3145.)

That said, Judges generally have the final say and have decided cases wildly differently from each other in either direction in the past on what is and is not copyright infringement.

It’s always an attempted murderer and arsonist on here, these days.

Its bacteria not a virus

And?