That reminds me of a story I read once, that I HOPE was a joke...
A customer gets a shop clerk to help them take their groceries out and put them in their car. While loading the groceries, the customer leaves their keys on the front seat, and closes the door, reflexively locking it as they close it -- then realizes the keys are inside. The customer begins to panic, and in their panic ignores the driver's side rear door that is still open, that the clerk is loading groceries into.
Customer: "Oh no, I locked my keys in the car!"
Clerk: "This door is still open."
Customer: "You don't understand, this is a disaster!"
Clerk: "But the door is open, you can just..."
Customer, irate because clerk isn't reacting, slams the rear door.
Customer: "There! Are you happy now? The door is shut. Now you can pay attention to my serious problem instead of blathering about nonsense!"
But...given that due process is how you find out if someone is an illegal alien criminal fuckwad in the first place, how would you stop the legal system from throwing everyone, you included, back across the border?
Re: Seems like a simple enough solution for politicians with spi
The city owns the streets. Technically every criminal in the city is hanging out on city property and using it to accomplish their illegal actions. Someone ought to seize the city.
The one to not be arbitrarily discriminated against. According to the complaint, Uber is being burdened with requirements and limitations other similar businesses are not.
Police are not exempt from arrest, and consider dragnet policing to be a viable tactic. But isn't it funny how if you applied that tactic to them, they'd scream their rights were being violated?
Fun fact: It's all but unheard of for a police department these days to not be subject to the RICO Act, if a prosecutor cares to go after them using it. Don't believe me? Just look up how many times a cop was accused of wrongdoing, the department stated that cop was completely in compliance with department policy, only for a court to later rule he had broken the law.
But that would be ILLEGAL! Only a government can do that! It's evil and immoral and unethical for individuals to do it, but it's somehow okay when a large group does it.
Suppose you are the landlord of an apartment building. You advertise that you have good security and residents will be safe there.
One day, someone breaks into and robs one of your tenant's apartments. Your reputation for keeping your customers safe has been harmed by the robber's actions, which are plainly illegal under the interpretation of the laws the government uses.
No direct harm is done to you, but your reputation takes a big hit as a result of the crime, which causes you financial harm -- nobody wants to live in a high-security building with no ability to protect them. Shouldn't you be able to sue the robber for that?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a problematic expansion of the law.
By that logic, if you own a high-security apartment building, then someone breaking into one of the apartments and robbing it is none of your business, even if it harms your reputation.
I doubt any government bureaucrat wants to set a precedent that a warrant or subpoena or other statutorily-mandatory production of information compels the recipient to spend exorbitant sums to invent a way to comply where no such method already exists.
But that seems to be exactly where AG Barr is heading. Bets on whether the precedent he wants to carve out somehow applies only to government orders, even though laws supposedly apply to everyone?
The Constitution might not be, but statutes routinely are, and it is a federal felony to conspire to deprive someone of constitutional, statutory or civil rights under color of law.
It's one of the few laws it's easier for a cop or judge or mayor to break than for a private citizen.
Re: This is working exactly how RIAA wants it to...
These decisions won't make RIAA happy for very long, since there's a fundamental problem with the viewpoint that copyright protects ideas not expressions. And once the courts notice, then combined with recent precedents it has the potential to destroy just about all music copyrights, everywhere.
Music is iterative.
The thing that illegal copying and theft have in common is that neither one confers ownership. If courts are ruling that the current generation of musicians are violating copyright because they utilize new expressions of the same idea, then those older expressions of those ideas cannot be copyrighted either, because they in turn infringe the copyrights of older expressions!
And if copyright protects ideas, not expressions, the fact that some of those protected ideas are older than their creator's life plus 70 years combined with copyright violation not conferring ownership means that NOTHING is copyrighted!
You could use this to take down the Democratic or Republican National Conventions, if there is no requirement to prove knowledge and any member of their respective parties has ever hired a prostitute.
You could even sue the US government, since having ground to stand on facilitates sex trafficking and the US government owns at least one piece of ground such trafficking crossed.
This. Even if a state or the federal government were to enact statutes that abolish the death penalty, a treason conviction could still result in an execution because it's actually written into the Constitution.
On the post: Copyright As Censorship: Gun Rights Advocate Gets Video Taken Down With Bogus Copyright Claim
Re: When Gun Nuts Go On About How They Revere The “Constitutio
So, I'm curious. What 'other parts' of the Constitution is supporting the Second Amendment in conflict with? I can't find any. Citation please?
On the post: Turkish Government Finally Lifts Wikipedia Ban
Re: I'll just leave this here
I came here to ask if that was accessible from Turkey on Wikipedia. Glad I'm not the only one!
On the post: FBI's Own Actions Likely Made Farook's iPhone Data Inaccessible
Re: Front door
That reminds me of a story I read once, that I HOPE was a joke...
A customer gets a shop clerk to help them take their groceries out and put them in their car. While loading the groceries, the customer leaves their keys on the front seat, and closes the door, reflexively locking it as they close it -- then realizes the keys are inside. The customer begins to panic, and in their panic ignores the driver's side rear door that is still open, that the clerk is loading groceries into.
Customer: "Oh no, I locked my keys in the car!"
Clerk: "This door is still open."
Customer: "You don't understand, this is a disaster!"
Clerk: "But the door is open, you can just..."
Customer, irate because clerk isn't reacting, slams the rear door.
Customer: "There! Are you happy now? The door is shut. Now you can pay attention to my serious problem instead of blathering about nonsense!"
On the post: DHS Move Ahead With Plan To Harvest DNA Samples From Nearly Everyone Detained By ICE And CBP
Re: Re: Re:
But...given that due process is how you find out if someone is an illegal alien criminal fuckwad in the first place, how would you stop the legal system from throwing everyone, you included, back across the border?
On the post: City Of Dallas Shuts Down Business Of Man Who Called Cops Over 100 Times In 20 Months To Deal With Criminals Near His Car Wash
Re: Seems like a simple enough solution for politicians with spi
The city owns the streets. Technically every criminal in the city is hanging out on city property and using it to accomplish their illegal actions. Someone ought to seize the city.
On the post: Uber Wins Dubious Honor Of Being First Big Tech Company To Bully A Small Nation Using Corporate Sovereignty
Re:
The one to not be arbitrarily discriminated against. According to the complaint, Uber is being burdened with requirements and limitations other similar businesses are not.
On the post: Immunity Just Barely Denied To Cop Who Claimed Driving A Beat-Up Car And Paying For Purchases Is Suspicious Behavior
Re: Re: Criminals breathing and old cars.
Police are not exempt from arrest, and consider dragnet policing to be a viable tactic. But isn't it funny how if you applied that tactic to them, they'd scream their rights were being violated?
Fun fact: It's all but unheard of for a police department these days to not be subject to the RICO Act, if a prosecutor cares to go after them using it. Don't believe me? Just look up how many times a cop was accused of wrongdoing, the department stated that cop was completely in compliance with department policy, only for a court to later rule he had broken the law.
On the post: Appeals Court: Not A Crime To Say A Mayor Should Get His Ass Capped
Re:
While it might be incitement to violence, that wasn't what the author of the note was charged with. It's certainly NOT harassment.
On the post: Malware Marketer NSO Group Looks Like It's Blowing Off Facebook's Lawsuit
Jursidiction?
I'm curious what jurisdiction a California court has over a company based in a foreign country with no local offices?
Wouldn't that be a lot like getting a court to issue a global takedown order?
On the post: Malware Marketer NSO Group Looks Like It's Blowing Off Facebook's Lawsuit
Re: It would seem more fitting...
But that would be ILLEGAL! Only a government can do that! It's evil and immoral and unethical for individuals to do it, but it's somehow okay when a large group does it.
On the post: Malware Marketer NSO Group Looks Like It's Blowing Off Facebook's Lawsuit
Re: Standing?
Suppose you are the landlord of an apartment building. You advertise that you have good security and residents will be safe there.
One day, someone breaks into and robs one of your tenant's apartments. Your reputation for keeping your customers safe has been harmed by the robber's actions, which are plainly illegal under the interpretation of the laws the government uses.
No direct harm is done to you, but your reputation takes a big hit as a result of the crime, which causes you financial harm -- nobody wants to live in a high-security building with no ability to protect them. Shouldn't you be able to sue the robber for that?
On the post: Malware Marketer NSO Group Looks Like It's Blowing Off Facebook's Lawsuit
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a problematic expansion of the law.
By that logic, if you own a high-security apartment building, then someone breaking into one of the apartments and robbing it is none of your business, even if it harms your reputation.
On the post: Malware Marketer NSO Group Looks Like It's Blowing Off Facebook's Lawsuit
Re: Re: Not a problematic expansion of the law.
No, but it might be nice to be able to sue someone under CFAA for HACKING your account.
On the post: Attorney General William Barr Says Apple Isn't Doing Enough To Let The DOJ Check Out A Dead Man's Phones
Precedent
I doubt any government bureaucrat wants to set a precedent that a warrant or subpoena or other statutorily-mandatory production of information compels the recipient to spend exorbitant sums to invent a way to comply where no such method already exists.
But that seems to be exactly where AG Barr is heading. Bets on whether the precedent he wants to carve out somehow applies only to government orders, even though laws supposedly apply to everyone?
On the post: Educator Sued Because Of Things A Journalist Wrote Collects $10,000 In Legal Fees From Idiot Plaintiff
Re: Re: NONE
The Constitution might not be, but statutes routinely are, and it is a federal felony to conspire to deprive someone of constitutional, statutory or civil rights under color of law.
It's one of the few laws it's easier for a cop or judge or mayor to break than for a private citizen.
On the post: How Years Of Copyright Maximalism Is Now Killing Pop Music
Re: This is working exactly how RIAA wants it to...
These decisions won't make RIAA happy for very long, since there's a fundamental problem with the viewpoint that copyright protects ideas not expressions. And once the courts notice, then combined with recent precedents it has the potential to destroy just about all music copyrights, everywhere.
Music is iterative.
The thing that illegal copying and theft have in common is that neither one confers ownership. If courts are ruling that the current generation of musicians are violating copyright because they utilize new expressions of the same idea, then those older expressions of those ideas cannot be copyrighted either, because they in turn infringe the copyrights of older expressions!
And if copyright protects ideas, not expressions, the fact that some of those protected ideas are older than their creator's life plus 70 years combined with copyright violation not conferring ownership means that NOTHING is copyrighted!
On the post: Civil FOSTA Suits Start Showing Up In Court; Prove That FOSTA Supporters Were 100% Wrong About Who Would Be Targeted
Re:
Not just the FDA either, you could sue Congress because it has enacted laws that make it possible for someone to engage in sex trafficking.
On the post: Civil FOSTA Suits Start Showing Up In Court; Prove That FOSTA Supporters Were 100% Wrong About Who Would Be Targeted
Re: Re:
You could use this to take down the Democratic or Republican National Conventions, if there is no requirement to prove knowledge and any member of their respective parties has ever hired a prostitute.
You could even sue the US government, since having ground to stand on facilitates sex trafficking and the US government owns at least one piece of ground such trafficking crossed.
On the post: This Week In Free Speech Hypocrites: 'Free Speech' Supporter Sheila Gunn Reid Gleefully Sues Someone For Calling Her A Neo-Nazi
Re: Re: Re: Her speech was clearly free.
It would indeed. If exercising a constitutionally-protected right is grounds for a lawsuit all by itself, then all such rights would be as well.
On the post: Turkey Continues Its Attempt To Pass China In The 'Most Journalists Jailed' Category
Re: Re: Re:
This. Even if a state or the federal government were to enact statutes that abolish the death penalty, a treason conviction could still result in an execution because it's actually written into the Constitution.
Next >>