Do we know that someone actually holds a valid copyright?
"My client, an defined purpose trust in Nevis, holds the copyright. It was assigned by a family member who wants to remain anonymous -- the scrawled signature is right here, counter-signed by Mr. Cooper. Just make the check payable to my law firm."
After this I'll be able to say and write 'Hitler', but I won't be able to whisper 'M*******'. And Google won't be able to index any site that allows me to post 'M*******'.
Mason, why is it considered OK for a business to be able to buy fake positive reviews but it is "defamation and also tortious interference of business" when there are negative reviews?
No one has standing to sue over the fake positive reviews. Even with standing, there it would be an overwhelming cost for a trivial improvement. But a business should be able to track down and financially ruin anyone that posts a negative review?
I'm sympathetic to the issue of false negative reviews.
There are enough fake positive reviews on Yelp that there must be at least a few fake negative ones.
But being sympathetic to the issue doesn't mean I would want a world where reviews couldn't be anonymous.
I think that this case was decided correctly. Venue was not correct.
Even if venue had been correct, the case appears to have another fatal flaw. They didn't plead that the review was, at its core, false. The claim was that they couldn't match the review to their customer record, and that therefore the review might be libel.
In other words they weren't claiming that the defamatory statement wasn't true. They were just claiming that some of the irrelevant details might not be accurate. And that they should be able to strip the anonymity from the reviewer because of that.
Well, California already has a state water system that transports water from northern California to the south. It's not a pipeline. That wouldn't move nearly enough water to make a difference. It's mostly canals with a few tunnels.
And pumping that water is already a significant consumer of energy in the state.
Desalinization plants are even energy hungry -- they would be massive energy users. And none of that energy would come from renewable sources. New energy consumption is always from fossil fuels.
Wow, I couldn't get past the statement about Internet prices.
"competition that has steadily driven prices down over the past two decades"
I pay less for content and get great value from services such as Netflix. In the past few months Waze has shown me that 'solved' problems such as maps could have major improvements.
I'm pay far, far more for Internet access than I did in the past, and it's much less reliable.
This will become like California's Proposition 65.
That required a notice of any toxic materials. But that's not well defined, and a business or building owner is strictly liable if there is an unknown hazard or a substance that is later decided to be hazardous.
It was quickly discovered that the quick way around this unlimited lawsuit open season was just to put notices everywhere. Many (most? nearly all?) commercial buildings have a Prop 65 notice posted somewhere. It doesn't mean there is toxic materials. It doesn't really mean anything. It's pretty much like putting up garlic over the doorway just in case there are vampires.
Rather than admit "yeah, we didn't think that through" and withdraw the specific law (which wouldn't require a withdraw vote on the proposition) California just pretends it's effective. The environmentalists claim a win and pat themselves on the back. Everyone loses a little bit except for the signmakers.
Shipping luggage separately from a flight sounds good in theory, but has major problems.
Two of the last three trips across the country have had canceled flights that left me overnight in Denver and Chicago. That's especially unlucky, but not exceptional. In both of those cases I was scheduled to spend one night in the destination city, have a morning meeting, then travel onward. By having my luggage with me I was able to both change clothes and reschedule my flights without having to deal with luggage left behind.
And what happens when your shipped luggage arrives a day or two late, after you have already left?
I'll posit a scenario: this guy came up with a way to rig the number-choosing side of the lottery, probably with a rootkit. He immediately wanted to see if it would work, so he bought a ticket, changed the security video frame record rate, and installed the rootkit.
Only after he does this, does he realize it's not a "dry run". He has already committed the crime. He left evidence. Rather than having time to complete the plan for the perfect crime, he is halfway in with no way to back out and no good endgame.
So he spends the next few months coming up with an approach to cash in the ticket. But it's a lot more difficult than he expected. There are plenty of ways to launder money if you have a big operation and a legitimate flow of money to hide under. But no good way to do a last-minute one-off.
He probably didn't have the contacts, but his best bet would probably have been someone looking to launder money. They would be willing to buy a winning lottery ticket in order to turn unexplainable piles of cash into legitimate income.
They are lawyers. Filing the suit cost them the filing fee and a little time to write up something that sounded plausible. Which might not have been much time, given that it was, to quote, a "threadbare recital of the cause of action".
To someone like Cooper, who was a caretaker in exchange for a rent-free cabin to live in, a lawsuit was a major event. It could (and perhaps did) financially ruin him. Even if it didn't, the possibility and uncertainty is hugely stressful.
I hope you mean a movie about Madagascar vanilla, and not Tahitian vanilla ice cream. And certainly the movie will avoid mentioning the villainy that is synthetic vanillin.
That's an astonishingly weak counterclaim. It almost looks as if there should be "" as part of the filing.
I suppose that it does check the box of filing a counterclaim, preventing the case from being unilaterally dismissed with the threat of refiling still existing.
A different viewpoint is that these companies want to reserve the economic benefit of globalization for themselves.
They have no problem with global outsourcing of call centers, post-production, animation, pressing DVDs, etc. Nor with routing revenue through unrelated countries to evade taxes. It all about having access to the lowest cost of production.
But these same companies are trying to limit consumers to buying only through tightly controlled distribution channels. Even if it's not their content, they want to block it -- they don't want consumers to have access to the world market.
We expect a worker in Seattle to compete with a worker in Thailand, and to take less pay if that's what it takes. But we want to enforce that the Seattle worker pays $250 for a textbook instead of $8, pays $15 for a DVD instead of under $1, and 20x for prescription drugs.
I thought that every porn site already had age verification in place? Isn't that why they ask you for your credit card number, just to verify your age? After, of course, showing you a few hard-core pictures.
I also have an idea for an interesting survey. Pay a bunch of teenaged boys to take multiple surveys. After about the tenth survey, I predict that you find that most of them have not only seen porn, but have actually starred in feature length movies. After the twentieth survey you'll find that 30% have injured themselves while having sex on a trapeze, while the other 70% successfully pulled it off.. with three girls at once.
If there is more than one reasonable way to interpret a statute, the interpretation should be obvious -- the court shouldn't be entertaining lawsuits targeting any of those reasonable interpretations.
The obvious meaning of "place of public accommodation" is a physical place. A place you can enter. Or has physical barriers to entry, such as high steps.
The police had a report of multiple people wounded by shotgun-wielding attackers, but waited an hour before actually approaching the building.
During that hour they avoided contact to avoid "tipping off" the putative attackers. What was the logic behind that? Because when you are holding hostages, you might think that the police are really there for the hostage situation next door?
On the post: Estate Of Joseph Goebbels Using Copyright To Demand Cash From New Biographer
"My client, an defined purpose trust in Nevis, holds the copyright. It was assigned by a family member who wants to remain anonymous -- the scrawled signature is right here, counter-signed by Mr. Cooper. Just make the check payable to my law firm."
On the post: Major Record Labels Use Lawsuit Against MP3Skull To Try To Backdoor In SOPA
After this I'll be able to say and write 'Hitler', but I won't be able to whisper 'M*******'. And Google won't be able to index any site that allows me to post 'M*******'.
On the post: Virginia's Top Court Refuses To Unmask Anonymous Yelp Reviewers, But Not For First Amendment Reasons
No one has standing to sue over the fake positive reviews. Even with standing, there it would be an overwhelming cost for a trivial improvement. But a business should be able to track down and financially ruin anyone that posts a negative review?
On the post: Virginia's Top Court Refuses To Unmask Anonymous Yelp Reviewers, But Not For First Amendment Reasons
There are enough fake positive reviews on Yelp that there must be at least a few fake negative ones.
But being sympathetic to the issue doesn't mean I would want a world where reviews couldn't be anonymous.
I think that this case was decided correctly. Venue was not correct.
Even if venue had been correct, the case appears to have another fatal flaw. They didn't plead that the review was, at its core, false. The claim was that they couldn't match the review to their customer record, and that therefore the review might be libel.
In other words they weren't claiming that the defamatory statement wasn't true. They were just claiming that some of the irrelevant details might not be accurate. And that they should be able to strip the anonymity from the reviewer because of that.
On the post: DailyDirt: Water, Water, Not Quite Everywhere...
Well, California already has a state water system that transports water from northern California to the south. It's not a pipeline. That wouldn't move nearly enough water to make a difference. It's mostly canals with a few tunnels.
And pumping that water is already a significant consumer of energy in the state.
Desalinization plants are even energy hungry -- they would be massive energy users. And none of that energy would come from renewable sources. New energy consumption is always from fossil fuels.
On the post: Presidential Hopeful Carly Fiorina Displays Astounding Ignorance In Slamming Net Neutrality
"competition that has steadily driven prices down over the past two decades"
I pay less for content and get great value from services such as Netflix. In the past few months Waze has shown me that 'solved' problems such as maps could have major improvements.
I'm pay far, far more for Internet access than I did in the past, and it's much less reliable.
On the post: California Bill Would Require Libraries Post Scary Warning Signs Not To Do Infringy Stuff With 3D Printers
That required a notice of any toxic materials. But that's not well defined, and a business or building owner is strictly liable if there is an unknown hazard or a substance that is later decided to be hazardous.
It was quickly discovered that the quick way around this unlimited lawsuit open season was just to put notices everywhere. Many (most? nearly all?) commercial buildings have a Prop 65 notice posted somewhere. It doesn't mean there is toxic materials. It doesn't really mean anything. It's pretty much like putting up garlic over the doorway just in case there are vampires.
Rather than admit "yeah, we didn't think that through" and withdraw the specific law (which wouldn't require a withdraw vote on the proposition) California just pretends it's effective. The environmentalists claim a win and pat themselves on the back. Everyone loses a little bit except for the signmakers.
On the post: TSA Agents Outwitted By Cory Doctorow's Unlocked, 'TSA-Safe' Suitcase
Two of the last three trips across the country have had canceled flights that left me overnight in Denver and Chicago. That's especially unlucky, but not exceptional. In both of those cases I was scheduled to spend one night in the destination city, have a morning meeting, then travel onward. By having my luggage with me I was able to both change clothes and reschedule my flights without having to deal with luggage left behind.
And what happens when your shipped luggage arrives a day or two late, after you have already left?
On the post: Former Security Director For Lottery Charged With Tampering Equipment Before Secretly Buying $14.3 Million Winning Ticket
Only after he does this, does he realize it's not a "dry run". He has already committed the crime. He left evidence. Rather than having time to complete the plan for the perfect crime, he is halfway in with no way to back out and no good endgame.
So he spends the next few months coming up with an approach to cash in the ticket. But it's a lot more difficult than he expected. There are plenty of ways to launder money if you have a big operation and a legitimate flow of money to hide under. But no good way to do a last-minute one-off.
He probably didn't have the contacts, but his best bet would probably have been someone looking to launder money. They would be willing to buy a winning lottery ticket in order to turn unexplainable piles of cash into legitimate income.
On the post: Court Dismisses Prenda's Ridiculous Defamation Lawsuit Against Internet Critics & Guy Whose Signature It Forged
They are lawyers. Filing the suit cost them the filing fee and a little time to write up something that sounded plausible. Which might not have been much time, given that it was, to quote, a "threadbare recital of the cause of action".
To someone like Cooper, who was a caretaker in exchange for a rent-free cabin to live in, a lawsuit was a major event. It could (and perhaps did) financially ruin him. Even if it didn't, the possibility and uncertainty is hugely stressful.
On the post: Hecklers Try To Veto University Screening Of 'American Sniper;' May Find Themselves Watching 'Paddington Bear' Instead
And is it gluten free? Vegan?
I know people that can be offended by *anything*.
On the post: Former Prenda Lawyer Hit With A $50,000 Counterclaim In ADA Shakedown Lawsuit
I suppose that it does check the box of filing a counterclaim, preventing the case from being unilaterally dismissed with the threat of refiling still existing.
On the post: Big Media Companies Insist That VPN Services Violate Copyright Law
They have no problem with global outsourcing of call centers, post-production, animation, pressing DVDs, etc. Nor with routing revenue through unrelated countries to evade taxes. It all about having access to the lowest cost of production.
But these same companies are trying to limit consumers to buying only through tightly controlled distribution channels. Even if it's not their content, they want to block it -- they don't want consumers to have access to the world market.
We expect a worker in Seattle to compete with a worker in Thailand, and to take less pay if that's what it takes. But we want to enforce that the Seattle worker pays $250 for a textbook instead of $8, pays $15 for a DVD instead of under $1, and 20x for prescription drugs.
On the post: Fighting Toddler 'Porn Addiction,' UK Lawmakers Demand Porn Sites Include Age Checks Or Face Closure
I also have an idea for an interesting survey. Pay a bunch of teenaged boys to take multiple surveys. After about the tenth survey, I predict that you find that most of them have not only seen porn, but have actually starred in feature length movies. After the twentieth survey you'll find that 30% have injured themselves while having sex on a trapeze, while the other 70% successfully pulled it off.. with three girls at once.
On the post: Quebec Looking To Force ISPs To Block Gambling Sites In Order To Protect Its Own State-Run Gambling Portal
Of course that is "initially selected". I'm sure every agency will soon want in on the action.
Remember kids, gambling is bad. Unless it's government-sponsored gambling. Then it's "for the children".
On the post: Two Court Rulings Completely Disagree With Each Other Over Whether Websites Need To Comply With Americans With Disabilities Act
The obvious meaning of "place of public accommodation" is a physical place. A place you can enter. Or has physical barriers to entry, such as high steps.
On the post: AT&T Shows Cupertino Precisely What Broadband Competition (Or The Lack Thereof) Looks Like
On the post: Cord Cutting Denial Is Alive And Well
We already have Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu Plus and Plex. We added an Ownzones channel this month, mostly for the Chromecast deal.
We are completely awash in available options. The topic of missing something on broadcast or cable TV never comes up.
And with all of content available, we are still paying far more to Comcast for their unreliable internet service than for all of these combined.
On the post: Maybe The Best Way To Stop All This Swatting Is To Have Fewer SWAT Teams?
The police had a report of multiple people wounded by shotgun-wielding attackers, but waited an hour before actually approaching the building.
During that hour they avoided contact to avoid "tipping off" the putative attackers. What was the logic behind that? Because when you are holding hostages, you might think that the police are really there for the hostage situation next door?
On the post: Blu Cigarettes Sues Blu Ale House Over Blu Logo
That was an allegation of criminal activity, albeit completely unspecified criminal activity.
Given that trademark conflicts are not criminal, I tend to disbelieve everything that posters writes. But it still appears to be slander.
Next >>