Pretty much everything about this is wrong. First, even if the appeal results in a reversal (which is unlikely), the odds are slim that the case ever goes to a jury. Second, if it does, Shiva (not Techdirt) will need to convince the jury, by clear and convincing evidence (not a preponderance), that Techdirt (not Shiva) lied when they said Shiva didn't invent email. That is, Shiva will have to prove, to a high level, that Techdirt knew what they were saying was false, but said it anyway. In order to do that, Shiva will need to prove (also to a high level) that he did invent email, but that's just the start of his burden of proof. And he's the plaintiff, so the burden is squarely on him. And it's unlikely he'll be able to rely on his "email means this highly-specific definition I've invented, not the general system that's been documented as having been around since before I was born."
You're right about one thing, though: that will be very hard. For Shiva, that is.
> To me that seems more logic because you're sure that parliament supports the government so they can get shit done.
Gridlock is not necessarily a bug, it's at least partially a feature. The founders intended that the branches of government would act as a system of checks and balances, and there was certainly no original intent to ensure that the congress supported the president.
He stated that "it serves no really useful function." Not so much an argument as a bare assertion. If he understood the function(s) it served in 1788, he would understand at least one of the functions it continues to serve in 2017. The representation of the smaller states hasn't gone away as an issue.
Maybe the electoral college doesn't protect the interests of smaller states very well. Maybe it has other, overriding disadvantages. But to deny that it serves any useful function is just ignorant.
And, frankly, it's kind of difficult to justify why we still have an electoral college when it's quite clear that it serves no really useful function.
There are certainly arguments to be made for the abolition of the electoral college, but Chesterton's fence says you aren't qualified to make them. Show that you understand why it's there, and what purposes it serves, then you can consider whether it should be abolished.
Calling him a Nazi is almost certainly a statement of opinion which wouldn't be actionable (regardless of how many or few people would agree with the opinion). The other claims, according to JLVD's complaint, are (1) JLVD was convicted of weapons charges and domestic violence; (2) as a result of (1), JLVD is prohibited by federal law from possessing a firearm, and therefore his possession of firearms is illegal; and (3) JLVD has engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. The "open letter" JLVD attached to his complaint clearly states (1); (2) and (3) are less clearly stated, but are at least mentioned. Those are statements which purport to be factual; if false, they are actionable.
OTOH, JLVD filing the action in Texas is crap, and the action should be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
What it means is that, in Georgia, professional practitioners, with access to the expensive official annotated code, are the only ones able to truly understand the law -- and the average everyday Georgian cannot.
Bullshit. First, the "expensive official annotated code" in the dead-tree version is incredibly cheap--the entire 40-volume hardcover set is about $400, which is dirt cheap for a 40-volume set of hardcover books; you can hardly buy paperbacks for $10 each any more. It's much less expensive than the competing annotated code published by West. Second, as you yourself mention, Lexis operates a website that makes the code available to the public at no cost. Third, if that website is really so unusable, or its terms of use really so objectionable, you can access a copy for free at your local county law library.
Finally, having access to the annotated code, as opposed to the unannotated code, is not going to turn a layman into a lawyer. Simply reading the annotations is not going to take the sales from his eyes and give him clarity as to the meaning of the text. Certainly the annotations will help, but they're not going to make the difference.
Replying to my own comment--no, the bogus trust has nothing to do with SEO. I still haven't parsed through the 30+ pages of gibberish (and I'm pretty sure that making a serious attempt to do so would cause my head to explode), but the short of it is that it's a gambit to attempt to register his independence from the government (at least at the federal, and quite possibly at the state and local levels as well). Here's some further information on the subject for the truly interested: https://www.sog.unc.edu/sites/www.sog.unc.edu/files/Sov%20citizens%20quick%20guide%20Nov%2013.pdf
That's some pretty bizarre word salad on the UCC financing statement linked as the "trust". Sounds like it's related to the "sovereign citizen" nonsense. Appointing the Secretary of the Treasury as your fiduciary? Very ballsy. Much chutzpah. Wow.
Agon may simply be butt hurt that they don't have the same kind of control over their 'events' that the NFL has over their games.
They shouldn't be too upset--the NFL doesn't have the control they think (or at least claim) they have, either. "Any accounts of this game without the express written permission of the NFL are prohibited" is simply a false statement of the law, and I'm equally free to tweet, blog, broadcast, or whatever, my account of any game I choose with no permission whatsoever--and for the same reason that Chess24 won here.
Aside from the obvious Section 230 problem, there's also the minor issue of the statute of limitations--in DC, it's one year for defamation. Sounds like the blog posts were 2+ years old, and DC has the Single Publication rule.
A "supposed breach"? No, that's an actual data breach--the data left their control without their knowledge or permission. And it left in a particularly stupid manner, too. It does sound like the FTC's overreaching (and greatly so), but don't minimize the degree of LabMD's fail here.
When the Centers for Disease Control sees crime as a disease, they're clearly well outside their charter. Congress is funding them to address disease control and prevention (their name is a bit of a clue), and violent crime has nothing to do with that mandate.
Re: Re: 'You already lost one eye, want to lose even more?"
Hmmm... Is there any politician or leader in Turkey who might be accurately described as "thin-skinned children masquerading as adults, throwing tantrums when people say mean things about them"? Maybe someone who's been covered here from time to time?
Oh wait, I forgot: this is about punishment, not prevention/rehabilitation.
Is it not appropriate to punish wrongdoers? I believe it is, and that's one of the stated goals (whatever you believe the actual goals to be) of the system.
He hasn't lost his license, it's just been suspended. That's a big difference. In most jurisdictions, if an attorney is disbarred, it's a permanent thing. He can get his license back in four years after taking the MPRE.
Re: "Ignore the experts, here's what it REALLY means..."
What you say makes sense, but consider a contrary position: When I license my works under a given license, I do so based on my understanding of what that license means. That understanding should be entitled to some consideration (though how much consideration would depend a lot on how reasonable it is).
Yes, but you're assuming the conclusion. The legal definition of "steal" includes that you intend to permanently deprive the owner of his property. It's a question for the jury, just like every other element of the offense, and it's up to them to decide whether the defendant had that intent.
On the post: Case Dismissed: Judge Throws Out Shiva Ayyadurai's Defamation Lawsuit Against Techdirt
Re:
You're right about one thing, though: that will be very hard. For Shiva, that is.
On the post: Appeals Court Tells Seattle Cops New Use Of Force Policy Doesn't Violate Their 2nd Amendment Rights
Re: Double negative?
On the post: Larry Lessig's Latest Big Challenge: Fixing The Way We Elect A President
Re: What is the point?
Gridlock is not necessarily a bug, it's at least partially a feature. The founders intended that the branches of government would act as a system of checks and balances, and there was certainly no original intent to ensure that the congress supported the president.
On the post: Larry Lessig's Latest Big Challenge: Fixing The Way We Elect A President
Re: Re: "Quite clear"
Maybe the electoral college doesn't protect the interests of smaller states very well. Maybe it has other, overriding disadvantages. But to deny that it serves any useful function is just ignorant.
On the post: Larry Lessig's Latest Big Challenge: Fixing The Way We Elect A President
"Quite clear"
There are certainly arguments to be made for the abolition of the electoral college, but Chesterton's fence says you aren't qualified to make them. Show that you understand why it's there, and what purposes it serves, then you can consider whether it should be abolished.
On the post: When Godwin's Law Met The Streisand Effect
Re: Uniting Godwin and Streisand?
OTOH, JLVD filing the action in Texas is crap, and the action should be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
On the post: Court Says Posting Georgia's Official Annotated Laws Is Not Fair Use, And Thus Infringing
Bullshit. First, the "expensive official annotated code" in the dead-tree version is incredibly cheap--the entire 40-volume hardcover set is about $400, which is dirt cheap for a 40-volume set of hardcover books; you can hardly buy paperbacks for $10 each any more. It's much less expensive than the competing annotated code published by West. Second, as you yourself mention, Lexis operates a website that makes the code available to the public at no cost. Third, if that website is really so unusable, or its terms of use really so objectionable, you can access a copy for free at your local county law library.
Finally, having access to the annotated code, as opposed to the unannotated code, is not going to turn a layman into a lawyer. Simply reading the annotations is not going to take the sales from his eyes and give him clarity as to the meaning of the text. Certainly the annotations will help, but they're not going to make the difference.
On the post: Convicted Felon Ask Google To Delist Multiple Government Websites Because His Name Is Protected By 'Common Law Trademark'
Re: Trust?
On the post: Convicted Felon Ask Google To Delist Multiple Government Websites Because His Name Is Protected By 'Common Law Trademark'
Trust?
On the post: Ridiculous Hot News And Copyright Battles As World Chess Seeks To Block Others From Broadcasting Moves
Re: Re: Re: Big Blue
On the post: Ridiculous Hot News And Copyright Battles As World Chess Seeks To Block Others From Broadcasting Moves
Re: Big Blue
They shouldn't be too upset--the NFL doesn't have the control they think (or at least claim) they have, either. "Any accounts of this game without the express written permission of the NFL are prohibited" is simply a false statement of the law, and I'm equally free to tweet, blog, broadcast, or whatever, my account of any game I choose with no permission whatsoever--and for the same reason that Chess24 won here.
On the post: Woman Sues Google Because SEO Guy Wrote A Mean Blog About Her Company
Statute of Limitations
On the post: Court Stays FTC's LabMD Injunction; No Deterrent In Punishing A Company It Helped Kill
Supposed breach?
On the post: This Is Huge: New Project Releases All Current (Non-Confidential) Congressional Research Service Reports
Re: They'll Be Missed
On the post: Turkey Becomes Brazil: Orders Victim To Pay For Costs Of Trial After Police Blinded Him
Re: Re: 'You already lost one eye, want to lose even more?"
On the post: Turkey Becomes Brazil: Orders Victim To Pay For Costs Of Trial After Police Blinded Him
Re: Sorry, but that's non-news
On the post: Chelsea Manning Facing Indefinite Solitary Confinement For Attempting Suicide, Possessing A Book On Hackers
Re: Re: Sounds like a B.F. Skinner experiment...
Is it not appropriate to punish wrongdoers? I believe it is, and that's one of the stated goals (whatever you believe the actual goals to be) of the system.
On the post: Prenda's Paul Hansmeier Loses His Law License; Won't Be Filing Bogus ADA Lawsuits For Now
Not lost, just suspended
On the post: Creative Commons Wants To Step Into Lawsuit Over Definition Of 'Noncommercial' In A CC License
Re: "Ignore the experts, here's what it REALLY means..."
On the post: The Coming Copyright Fight Over Viral News Videos, Such As Police Shootings
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>