Even my bad-taste buds -- dulled by years of abuse, lack of a keep-it-to-yourself governor, and a faulty tackiness gauge -- were shocked at the sour that tweet left behind.
I have long believed that by the time a cop has enough experience to be competent, he/she has become too jaded to be effective. Really ... we aren't all criminals.
This motion happens before the defendant even files an Answer, and is based on whether plaintiff stated enough plausible facts to support a claim. These are *alleged* facts. They still have to be proven.
Many judges don't want to pull the trigger on kicking an entire lawsuit based solely on what was said in the Complaint. And there is still a full litigation to get to. So it's really more of a "let's give plaintiffs the chance to make their case" kind of thing.
Personally: Seriously? If you're going to buy into Microsoft's deceptive Scroogled ad campaign, use their email then (and cut off all your gmail friends, like a recovering alky cuts off his drinking friends).
If plaintiffs even prevail in the matter and it goes to appeal, just wait 'till the amicus briefs from every processor of data start rolling in. This one I am not losing any sleep over.
And if you are one of the class plaintiffs, think about where that settlement money, if any, will go: 1) Lawyers; 2) Somewhere other than your pocket. (Hope you like lawyers, charities, and useless gift certificates.)
I remember the specific day that Twitter suddenly became useful to me...
April 4, 2010. We felt a bigass earthquake on our mesa in San Diego. That doesn't happen; no major fault line. Nothing about it anywhere online, radio, tv, nothing. It had to be far away, and big. Needed someone talking about it *now*
So I signed up w/ Twitter, and instantly found out it was felt all the way up in LA, and out to AZ, complete with shots of sloshing pools, etc., and got a feel for where the epicenter likely was (Mexicali/Calexico area). (And at the time, from the press, I thought of it as Ashton Kutcher's miniblog.)
Have used it for status of close brush fires as well (and of course, baseball info). Pretty friggin useful, indeed.
Another very good reason the leaks need to keep coming is that if they stop, the short-memory public starts to forget and the short-sighted Congress may stop feeling like something has to be done.
This stuff is still making mainstream news months later ... because of new leaks. By all means, please keep dribbling this info out for as long as possible, Mr. Greenwald et al.
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard, unless they start a program for Minecraft addiction, in which case, where do I send my money? And can I pay with the diamonds and gold ingots I've dug up?
I don't know from Texas, but there are doctrines related to assumption of the risk often at play in these situations. Like, you can't sue for getting hit by a foul ball at the ballgame. Vets generally assume the risk of being bitten by a dog they are treating ... You know, sensible doctrines.
I would submit that a cop assumes the risk of being injured in responding to a 911 call re an "aggressive" drugged-up fellow.
Notwithstanding that this may be the best story ever, I was contemplating the obvious "why ice blocks?" question.
Theory: Some other criminal told them that those freezer ice packs work for the scam(kind of the same size anyway), and our heroes here got the "ice" part right, but not the reason therefor part.
So the implication is it may be a crime to teach a party how to beat a test that one cannot be forced to take in the first place and often cannot be used as evidence against someone who is accused of a crime? I'm dizzy from the circularity.
..."it is difficult for plaintiff's attorney to call to discuss confidential and privileged matters regarding this case."
Um, if you are talking to opposing counsel, the very last thing you should be talking about is confidential and privileged matters -- regarding your client at least. Especially with regard to discovery disputes, all communications with opposition should be made with the idea that they may end up as an exhibit.
I am starting to think that Techdirt's "wow dept" may need its own separate blog.
I am also starting to long for the days when the stories were about buffoonish censorious asshattery and desperate dying business models, rather that stories of US Govt. activities that directly affect me, and would make Stalin simultaneously blush and turn green with envy.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Heh, heh. I admit this is innovative!
Besides that, no web-site has a right to leave up FALSE information once alerted.
Er, of course they do. And if they didn't write it, they are not liable and a court generally cannot force them to remove it. That's Sec. 230 at play ... the one in this story.
Just look at Ripoff Report -- pretty much anywhere, and you'll see tons of obviously false information.
Beat me to it. Yes, the click-wrap agreement (check the box) when you sign up for RipoffReport is almost certainly binding, and the copyright license as written is irrevocable. Regardless whether the Court had authority to transfer the copyright in the first place (questionable), the assignment of the copyright would not in itself revoke any licenses. (Could you imagine the mayhem if it could? You don't like the licenses you granted, so you assign it to your cousin ...)
I didn't see mention of the license in the Complaint -- a deliberate omission, or was Mr. End-Run only thinking one step at a time?
(Pay no attention to ootb, it knows naught of which it speaks.)
The rationale is that cell phone companies are not required by the government to create or retain this data and that citizens are not required by the government to carry or use cell phones, thus making this data subject to the Third Party Doctrine and removing any expectation of privacy.
Uh, we're not required by the government to live in a house either, but I'm pretty sure the 4th Amendment covers that, as well as our "papers and effects" which in relation to cell phones, the former being accessible or stored in the latter.
So the annotations are the Cliff Notes version of the law. No wonder the legal system is in such disarray.
Hahaha ... indeed. Good lawyers will at least look at the case itself to check for things like, you know, context, or to make sure the rest of the case doesn't destroy your argument.
In motions, I try to use the cases cited by opposition and kick them back on them with what the cases were really saying/about.
On the post: News Anchor Does Twitter Wrong: Teases Homicide Story Referencing Breaking Bad
On the post: Philly Transit Police Chief Shocked That No One Came To The Assistance Of A Cop Being Assaulted By A Suspect
On the post: Car Thief Tries To Blame GTA For His Actions
On the post: Court Says That Google's Scanning Email Content To Place Ads Could Violate Wiretap Laws
It's just a Motion to Dismiss
Many judges don't want to pull the trigger on kicking an entire lawsuit based solely on what was said in the Complaint. And there is still a full litigation to get to. So it's really more of a "let's give plaintiffs the chance to make their case" kind of thing.
Personally: Seriously? If you're going to buy into Microsoft's deceptive Scroogled ad campaign, use their email then (and cut off all your gmail friends, like a recovering alky cuts off his drinking friends).
If plaintiffs even prevail in the matter and it goes to appeal, just wait 'till the amicus briefs from every processor of data start rolling in. This one I am not losing any sleep over.
And if you are one of the class plaintiffs, think about where that settlement money, if any, will go: 1) Lawyers; 2) Somewhere other than your pocket. (Hope you like lawyers, charities, and useless gift certificates.)
On the post: Twitter IPO Reminds Us That What Starts Out As Trivial And Pointless Can Turn Into Something Amazing
I remember the specific day that Twitter suddenly became useful to me...
So I signed up w/ Twitter, and instantly found out it was felt all the way up in LA, and out to AZ, complete with shots of sloshing pools, etc., and got a feel for where the epicenter likely was (Mexicali/Calexico area). (And at the time, from the press, I thought of it as Ashton Kutcher's miniblog.)
Have used it for status of close brush fires as well (and of course, baseball info). Pretty friggin useful, indeed.
On the post: Author Claims We've Learned Enough From The Snowden Docs And The Rest Should Be Destroyed
... and so nobody forgets about it
This stuff is still making mainstream news months later ... because of new leaks. By all means, please keep dribbling this info out for as long as possible, Mr. Greenwald et al.
On the post: PA Hospital First To Open Inpatient Treatment Program For Addiction To The Internet
On the post: Texas Deputy Sues 911 Caller For Not 'Adequately Warning' Him Of Potential Danger Or 'Making The Premises Safe'
Assumption of the Risk ...
I would submit that a cop assumes the risk of being injured in responding to a 911 call re an "aggressive" drugged-up fellow.
On the post: AP Claims Copyright Over Manning's Request For Pardon
You think that's outrageous ...
Yo, AP: The only reason to endure pop-under ads is for free software or porn.
On the post: Dumb Criminal Tries To Pass Off Ice Blocks As iPads For Fun And Profit
The Why
Theory: Some other criminal told them that those freezer ice packs work for the scam(kind of the same size anyway), and our heroes here got the "ice" part right, but not the reason therefor part.
On the post: Federal Official Declares That Anyone Who Speaks Out Against Lie Detector Tests Should Be Criminally Investigated
Re: Re: Wait ... huh?
On the post: Federal Official Declares That Anyone Who Speaks Out Against Lie Detector Tests Should Be Criminally Investigated
Wait ... huh?
On the post: Comcast Confirms That Steele-Hansmeier Controlled IP Address Used To Seed Content
Er ...
Um, if you are talking to opposing counsel, the very last thing you should be talking about is confidential and privileged matters -- regarding your client at least. Especially with regard to discovery disputes, all communications with opposition should be made with the idea that they may end up as an exhibit.
On the post: Prenda Lawyer Would Like Future Documents Sealed Because Techdirt Commenters Said Mean Stuff About Him
Re: Re: Page 10 of the second document...
On the post: Prenda Lawyer Would Like Future Documents Sealed Because Techdirt Commenters Said Mean Stuff About Him
I made the grade!
On the post: DEA Not Only Gets Intelligence Data, But Then Is Instructed To Cover Up Where It Gets The Info
Wow
I am also starting to long for the days when the stories were about buffoonish censorious asshattery and desperate dying business models, rather that stories of US Govt. activities that directly affect me, and would make Stalin simultaneously blush and turn green with envy.
On the post: Lawyer Gets Court To Assign Copyright On Negative Review To Him, Then Sues For Copyright Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Heh, heh. I admit this is innovative!
Er, of course they do. And if they didn't write it, they are not liable and a court generally cannot force them to remove it. That's Sec. 230 at play ... the one in this story.
Just look at Ripoff Report -- pretty much anywhere, and you'll see tons of obviously false information.
On the post: Lawyer Gets Court To Assign Copyright On Negative Review To Him, Then Sues For Copyright Infringement
Re:
I didn't see mention of the license in the Complaint -- a deliberate omission, or was Mr. End-Run only thinking one step at a time?
(Pay no attention to ootb, it knows naught of which it speaks.)
On the post: Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals Upholds Decision That Warrantless Cell Phone Tracking Doesn't Violate Fourth Amendment
Uh ...
Uh, we're not required by the government to live in a house either, but I'm pretty sure the 4th Amendment covers that, as well as our "papers and effects" which in relation to cell phones, the former being accessible or stored in the latter.
On the post: Georgia Claims Its Annotated Laws Are Covered By Copyright, Threatens Carl Malamud For Publishing The Law
Re: Re: On the other hand ...
Hahaha ... indeed. Good lawyers will at least look at the case itself to check for things like, you know, context, or to make sure the rest of the case doesn't destroy your argument.
In motions, I try to use the cases cited by opposition and kick them back on them with what the cases were really saying/about.
Next >>