People who make their point of argument to be "offense" or something similar generally don't get it.
Sure there are people in the world who just cannot bear "foul language" or "being offended", but the funny thing is that i rarely ever see them in the places where someone decides to make the argument that "you just can't handle teh free speechz, grow up".
Same for "both sides trying to score points" idea. Lol, it's called a conversation. (And in fact, a little meta is needed here now and then.)
Schrödinger's Trump (Twitter account): A superposition of presidential and non-presidential states. Wavefunction only collapses when observed by the DOJ.
Until the libel laws were lightly reformed, UK was the venue shopping capital for that, and it didn't seem like you had to have any connection to the UK. (Or maybe just something very, very tenuous.)
Yup. It significantly raises the internet-only rate, and then they throw ridiculously low caps on it. So cord-cutters (i.e., people who still watch programs) are not going to make out at all, unless they watch little. It would pretty much suck even for me, and i don't watch much if anything.
With even higher rates, it will definitely have the effect they want.
Only after re-defining them as not Title II in the first place. I was expecting this very question. ISPs are exactly analogous to phone lines for the purposes of Title II. They were, in fact, the phone lines for ages. Just because cablecos started selling "extra" bandwidth on their coax as internet (and very poorly at that), and some were smart enough, briefly, to deploy fiber outside the backbone (and then proceeded to buy up the backbone as well), doesn't make the system, utility-wise, different from POTS. In fact, they are doing all the things AT&T was dismantled for, and they don't even have amazing research departments that bring us really good inventions and innovations. Maybe they don't manufacture their own user equipment and completely force you to use only that, but they have evolved functional equivalents. I think there are pretty good arguments that the bastard child, mobile, should be in the Title II space as well.
But that's all irrelevant to this article, isn't it?
If the protests are otherwise not influenced, and not based on other misinformation from the same source in the first place - hey, go ahead and spend your money here. But it may behoove protest organizers to look closer at who is contributing to them or funding them directly. Generally doesn't look good later when it turns up.
All the other stuff, lol, we don't need help with that. It's as stupid, wasteful, and unethical as the US or any other actor doing similar. And when you are competing with the States government at who can be the worst in this area, we know you are all part of the same bullshit in power structure. Congratulations on winning the competition so far this decade.
Re: Should probably depend on the nationality and residence of the target
It doesn't make much sense that I can help to insulate my affairs from law enforcement investigation by telling Amazon, or whomever, to store my data in another country, even though both Amazon and myself are US entities.
You can do it with your money, so why not?
What I actually find problematic is multiple sets of rules, period. Why should foreign anything be an easier target? Why should the general human rights enshrined in the Constitution not apply to any human being? (We keep losing them in the States, too, so eventually we may all be equal if not free.)
If you have a valid (truly valid, not gaming, not enhanced by ridiculous new laws or "interpretations", not because you can find the right judge to sign anything) warrant for a particular thing, then sure why not make someone subject to US law (i.e., legal punishment) cough it up?
The real problem is the expansive power to subpoena large swathes of whatever pretty much on a whim, keep it forever, and not discard irrelevant information regarding unrelated parties or things unrelated to any supposed investigation.
On the post: Court Has No Problem With All House Residents Being Forced To Hand Over Fingers To Law Enforcement
Re: "All House Residents Being Forced To Hand Over Fingers"
On the post: Michigan Lawmaker Flees Twitter After Reports Highlight She Helped AT&T Push Anti-Competition Broadband Law
Re:
On the post: DOJ Subpoenas Twitter About Popehat, Dissent Doe And Others Over A Smiley Emoji Tweet
Re: Re: Re: Re: WWKD
Sub epona.
On the post: DOJ Subpoenas Twitter About Popehat, Dissent Doe And Others Over A Smiley Emoji Tweet
Re: Re: Re: Re: WWKD
On the post: Google Removed Catalonian Referendum App Following Spanish Court Order
Re:
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: October 15th - 21st
Re: Isn't it ironic
On the post: NYPD Tells Judge Its $25 Million Forfeiture Database Has No Backup
Re: Foul language? Oh you sweet summer child.
Sure there are people in the world who just cannot bear "foul language" or "being offended", but the funny thing is that i rarely ever see them in the places where someone decides to make the argument that "you just can't handle teh free speechz, grow up".
Same for "both sides trying to score points" idea. Lol, it's called a conversation. (And in fact, a little meta is needed here now and then.)
On the post: NYPD Tells Judge Its $25 Million Forfeiture Database Has No Backup
Re: Oi.
"Vague orders with no detailed plans, no thought for any potential consequences, and a side order of condescension and cruelty."
And that is NYPD's problem in the first place, isn't it?
On the post: Lawyers: Trump's Twitter Account Not Presidential; Also: Trump Is President, Can't Be Sued
Re: Re: Re: Not Official
On the post: A Joke Tweet Leads To 'Child Trafficking' Investigation, Providing More Evidence Of Why SESTA Would Be Abused
Re: With rising pitch
On the post: Multiple Titles Using Denuvo Cracked On Release Day As Other Titles Planning To Use It Bail On It Completely
On the post: Lawyers: Trump's Twitter Account Not Presidential; Also: Trump Is President, Can't Be Sued
On the post: Author Who Lost Copyright Case Over The Da Vinci Code In The US In 2007 Looks To Revive It In The UK In 2017
Re: Re: England vs. USA
On the post: The Cable Industry's Ingenious 'Solution' To TV Cord Cutting? Raise Broadband Rates
Re: Re: But...
With even higher rates, it will definitely have the effect they want.
On the post: UK Gov't Considering Redefining Social Media Services As Publishers To Make It Easier To Control Them
Re:
They are very concerned.
On the post: UK Gov't Considering Redefining Social Media Services As Publishers To Make It Easier To Control Them
Re:
But that's all irrelevant to this article, isn't it?
On the post: Adidas Opposes Turner Broadcasting's ELEAGUE Logo Trademark Because Of Lines
On the post: Government Drops Its Demand For Data On 6,000 Facebook Users
On the post: New Whistleblowers Highlight How Russia's Information War On U.S. Was Larger Than Initially Reported
All the other stuff, lol, we don't need help with that. It's as stupid, wasteful, and unethical as the US or any other actor doing similar. And when you are competing with the States government at who can be the worst in this area, we know you are all part of the same bullshit in power structure. Congratulations on winning the competition so far this decade.
On the post: Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Case Involving US Demands For Emails Stored Overseas
Re: Should probably depend on the nationality and residence of the target
It doesn't make much sense that I can help to insulate my affairs from law enforcement investigation by telling Amazon, or whomever, to store my data in another country, even though both Amazon and myself are US entities.
You can do it with your money, so why not?
What I actually find problematic is multiple sets of rules, period. Why should foreign anything be an easier target? Why should the general human rights enshrined in the Constitution not apply to any human being? (We keep losing them in the States, too, so eventually we may all be equal if not free.)
If you have a valid (truly valid, not gaming, not enhanced by ridiculous new laws or "interpretations", not because you can find the right judge to sign anything) warrant for a particular thing, then sure why not make someone subject to US law (i.e., legal punishment) cough it up?
The real problem is the expansive power to subpoena large swathes of whatever pretty much on a whim, keep it forever, and not discard irrelevant information regarding unrelated parties or things unrelated to any supposed investigation.
Next >>