<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I See Dead People</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.annointedfig.com/i-see-dead-people/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.annointedfig.com/i-see-dead-people/</link>
	<description>Metamorphoses</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:28:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ASiCat</title>
		<link>http://www.annointedfig.com/i-see-dead-people/comment-page-1/#comment-99</link>
		<dc:creator>ASiCat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 20:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.annointedfig.com/?p=930#comment-99</guid>
		<description>Thank you so much for your thoughtful response.  I am sure you can imagine it makes a day of any blogger.

And yes, I entirely agree with how you can&#039;t really put limits on the net -- it is it&#039;s greatest assets and the greatest drawback.

But what I don&#039;t understand is, how can it bring so much BAD in so many of us.  Is it hiding somewhere?  Just waiting for a chance to slither out and do its worst unpunished?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you so much for your thoughtful response.  I am sure you can imagine it makes a day of any blogger.</p>
<p>And yes, I entirely agree with how you can&#8217;t really put limits on the net &#8212; it is it&#8217;s greatest assets and the greatest drawback.</p>
<p>But what I don&#8217;t understand is, how can it bring so much BAD in so many of us.  Is it hiding somewhere?  Just waiting for a chance to slither out and do its worst unpunished?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Farkit</title>
		<link>http://www.annointedfig.com/i-see-dead-people/comment-page-1/#comment-98</link>
		<dc:creator>Farkit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 17:51:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.annointedfig.com/?p=930#comment-98</guid>
		<description>I sympathize with the family in their loss. I know the pain of losing a family member in a horrible traffic accident, and would be hurt as they are about photos of a relative&#039;s death photos being shared around the internet.



The problem with control over the internet or what is posted to it is not reality. Sure there can be laws in place that allow the family to sue those who leaked the photos but once those photos hit the net, it is all over. First off, America does not control the internet and our laws do not extend to other countries. If these death photos were posted to a German or Swedish website, the family has no recourse if laws in that country do not forbid posting or distribution of such photos. 



Even WITH laws, once something is released on the internet, there is no recalling or stopping it. This family can sue all they like but they will run out of money long before they shut down even a tiny fraction of the sites that have the photos. For those that are not geeks, you need to understand that the internet sees any attempt at censorship as &#039;damage&#039; and routes around it. When someone or something tries to remove information from the web, many other websites take up the information and spread it along, making censorship next to impossible.



If this family had taken a second to look at the DVD decryption hex code debacal, they would give up while they are ahead and only be in debt for that second morgage to pay for the lawyers. I&#039;m not saying give up on sueing on the leak, but I am saying they are just wasting their money trying to sue websites into taking down the photos. Demands like this only spread the information faster and make it harder for it to disappear. The best thing they could have done (as hard as it would be) instead of suing websites that hosted the pictures is to have just gone after the leak and left the net alone. The pictures would have eventually ran their course and ended up on just a couple obscure &quot;faces of death&quot; type websites. As it is now, many many websites have these pictures and the new &#039;Newsweek&#039; article is just going to fuel another explosion of attention to these photos. 



I&#039;m sorry for their loss, but when it comes to the internet, suing to stop the spread of information always...ALWAYS...has the reverse affect you want.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I sympathize with the family in their loss. I know the pain of losing a family member in a horrible traffic accident, and would be hurt as they are about photos of a relative&#8217;s death photos being shared around the internet.</p>
<p>The problem with control over the internet or what is posted to it is not reality. Sure there can be laws in place that allow the family to sue those who leaked the photos but once those photos hit the net, it is all over. First off, America does not control the internet and our laws do not extend to other countries. If these death photos were posted to a German or Swedish website, the family has no recourse if laws in that country do not forbid posting or distribution of such photos. </p>
<p>Even WITH laws, once something is released on the internet, there is no recalling or stopping it. This family can sue all they like but they will run out of money long before they shut down even a tiny fraction of the sites that have the photos. For those that are not geeks, you need to understand that the internet sees any attempt at censorship as &#8216;damage&#8217; and routes around it. When someone or something tries to remove information from the web, many other websites take up the information and spread it along, making censorship next to impossible.</p>
<p>If this family had taken a second to look at the DVD decryption hex code debacal, they would give up while they are ahead and only be in debt for that second morgage to pay for the lawyers. I&#8217;m not saying give up on sueing on the leak, but I am saying they are just wasting their money trying to sue websites into taking down the photos. Demands like this only spread the information faster and make it harder for it to disappear. The best thing they could have done (as hard as it would be) instead of suing websites that hosted the pictures is to have just gone after the leak and left the net alone. The pictures would have eventually ran their course and ended up on just a couple obscure &#8220;faces of death&#8221; type websites. As it is now, many many websites have these pictures and the new &#8216;Newsweek&#8217; article is just going to fuel another explosion of attention to these photos. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry for their loss, but when it comes to the internet, suing to stop the spread of information always&#8230;ALWAYS&#8230;has the reverse affect you want.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
