“It just makes no sense,” said Mr. Chabali, a SWAT veteran who retired as assistant chief of the Dayton, Ohio, Police Department in 2015. “Why would you run into a gunfight? If we are going to risk our lives, we risk them for a hostage, for a citizen, for a fellow officer. You definitely don’t go in and risk your life for drugs.”
It will be fun if the police union is forced to present some evidence of their claims...
One of the most important actions Thursday — a project of Democratic Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter — sets the stage for a return to active rulemaking. [...]
Khan also said the FTC would probably consider writing its own definition of what conduct amounts to an “unfair method of competition” — an idea that could allow the agency to sue businesses for bad behavior not covered by traditional antitrust law.
Soon Republicans will propose to defund the system and instead give citizens vouchers to buy the required services from their own preferred provider. Oh wait, was that only for education?
Reasons unknown, or quite well known. TERREG was approved and will become active in one year. Whatever any official in any EU member states bother to declare "terrorist content" will need to be removed within 1 h. So Europol and friends will gain a "delete" button on most of the web. https://edri.org/our-work/european-parliament-confirms-new-online-censorship-powers/
Of course authorities would never abuse this power to work around the pesky criteria of other processes for counterfeit items, copyright infringements and whatnot.
Ideally. Or just "free software". But I didn't want to assume T's website has RSS or anything. Using vanilla Wordpress would have been best, so I'm not surprised they seem to be doing something else.
Nice! It only took some 15 years and countless disasters, but maybe at some point people will realise that there was nothing liberating about posting to walled gardens like Facebook, Instagram or Twitter rather than to the open web, and everyone can just happily go back to the vastly superior technologies of the earlier 2000s and late 1990s.
This is so typical. Three-letter agency accuses $foreign_competitor of large-scale asset occupation; proceeds days later to do the same. Proof of the supposed original action is never found, but the magnitude of the "reaction" is such that it can't even be hidden.
'Stay out of politics,' Republican leader McConnell tells U.S. CEOs, warns of 'consequences'
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell lashed out at corporate America on Monday, warning CEOs to stay out of the debate over a new voting law in Georgia that has been criticized as restricting votes among minorities and the poor.
The conversation is silly, but I just don't see the supposed "threat" by Warren. Beyond the rhetoric, she's just reiterating her two usual points, that big corporations:
1) write the laws to benefit themselves;
2) strong-arm the politicians by various methods (including money and positive or negative publicity).
Warren has some proposals to change the situation, does any of them propose to write a law which name-calls Amazon? I didn't see any. What she wrote would sound worse if she were in an executive position to advance targeted action against Amazon. You wouldn't want a FTC member or federal judge to look partial like that.
This is merely a way to hide the bigger problems ahead from its shareholders. As Bloomberg's Tara Lachapelle noted:
One of the biggest benefits, though, is that its earnings reports will no longer need to call attention to DirecTV, nor will executives have to continue struggling to defend owning the business. The magic words of Thursday’s press release: “Following close of the transaction, AT&T expects to deconsolidate the U.S. video operations from its consolidated results.”
Why retain a stake at all? The likeliest reason is that AT&T, after a long and thorough search, couldn’t find a buyer willing to buy the whole thing at a palatable enough price.
Contrary to what written in the article, Google and Facebook do not seem to be mentioned explicitly, unless it was in some attachment I missed:
«(1) The bargaining news business representative for a registered news
business may notify a responsible digital platform corporation for a
designated digital platform service that it wishes to bargain over
one or more specified issues relating to the registered news
business’ covered news content made available by the designated
digital platform service.
(2) If the bargaining news business representative is the bargaining
news business representative for 2 or more registered news
businesses, a notification made for the purposes of subsection (1)
may relate to some or all of those registered news businesses.»
The forbidden content includes literally any website:
«core news content means content that reports, investigates or
explains:
(a) issues or events that are relevant in engaging Australians in
public debate and in informing democratic decision-making;
or
(b) current issues or events of public significance for Australians
at a local, regional or national level.
covered news content means content that is any of the following:
(a) core news content;
news business means:
(a) a news source; or
(b) a combination of news sources.
news source means any of the following, if it produces, and
publishes online, news content:
(a) a newspaper masthead;
(b) a magazine;
(c) a television program or channel;
(d) a radio program or channel;
(e) a website or part of a website;
(f) a program of audio or video content designed to be
distributed over the internet.»
Every link is forbidden:
«(1) For the purposes of this Part, a service makes content available if:
(a) the content is reproduced on the service, or is otherwise
placed on the service; or
(b) a link to the content is provided on the service; or
(c) an extract of the content is provided on the service.
(2) Subsection (1) does not limit, for the purposes of this Part, the
ways in which a service makes content available.»
On the post: As Cuba Tries To Block Internet Messaging, A Reminder Of Why The Open Internet Is So Important
Dislike for encrypted communication
Oh, so there's something Cuba and the USA three-letter-agencies agree on. How comforting.
On the post: Trump Notifies Attorney General He's Challenging The Constitutionality Of Section 230 On The Dumbest Grounds Possible
Social media
I'm pretty sure social media existed in 1996. It was called IRC, or Usenet, etc.
On the post: Police Union Sues Kentucky City's Mayor, Claiming New No-Knock Warrant Ban Violates Its Bargaining Agreement
National Tactical Officers Association
As John Oliver pointed out, former police also argue that drug raids are pointless: https://www.cato.org/blog/no-knock-warrants-war-drugs (conveniently quoting the New York Times).
It will be fun if the police union is forced to present some evidence of their claims...
On the post: Biden Executive Order Will Try To Address Some 'Right To Repair' Harms
Rules of practice and "unfair method of competition"
It can't be a coincidence that this comes out few days after the first meeting of the FTC where major decisions were taken https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/01/ftc-lina-khan-antitrust-chair-497764 :
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/federal_register_notices/2021/07/rules_of_practice_ parts_0_and_1_proposed_text.pdf
On the post: Did The Supreme Court Just Take A Sledge Hammer To Copyright's Statutory Damages?
Re: Creative Commons BY-NC
Why NC? What do you use your commercial monopoly for?
On the post: After Eight Years And Three Reviews Of The Case, Indiana Supreme Court Rules Police Must Return Seized Car To Its Owner
Re: Re: Car value and costs
Is the next step for Timbs to ask damages?
On the post: Map Of The Internet Exposes The Lie That 'Big Tech' Controls The Internet
Re: Techdirt on the map
Even in the original, Techdirt would probably one of the peaks in the north of the peninsula east of the Bay of Flame https://xkcd.com/802_large/
On the post: Oatly Sues PureOaty For Trademark And Trade Dress Infringement
Re: Usage of term milk
They don't (in EU), after a barrage of lawsuits from the dairy industry, recently copied by the animal-based meat industry.
https://www.thedrum.com/news/2018/10/17/after-angering-swedish-dairy-industry-oatly-brings -controversial-ad-campaign-the-uk
https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/meps-save-v eggie-burger-from-denomination-ban/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-14/swedish-oat-milk-producer-benefits-f rom-dairy-industry-lawsuit
Funnily, trademark protection was deployed to defend some of the slogans the dairy industry doesn't like.
https://www.taylorwessing.com/en/insights-and-events/insights/2021/04/oatly-milk-made-for-huma ns-decision-confirms-that-a-memorable-slogan-can-be-a-trade-mark
On the post: Crime-Reporting App Citizen Apparently Attempting To Get Into The Law Enforcement Business
Brilliant
Soon Republicans will propose to defund the system and instead give citizens vouchers to buy the required services from their own preferred provider. Oh wait, was that only for education?
On the post: eBay To Let Governments Pull Down Listings Automatically; What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Reasons unknown
Reasons unknown, or quite well known. TERREG was approved and will become active in one year. Whatever any official in any EU member states bother to declare "terrorist content" will need to be removed within 1 h. So Europol and friends will gain a "delete" button on most of the web.
https://edri.org/our-work/european-parliament-confirms-new-online-censorship-powers/
Of course authorities would never abuse this power to work around the pesky criteria of other processes for counterfeit items, copyright infringements and whatnot.
On the post: Trump Shows Why He Doesn't Need Twitter Or Facebook, As He Launches His Own Twitter-Like Microblog
Re: Re: Blogging is back
Ideally. Or just "free software". But I didn't want to assume T's website has RSS or anything. Using vanilla Wordpress would have been best, so I'm not surprised they seem to be doing something else.
On the post: Trump Shows Why He Doesn't Need Twitter Or Facebook, As He Launches His Own Twitter-Like Microblog
Blogging is back
Nice! It only took some 15 years and countless disasters, but maybe at some point people will realise that there was nothing liberating about posting to walled gardens like Facebook, Instagram or Twitter rather than to the open web, and everyone can just happily go back to the vastly superior technologies of the earlier 2000s and late 1990s.
On the post: FBI Flexes Rule 41 Powers, Uses Remote Access Technique To Neutralize Compromised Software All Over The US
Do as we say
This is so typical. Three-letter agency accuses $foreign_competitor of large-scale asset occupation; proceeds days later to do the same. Proof of the supposed original action is never found, but the magnitude of the "reaction" is such that it can't even be hidden.
On the post: It's Apparently Bipartisan To Threaten To Punish Companies Via Antitrust Law For Speech You Don't Like
McConnell and "consequences"
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-georgia-mcconnell/stay-out-of-politics-republican-lead er-mcconnell-tells-u-s-ceos-warns-of-consequences-idUSKBN2BS1R8
I wonder what "consequences". Maybe McConnell will support Yellen's corporate taxation plans? :-)
On the post: Senator Elizabeth Warren Goes Over The Line; Threatens To Punish Amazon For 'Snotty Tweets'
Not a threat
The conversation is silly, but I just don't see the supposed "threat" by Warren. Beyond the rhetoric, she's just reiterating her two usual points, that big corporations:
1) write the laws to benefit themselves;
2) strong-arm the politicians by various methods (including money and positive or negative publicity).
You may agree or not with those propositions. When it comes to Australia and Murdoch, however, we all seem to agree that it happens.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210222/23213246298/facebook-caves-to-australia-will-res tore-links-after-government-gives-it-more-time-to-negotiate-paying-news-links.shtml
Warren has some proposals to change the situation, does any of them propose to write a law which name-calls Amazon? I didn't see any. What she wrote would sound worse if she were in an executive position to advance targeted action against Amazon. You wouldn't want a FTC member or federal judge to look partial like that.
On the post: AT&T Spins Off DirecTV After Losing Billions On Its TV Dreams
Out of sight, out of mind
This is merely a way to hide the bigger problems ahead from its shareholders. As Bloomberg's Tara Lachapelle noted:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-25/at-t-ditches-directv-to-make-room-for- 5g-streaming-debt
On the post: Apple Settles Trademark Opposition With PrePear Recipe App After The Latter Makes A Barely Perceptible Change In Logo
Fig leaf
Someone needed cover.
On the post: The Bizarre Reaction To Facebook's Decision To Get Out Of The News Business In Australia
Re: Re: Difference in Australia
Easy: Murdoch.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/19/kevin-rudd-says-australian-politicia ns-frightened-of-murdoch-media-beast-in-senate-inquiry
On the post: The Bizarre Reaction To Facebook's Decision To Get Out Of The News Business In Australia
Re: Re: Re: The letter of the law
Yes, something like that. I wonder how confident Satya Nadella is that Microsoft won't be next, if there's a new PM.
On the post: The Bizarre Reaction To Facebook's Decision To Get Out Of The News Business In Australia
Re: The letter of the law
The draft of the law runs to 58 pages...
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result ?bId=r6652
https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r6652_third-reps/toc_pdf/ 20177b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf
Contrary to what written in the article, Google and Facebook do not seem to be mentioned explicitly, unless it was in some attachment I missed:
«(1) The bargaining news business representative for a registered news
business may notify a responsible digital platform corporation for a
designated digital platform service that it wishes to bargain over
one or more specified issues relating to the registered news
business’ covered news content made available by the designated
digital platform service.
(2) If the bargaining news business representative is the bargaining
news business representative for 2 or more registered news
businesses, a notification made for the purposes of subsection (1)
may relate to some or all of those registered news businesses.»
The forbidden content includes literally any website:
«core news content means content that reports, investigates or
explains:
(a) issues or events that are relevant in engaging Australians in
public debate and in informing democratic decision-making;
or
(b) current issues or events of public significance for Australians
at a local, regional or national level.
covered news content means content that is any of the following:
(a) core news content;
news business means:
(a) a news source; or
(b) a combination of news sources.
news source means any of the following, if it produces, and
publishes online, news content:
(a) a newspaper masthead;
(b) a magazine;
(c) a television program or channel;
(d) a radio program or channel;
(e) a website or part of a website;
(f) a program of audio or video content designed to be
distributed over the internet.»
Every link is forbidden:
«(1) For the purposes of this Part, a service makes content available if:
(a) the content is reproduced on the service, or is otherwise
placed on the service; or
(b) a link to the content is provided on the service; or
(c) an extract of the content is provided on the service.
(2) Subsection (1) does not limit, for the purposes of this Part, the
ways in which a service makes content available.»
Next >>