Jim Griffin who has tried for many years to migrate the music industry to a mandatory licensing scheme has received backing from Warner for a plan called Choruss. Mike Masnick is skeptical of the details; Griffin for some reason has responded on private forums rather than public. The "interchange" the two is interesting - you can read about it on Mike Masnick's blog.

Quite frankly, I believe a far more meaningful discussion between Messrs. Mansick and Griffin would take place in an off-line venue given the numerous posters at the techdirt website who seem inclined to rant versus engage in informed and civil discourse.

No. None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about Techdirt are at all true.

Please note that when I use the term "posters" I am referring to those who respond with comments to the posted articles. By far the majority of those posted comments are little more than rants devoid of substance and evidencing little more that visceral reactions.

While I do disagree with many of the points made in the site's articles, I also give credit to the insight they typically provide.

MLS:

Interesting that your statement is in response to someone making a meaningless statement devoid of substance and full of paranoid delusions. I guess Beeswax's keepers permitted him out for his once a week trip to the computer.

Mike Masnick is an anti-patent hack that gets sponsorship checks from Research in Motion.

Our resident troll wrote: "Interesting that your statement is in response to someone [insult deleted] and [insult deleted]. I guess Beeswax's [implied insult deleted]."

No. None of the nasty things that Lonnie has said or implied about me are at all true.

My statement about Techdirt was quite accurate.

Following our resident troll, someone else (or maybe him again "in disguise") wrote a libelous statement about Mike Masnick.

None of the nasty things that he has said or implied about Mike Masnick are at all true.

Beeswax:

I wonder why you keep deleting the truthful things I have said about you and called them insults? How can facts be insults?

In any case, the person who wrote the message after me was someone else. I do not hide from my statements on this web site. I also do not believe the statement as written. Is it possible that YOU wrote it?

You have said nothing whatsoever truthful about me, and your insults are by no stretch of the imagination anything remotely resembling "facts".

Furthermore, I did not post the comment attacking Mike Masnick. (Indeed, it would be rather illogical of me to do so, then post a comment defending him, with the net effect of canceling my own previous actions out; such a course of action would amount to time-wasting wheel-spinning.)