Obviously Yahoo is *NOT* a law abiding company as they broke the 4th Ammendment in such a way that constitutes treason to the American people.
How does it constitute treason? It failed to protect the American people in their "right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and *effects*, against unreasonable searches and seizures" This constitutes grave damage to the people of this nation by Yahoo's betrayal of trust, which is one of the definitions for Treason.
Now, I don't know about you, but I damned sure count my e-mails as "personal effects", and am damned sure that I have not, and will not allow anyone from the lowliest beggar to the PoTUS or SCoTUS to redefine them in any way.
What about the county and townships rights trumping the state?
Just re-word it so that it is specifically states that it is designed to remove State controls or limitations over local County, City, Town or Township community efforts.
Convert mandate to simpler terms not open to debate.
Here's my proposed take on an updated mandate.
The copyright office's sole duty is to move content into public domain as soon as humanly possible. Failing in this task begets life in prison for everyone working for the office, and those working for corporations trying to stretch copyright terms beyond 5 years.
There, that should be simple enough for the two-toned zebra-headed, slime-coated, pimple-farmin' paramecium brains, munchin' on their own mucosa, suffering from content creator envy, that currently work for the copyright office and their counterparts in the media industries.
I guess I'd say that it's a damned good thing that neither the MPAA nor the RIAA are government entities. That means that nothing they say or do means anything when it comes to the discussion of copyright or in this case cable-boxes.
It's funny that they are asking congress "not to free up" billions of dollars that the consumers could spend in other ways, perhaps even going out to more "movies" or buying more "music".
Wait, what's that you say? They just stepped on their own detachable penises with track cleats? Yup, they sure did. They just backed the cable industry in keeping RIAA/MPAA member corporate profits lower than they could be if they supported the end of the cable-box monopolies.
If the 2 entities involved "schemed" to undercut the price of the stocks to make money off of the deal, it would still be stock fraud, and is very akin to insider trading as "details" unknown to even the "company" were shared with "investors" before leaking a "story" intentionally desined to tank the stock allowing for a short sell.
Here's the plan to fix this oversight on our part...
For the next 10 to 20 elections, let's use the shampoo method.
Apply a thick layer of voting out every incumbent, scrub vigorously with our fingers until the scales of corruption flake away, rinse to clean away the grime of greed, repeat until Capitol Hill shows a healthy shine and sheen of fresh and healthy people laboring to correct decades of abuse, tyranny and oppression.
The American people will cry out in joy seeing these new representatives working for us, not themselves, not corporations, not criminal alphabet agencies.
Their work may take a while as there's quite an unhealthily thick layer of corrupt, corpulent, gangrenous mass infecting Capitol Hill. These new people, guided by the writings of our forefathers have their work cut out for them as they dig out the rotting, decaying corpses of the Constitution and Bill of rights that were left to die by the corrupt, the greedy, the power-mongering politicians that have infected our government for much too long.
Hopefully there's enough genetic material left that isn't corrupted that we can attempt to clone the originals and provide them with a healthy environment in which to grow strong and true, so that evil and corruption can never take hold again.
Let these elected sociopaths know who runs this country.
They're less than 500 people, and we, the millions of people let them walk all over us?
Anyone hit by this needs to contact their States AG
You pay XYZ, LLC, for XXMb/S download XXKb/S upload bandwidth. Multiply each by (( 60 * 60 * 24 ) / 8 ), and that's how much "bandwidth" you've paid for.
Anything less than that is breach of contract.
Everyone knows that you'll never hit that number constantly, but it gives a good number to compare to.
Usage caps below this number illegally limit the service you've paid for.
They'd be wrong to feel that way as Comcast's customers have already paid for the bandwidth they'd use. Stars already paid their upstream provider for the bandwidth their customers use.
That hasn't stopped the crooks *coughcomcast* from "trying" to illegally double-dip, but that doesn't mean they should continue to make the attempts.
It's an extortion racket, pure and simple. "Say, that's a nice data stream, it sure would be a shame if something were to happen to that while it traverses our network." while at the same time telling their customers that "Sorry, but so far, Starz has failed to pay up, so you can't watch what you want to watch becuz we sez so. If'n you don' like that, tuff, 'dez not much you can do about it as we gots dis whole neighborhood on lockdown."
If Atari wishes to try and prove their claim, all they'd end up doing is losing to Magnavox.
The original Magnavox Odyssey gaming system from the early 70s (1972) used multiple potentiometer based controllers to move a "ghost" through the haunted house, who's graphics were made by "clings" statically attached to the front of the television.
So really, Magnavox had the "original" Haunted House Video Game.
Sorry Atari.
Doing a search for "Magnavox Odyssey Haunted House" will bring up several sites with plenty of historical information.
Here's what the penalty for fraudulent claims must be.
The work that is claimed to be "harmed" by the supposed copyright infringer is immediately moved to public domain and the copyright is voided for all time with no recourse to recover / reclaim it.
AT&T probably tested this with their employees first
I'm sure that like most big corporations, AT&T has tested a way to get their employees to pay more for their insurance benefits.
They couch it in terms of "if you give us federally protected health information, we'll give you a discount on your health insurance that still costs more than you ever paid before".
If you refuse to give up your health information, you pay even more for your benefits, in some cases that "increase" caused by "not getting the discount" equates to 300 a month more for the same substandard insurance plan.
This activity is tantamount to blackmail and coercion, to force employees to hand over data that is otherwise prohibited by federal law for companies to ask for.
They go one step further to "protect" themselves by asking an intermediary company to "collect, sort and analyze" the data.
It's time for multiple class action lawsuits for employees to sue their employers, customers to sue their service providers.
It's also time for the states AG's offices to dig into and block these kinds of blatantly illegal practices.
Self Incrimination and the if I'm dead I can't answer your questions...
One of the major things to think about these days is that the amount of information needed just to do our daily tasks is often well beyond what a person can keep readily at hand in their memories.
This code, that password, this identifier, etc...
Enter the personal information device, aka Smart Phone, which from here on I will refer to as a "port-a-mind".
These devices become extensions of our minds, storing vast amounts of data, some of which is extremely personal and or confidential.
Yes, some people store things they shouldn't. Just like people know things they probably shouldn't because the knowledge can only be gained by doing something illegal.
The thing is that up until recently, if you were arrested and dragged in to court, you could plead the 5th. Sure, it makes you look guilty as hell, but you could do it and nobody, including the judge can force you to answer.
A person's spouse can also not be coerced into answering questions as that is protected against as well.
So why isn't a person's port-a-mind protected as well? Remember, the port-a-mind is that extension of the person's mind for the digital age which is almost a requirement to remember all those digital bits and pieces of information necessary to interact with doctors, lawyers, schools, government entities, pretty much anyone these days.
That's where encryption comes in. Strong, unbreakable (without uber quantum computers able to handle billions of quarthian strands) encryption, that cannot be coerced or forced into giving those answers that you refuse to give.
With encryption, our port-a-minds are safe to use and can store confidential information with impunity. We're safe knowing that no-one can get our data without our consent, extending the 5th amendment to our digital data.
Without encryption, or with encryption that others can break against your will, port-a-minds are useless.
Without these port-a-minds, many people's daily lives will become more frantic, panic filled as they forget key pieces of data that now have to be indelibly etched into their wetware.
So, Mr. Obama, you can either have encryption, or you cannot. Encryption can only be considered encryption when no-one that you have not authorized can decrypt the data.
There is no balance, it is and will always be an absolute. Black or White - no grey. Encryption / Not Encryption, or to quote an extremely old and extremely wise muppet with the power to lay the white-house to waste with a wave of his little green hand, "Encrypt or encrypt not, there is not try."
In another form of word play, "You can pry the decryption keys from my cold, dead - ohhhh, that's right, you can't now can you assholes!"
That's why the constitutional amendments were so clear and adamant about "Congress may pass no law" when it comes to sidestepping them.
The founding fathers "KNEW" that generations down the line would be tempted to fuck everyone over to line their pockets and seize the reigns of power ever more tightly.
However, our privacy commitment does not extend to criminals.
Ahh, so blackberry will wait until the person has been arrested, tried and convicted before turning over the data, most excellent.
Wait! What? You mean that you weren't telling the truth? That what you really meant was: "However, our privacy commitment does not extend to anyone that law enforcement suspects of committing a crime? That just being accused of a crime or hell just getting caught in a drag-net by constitutional terrorist organizations like the FBI, CIA, NSA is sufficient for you to violate their constitutional rights?
Wow - and here we thought with your new "Priv", Blackberry was all about privacy, period.
Thanks for clearing that up, and say goodbye to the entity that Blackberry was.
On the post: Yahoo Secretly Built Software To Scan All Emails Under Pressure From NSA Or FBI
Yahoo committed treason against this nation.
How does it constitute treason? It failed to protect the American people in their "right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and *effects*, against unreasonable searches and seizures" This constitutes grave damage to the people of this nation by Yahoo's betrayal of trust, which is one of the definitions for Treason.
Now, I don't know about you, but I damned sure count my e-mails as "personal effects", and am damned sure that I have not, and will not allow anyone from the lowliest beggar to the PoTUS or SCoTUS to redefine them in any way.
On the post: This Bill Could Stop Protectionist State Broadband Laws, But ISP Control Over Congress Means It Won't Pass
What about the county and townships rights trumping the state?
On the post: The Copyright Office Acts As Hollywood's Lobbying Arm... Because That's Basically How It's Been Designed
Convert mandate to simpler terms not open to debate.
The copyright office's sole duty is to move content into public domain as soon as humanly possible.
Failing in this task begets life in prison for everyone working for the office, and those working for corporations trying to stretch copyright terms beyond 5 years.
There, that should be simple enough for the two-toned zebra-headed, slime-coated, pimple-farmin' paramecium brains, munchin' on their own mucosa, suffering from content creator envy, that currently work for the copyright office and their counterparts in the media industries.
On the post: MPAA Freaks Out In Response To FCC's Revised Set Top Box Plan
MPAA / RIAA - Not government entities
That means that nothing they say or do means anything when it comes to the discussion of copyright or in this case cable-boxes.
It's funny that they are asking congress "not to free up" billions of dollars that the consumers could spend in other ways, perhaps even going out to more "movies" or buying more "music".
Wait, what's that you say? They just stepped on their own detachable penises with track cleats? Yup, they sure did.
They just backed the cable industry in keeping RIAA/MPAA member corporate profits lower than they could be if they supported the end of the cable-box monopolies.
On the post: Security Startup MedSec Shorts St. Jude Medical Stock To Punish It For Flimsy Pacemaker Security
Re: Question from ignorance
I hope to see MedSec's officers behind bars.
On the post: Appeals Court Strikes Down FCC Attempt To Eliminate Protectionist State Broadband Laws
Re: Re: Re: Sad but kinda expected
You do know that the SCotUS declared that corporations were people.
Now, whenever the laws say "for the people", it clearly only means "for the corporations".
Jump onto the "move to amend" bandwagon if you'd like this to change.
movetoamend.org
On the post: Appeals Court Strikes Down FCC Attempt To Eliminate Protectionist State Broadband Laws
Re: "North Carolina and Tennessee quickly sued..."
Let me correct that thar statement you made.
"who really answer to no-one."
Obviously, while vexed, you clearly forgot that they do in fact answer to someone.
That someone is BigCorp. You know, the company that paid them to sue the FCC...
On the post: Appeals Court Strikes Down FCC Attempt To Eliminate Protectionist State Broadband Laws
Re:
On the post: Appeals Court Strikes Down FCC Attempt To Eliminate Protectionist State Broadband Laws
Simple Fix...
Oh, so sorry, I see you have laws that don't allow competition for phone, internet, cable and cellular services in your states.
Damn, and here we had several billion dollars that we were going to give you to help fund whatever projects you'd like to spend it on.
Better luck next year.
Perhaps you should ask BigCorp for more money to cover your sudden budget shortfalls. lol Good luck on that.
On the post: Appeals Court Shoots Down ACLU, Says Full CIA Torture Report Is Beyond The Reach Of FOIA Requesters
Here's the plan to fix this oversight on our part...
Apply a thick layer of voting out every incumbent, scrub vigorously with our fingers until the scales of corruption flake away, rinse to clean away the grime of greed, repeat until Capitol Hill shows a healthy shine and sheen of fresh and healthy people laboring to correct decades of abuse, tyranny and oppression.
The American people will cry out in joy seeing these new representatives working for us, not themselves, not corporations, not criminal alphabet agencies.
Their work may take a while as there's quite an unhealthily thick layer of corrupt, corpulent, gangrenous mass infecting Capitol Hill.
These new people, guided by the writings of our forefathers have their work cut out for them as they dig out the rotting, decaying corpses of the Constitution and Bill of rights that were left to die by the corrupt, the greedy, the power-mongering politicians that have infected our government for much too long.
Hopefully there's enough genetic material left that isn't corrupted that we can attempt to clone the originals and provide them with a healthy environment in which to grow strong and true, so that evil and corruption can never take hold again.
Let these elected sociopaths know who runs this country.
They're less than 500 people, and we, the millions of people let them walk all over us?
How dare we!
On the post: ISPs Are Now Forcing Cord Cutters To Subscribe To TV If They Want To Avoid Usage Caps
Anyone hit by this needs to contact their States AG
Multiply each by (( 60 * 60 * 24 ) / 8 ), and that's how much "bandwidth" you've paid for.
Anything less than that is breach of contract.
Everyone knows that you'll never hit that number constantly, but it gives a good number to compare to.
Usage caps below this number illegally limit the service you've paid for.
On the post: Comcast Preventing Customers From Accessing Starz Streaming App, Can Only Offer Flimsy Reasons Why
Re: Just a theory...
That hasn't stopped the crooks *coughcomcast* from "trying" to illegally double-dip, but that doesn't mean they should continue to make the attempts.
It's an extortion racket, pure and simple.
"Say, that's a nice data stream, it sure would be a shame if something were to happen to that while it traverses our network." while at the same time telling their customers that "Sorry, but so far, Starz has failed to pay up, so you can't watch what you want to watch becuz we sez so. If'n you don' like that, tuff, 'dez not much you can do about it as we gots dis whole neighborhood on lockdown."
On the post: Ex-Game Maker Atari To Argue To The US PTO That Only It Can Make 'Haunted House' Games
Re: Atari "Haunted House"
Right? I believe their use in 1972 predates Atari's use.
On the post: Ex-Game Maker Atari To Argue To The US PTO That Only It Can Make 'Haunted House' Games
Sorry Atari, you weren't the first...
The original Magnavox Odyssey gaming system from the early 70s (1972) used multiple potentiometer based controllers to move a "ghost" through the haunted house, who's graphics were made by "clings" statically attached to the front of the television.
So really, Magnavox had the "original" Haunted House Video Game.
Sorry Atari.
Doing a search for "Magnavox Odyssey Haunted House" will bring up several sites with plenty of historical information.
On the post: Can Lawyers 'Overcome' The Bogus Copyright On 'We Shall Overcome' And Free It To The Public Domain?
Re: fraudulent copyright claims.
The work that is claimed to be "harmed" by the supposed copyright infringer is immediately moved to public domain and the copyright is voided for all time with no recourse to recover / reclaim it.
That will shut them up, permanently.
On the post: Trademark For 'Square Donuts' At Heart Of Trademark Dispute Despite It Being Entirely Descriptive
Easy Fix
Donuts Squared
(techdirt doesn't support the sup tag apparently)
On the post: AT&T Tries To Claim That Charging Users More For Privacy Is A 'Discount'
AT&T probably tested this with their employees first
They couch it in terms of "if you give us federally protected health information, we'll give you a discount on your health insurance that still costs more than you ever paid before".
If you refuse to give up your health information, you pay even more for your benefits, in some cases that "increase" caused by "not getting the discount" equates to 300 a month more for the same substandard insurance plan.
This activity is tantamount to blackmail and coercion, to force employees to hand over data that is otherwise prohibited by federal law for companies to ask for.
They go one step further to "protect" themselves by asking an intermediary company to "collect, sort and analyze" the data.
It's time for multiple class action lawsuits for employees to sue their employers, customers to sue their service providers.
It's also time for the states AG's offices to dig into and block these kinds of blatantly illegal practices.
On the post: President Obama Is Wrong On Encryption; Claims The Realist View Is 'Absolutist'
Self Incrimination and the if I'm dead I can't answer your questions...
This code, that password, this identifier, etc...
Enter the personal information device, aka Smart Phone, which from here on I will refer to as a "port-a-mind".
These devices become extensions of our minds, storing vast amounts of data, some of which is extremely personal and or confidential.
Yes, some people store things they shouldn't. Just like people know things they probably shouldn't because the knowledge can only be gained by doing something illegal.
The thing is that up until recently, if you were arrested and dragged in to court, you could plead the 5th. Sure, it makes you look guilty as hell, but you could do it and nobody, including the judge can force you to answer.
A person's spouse can also not be coerced into answering questions as that is protected against as well.
So why isn't a person's port-a-mind protected as well? Remember, the port-a-mind is that extension of the person's mind for the digital age which is almost a requirement to remember all those digital bits and pieces of information necessary to interact with doctors, lawyers, schools, government entities, pretty much anyone these days.
That's where encryption comes in. Strong, unbreakable (without uber quantum computers able to handle billions of quarthian strands) encryption, that cannot be coerced or forced into giving those answers that you refuse to give.
With encryption, our port-a-minds are safe to use and can store confidential information with impunity. We're safe knowing that no-one can get our data without our consent, extending the 5th amendment to our digital data.
Without encryption, or with encryption that others can break against your will, port-a-minds are useless.
Without these port-a-minds, many people's daily lives will become more frantic, panic filled as they forget key pieces of data that now have to be indelibly etched into their wetware.
So, Mr. Obama, you can either have encryption, or you cannot.
Encryption can only be considered encryption when no-one that you have not authorized can decrypt the data.
There is no balance, it is and will always be an absolute.
Black or White - no grey.
Encryption / Not Encryption, or to quote an extremely old and extremely wise muppet with the power to lay the white-house to waste with a wave of his little green hand, "Encrypt or encrypt not, there is not try."
In another form of word play, "You can pry the decryption keys from my cold, dead - ohhhh, that's right, you can't now can you assholes!"
On the post: US Gov't Agencies Freak Out Over Juniper Backdoor; Perhaps They'll Now Realize Why Backdoors Are A Mistake
One of 3 possibilities here - NSA, CIA, FBI
Truth be damned, et al.
That's why the constitutional amendments were so clear and adamant about "Congress may pass no law" when it comes to sidestepping them.
The founding fathers "KNEW" that generations down the line would be tempted to fuck everyone over to line their pockets and seize the reigns of power ever more tightly.
On the post: Blackberry CEO Gives Public One More Reason To Not Buy Its Phones By Arguing For Greater Law Enforcement Cooperation
Ahh, so blackberry will wait until the person has been arrested, tried and convicted before turning over the data, most excellent.
Wait! What? You mean that you weren't telling the truth?
That what you really meant was: "However, our privacy commitment does not extend to anyone that law enforcement suspects of committing a crime? That just being accused of a crime or hell just getting caught in a drag-net by constitutional terrorist organizations like the FBI, CIA, NSA is sufficient for you to violate their constitutional rights?
Wow - and here we thought with your new "Priv", Blackberry was all about privacy, period.
Thanks for clearing that up, and say goodbye to the entity that Blackberry was.
Next >>