California Can't Resist: Wants To Tax iTunes Downloads Again

from the keep-on-trying dept

There are some states that already include a sales tax on internet downloads for things like iTunes purchases (even if the rationale for the tax doesn't seem to exist beyond "the state needs money"). Every so often various other state politicians start itching to add an iTunes download tax. The latest is California. Some state politicians made a bunch of news back in April for proposing just such a plan, but the resulting publicity and anger from California residents made sure that proposal was quickly shot down. So what did the main sponsor of that proposal do? He waited less than two months and proposed a nearly identical tax on digital downloads. Of course, all this will really do is push more people to look at alternatives, legal or not, because of the greater expense associated with digital downloads (a product that should get cheaper over time, rather than more expensive).

Filed Under: california, downloads, itunes, sales tax, taxes

Taking Suggestions: What Else Should We Ban While Driving?

from the we-obviously-need-a-list dept

With California's law banning driving while talking on a mobile phone without a handsfree device set to take effect next week, the author of the original bill is already working on a followup to ban driving-while-texting as well. He says this is necessary because driving-while-texting "wasn't an issue" when the original bill was put forth. Of course, there are an unlimited number of different driving distractions -- so if we really need to come up with a law for all of them, why don't we put our heads together to come up with a list. After all, we've already heard of worries that involve driving while using a laptop, driving while using OnStar, driving while faxing (which also includes something about driving while playing a video game). And, of course, everyone's favorite: driving while having sex.

Rather than coming up with all these laws banning each particular action, why not recognize that you can't ban stupidity, and just focus on already existing laws against reckless driving? If you're doing something other than driving that puts others at danger, that should be plenty. We shouldn't need a list of "banned" activities while driving. We should just be focused on teaching people to actually drive when they're driving.

Filed Under: california, driving distraction, laws

California To Copy NY's Bad Plan Forcing ISPs To Block Sites

from the the-great-firewall-of-america dept

The next time US officials complain about other countries blocking websites and censoring the internet, just point them to the actions of various publicity-seeking US states' Attorneys General. We've already mentioned NY AG Andrew Cuomo's incredibly misguided plan to force ISPs to block certain websites and newsgroups. While officially in the name of stopping child porn (an excellent goal), the plan is open to widespread abuse. First, it targets the ISPs, rather than the actual perpetrators of child porn. Second, it involves a secret list that won't be available for review to make sure it doesn't include perfectly legitimate content. Third, ISPs are already "over-blocking" additional content to avoid getting in trouble -- meaning that plenty of legitimate content is also being blocked. Fourth, those who really want child porn will simply use other methods to find it -- and it will be harder for authorities to track those new sources down.

With all that going against the plan, wouldn't you know that California's AG is claiming that the NY agreement doesn't go far enough. While the NY agreement only covers Verizon, Time Warner and Sprint -- California Attorney General Jerry Brown is saying all ISPs should have to do the same, as well. Unfortunately, it seems like this type of "non-solution" is appealing to politicians who don't understand the actual issues. It makes them look like they're sweeping child porn off the internet, when all they're really doing is blocking legitimate content while making it more difficult to find those actually engaged in child pornography.

Filed Under: andrew cuomo, blocking, california, censorship, isps, jerry brown, new york, porn

Why Do You Need A Doctor's Note To Get A Genetic Test?

from the makes-no-sense dept

There have been a bunch of personal genetic testing services popping up over the past couple of years. One of the most well known is 23andMe, who got a PR lift for being founded by Sergey Brin's wife -- and also getting an investment from Google. Typically, the program lets people send in a cheek swab and receive back personal genetic info. These services are still in their early stages, but the few folks I know who have used 23andMe have found it to be an interesting learning process. However, now it's coming out that 23andMe and other personal genetic testing services may actually be breaking California law. California has sent a bunch of these firms cease-and-desist letters demanding they close up shop until certain conditions are met.

Apparently any labs doing the tests need to get both state and federal certification and can only do tests based on a physician's recommendation. The state claims it sent the letters after receiving "multiple consumer complaints about the accuracy and costs of genetic testing advertised on the Internet." This seems quite questionable for a variety of reasons. First, if people have "complaints" about the costs... then the proper response is to simply not buy the test. I have complaints about the price of Ferraris, but I'm not going to complain to the state of California -- and I doubt that the state would send cease and desist letters to Ferrari dealers.

Secondly, it seems quite ridiculous to say that these sorts of tests can only be taken with permission from a physician. There seems no reason not to let those who are willing to pay the associated fees to get a personal genetic test without involving a physician at all. As we move more and more towards more personalized medicine, this problem is only going to come up more and more. Not all medical tests and treatments need to be done under a doctor's care -- and requiring it in all cases seems more like a way to protect physicians' fees rather than citizens' health.

Filed Under: california, cease-and-desist, genetic tests
Companies: 23andme

Yet Another Politician Blaming Social Networks For Youth Violence

from the proof,-please? dept

A California state politician is pushing a totally useless "non-binding resolution" that would ask social networking sites to immediately takedown any "violent or explicit" videos that appear on their sites. How those sites would automatically know that the content is violent or explicit (or what is considered "acceptable" is unclear). Even better, the resolution would call on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to create a task force to "address the proliferation of violence on the Internet." Would that include "violence" such as that found in Schwarzenegger's movies, many of which can be found online? This whole thing seems like a witch hunt based on the faulty premise that somehow watching a violent clip on a website will somehow make the viewer violent, when actual research seems to suggest the opposite.

Filed Under: blame, california, politics, videos, violence

California Looks To Strengthen Anti-SLAPP Laws; Protect Online Anonymity

from the good-for-them dept

We've covered various anti-SLAPP laws in the past. These are laws that protect people from bogus lawsuits that are merely designed to shut them up. SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) are basically when a large corporation just files suit against someone knowing that the lawsuit alone will cause them problems, no matter how bogus the lawsuit is. Many states have created anti-SLAPP laws that let victims of SLAPP suits ask for them to be quickly dismissed. California has good anti-SLAPP laws, but they may get even stronger. While current California law lets those accused in SLAPP lawsuits to also get back attorneys fees, the law may now be extended to cover lawsuits filed outside of California against California residents. This should serve to help protect anonymity online as well as the ability to speak out against much larger entities. Hopefully, other states will follow suit as well.

Filed Under: anonymity, anti-slapp, california, slapp

California Lawmaker Wants To Change Law To Tax iTunes; Pretending Infinite Goods Are Tangible

from the reality-is-meaningless-if-it-gets-in-the-way-of-tax-revenue dept

Slashdot points us to the news that a Los Angeles (surprise, surprise) area politician is pushing to change a California law that requires sales tax on the sale of tangible goods. He wants the law to be adjusted such that digital goods would be considered tangible goods so they can be taxed. Effectively, this is a way of applying a sales tax on iTunes downloads as a way to make up the California budget shortfall. Considering that the entertainment industry has been trying to convince the world that intellectual property is no different than tangible property, it's not surprising that a politician coming from LA would see no problem with pretending infinite goods are tangible goods. However, it seems likely that such a plan would backfire. If anything, it will push more people to look for alternatives (potentially unauthorized) alternatives if California forces an unwanted price increase on iTunes. Also, if the law starts treating digital goods as tangible goods, will that give people other rights -- such as the right to do what they want with the content after purchase? It looks like there's plenty of opposition to this plan, so it probably won't go very far. In the meantime, though, does someone want to explain the difference between tangible goods and infinite goods to Assemblyman Charles Calderon?

Filed Under: california, charles calderon, digital goods, infinite goods, itunes, tangible goods, taxes

Marilyn Monroe's Estate Loses Rights To Photos After Fighting To Make Her A New Yorker

from the figure-this-one-out dept

It appears Marilyn Monroe's estate didn't think all the way through its strategy of posthumously moving the famed star to New York. Apparently, her family convinced California tax authorities that Monroe had been a New York resident, in an attempt to avoid paying taxes on the estate in California. Unfortunately for the estate, that would also mean that Marilyn Monroe's publicity rights died with her. As Against Monopoly points out in the latest example of the bizarre effects of intellectual property rules, California allows "rights of publicity" to live on after death -- meaning that images of famous people still need to be licensed. However, New York says your right of publicity dies when you die. So, a court has now ruled that, thanks to Monroe's own estate claiming that she was a New Yorker, there's no longer a right of publicity for Monroe, and photographers who own Monroe photographs shouldn't have to pay her estate (as they've done since her death). This has photographers claiming that the estate has been unfairly demanding licenses for many years. Next time, perhaps Monroe's estate will just pay the taxes it owes. But, in the meantime, we get to see the bizarre impact of rules such as "publicity rights" which have forced photographers to pay to use photographs they took for many years.

Filed Under: california, marilyn monroe, new york, publicity rights

Special License Plates Let Certain California State Employees Avoid Tolls, Red Light Cameras

from the abusing-the-system dept

With all the fuss recently over red light cameras, Boing Boing points us to a fascinating story about how somewhere around one million Californians have special license plate that basically shield them from toll booth transponders and red light cameras. Basically, the system was originally designed for police, putting their license plate info in a special secret database to shield home addresses from criminals who might want to hurt them. That system is no longer needed because DMV records are all now private. But one of the unintended consequences of the system was that it became nearly impossible to send a remotely recorded ticket (such as via a toll booth reader or a red light camera) to the guilty party -- since you couldn't get their address. It even works in some cases when people are pulled over by police, because once the plate is looked up the record indicates that the plate is in this protected category, so officers often let the driver off for being "protected."

To make matters worse, California has made it quite easy for state employees of all different types to get their license plate on the list, and from the sound of it, at least a few folks are abusing the privilege. The article found some who owed tens of thousands of dollars in unpaid fines for abusing toll lanes. It seems clear that many state employees are aware of these "benefits." The article notes that museum security guards actually made sure to include a clause in a recent labor agreement that would allow them to get these secret plates. At this point, it would appear there's simply no reason to keep these secret license plates in existence, but they're still there basically just to be used by folks who want to disobey traffic laws and get away with it for free, no matter how often they're caught.

Filed Under: california, license plates, red light cameras, tolls

California Reviews... And Decertifies... More ES&S E-Voting Machines

from the a-lesson-in-weak-security dept

Remember how e-voting firm ES&S was so against letting California's Secretary of State have an independent security team review their e-voting machines? Well, now we know why. The state had already released one damning security report and sued ES&S for giving the state uncertified machines. Now the state has come out with another report on more ES&S machines and the story gets worse and worse and worse. The good news is that California won't certify any of them. The bad news is that ES&S appears to not only be belligerent in not wanting to let California review its machines, but it also seems to be incompetent as well. As Dan Wallach notes in reviewing the report, ES&S appears to have outright ignored issues that the state asked them to address. As for the machines themselves? There seem to be all sorts of problems, including an awful lot of data stored in cleartext rather than encrypted, easily accessible and easily changed or corrupted data, and seldom-used and easily-broken password protection. Physical locks were all easily picked (some within 5 seconds, the rest within a minute). In other words, the security is a near total joke. This, despite the fact that people have been pointing out these kinds of security concerns for over five years. I wonder if the guy from ES&S who showed up a year ago and told us all we had no clue what we were talking about and swearing up and down that the machines were safe will come back and explain these latest results.

Filed Under: california, e-voting
Companies: es&s