Gotta say, religion and copyright have a lot in common: - follow long established doctrine - suspend logic - seem to be endlessly open to re-interpretation by the practitioners - require blind faith Let them slug it out. Popcorn ready :)
No. God did not write it. The people that did died more than [50 | 70 | 90][select as inappropriate by location] years ago. You could argue that God wrote everything, that everything is a religious gathering and therefore exempt...
What I find astounding is that people, even the apologists like Fienstien, really don't understand the logic of these bulk collections. For instance, the AT & T taps take everything. There is no possibility of not taking communications involving senators, privileged legal communications, or anything other prohibited communications. It is ALL. The only way the NSA could avoid any of these is to collect none of them in bulk. It's largely the same story for minimisation. You actually need to know it's priveledged to minimise it, and in most cases, they never get that far. No amount of legislation will change that logic. The NSA crossed the rubicon quite some time ago, and as we have seen, they aren't going back.
You know, marketing peoples ideas when advertising doesn't work is often simply to stuff more aggressive / intrusive ads down any pipes they can find. If customers are already pissed off with that (ie TV programming that is 50%+ ads), stuffing more ads in is counter-productive. People leave. Unfortunately, marketing people are often too simple to understand this.
Initially, I found it a little creepy just how much they were tracking me to do this pointless thing. Still do if I think about it. It is also clear from the data that my metadata (linked to real comms channels) are being sold ion a marketplace. I'm a little bemused that they think this generates sales. Not from me it doesn't.
Hmmm. Ads. I hate them. There are two ways of doing them. Make them unobtrusive enough that they don't fight for my attention, and I'll ignore them. Make them aggressive and I'll avoid the site. What I will NOT do is use any of those advertisers - at least not in response to the ads. If I want to purchase something, I'll go to a store I trust or I'll research the issue. We did some home improvements a couple of years ago - and I still get ads for floorboards, furniture and paint. Sure it's targeted - but guys, the purchases were made years ago, I'm not buying more floorboards in the next couple of decades... why am I a target?
Just astounding how accurately the FOIA response actually describes the situation: - scatter gun approach (this is what the Govt is doing) - the response is plainly vexatious I wonder what GCHQ has on her?
I've had a short read of this and I too find it a little disappointing. Judge Dawson, in my view, relies too heavily on the DOJ case. The part that struck me was the discussion over Secondary Copyright Infringement and whether it is a criminal offense. The judge accepts that it is simply on the base that Jay Prabhu is the US Attorney General and has signed a document stating that it is. The testimony of one of the top US lawyers in the field with that, and that this should be decided in a US trial, as he says with so much.
There are other issues that appear problematic, not least the casual disregard law enforcement in both NZ and the US have shown for the law. Aside from the theatrics of the raid, it is clear that much of the evidence was seized illegally and should not be admissible.
While I am sure a lot of this is allowed for in the extradition treaty, there was plenty there for a questioning judge to be critical of. Shame Dawson lacked the balls.
In ACS's case, between 30 and 50% of "detections" could not be matched to a subscriber. Given that this is a congested IPV4 pool, I would be surprised if more than 50% of the remainder are not false positives. Even if they get past that, they still have no idea of the identity of infringer. I would expect they are correct on this point less than 10% of the time.
On the post: God v. Copyright: Mike Huckabee Invokes Religion In Copyright Suit
- follow long established doctrine
- suspend logic
- seem to be endlessly open to re-interpretation by the practitioners
- require blind faith
Let them slug it out. Popcorn ready :)
On the post: God v. Copyright: Mike Huckabee Invokes Religion In Copyright Suit
Re:
On the post: God v. Copyright: Mike Huckabee Invokes Religion In Copyright Suit
Re: Does God own the Copyright on the BIble
On the post: NZ Newspaper: An 'Honor' To Welcome Small Pacific Rim Countries As They Sign Away Much Of Their Sovereignty
On the post: Copyright Blocking Security Research: Researchers Barred From Exploring Leaked Archive
Is that Chris Dodd or Tim Kuik?
On the post: After Spending Time As Surveillance Subjects, Intelligence Oversight Committee Suddenly Performing Some Oversight
On the post: GQ And Forbes Go After Ad Blocker Users Rather Than Their Own Shitty Advertising Inventory
Re: Re: We can block if we want to...
On the post: GQ And Forbes Go After Ad Blocker Users Rather Than Their Own Shitty Advertising Inventory
Re: Re:
On the post: FBI Turns 18-Year-Old With An IQ Of 51 Into A Terrorist; Dumps Case Into Laps Of Local Prosecutors
Re: Re:
On the post: GQ And Forbes Go After Ad Blocker Users Rather Than Their Own Shitty Advertising Inventory
On the post: NSA Never Stopped Intercepting Foreign Leaders' Communications, Swept Up Congress Members In Its Collection
Re: Defender of the Constitution?
On the post: TPP's Forgotten Danger: Stronger Trade Secrets Protection, With Criminal Penalties For Infringement
Re:
On the post: Who Needs A No-Fly List When You Can Just Ground 91 Million Citizens?
Re:
On the post: UK Home Secretary Wants Everyone's Metadata; But If You Ask For Hers, Gov't Says You're Being Vexatious
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Home Secretary Wants Everyone's Metadata; But If You Ask For Hers, Gov't Says You're Being Vexatious
- scatter gun approach (this is what the Govt is doing)
- the response is plainly vexatious
I wonder what GCHQ has on her?
On the post: Judge's Opinion On Kim Dotcom Shows An Unfortunate Willingness To Ignore Context
There are other issues that appear problematic, not least the casual disregard law enforcement in both NZ and the US have shown for the law. Aside from the theatrics of the raid, it is clear that much of the evidence was seized illegally and should not be admissible.
While I am sure a lot of this is allowed for in the extradition treaty, there was plenty there for a questioning judge to be critical of. Shame Dawson lacked the balls.
On the post: UK Government Has Secretly Created A Huge Database Storing Details About Its Citizens' Private Lives -- Since 2000
Re: How long before this data is used against political opponents?
On the post: $25 Million Jury Verdict In Rightscorp Case Raises Serious Questions About Copyright Law
Re: Re: Replies to killing access on accusations & copyright math
On the post: $25 Million Jury Verdict In Rightscorp Case Raises Serious Questions About Copyright Law
Re: Re: Re: Accusation is not guilt
On the post: $25 Million Jury Verdict In Rightscorp Case Raises Serious Questions About Copyright Law
Re: Re: Re: Accusation is not guilt
Next >>