Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 May 2019 @ 7:41am
Re:
What we call 'war' today is different than what we called 'war' in the past. We aren't fighting a sovereign nation. They don't wear uniforms. There are no actual front lines. And we spread that word to things like the 'war on drugs' and other issues those standing for office on a law and order platform determine are good for sound bites.
Since the use of the word 'war' has changed so much, the answer to whom might be winners must also change. And as we have learned, the 'winners' are those who get increased funding to fight 'their war'. Defeating the 'enemy' is no longer a part of war, it is the excuse.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 May 2019 @ 7:34am
Re: Re:
The oath is to uphold the Constitution, not to hide the bad acts of the Government. That same oath was taken by those in the Government who commit those bad acts, as well as the law enforcement agents who do the investigation and prosecution of whistleblowers.
I don't see exposing someone or some people in the Government to potential butthurt as any of those things. Disloyalty, maybe, criminal disloyalty, also maybe, but then only due to unreasonable definitions set in law by Congress, that have never been tested as to their constitutionality. Now if he had given the information to a foreign power, clandestinely, things might be different. He gave the information to the public, because the public has a right to know about things the Government does in their name.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 10 May 2019 @ 12:52pm
Re:
Right.
You could try looking up the photographers website, which is mentioned in the article, and then doing a search for 'burl', rather than trying to get someone here to do what the article is talking about and creating an opportunity for Higbee to go after Mike.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 May 2019 @ 6:56pm
Re: Re:
Doesn't content ID need some input from a copyright holder for it to match to? Yes it does. Someone put sufficient information into ContentID to make it respond this way. Now the real question is, who was that, and how to berate THEM.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 May 2019 @ 1:20pm
Re: Re: Re:
Taking data is like downloading a video file, the original is still in place, that is unless you stole a wallet or something.
Now using that information is not like copyright infringement. If I watch the movie, no one is harmed (don't get started on the creators, if I would never buy that video, they are not harmed). But with identity, the use does harm. Ruins credit score, creates debts in your name that are not yours, hurts reputation by posting to the FCC when you believe the opposite of what was posted in your name, etc..
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 May 2019 @ 11:53am
Internet Policing
I am waiting with baited breath for them to create an Interpol for the Internet (IFTI). There are two ways that could go. The first is that they may only enforce the rules that apply in a particular country and would have to respect treaties that define extradition rules between those countries, with all the attending headaches. The other is that they apply whatever laws they feel like applying, wherever they want to apply them without regard for anyone's law and without respect for anyone's extradition rules, and headaches only when courts start to interfere, or fail to follow through. Which might or might not happen, depending on location.
I suspect the latter will be more likely than the former, much like various police forces, and courts act now.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 7 May 2019 @ 5:57pm
Antithesis
'Trademark Office' and 'more thought' are two phrases that don't really seem to mix well. Sometimes thought floats to the top, but more often trademarks rise.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 May 2019 @ 9:55am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To serve and protect... the stream of money
Maybe so, but there are a few critical issues that the lawmakers will have to pay attention to. If they don't re-enable a law on time, it disappears. The first few iterations they will lose many laws, and will have to prepare to re-enact them the next time around. Language will become much simpler as they go through iterations so they have more time to enact new law. The lawmakers won't have much time to interact with lobbyists, as they will need as much time as they can get to keep their favorite laws from sunsetting. If a lobbyist does slip something in, it would have to be re-enacted just 7 years later, or more sensible heads will prevail.
Don't forget that there will be a churn in lawmakers as well.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 May 2019 @ 8:39am
Re: Re: Re: To serve and protect... the stream of money
I think a better idea would be to sunset all laws, every 7 years. The legislative branches would be so consumed with re-enacting laws (at least until they pared them down to a usable few) that they would not be able to do so much 'something must be done' legislation. For that we will all benefit, and we would have a set of laws that would be more easily grasped, even by law enforcement.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 May 2019 @ 9:36am
Fishing expedition, they brought the bait, but the wrong hook
If the text messages came from and ATF informant, then they already have both parts of the conversation, are they looking for other conversations?
If the Iphone belongs to someone else, why is Robert Brito-Pina being charged? If the Iphone belongs to someone else, how can they assert that Robert Brito-Pina used it?
Makes one wonder what that Federal Judge was thinking. Presumably the warrant was sufficiently detailed as to what they were looking for, but the nexus between the stated defendant and phone seems very tenuous.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 1 May 2019 @ 11:46am
Re: Re: Vicious Circles
Judges in which country? That's the problem with leaving it to courts of law. While any legal decision might be enforceable in the country the judges reside in, what about the rest of the world? We cannot just allow any judge in any country try to enforce their edicts world wide.
At the same time, what exists isn't working either.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 1 May 2019 @ 11:26am
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah, your thinking about the end user's insurance, and that might part of the process. I was thinking about those that insure the manufacturers. They are going to do everything they can to mitigate the manufacturers liability.
I am surprised they haven't taken action with regard to the security of the software mounted in their products, as it will only take a couple of successful cases where that insecurity will cause them major liability, possibly for negligence. Those insecurities, and the potential problems, are becoming more and more apparent. It is only a matter of time, or a few cases, before those that insure the manufacturers bring the hammer down, fix it or lose your insurance.
It is too bad that those few cases might catastrophic for those end users, but sometimes it takes a good smack to wake someone up, especially when they are blinded by profit.
On the post: US Government Rings Up Another Whistleblower On Espionage Charges
Re:
What we call 'war' today is different than what we called 'war' in the past. We aren't fighting a sovereign nation. They don't wear uniforms. There are no actual front lines. And we spread that word to things like the 'war on drugs' and other issues those standing for office on a law and order platform determine are good for sound bites.
Since the use of the word 'war' has changed so much, the answer to whom might be winners must also change. And as we have learned, the 'winners' are those who get increased funding to fight 'their war'. Defeating the 'enemy' is no longer a part of war, it is the excuse.
On the post: US Government Rings Up Another Whistleblower On Espionage Charges
Re: Re:
The oath is to uphold the Constitution, not to hide the bad acts of the Government. That same oath was taken by those in the Government who commit those bad acts, as well as the law enforcement agents who do the investigation and prosecution of whistleblowers.
They claim treason, but from Wikipedia:
I don't see exposing someone or some people in the Government to potential butthurt as any of those things. Disloyalty, maybe, criminal disloyalty, also maybe, but then only due to unreasonable definitions set in law by Congress, that have never been tested as to their constitutionality. Now if he had given the information to a foreign power, clandestinely, things might be different. He gave the information to the public, because the public has a right to know about things the Government does in their name.
On the post: Broad Coalition Tells Congress To Bring Back The Office Of Technology Assessment
Re: Re: Re:
Tell that to trees.
On the post: Higbee Tries To Shake Down Forum For Deep Linked Photograph
Re:
Right.
You could try looking up the photographers website, which is mentioned in the article, and then doing a search for 'burl', rather than trying to get someone here to do what the article is talking about and creating an opportunity for Higbee to go after Mike.
You are so transparent.
On the post: YouTube Copyright Filters Suck: The 'Beat Saber' And 'Jimmy Fallon' Edition
Re: Re:
Doesn't content ID need some input from a copyright holder for it to match to? Yes it does. Someone put sufficient information into ContentID to make it respond this way. Now the real question is, who was that, and how to berate THEM.
On the post: GDPR Penalties Prove Why Compliance Isn't Enough—And Why Companies Need Clarity
Re: Re: Re:
Taking data is like downloading a video file, the original is still in place, that is unless you stole a wallet or something.
Now using that information is not like copyright infringement. If I watch the movie, no one is harmed (don't get started on the creators, if I would never buy that video, they are not harmed). But with identity, the use does harm. Ruins credit score, creates debts in your name that are not yours, hurts reputation by posting to the FCC when you believe the opposite of what was posted in your name, etc..
On the post: FBI And Half The World Bust Operators Of A Site That Made The Dark Web Searchable
Re: Re: Internet Policing
That would fall under the latter scenario.
On the post: FBI And Half The World Bust Operators Of A Site That Made The Dark Web Searchable
Internet Policing
I am waiting with baited breath for them to create an Interpol for the Internet (IFTI). There are two ways that could go. The first is that they may only enforce the rules that apply in a particular country and would have to respect treaties that define extradition rules between those countries, with all the attending headaches. The other is that they apply whatever laws they feel like applying, wherever they want to apply them without regard for anyone's law and without respect for anyone's extradition rules, and headaches only when courts start to interfere, or fail to follow through. Which might or might not happen, depending on location.
I suspect the latter will be more likely than the former, much like various police forces, and courts act now.
On the post: Sturgis Motorcycle Rally Inc. Keeps Telling Licensees Its Trademarks Are Valid While Courts Keep Insisting They Are Not
Antithesis
'Trademark Office' and 'more thought' are two phrases that don't really seem to mix well. Sometimes thought floats to the top, but more often trademarks rise.
On the post: FCC Fixes Giant Error Over-Stating Broadband Availability... Then Doubles Down On Bogus Claims
Re:
Wouldn't it be simpler to just call it 'spin'? Of course, the difference between spin and lie is minuscule.
On the post: UMG Fails To Get Trademark For 'As Heard On TV' In A Remarkably Sane Ruling From The TTAB
Broken clocks are also right, twice per day
It appears that UMG failed to make the appropriate contributions, or did make the contributions, but to the wrong people. Well, live and learn.
Maybe they should try for 'Cord cutters will never hear this music'.
I think I will be eternally grateful for that.
On the post: Federal Judge Says Flashing Headlights To Warn Drivers Of Hidden Cops MIGHT Be Protected Speech
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To serve and protect... the stream of money
Maybe so, but there are a few critical issues that the lawmakers will have to pay attention to. If they don't re-enable a law on time, it disappears. The first few iterations they will lose many laws, and will have to prepare to re-enact them the next time around. Language will become much simpler as they go through iterations so they have more time to enact new law. The lawmakers won't have much time to interact with lobbyists, as they will need as much time as they can get to keep their favorite laws from sunsetting. If a lobbyist does slip something in, it would have to be re-enacted just 7 years later, or more sensible heads will prevail.
Don't forget that there will be a churn in lawmakers as well.
On the post: Federal Judge Says Flashing Headlights To Warn Drivers Of Hidden Cops MIGHT Be Protected Speech
Re: Re: Re: To serve and protect... the stream of money
I think a better idea would be to sunset all laws, every 7 years. The legislative branches would be so consumed with re-enacting laws (at least until they pared them down to a usable few) that they would not be able to do so much 'something must be done' legislation. For that we will all benefit, and we would have a set of laws that would be more easily grasped, even by law enforcement.
On the post: Federal Judge Says Flashing Headlights To Warn Drivers Of Hidden Cops MIGHT Be Protected Speech
Re: Clear aiding and abetting of a non-crime
I arresting you for your own good. You may not realize it now, but you will. However this comes out we will both feel better.
From Appellate Squawk:
On the post: Unsurprisingly, Larry Klayman's Veiled Threats And Insulting Of Judges Isn't Helping Roy Moore's $95 Million Defamation Lawsuit
Re: Re: Conviction
I would think that judges who are peers and worked with Judge Moore would have an inkling as to whether he was ethical or not.
From the linked article above:
On the post: Massachusetts Judge Says ATF Can Apply A Suspect's Fingerprints To Unlock An IPhone
Fishing expedition, they brought the bait, but the wrong hook
If the text messages came from and ATF informant, then they already have both parts of the conversation, are they looking for other conversations?
If the Iphone belongs to someone else, why is Robert Brito-Pina being charged? If the Iphone belongs to someone else, how can they assert that Robert Brito-Pina used it?
Makes one wonder what that Federal Judge was thinking. Presumably the warrant was sufficiently detailed as to what they were looking for, but the nexus between the stated defendant and phone seems very tenuous.
On the post: Man Wins Legal Battle Over Traffic Ticket By Convincing Court A Hash Brown Is Not A Phone
In the eyes of the beholder
I sure hope Mr. Stiber learned his lesson. In the future, get the Egg McMuffin, it looks nothing like a cellphone.
On the post: Congress Pushing A Terrible Bill To Massively Expand Patent Trolling
Re:
Nah, just to lawyers who will file the claims against infringer's who under a better regime would not be infringing on anything.
On the post: Impossible Content Moderation Dilemmas: Talking About Racism Blocked As Hate Speech
Re: Re: Vicious Circles
Judges in which country? That's the problem with leaving it to courts of law. While any legal decision might be enforceable in the country the judges reside in, what about the rest of the world? We cannot just allow any judge in any country try to enforce their edicts world wide.
At the same time, what exists isn't working either.
On the post: GPS Service Vulnerability Opened Door To Remote Vehicle Shutdown
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah, your thinking about the end user's insurance, and that might part of the process. I was thinking about those that insure the manufacturers. They are going to do everything they can to mitigate the manufacturers liability.
I am surprised they haven't taken action with regard to the security of the software mounted in their products, as it will only take a couple of successful cases where that insecurity will cause them major liability, possibly for negligence. Those insecurities, and the potential problems, are becoming more and more apparent. It is only a matter of time, or a few cases, before those that insure the manufacturers bring the hammer down, fix it or lose your insurance.
It is too bad that those few cases might catastrophic for those end users, but sometimes it takes a good smack to wake someone up, especially when they are blinded by profit.
Next >>