a).... There is also good evidence that anyone who ate potatoes before 1880 is now dead. Aren't statistics great!
b).... one word!!! POLIO [ Oh sorry.. did I cause a sore point that totally destroys your idiotic notion about how vaccines are bad and unethical to force people to take them and what happens when the loons take over the asylum...good!]
c)... Let me guess.. you're a creationist and right to lifer as well? since all your so called theories are based on made up and/or bogus claims or placed out of context to suit your agenda instead of looking at evidence holistically and contextually using best practice scientific methodology
You know what else causes death in Infants, Children, Adults, etc??
Accidents, Stupidity, Bad luck, genetics, Virus's, physical maladies, Force majeure, etc.. The list is huge.
Based on your logic these things too should be outlawed and to stop any and all statistical outliers from EVER happening I suggest you lock yourself in an airtight room and never come out to eat, sleep, breath, procreate, or anything else.
Because you never know.. you MIGHT die from something.. better off not taking the risk hey? and well at least it allows the rest of the human race the knowledge that you are saving yourself from us and thereby helping us weed out the second part of my list above from infecting others.
Oh and the human race as a holistic entity would rather one die as a high probability statistical outlier than a statistical majority. So therefore based on a comment of yours below as an ethical dilemma the ability of the race as a whole to enforce vaccinations knowing that sometimes deaths will occur (panadol has EXACT same problem.. so does water.. so does life) is an actual correct ethical solution. No matter how you try to spin it
Providing encryption keys that actually work though is another matter entirely since the subpoena has been fulfilled if any reasonably key is provided.
Been there, gone through that ambiguous bullshit from both sides of evidence collection under that legislation. Also the subpoena/warrant is authorised by a Court (Local/Magistrate or District normally) and NOT by some other non trier of facts body set up for that express purpose (ie:tribunal) as the AG want in this matter.
Yeppers, we don't even have Freedom of Speech per say here though we definitely have an equivalence to the 4th amendment under Procedural Fairness Doctrines of all courts and other criminal investigative statutory powers of LEO's.
As for the 5th.. well the equivelant of Miranda Warning is all over Australia and you have the ability NOT to answer any questions by Police (other than in very controversial situations that haven't really been tested like terrorism matters) and the best advice any solicitor would give any client is "when in doubt SHUT UP.. If you don't understand that answer SHUTUP.. if you don't shutup then your a problem to yourself"
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawyers and Technology generally don't mix
PS: Your last statement about Barristers & QC's is only sometimes correct. And realistically not many people actually know what a QC, SC ( Senior Counsel), or even a barrister actually is let alone the distinction between them and a standard Solicitor.
In actuality most people think of "The Castle" when they think of QC's. Thankfully I don't practice (though I hold an LLB) so don't have to worry about what people think of me in that area.. I already know I'm an arsehole :)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawyers and Technology generally don't mix
Brandis is basically a technology noob, I never said differently, and if you want a Senator that actually has anything like a CLUE in the current Senate (and hopefully in next depending on how WA goes) then Scott Ludlum is the ONLY bet at the moment.
Sadly the above policy is NOT the only idiotic submission that has been put forth due to the actual Senate inquiry into the TIA (Telecommunications Interception & Access Act) put forth by the Greens with an emphasis on internet surveillance. The other stupidities are:
* data retention provisions (that were rejected by parliament already) to be part of a new TIA .WTF!!!!!!!!
* The NT Police (as if they don't have enough problems already) called for EVERYONE'S browsing history to be logged so it can be used in investigations for them (or anyone)
* The AFP and ASIO (+ other acronyms) have asked for hugely expanded data retention and surveillance powers that bypass standard procedural fairness doctrines.
* though ironically all areas of government(s) all state that privacy is IMPORTANT (Though that could be because the new Aust Privacy principles came into effect on 12th March) but only when it doesn't suit there own mandates.
As for the 'salted earth' password technique... That's an old method and basically creates a new criminal offense anyway. Always has since you are intentionally destroying evidence, unles you can prove that you had no reasonable knowledge that 'password' would do such a thing. Onus is on the informant to prove their non intent.. good luck with that one
The Attorney General (Federal) is an appointed role that is appointed by the Federal cabinet using an ELECTED member from that cabinet.
In this instance the AG is Senator George Brandis QC who is an elected senator for the State of Queensland and has been a lawyer (Solicitor then Barrister then Queens Counsel) since 1985.
George is actually a very well known and brilliant lawyer though he has negligible experience with criminal law since his practice was entirely devoted to civil. Which realistically doesn't mean squat as the AG since he has a multitude of minions working for the Department who really do all the work and he just spews forth their IDIOTIC recommendations.
As for this recommendation, it's idiotic, bypasses all procedural fairness (especially since it's NOT using a court to issue warrants but an external 'independent' -HA FUCKING HA - issuing authority) and is unworkable with so many chilling effects. If it gets passed the High Court case and subsequent hammering of the unconstitutionality of the thing will be highly enjoyable to watch.
Thanks... though this also can lead to major political bias unless your Senate is somehow magically immune from political and/or other interest groups and can appoint someone as a Judge based on solely their merits, past actions and upholding of the Constitution, Equity and Procedural Fairness...
You seem to have confused obscurity with censoring.. though then again you also confuse coherent debate with whatever your yabbering of Blarggha Flargga bargha is.
Absolutely and based on the above court order, the Chinese court could use it's own "inherent equitable power" to then seize any and all assets of those organisations within China or any other company that does business with them ie: Apple
Now that' I'd LOVE to see.
This is the old situation where Federal USA judges who are elected (WTF is with that dumb move) who basically even with default judgements are going ultra vires on their actual ability and instead are thinking themselves above any laws by any jurisdiction whatsoever.. in other words FUCK comity.. we are the USA obey us or we'll destroy you.
Another group that are NOT subject to this idiot of a US-centric Federal judge's orders are anyone outside of the USA who is part of the inclusive list (that is basically ANYONE on the planet) of the order to cease and desist from any and all business with DVDFab.
I might now just for the Lulz offer my services to DVDFab and send this idiotic federal US court a statement stating they either prosecute me for something and suffer the amazing amount of crap that would come their way (yes that is a threat) or STFU and remove the ambiguous and totally specious order that has just allowed the USA to dictate business contracts anywhere on the planet.
The operative phrase i used was "would also be" meaning if the recipe was able to be copyrighted (which it isn't) then the hypothetical situation then becomes EXACTLY a work for hire since you are choosing off of a list making your preferences and also able to change those preferences to suit YOUR taste style.. so if the chefs want to start yabbering about IP rights (which they have NONE in this regard) then they better be prepared for 'works for hire' since they are created for a specific individual purpose, are unique to that purpose and only for that hiree, are actually a very volatile good(s), and therefore are very much within the elements that are the bright lines for what is a 'work for hire' - in this hypothetical situation where "dishes" are "works" with copyright of course.
AS for 'work for hire' generally being about employees.. some Tattoo artists would disagree with you now. Also every single consultant that is NOT an employee is now grinning from ear to ear since you have allowed them to own there creative expression in whatever work they were paid to accomplish.
In Australia at the moment we have a TV reality show called "My Kitchen Rules" as part of the show viewers can enter an online competition to win a car.
To enter that competition you have to 1. SNAP - Take a photo of your dish at a local café or restaurant 2. CRITIQUE - Write a short review 3. UPLOAD - and maybe win the prize [ http://au.tv.yahoo.com/my-kitchen-rules/be-the-judge/ ]
Shows that some countries understand the difference between petulant and idiotic restaurant owners who don't understand the basics of IP or Marketing and those that do since there have been no problems with the competition and restaurant owners LOVE the idea that they are getting exposure and some of the photos are absolutely brilliant. Don't look if you are hungry ;)
A recipe is not copyrightable whatsoever this is LONG established doctrine everywhere not just the USA.
Furthermore a meal served at a restaurant by a paying (whether monetarily or other consideration) patron would also be a "work for hire" therefore the IP if any (which their isn't - though there might be a design trademark at a stretch) is actually owned by the client eating said work, which allows them not only to photograph the work and use it also for commercial purposes it also means they can smear it over their face and photograph that as an artwork too.
The only thing the restauranteer can do about it is ask them to remove themselves from the premises, though this could open the restaurant up to tortuous actions on other fronts due to the contract of sale not being fulfilled. Remember they offered to purchase meal and it was accepted, they received meal.. legally photographed it and then were made to leave without consuming their consideration part of the contract. Not to mention things like NEID or IIED that could be problematic.
On the post: Thanks Anti-Vax Loons: The Return Of The Measles And The Backlash Against Jenny McCarthy
Re: Re: Re: um
ummm.... *points out all the anti-vaxxers worldwide lately* Stupidity!
On the post: Thanks Anti-Vax Loons: The Return Of The Measles And The Backlash Against Jenny McCarthy
Re: Re: Re: orly?
b).... one word!!! POLIO [ Oh sorry.. did I cause a sore point that totally destroys your idiotic notion about how vaccines are bad and unethical to force people to take them and what happens when the loons take over the asylum...good!]
c)... Let me guess.. you're a creationist and right to lifer as well? since all your so called theories are based on made up and/or bogus claims or placed out of context to suit your agenda instead of looking at evidence holistically and contextually using best practice scientific methodology
On the post: Thanks Anti-Vax Loons: The Return Of The Measles And The Backlash Against Jenny McCarthy
Re: Re: Re: Re: orly?
Someone should tell em about all the diseases cherry's can have on them.. LOL
On the post: Thanks Anti-Vax Loons: The Return Of The Measles And The Backlash Against Jenny McCarthy
Re: RE: Allergic reaction
Accidents, Stupidity, Bad luck, genetics, Virus's, physical maladies, Force majeure, etc.. The list is huge.
Based on your logic these things too should be outlawed and to stop any and all statistical outliers from EVER happening I suggest you lock yourself in an airtight room and never come out to eat, sleep, breath, procreate, or anything else.
Because you never know.. you MIGHT die from something.. better off not taking the risk hey? and well at least it allows the rest of the human race the knowledge that you are saving yourself from us and thereby helping us weed out the second part of my list above from infecting others.
Oh and the human race as a holistic entity would rather one die as a high probability statistical outlier than a statistical majority. So therefore based on a comment of yours below as an ethical dilemma the ability of the race as a whole to enforce vaccinations knowing that sometimes deaths will occur (panadol has EXACT same problem.. so does water.. so does life) is an actual correct ethical solution. No matter how you try to spin it
On the post: Kid Bullied For My Little Pony Backpack Told Not To Bring It To School Anymore
Re: *Headdesk*
On the post: Australian Attorney General Wants To Make It A Criminal Offense To Not Turn Over Private Encryption Keys
Re: Re: be afraid, very afraid
Been there, gone through that ambiguous bullshit from both sides of evidence collection under that legislation. Also the subpoena/warrant is authorised by a Court (Local/Magistrate or District normally) and NOT by some other non trier of facts body set up for that express purpose (ie:tribunal) as the AG want in this matter.
Yeppers, we don't even have Freedom of Speech per say here though we definitely have an equivalence to the 4th amendment under Procedural Fairness Doctrines of all courts and other criminal investigative statutory powers of LEO's.
As for the 5th.. well the equivelant of Miranda Warning is all over Australia and you have the ability NOT to answer any questions by Police (other than in very controversial situations that haven't really been tested like terrorism matters) and the best advice any solicitor would give any client is "when in doubt SHUT UP.. If you don't understand that answer SHUTUP.. if you don't shutup then your a problem to yourself"
On the post: Australian Attorney General Wants To Make It A Criminal Offense To Not Turn Over Private Encryption Keys
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawyers and Technology generally don't mix
In actuality most people think of "The Castle" when they think of QC's. Thankfully I don't practice (though I hold an LLB) so don't have to worry about what people think of me in that area.. I already know I'm an arsehole :)
On the post: Australian Attorney General Wants To Make It A Criminal Offense To Not Turn Over Private Encryption Keys
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawyers and Technology generally don't mix
Sadly the above policy is NOT the only idiotic submission that has been put forth due to the actual Senate inquiry into the TIA (Telecommunications Interception & Access Act) put forth by the Greens with an emphasis on internet surveillance. The other stupidities are:
* data retention provisions (that were rejected by parliament already) to be part of a new TIA .WTF!!!!!!!!
* The NT Police (as if they don't have enough problems already) called for EVERYONE'S browsing history to be logged so it can be used in investigations for them (or anyone)
* The AFP and ASIO (+ other acronyms) have asked for hugely expanded data retention and surveillance powers that bypass standard procedural fairness doctrines.
* though ironically all areas of government(s) all state that privacy is IMPORTANT (Though that could be because the new Aust Privacy principles came into effect on 12th March) but only when it doesn't suit there own mandates.
Actually the full list of submissions is fascinating reading as to whom is actually wanting what etc etc. http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/Comp rehensive_revision_of_TIA_Act/Submissions
On the post: DailyDirt: Are College Degrees Useless Now?
Re: Useless for what?
On the post: Australian Attorney General Wants To Make It A Criminal Offense To Not Turn Over Private Encryption Keys
Re:
As for the 'salted earth' password technique... That's an old method and basically creates a new criminal offense anyway. Always has since you are intentionally destroying evidence, unles you can prove that you had no reasonable knowledge that 'password' would do such a thing. Onus is on the informant to prove their non intent.. good luck with that one
On the post: Australian Attorney General Wants To Make It A Criminal Offense To Not Turn Over Private Encryption Keys
Re: Re:
In this instance the AG is Senator George Brandis QC who is an elected senator for the State of Queensland and has been a lawyer (Solicitor then Barrister then Queens Counsel) since 1985.
George is actually a very well known and brilliant lawyer though he has negligible experience with criminal law since his practice was entirely devoted to civil. Which realistically doesn't mean squat as the AG since he has a multitude of minions working for the Department who really do all the work and he just spews forth their IDIOTIC recommendations.
As for this recommendation, it's idiotic, bypasses all procedural fairness (especially since it's NOT using a court to issue warrants but an external 'independent' -HA FUCKING HA - issuing authority) and is unworkable with so many chilling effects. If it gets passed the High Court case and subsequent hammering of the unconstitutionality of the thing will be highly enjoyable to watch.
On the post: Ridiculously Broad Ruling Against DVD Ripper Software Has Court Allow Seizure Of Domains, Social Media & More
Re: Re: Re: Re: Order
On the post: Ridiculously Broad Ruling Against DVD Ripper Software Has Court Allow Seizure Of Domains, Social Media & More
Re:
On the post: Ridiculously Broad Ruling Against DVD Ripper Software Has Court Allow Seizure Of Domains, Social Media & More
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Ridiculously Broad Ruling Against DVD Ripper Software Has Court Allow Seizure Of Domains, Social Media & More
Re: Re: Order
Now that' I'd LOVE to see.
This is the old situation where Federal USA judges who are elected (WTF is with that dumb move) who basically even with default judgements are going ultra vires on their actual ability and instead are thinking themselves above any laws by any jurisdiction whatsoever.. in other words FUCK comity.. we are the USA obey us or we'll destroy you.
On the post: Ridiculously Broad Ruling Against DVD Ripper Software Has Court Allow Seizure Of Domains, Social Media & More
Re: Order
I might now just for the Lulz offer my services to DVDFab and send this idiotic federal US court a statement stating they either prosecute me for something and suffer the amazing amount of crap that would come their way (yes that is a threat) or STFU and remove the ambiguous and totally specious order that has just allowed the USA to dictate business contracts anywhere on the planet.
On the post: That Time Yelpers Took Revenge On A Bigot Restaurant Owner
Re:
Maybe you should be checked for Logophobia since you also cannot read properly either
On the post: Some Chefs Still Insisting That Photographing Meals Steals Some Of Their Intellectual Property
Re: NOT work for hire.
AS for 'work for hire' generally being about employees.. some Tattoo artists would disagree with you now. Also every single consultant that is NOT an employee is now grinning from ear to ear since you have allowed them to own there creative expression in whatever work they were paid to accomplish.
On the post: Some Chefs Still Insisting That Photographing Meals Steals Some Of Their Intellectual Property
Australia must be Opposite Land
To enter that competition you have to
1. SNAP - Take a photo of your dish at a local café or restaurant
2. CRITIQUE - Write a short review
3. UPLOAD - and maybe win the prize
[ http://au.tv.yahoo.com/my-kitchen-rules/be-the-judge/ ]
Shows that some countries understand the difference between petulant and idiotic restaurant owners who don't understand the basics of IP or Marketing and those that do since there have been no problems with the competition and restaurant owners LOVE the idea that they are getting exposure and some of the photos are absolutely brilliant. Don't look if you are hungry ;)
On the post: Some Chefs Still Insisting That Photographing Meals Steals Some Of Their Intellectual Property
Re:
Furthermore a meal served at a restaurant by a paying (whether monetarily or other consideration) patron would also be a "work for hire" therefore the IP if any (which their isn't - though there might be a design trademark at a stretch) is actually owned by the client eating said work, which allows them not only to photograph the work and use it also for commercial purposes it also means they can smear it over their face and photograph that as an artwork too.
The only thing the restauranteer can do about it is ask them to remove themselves from the premises, though this could open the restaurant up to tortuous actions on other fronts due to the contract of sale not being fulfilled. Remember they offered to purchase meal and it was accepted, they received meal.. legally photographed it and then were made to leave without consuming their consideration part of the contract. Not to mention things like NEID or IIED that could be problematic.
Next >>