Also for all, please be aware: this isnt 'deaf only'! This is for every JW world wide. Its been in the YPA book for decades and in the "Youth" book for decades before that. Its a gross invasion of the privacy and rights of familys to handle these things as they see fit and an examplemof cult like control trying to be exgerted. Its funny because (in a juvinile locker room way) of the way this language was used to express it, but lets not loose sight of the big picture.
5 Reasons Why the DEAF Masturbation Video is different than anything before...
by BluePill2 241 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
BluePill2
but lets not loose sight of the big picture.
Amen, Brother.
Thanks to this, people are making the right questions - again > Blood policy, shunning, handling of pedophiles. Now we are back in game.
-
simon17
Also for all, please be aware: this isnt 'deaf only'! This is for every JW world wide. Its been in the YPA book for decades and in the "Youth" book for decades before that. Its a gross invasion of the privacy and rights of familys to handle these things as they see fit and an examplemof cult like control trying to be exgerted. Its funny because (in a juvinile locker room way) of the way this language was used to express it, but lets not loose sight of the big picture.
Exactly, that nature of the ASL presentation of the material just exemplifies more vividly how inappropriate and controlling this message is in ANY FORMAT.
-
sabastious
Great point, EE. The real issue is the invasion of the Watchtower into their families personal lives. The deaf video just shouts the issue from the rooftops.
-Sab
-
King Solomon
Billy said:
Let me make this very clear... I NEVER SAID THAT THE DEAF COULD NOT READ OR ARE IN ANY WAY IGNORANT. Where you're coming at me with that argument is beyond me.
I never suggested you did: read my post again, and note that I specifically mentioned that some comments were made "in this thread" to that effect (I can't remember who it was who repeated that old wives-tale that the deaf cannot read; it's obviously not true, as seen by the many deaf posters here on JWN).
Quite the contrary. My argument is that THE DEAF CAN SPELL. There is no good reason for WT to use such suggestive gestures for both male and female masturbation repeatedly in that video. English WT publications use the least descriptive term for the action (English has far more desciptive terms for jacking off than "masturbation"), yet ASL chooses the most graphic gesture and expresses it for both genders. WT has made this content available to everyone on the Internet. In that very page that you pointed me to, Lady Lee said:
"I just know that as an interpreter I would have signed the word. And while the adults understood then they could explain it later to their children in a manner appropriate to their age."
I understood that to mean that she would have spelled the word rather than make the gesture that she was stroking the male genitals or rubbing the female genitals. On page 1 of the thread, Lady Lee said:
"as an ex-interpreter I find that disgusting."
Remember that spelling out words takes MUCH LONGER, and time spent spelling every potentially offensive word means the translator quickly falls behind, isn't using standard language (that saves time) and the other signs quickly get "crowded" thus making it harder for their audience to understand. It's the same with spoken language: try spelling out "m-a-s-t-u-r-b-a-t-i-o-n" vs saying it. Same deal....
Lady Lee admits to using SEE (not ASL, IIRC), and that ASL is a more graphic, expressive form of signing. It's a different language, just like all the international languages are unique, with different signs: hence why it's called "American" Sign Language. Allow me to guess (knowing that someone knowledgeable will correct me if it's wrong) that spelling words is frowned on in both conventions, but perhaps more acceptable with SEE vs ASL? But the bottom line is that signs exist for a real: to facilitate communication, NOT to slow it down....
And finally, remember that the goal of signing is TRANSLATION, not interpretation or editing: just like language translations, the translators job is not to add or remove ideas, but to accurately reflect the words being spoken as best as possible. Hence it would be inappropriate for a translator to deviate, so as to make it more palatable or acceptable for others: that's a bit unfair, IMO.
I'll address some of the other issues you raised in posts to follow....
-
King Solomon
King Sol said:
Further, by using the material on JWN, the site is at risk for being served DMCA takedowns by WTBTS, and that puts Simon et al in a bind.
Cedars said:
I would let Simon worry about that if I were you. I'm sure he isn't bothered in the slightest.
Cedars, weren't YOU the guy worried about being outed by the WT (hence why you didn't challenge the YT takedown of the Sparlock video), so as to maintain your anonymity? It's likely YOU that should be worried, as he's not at risk of being outed.You DO realize that by posting infringing copyright material on JWN you've made it MUCH EASIER for WTBTS to ID you, than even by YT?
Here's how the scenario is likely to play out:
All downloaded video originally came from WTBTS page (or the DVD, which contains a similar legal notice) which says:
Legal Notices
Terms of Use
Site visitors may download copyrighted materials for their personal, non-commercial use only. By downloading such materials from this site, visitors agree not to post these materials on any electronic network, redistribute them without written permission, or share these materials in exchange for money, even if no profit is involved. Site visitors may not modify, publish, or participate in the transfer or sale of any of the content, in whole or in part.
Copyright
© 2012 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. All rights reserved.
This Web site is published and maintained by Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. Unless otherwise indicated, all text and other information contained in this Web site are the intellectual property of Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. All rights reserved.
That's a bog-standard legal 'click-wrap' EULA (End User Licensing Agreement). WTBTS in Brooklyn Legal Dep't owns the rights to the video footage, and anyone who uses the content agrees (whether they downloaded it there, or elsewhere from a mirrored site).
So WT assigns rights to WT Legal Dept in UK to protect their interests, and use the posts you made with GIFs, video links, etc (and your incriminating statements) to draft a request for a court order in the UK (privacy rights in UK are stricter than US, but you've given plenty of probable cause to get a court order from a judge), and WT UK serves the order on JWN, who HAS to give all information they have on user ID "Cedars" (name, address, IP/ISP, chat logs, post times, etc). That's not OPTIONAL on their part: they HAVE to roll over on you, in order to limit their copyright infringement liability (and if Simon is a subscriber, he's not necessarily in the loop: you violated the forum posting rules by posting someone else's content to the site).
Once armed with the ID info from JWN, WT UK Legal relays it to WT Brooklyn Legal to issue a DMCA order in the U.S. to obtain specific info to locate your ISP (based on DNS), and then they have YOUR name, YOUR address (if you were posting at home/work), YOUR phone number, etc. You may have been clever and used a VPN, proxy, or anonymizer (eg Tor), but those are rather useless nowadays: they were effective in the 1990's, but nowadays security experts have pointed out basic vulnerabilities that mean they offer only a minor nuisance to IT pros.
Once WT have your personal information, Brooklyn HQ makes a call to your local Elders, and next thing you know you're invited after a meeting to the 'screaming baby' room for a "friendly chat" for you to do some explaining.
Thus it's actually less of a challenge legally for WT to locate an infringer when they post content on JWN, because at least with the YT/DCMA regime, you could simply allow the video to be taken down and NOT file a counter-notice to maintain your anonymity. That's not an option here: the WTBTS doesn't need ANYONE'S consent to reassign rights and obtain a UK court order (and you've already given plenty of probable cause, by the self-incriminating statements made in this thread where you admit).
So then you're facing JC, PLUS the spectre of having to defend a DMCA copyright infringement lawsuit in U.S> Fed Court, with the prosecutor noting your legal defense posted above ("But everyone else did it!" In legal terms, that's worse than, "Your Honor, I'm guilty...." as it doesn't work when you're 5 with your Mom, and it won't work in Fed Court).
Even preparing a defense is going to cost mucho $$, and with a weak 'fair-use' defense as this you'd likely be hit with an adverse judgment. The WTBTS has deeper pockets than God. After you likely lose the case, you get to explain you were DFed for posting a video of an ASL translator saying, "masturbation" over and over, in a loop.... Then who's got egg on their face?
There's probably no one WTBTS would LUV to smoke out than you (esp. after this recent attempt to embarrass them, and the involvement in the Anon hacking attempts: remember the "fruit from a tainted tree" deal?). Firms like NBC Universal are more likely to let CI slip in a fair-use case, but WTBTS is different: they'd LOVE to hang an apostate on the copyright-infringing cross (they're normally against crosses, but they'd make an exception, LOL!) with a high-profile "mentally-diseased" copyright-infringing apostate up there. Is it worth it?Take my advice or leave it, you will do as you will.... I'd be asking Simon to yank those posts that contain WTBTS IP content, just so they CAN'T do that to you. Honestly, we need you alive to fight another day on JWN, and not to serve as a martyr (esp for a silly reason like this: masturbation?).
PS None of this is legal advice; you should pay $$ to an international intellectual property lawyer to confirm.... -
King Solomon
Blue Pill said:
King Solomon: alone the name you have picked says a lot about you - will you strike us all with gawds wrath? Beheading or Stoning, which will it be? You come off as self-righteous and treat people in a condescending way, because "OMG, DISABLED PEOPLE". I have worked with disabled people and believe me they are more chilled than you think. I bet deaf persons are laughing about the video, because it IS RIDICULOUS.
Bud, I wouldn't be bringing up user names: "Blue Pill"? As in Viagra, the blue erectile dysfunction drug? Say no more....
I chose my name for much the same reason as some here are exploiting the video: it offers a different view of something that people don't often "see" unless they see it through a different lens. THe word masturbation is more vivid in ASL than in English, although it represents the SAME THING.
King Sol was famous for threatening a child with death by sword to solve a custody issue! How brutal is that? The fact is, the Bible is FILLED with gruesome, immoral stories, and as an atheist, I saw it's time to give up a book of 3,000 yr old moral principles that support slavery, child sacrifice, genocide, etc. I think ALL religions that are based on Abrahamic faith carry a common weakness: they're based on a morally-reprehensible book written by ANE hunter-gatherers, and trying to use cultural values from an ancient time in 2012. That's whacked....
That's not to say all of the principles are invalid, eg Jesus had some good Essene writers who wrote some of his best stuff 100 years before he was on the Earth (as well as some Buddhist/Indian influences). But the point is, what is important are the IDEAS, not where they came from....
(donning flame suit for rabid Xian counter-attack)
Simon17 said:
WHO exactly posted it on YouTube for all the World to see? It wasn't WT. Try again....
This is just flat out wrong.
What does the WT always say and warn against regarding things like Facebook? Once you upload something to the Internet it is there forever. Don't upload anything to the Internet you don't want to be seen and shared. Don't they repeatedly hammer this point in about the dangers of the Internet? And, in giving this strong admonition, they are talking about uploading to places that are restricted sites (i.e., a private social media account). This video upload was NOT password protected, NOT account protected, did NOT require a log-in, NOTHING. This video was not only made public by the WT, it was POSTED AS PUBLICLY AS ANYTHING POSSIBLY CAN BE.
Did you NOT read the legal agreement (like so many don't, in a rush to download the vid)? You apparently didn't read the 'click-wrap' EULA, but the fact remains that it IS a legally-binding document, as click-wraps have repeatedly been upheld in court to constitute valid and enforceable legal contracts.
Second, claiming innocence based on a lack of password-protection on their site is goofy: that's not relevant. Remember how Anon was trying to HACK into WT servers to STEAL information? Even if it wasn't hacking like that, it's still a crime to gain unauthorized access to any computer system (whether it's pass-word protected or not) or to violate the terms of use with any downloaded material (whether you downloaded it or not: that applies to not only the original downloader, but to ALL subsequent users.Don't believe me? There are HUGE legal firms in L.A. and N.Y. which do nothing except seek legal permission/rights to use music clips, video, etc for productions. ALL the music heard at the recent DNC/GOP had to be cleared by the rights-holders to be played, and if the legal clearance is not done properly, the original content owner can sue for copyright infringement, often getting much more than they'd get in negotiated upfront licensing fees, due to the damages claims. Understand it or not, it's called the music/video/film business....
Using someone else's content without their permission is illegal, a violation of Fed copyright law, whether it's password-protected or not (hacking, or breaking encryption is a SEPARATE add-on charge).
So you can tell your "unique" legal theories in Court on the stand, and when you're done explaining the law to a Fed Superior Court Judge wearing a black robe, he'll still rule against you, based on the law of the Land. Unfortunately, ignorance of the law is no defense....
I understand you're sensitive to ASL being the subject of (or vehicle for) ridicule. But you need to take a step back and be objective because the post you made in response to me was entirely irrational. You've made some valid points in this thread, but now you're just arguing for arguments sake against anyone because of your personal sensibilities to this subject.
No, I'm arguing about what I KNOW as fact, based on real-life school of hard knocks... Ignore at your own risk, as I understand that some people will only learn things the 'hard' way.... -
simon17
Did you NOT read the legal agreement (like so many don't, in a rush to download the vid)? You apparently didn't read the 'click-wrap' EULA, but the fact remains that it IS a legally-binding document, as click-wraps have repeatedly been upheld in court to constitute valid and enforceable legal contracts.
Second, claiming innocence based on a lack of password-protection on their site is goofy: that's not relevant.Its not at all relevant to me because I don't post any material. I just view them, as do thousands upon thousands of people.
What you're saying is equivalent to something like people should not be expected to speed on highways because there are laws and it should be fine to build a curve in a highway that is only safe at 55 mph because everyone will be obeying the speed limit. Well we know that is not that case. People will speed and that curve will not be safe.
If you upload something to the internet, it will be copied and shared and passed around and viewed by as many people see fit to view it because MANY people don't know or care about the copyright laws. So yes, WT should know better than to post a video that, to 99% of the outside world (and probably 90% of the JW world), looks absolutely absurd, comical, inappropriate for children, and/or vulgar. Laws are nice but in the Internet, things spread illegally no matter what. Haven't they themselves cautioned this for years? Answer: yes.
-
cedars
King Solomon
Cedars, weren't YOU the guy worried about being outed by the WT (hence why you didn't challenge the YT takedown of the Sparlock video), so as to maintain your anonymity? It's likely YOU that should be worried, as he's not at risk of being outed.
You DO realize that by posting infringing copyright material on JWN (services provided by InteSoft, IT LTD, in Manchester, UK), you've made it MUCH EASIER for WTBTS to ID you, than even by YT?So now you've got a beef with me? What the hell has this got to do with me? Are you trying to intimidate me against posting stuff? If so, why?
So I had a video taken down of Youtube... so what?
you violated the forum posting rules by posting someone else's content to the site
So now you're a mod?
What's your problem with me? Oh, and try to make your answer a little more succinct. I see your epic responses and I just get a headache. If your logic is sound over such a relatively simple issue, you shouldn't need to explain it in so many words.
Cedars
-
donuthole
LOL @ Solomons crazy scenario about the Watchtower tracking down Cedars identity.