Your second question is an absurd appeal to the extremes and not worthy of a response. Your first question already has been answered by an AC: "That's... not how it works at all." You clearly do not understand the American legal system, the concept of "procedural posture", or how appeals work.
Simply put, your "aspirin" would only be useful to treat the headache of a cease-and-desist letter, if at all. TechDirt has a much more serious condition that requires a serious response. As numerous other commenters have recognized, TechDirt has made that response and has a reasonable chance of success.
Your advice is the equivalent of refusing a $10,000 drug in favor of some aspirin that won't help because you just should let the disease run its course and get a $100,000 surgery later. Your comment about an appeal is like saying that, if surgery fails, you always can get a $200,000 transplant.
If you only can afford the first option, by all means take it. If you can't afford option two combined with option three, or even option two standing alone, this may be your only chance for survival.
Re: Wanted: Better financial models for journalism
In your first comment: "I rest my case…" Your assertion that TechDirt is inconsequential is belied by your continued need to comment. If you actually believed TechDirt didn't matter, you wouldn't have bothered with your first comment, much less all of the others.
P.S. Are you making up for the absence of a donation by trying to drive higher-than-usual levels of activity on this post?
What if the FBI is unreasonably denying responses to requests it knows are relatively harmless so as to consume Leopold's time, leaving him less time to draft other more "harmful" requests?
Go ahead, file a lawsuit, fight us in court. When you win, we just give you the files we already gave to Masnick. And you've lost two years fighting us—two years you could have spent filing requests we really didn't want to have to deal with.
Excellent post, Mike. I had the same thoughts. I will add just a few.
People apparently no longer understand what it means to "break" a strike. If the taxi companies hired Uber drivers to drive their yellow cabs and fill the empty taxi lane at JFK Terminal 4, that would be "strike breaking". What happened here was merely consumers choosing a non-striking service.
Of course, Uber drivers were free to go on their own strike if they had wanted. But imagine if Uber had ordered a shutdown of its service. For one hour, it would force its drivers to receive no income, not by their choice but by Uber's. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people effectively would have their means of income taken away for an hour.
But isn't that what the taxi drivers did? No, they elected union bosses to make that decision for them. The taxi companies didn't decide for the drivers. And the drivers presumably got paid for the missed hour of work from the union account set aside for funding strikes. Equating the two is dishonest at worst and unfair at best.
Finally, if people decide to use some non-striking company for the same service and it renders a strike powerless, that merely demonstrates that the striking union has lost its market power. We all knew that Uber (and Lyft) had decimated the taxi industry. We just didn't realize how nearly complete that decimation was.
P.S. As the only permitted reaction to rational thought in today's marketplace of ideas apparently is to do something irrational, I must now #DeleteTechDirt. Sorry, Mike. Next time, don't be so rational.
P.P.S. I'll be back tomorrow ... just like all the protesters who will reinstall their Uber app the next time they need a ride.
Apparently the Heisenberg uncertainty principle applies to FOIA requests: the more you know about a document's location, the less you are allowed to know about its contents.
"Federal registration is the T.S.A. PreCheck of intellectual-property law: Not everyone has to get it, but if you do a lot of business, you probably should."
DHS has a trademark on TSA Pre√. Does this mean we've reached the bureaucratic singularity?
Never mind about the White House site. It doesn't include any pre-administration statements, only those once Obama was in office. It's been a long eight years.
"I know it's easy to be cynical about politics in this country," Obama said. "I understand that cynicism. But I've always said that when the American people are paying attention -- when they're involved and engaged and informed about what's going on in their government -- then good things happen. I've spent my life trying to open up the political process to people, and I believe we can do it again. And when we do that, we will have a government that listens to their voices and finally responds to their best hopes once more."
"Good things happen" means lawsuits and court orders? That would only be true if Obama were a lawyer. Oh. Never mind.
p.s.s. When leaving office, the Clinton administration stole all of the W's from the keyboards in the White House. Here's guessing the Obama administration steals the "Delete" keys.
On the post: Techdirt Survival Fund: I Support Journalism
Re: Following the angry mob, eh?
No problem! I have an invisible t-shirt to sell you.
On the post: Techdirt Survival Fund: I Support Journalism
Re: Re: Re: Strategy?
Simply put, your "aspirin" would only be useful to treat the headache of a cease-and-desist letter, if at all. TechDirt has a much more serious condition that requires a serious response. As numerous other commenters have recognized, TechDirt has made that response and has a reasonable chance of success.
On the post: Techdirt Survival Fund: I Support Journalism
Re: Strategy?
If you only can afford the first option, by all means take it. If you can't afford option two combined with option three, or even option two standing alone, this may be your only chance for survival.
On the post: Techdirt Survival Fund: I Support Journalism
Re: Wanted: Better financial models for journalism
P.S. Are you making up for the absence of a donation by trying to drive higher-than-usual levels of activity on this post?
On the post: Judge In Twitter Lawsuit Over Surveillance Disclosure Dings DOJ For Cut-And-Paste Legal Argument
Re: Friendly Reminder...
On the post: Iowa Appeals Court Doubles Down On Curbing Police Abuse Of 'Inventory Search' Warrant Exceptions
Just a Thought
On the post: Court Tells Melania Trump She Can't Sue The Daily Mail In Maryland, So She Refiles In New York
Double Jeopardy: Charles Harder's Stand-Up Routine
On the post: Federal Court Basically Says It's Okay To Copyright Parts Of Our Laws
Regression to the Mean...ing
On the post: Why Did The FBI Say It Couldn't Release Documents To 'FOIA Terrorist' Jason Leopold That It Released To Me Months Earlier?
Re: "THIS guy? Again?!"
Go ahead, file a lawsuit, fight us in court. When you win, we just give you the files we already gave to Masnick. And you've lost two years fighting us—two years you could have spent filing requests we really didn't want to have to deal with.
On the post: Why Did The FBI Say It Couldn't Release Documents To 'FOIA Terrorist' Jason Leopold That It Released To Me Months Earlier?
FBI Training Manual
"Going Dark" (internal): limiting responses to, or denying outright, FOIA requests
On the post: Here's What Happened When The Dutch Secret Service Tried To Recruit A Tor Admin
Post Hole Digger
On the post: The Massive Overreaction To Uber's Response To JFK Protests
Irrational Numbers
People apparently no longer understand what it means to "break" a strike. If the taxi companies hired Uber drivers to drive their yellow cabs and fill the empty taxi lane at JFK Terminal 4, that would be "strike breaking". What happened here was merely consumers choosing a non-striking service.
Of course, Uber drivers were free to go on their own strike if they had wanted. But imagine if Uber had ordered a shutdown of its service. For one hour, it would force its drivers to receive no income, not by their choice but by Uber's. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people effectively would have their means of income taken away for an hour.
But isn't that what the taxi drivers did? No, they elected union bosses to make that decision for them. The taxi companies didn't decide for the drivers. And the drivers presumably got paid for the missed hour of work from the union account set aside for funding strikes. Equating the two is dishonest at worst and unfair at best.
Finally, if people decide to use some non-striking company for the same service and it renders a strike powerless, that merely demonstrates that the striking union has lost its market power. We all knew that Uber (and Lyft) had decimated the taxi industry. We just didn't realize how nearly complete that decimation was.
P.S. As the only permitted reaction to rational thought in today's marketplace of ideas apparently is to do something irrational, I must now #DeleteTechDirt. Sorry, Mike. Next time, don't be so rational.
P.P.S. I'll be back tomorrow ... just like all the protesters who will reinstall their Uber app the next time they need a ride.
On the post: Legal Threats By Charles Harder & Shiva Ayyadurai Targeting More Speech
All you need to do is...
On the post: Database CIA Claimed Too Difficult To Compile For FOIA Requesters Released In Full On CIA Website
Database Relativity
On the post: Supreme Court Delves Into Question Of Whether Or Not You Can Trademark 'Disparaging' Terms
Bureaucratic Singularity
DHS has a trademark on TSA Pre√. Does this mean we've reached the bureaucratic singularity?
http://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn86107248&docId=ORC20140701005456#docIn dex=0&page=1
On the post: DOJ, Obama Administration Fight Order Requiring The Full CIA Torture Report To Be Turned Over To The Court
Re: You've Got a Good Thing Coming
On the post: DOJ, Obama Administration Fight Order Requiring The Full CIA Torture Report To Be Turned Over To The Court
You've Got a Good Thing Coming
"I know it's easy to be cynical about politics in this country," Obama said. "I understand that cynicism. But I've always said that when the American people are paying attention -- when they're involved and engaged and informed about what's going on in their government -- then good things happen. I've spent my life trying to open up the political process to people, and I believe we can do it again. And when we do that, we will have a government that listens to their voices and finally responds to their best hopes once more."
"Good things happen" means lawsuits and court orders? That would only be true if Obama were a lawyer. Oh. Never mind.
p.s. This quote came from http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=93244, because the White House archives only go back to 2009. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-and-releases?term_node_tid_depth=41&page=117 5 Hmm.
p.s.s. When leaving office, the Clinton administration stole all of the W's from the keyboards in the White House. Here's guessing the Obama administration steals the "Delete" keys.
On the post: DOJ, Obama Administration Fight Order Requiring The Full CIA Torture Report To Be Turned Over To The Court
Re: Re: Offending the Monkeys
On the post: FTC Sues D-Link For Pretending To Give A Damn About Hardware Security
Wordsmithing
Maybe we should call them "shlackers"...
On the post: Software Copyright Litigation After Oracle v. Google
Which brings us back to D'oh
Next >>