I don't see any problem with this, when the police have an arrest warrant and a search warrant.
It could even be a regular part of an arrest warrant, if the investigators have probable cause that specific evidence related to the activity for which the warrant is issued is on the phone.
But this sounds as if the police are arresting someone in order to do a fishing expedition on everything the phone can access. They want not just the phone and text history, but unfettered access to all online accounts.
It's fine for a trade name or trademark to be protected in the original context. But it shouldn't automatically be protected when the business is expanded, either geographically or in breadth of offering.
When a company starts filing objections, that's a good time to review if their original trademark circumstances still apply.
This sounds like a specific enough set of information to get discovery. Perhaps quite limited discovery, narrowly tailored to the source code or configuration identified as similar and thus might be copied.
That discovery should basically settle the case.
Either there was obvious copying, which should result in a settlement negotiation. Or there was no obvious copying, and there might be quibble over similarity that probably shouldn't end up in a full trail.
First of all, remember that aluminum foil works well to block radio waves, but it does nothing to block mind control rays. You need tin foil to block that. But the government long ago secretly banned tin foil, using the rays to cause aluminum foil to be substituted in every application.
Back to the point at hand. I don't know why these people are getting press. This is a a specific feature of many modern audio subsystems. It's ubiquitous on mobile SoCs (phone and tablet chips). It's used to automatically adapt to the incompatible plugs of mono earphones, stereo headphones, mono headsets (w/ mic) and stereo headsets. Some even support uncommon connections such as stereo microphones, digital audio, Rx/Tx serial connections, and combined optical digital audio (an optical fiber or IR LED/receiver on the very tip of the 1/8" plug).
I've seen "ticket mill" traffic stops, with one police officer standing in the middle of the lane, waving over cars, and several others writing tickets. They are done in under 5 minutes.
To confirm my memory, I did a quick search. That brought up a story from Tigard OR where the police department credited an automated ticket printing system dropped their average ticket writing time from 6 minutes to 3 minutes.
Taking 19+ minutes to not quite finish issuing a citation is clearly prolonging the stop.
In Baltimore they apparently used a hand-carried money order, which provides some deniability. There is undoubtedly some courthouse video, but that evidence might not stand on its own.
But a check.. I can only guess it's with the thought that anything out of the ordinary might trigger suspicion.
Are they really claiming a trademark on a common descriptive word in their target market?
When I was involved in applying for trademarks we paid a specialty firm to produce a report. We ended up with a giant binder of potentially conflicting marks and names, which we needed to document as non-overlapping. There were a handful that did appear to conflict. In every case we found that the trademark claimed only those words in a specific font or when tied to unique elements of their mark. Which was carefully documented in case there was a later question.
Stronge accounting guidelines (GAAP) have been around in the U.S. for about a decade. The global version, IFRS, has lagged and had more holes, but is now well established.
My guess is that the reason they haven't gotten an accounting in at least two years is that no one will put their professional status at risk by signing off on the fiction.
Prior to a decade ago, an accountant could have claimed that some rules were ambiguous or open to interpretation. Then they could claim that they were using a now-blatantly-invalid structure during a transition period. Now they have no cover.
I expect that the first response will be a question of jurisdiction. The venue isn't proper because the original plaintiff or defendant does not live in the jurisdiction.
That's an advantage of using fictional parties in different jurisdictions. It's always the wrong venue.
I imagine attorney-client privilege will be thrown on the wall, but I can't see that sticking.
Questioning standing does have a chance of being considered, but I expect that a judge can find a sufficient relationship to move into basic discovery, especially if the judge suspects fraud.
The details differ, but medallions are usually permits issued for a nominal fee. That fee is generally considered an administrative fee, rather than a tax, sale, bond or investment.
Where medallions are transferable, the market for buying and selling them makes them appear superficially similar to a security, but that doesn't make them a security. They aren't a financial instrument. They don't represent ownership in a corporation. They don't represent a creditor relationship. They aren't an option to buy or sell.
I would argue that price of medallions proves that, in some areas, the taxi business is immensely profitable.
In New York City the price of medallions hit a $1M each. The net present value of the profit from operating a single cab was worth that much. That's profitable.
It's an excellent economic case study in profit capture. The medallions were unarguably fairly priced at the time. The market was established, active, and very well understood. There were both large-scale medallion holders that had access to investment fund, and individual drivers that obsessed over the dollar-by-dollar economics of becoming a owner.
The artificial limit and nature of the market concentrated all of the profit into that single artifice. That makes it trivial to accurately observe the profit.
A huge downside of the medallion 'ownership' system is that it transfers all of the wealth to the people leaving the system. People that got medallions for a nominal fee long ago retire to Florida on their windfall. People entering the system go deeply into debt for the artifice, funding that retirement, rather than making a capital investment into equipment or facilities. With a on-the-edge debt, a medallion purchaser wants to maximize the return and runs the cab 24 hours a day, which results in lots of wasted no-fare hours for low-paid drivers.
I expect that this incident will result in the rapid evolution of the FCC's regulatory stance.
The FCC has the exclusive regulatory control ("competency" for you EU types) over the use of the airwaves and regulation of transmitting devices in the U.S. That includes the exclusive right to prohibit and limit transmitting devices.
I'm guessing that they will re-write rules to make that clear, and to provide specific areas where they cede their authority (rather than leave ambiguity if they have the authority). Exceptions will include listed areas where all transmitting devices are allowed to be banned for safety reasons: certain areas of hospitals (although it is questionable if that is technically required), on aircraft (again questionable), prisons (although prohibiting contraband should cover that), areas being prepared with explosives, and parts of the federal government exempt from FCC rules (the US DoD cooperates with the FCC, but does not need to follow the rules).
They will specifically state the banning other devices so that your devices work better is usurping their exclusive authority. Banning devices for safety reasons will be a narrowly interpreted, especially if you want to use transmitting devices while banning everyone else.
There is a fresh urgency to clarify the rules, since this case might be opening the floodgates to every contract, ticket and venue purporting to be able to regulate how you can use the public airwaves.
From the pictures of the shot-up car, it was a 1980's-era car (squared-off grill, rectangular sealed-beam headlights). That makes it likely using a carburetor. A backfire is certainly likely. Bump up the chance since this type and era of car is in the still in the 'junker' category rather than being a well-tended classic.
The are expenses might have cost the defendant far more than you might expect.
It's difficult to put a cost on spending four unjustified days in jail. So I won't. But I did note that they waited to arrest him until the Friday before Easter. That certainly was specifically timed so that he would have to spend the Easter weekend in jail before receiving a bail hearing. That is egregious behavior when there was no urgency to arrest someone for this non-violent 'offense'.
He was released on supervised probation. Many of those programs require paying for the 'service', including random court fees, paying for appointments with a probation officer, and paying for frequent drug tests. These fees must typically be paid in advance, and won't be returned if you are found not guilty.
The problem wasn't simply that the police pulled the car over for a common occurrence. It was that the non-infraction was then used as a pretext for a search.
As for one of the resident troll's comments: if the law is so complicated that a trained law enforcement officer needs a lawyer to ride along, that's an indictment of the law, LEO training, or police intellect.
I'm sure they are especially interested in the sales records of the items taken.
I'm guessing that the vast majority will be listed as 'discarded', or sold for a nominal amount to an insider. If they are discovered later, those involved will just claim they were retrieved from the trash.
My understanding is that legal documents, contracts and courts filings, are generally excluded from copyright protection. They are functional documents intended to be disseminated.
This case is different than the usual 'you copied my stuff (that I released to the public)'. The draft was copied before it was filed. That makes it pretty much the same as copying fiction. Well, that might be the wrong way to put it. But an unsubmitted draft it was clearly wasn't a legal instrument at that point.
On the post: UK Police Circumventing Cellphone Encryption By 'Mugging' Suspects While Their Phones Are Unlocked
I don't see a problem with this, with a warrant
It could even be a regular part of an arrest warrant, if the investigators have probable cause that specific evidence related to the activity for which the warrant is issued is on the phone.
But this sounds as if the police are arresting someone in order to do a fishing expedition on everything the phone can access. They want not just the phone and text history, but unfettered access to all online accounts.
On the post: Who Gets To Trademark Iceland?
The problem is expansion..
When a company starts filing objections, that's a good time to review if their original trademark circumstances still apply.
On the post: Appeals Court Dumps Infringement Lawsuit Against EA After Plaintiff Fails To Produce Evidence
This sounds like a specific enough set of information to get discovery. Perhaps quite limited discovery, narrowly tailored to the source code or configuration identified as similar and thus might be copied.
That discovery should basically settle the case.
Either there was obvious copying, which should result in a settlement negotiation. Or there was no obvious copying, and there might be quibble over similarity that probably shouldn't end up in a full trail.
On the post: Border Patrol Stops Journalist From Heading To Dakota Pipeline Protests, Searches All Of His Electronic Devices
Inalienable rights apply to all men
On the post: Your Earbuds Can Be Made Into Microphones With Just A Bit Of Malware
Back to the point at hand. I don't know why these people are getting press. This is a a specific feature of many modern audio subsystems. It's ubiquitous on mobile SoCs (phone and tablet chips). It's used to automatically adapt to the incompatible plugs of mono earphones, stereo headphones, mono headsets (w/ mic) and stereo headsets. Some even support uncommon connections such as stereo microphones, digital audio, Rx/Tx serial connections, and combined optical digital audio (an optical fiber or IR LED/receiver on the very tip of the 1/8" plug).
On the post: Another State Court Says Speedy Fourth Amendment Violations Are Still Just Fourth Amendment Violations
Reasonable time for a ticketed traffic stop?
To confirm my memory, I did a quick search. That brought up a story from Tigard OR where the police department credited an automated ticket printing system dropped their average ticket writing time from 6 minutes to 3 minutes.
Taking 19+ minutes to not quite finish issuing a citation is clearly prolonging the stop.
On the post: Federal Judge Now Taking A Closer Look At Bogus Libel Lawsuits Filed By Unscrupulous Reputation Management Companies
They used a check?
That's pretty bold.
In Baltimore they apparently used a hand-carried money order, which provides some deniability. There is undoubtedly some courthouse video, but that evidence might not stand on its own.
But a check.. I can only guess it's with the thought that anything out of the ordinary might trigger suspicion.
On the post: Huge Casino Threatens Small Blues Club For Using The Word 'Live' In Its Name
"Live!" is not the same as "Live"
When I was involved in applying for trademarks we paid a specialty firm to produce a report. We ended up with a giant binder of potentially conflicting marks and names, which we needed to document as non-overlapping. There were a handful that did appear to conflict. In every case we found that the trademark claimed only those words in a specific font or when tied to unique elements of their mark. Which was carefully documented in case there was a later question.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Back In Court: How Has Spinal Tap Only Earned $81 In Merchandise Sales For Its Creators?
GAAP makes 'Hollywood Accounting' untenable
My guess is that the reason they haven't gotten an accounting in at least two years is that no one will put their professional status at risk by signing off on the fiction.
Prior to a decade ago, an accountant could have claimed that some rules were ambiguous or open to interpretation. Then they could claim that they were using a now-blatantly-invalid structure during a transition period. Now they have no cover.
On the post: Pissed Consumer Sues Reputation Management Firms Over Their Bogus Lawsuit/Fake Defendant/Takedown Scams
Jurisdiction?
That's an advantage of using fictional parties in different jurisdictions. It's always the wrong venue.
I imagine attorney-client privilege will be thrown on the wall, but I can't see that sticking.
Questioning standing does have a chance of being considered, but I expect that a judge can find a sufficient relationship to move into basic discovery, especially if the judge suspects fraud.
On the post: Judge Posner Smacks Around Cabbies For Thinking That Cities Allowing Uber Violates Their 'Property Rights'
How is a medallion a security?
That statement is very wrong.
The details differ, but medallions are usually permits issued for a nominal fee. That fee is generally considered an administrative fee, rather than a tax, sale, bond or investment.
Where medallions are transferable, the market for buying and selling them makes them appear superficially similar to a security, but that doesn't make them a security. They aren't a financial instrument. They don't represent ownership in a corporation. They don't represent a creditor relationship. They aren't an option to buy or sell.
On the post: Judge Posner Smacks Around Cabbies For Thinking That Cities Allowing Uber Violates Their 'Property Rights'
Competition is tough in the taxi business?
In New York City the price of medallions hit a $1M each. The net present value of the profit from operating a single cab was worth that much. That's profitable.
It's an excellent economic case study in profit capture. The medallions were unarguably fairly priced at the time. The market was established, active, and very well understood. There were both large-scale medallion holders that had access to investment fund, and individual drivers that obsessed over the dollar-by-dollar economics of becoming a owner.
The artificial limit and nature of the market concentrated all of the profit into that single artifice. That makes it trivial to accurately observe the profit.
A huge downside of the medallion 'ownership' system is that it transfers all of the wealth to the people leaving the system. People that got medallions for a nominal fee long ago retire to Florida on their windfall. People entering the system go deeply into debt for the artifice, funding that retirement, rather than making a capital investment into equipment or facilities. With a on-the-edge debt, a medallion purchaser wants to maximize the return and runs the cab 24 hours a day, which results in lots of wasted no-fare hours for low-paid drivers.
On the post: The FCC Wants To Know Why Journalists Had To Pay $200 For WiFi At Presidential Debate
The FCC has the exclusive regulatory control ("competency" for you EU types) over the use of the airwaves and regulation of transmitting devices in the U.S. That includes the exclusive right to prohibit and limit transmitting devices.
I'm guessing that they will re-write rules to make that clear, and to provide specific areas where they cede their authority (rather than leave ambiguity if they have the authority). Exceptions will include listed areas where all transmitting devices are allowed to be banned for safety reasons: certain areas of hospitals (although it is questionable if that is technically required), on aircraft (again questionable), prisons (although prohibiting contraband should cover that), areas being prepared with explosives, and parts of the federal government exempt from FCC rules (the US DoD cooperates with the FCC, but does not need to follow the rules).
They will specifically state the banning other devices so that your devices work better is usurping their exclusive authority. Banning devices for safety reasons will be a narrowly interpreted, especially if you want to use transmitting devices while banning everyone else.
There is a fresh urgency to clarify the rules, since this case might be opening the floodgates to every contract, ticket and venue purporting to be able to regulate how you can use the public airwaves.
On the post: Court Dumps Cops' Complaint They Were Unfairly Treated After Shooting Two Unarmed Suspects 47 Times
Backfire vs. afterfire
Backfires through the intake can definitely sound like gunshots.
On the post: Court Dumps Cops' Complaint They Were Unfairly Treated After Shooting Two Unarmed Suspects 47 Times
Re: Stupid quesiton:
On the post: Man Arrested For Parodying Police Department's Facebook Page Sues City, PD Over Rights Violations
How much did this cost the defendant?
It's difficult to put a cost on spending four unjustified days in jail. So I won't. But I did note that they waited to arrest him until the Friday before Easter. That certainly was specifically timed so that he would have to spend the Easter weekend in jail before receiving a bail hearing. That is egregious behavior when there was no urgency to arrest someone for this non-violent 'offense'.
He was released on supervised probation. Many of those programs require paying for the 'service', including random court fees, paying for appointments with a probation officer, and paying for frequent drug tests. These fees must typically be paid in advance, and won't be returned if you are found not guilty.
On the post: Cop To Court: This Normal Behavior I Literally Observe All The Time Is Suspicious Behavior Justifying A Traffic Stop
Don't lose sight of the problem
As for one of the resident troll's comments: if the law is so complicated that a trained law enforcement officer needs a lawyer to ride along, that's an indictment of the law, LEO training, or police intellect.
On the post: Before Forfeiture Is Finalized, Sheriff Racks Up 54k Miles On Seized Vehicle, Sells It To Private Buyer
Inventory and sales records.
I'm guessing that the vast majority will be listed as 'discarded', or sold for a nominal amount to an insider. If they are discovered later, those involved will just claim they were retrieved from the trash.
On the post: Before Forfeiture Is Finalized, Sheriff Racks Up 54k Miles On Seized Vehicle, Sells It To Private Buyer
Inventory and sales records.
On the post: Newegg Sues Over Copied Legal Filing; Judge Rules That It's Not Fair Use
My understanding is that legal documents, contracts and courts filings, are generally excluded from copyright protection. They are functional documents intended to be disseminated.
This case is different than the usual 'you copied my stuff (that I released to the public)'. The draft was copied before it was filed. That makes it pretty much the same as copying fiction. Well, that might be the wrong way to put it. But an unsubmitted draft it was clearly wasn't a legal instrument at that point.
Next >>