Unfortunately, it's simpler than that. A DOJ prosecutor advances their career by convictions...no one checks to see if the innocent are being convicted.
Why would innocent or guilty matter? What matters is can/can't convict. If a "can't" can be changed to a "can" by hiding a video, why not hide it?
There's really nothing to worry about: The IOC is "pricing itself out of the market." Yes, they have a monopoly, but they forget their monopoly is in an optional commodity.
That's all anyone needs to do is cooperate with the government. Government shows up at your bank, the bank should just cooperate and give them any of your account information they want. At your email provider, same thing. Agent shows up at your door and asks to search your house, step aside and cooperate.
We have Fourth Amendment rights, yes, but that doesn't mean we should be uncooperative when the government wants in.
Agent: "A reason for suspicion? A Muslim? Who travels to foreign countries for her so-called "job"? Could anyone be more suspicious? But it's not like we profile or anything like that."
4. His clueless request asks for "https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails" to be removed. That's the front page for Wikileaks' archive of all the leaked Sony emails. That means that the actual email wouldn't even have been removed from Google's Index if Google had complied (which it did not).
You think that was the mistake, but it wasn't. As I'm sure he would tell you if you asked, he meant to leave off the "/sony/emails" part and only takedown "https://wikileaks.org/". Oops.
Many of those responding to Tuesday's opinion emphasised the main finding that "solely the fight against serious crime is an objective in the general interest that is capable of justifying a general obligation to retain data, whereas combating ordinary offences and the smooth conduct of proceedings other than criminal proceedings are not."
Nice ruling. Translation: You can make them keep data for any serious crime--such as that "serious crime" of copyright infringement--but you can't make them keep data that might expose the inner (mis)workings of government or corporations.
The ruling so wonderfully expresses the difference between ruling and ruled.
1. Anything we don't like violates this EULA; 2. If you violate the EULA, you're infringing our copyright; 3. If you infringe our copyright: 10 years in prison.
Not true. What the government wants to do--at the bidding of big media--is line pirates up in front of a firing squad. But someone might object to that if the government just jumps in, so they're starting small and working up.
There's absolutely no reason that the airlines shouldn't be providing their own security at airports. Security was actually much better when that was the case and people weren't molested or worse every time they wanted to fly.
No, you're wrong, there's a very good reason. The taxpayers are paying for the TSA abuse. If the airlines did their own security, they would have to pay.
...nine purchases...three and a half months...purchase every two weeks...hardly lab-supporting frequency...if law enforcement officers are looking for a reason to search a vehicle/house, this level of activity is considered suspicious.
Somehow, I don't think "frequency" mattered here. What if he'd only bought it only once in three and a half months? I bet LCNA would have considered that suspicious, too.
In fact, I bet if NPLEx had shown zero purchases LCNA would have found that suspicious on the grounds that he was clearly buying pseudoephedrine under a false name.
"But your honor! We copied pages and pages of junk into the warrant application! There's even whole books from the Bible! Surely that's worth some probable cause!"
On the post: Appeals Court Says DOJ Can Keep Its Evidence-Production Guidelines To Itself
Re:
Why would innocent or guilty matter? What matters is can/can't convict. If a "can't" can be changed to a "can" by hiding a video, why not hide it?
On the post: Dear US Olympic Committee: Tweeting About The Olympics Is Never Trademark Infringement
Re:
On the post: Dear US Olympic Committee: Tweeting About The Olympics Is Never Trademark Infringement
Re: Pussies!
No Countries Want to Host the 2022 Olympics
On the post: Wall Street Journal Reporter Hassled At LA Airport; Successfully Prevents DHS From Searching Her Phones
Re:
That's all anyone needs to do is cooperate with the government. Government shows up at your bank, the bank should just cooperate and give them any of your account information they want. At your email provider, same thing. Agent shows up at your door and asks to search your house, step aside and cooperate.
We have Fourth Amendment rights, yes, but that doesn't mean we should be uncooperative when the government wants in.
On the post: Amazon, Cable Industry Molest The Definition Of Copyright In Ongoing Scuff Up Over Cable Box Reform
Molestation
Why not "mangle the definition?"
On the post: Wall Street Journal Reporter Hassled At LA Airport; Successfully Prevents DHS From Searching Her Phones
Nope, no profiling here
On the post: Sony Pictures Legal Affairs VP Files Bogus DMCA Notice Because His Salary Is Listed On Wikileaks
Oops
You think that was the mistake, but it wasn't. As I'm sure he would tell you if you asked, he meant to leave off the "/sony/emails" part and only takedown "https://wikileaks.org/". Oops.
On the post: EU Court Of Justice Advisor Suggests UK's Last Surveillance Bill May Be Legal, But Hints That The New One Might Not Be
Ruling and ruled
Nice ruling. Translation: You can make them keep data for any serious crime--such as that "serious crime" of copyright infringement--but you can't make them keep data that might expose the inner (mis)workings of government or corporations.
The ruling so wonderfully expresses the difference between ruling and ruled.
On the post: Store Owner Sues Baton Rouge Police For Seizing His CCTV Recording Of Alton Sterling Shooting
Re: Recording police
On the post: Store Owner Sues Baton Rouge Police For Seizing His CCTV Recording Of Alton Sterling Shooting
Recording police
Because, if he gets that drive back, it's going to be erased "accidentally"...all the way down to the aluminum substrate.
On the post: Checking In: Blizzard Still Suing Hack/Cheat Makers For Copyright Infringement? Yup!
As easy as one-two-three
1. Anything we don't like violates this EULA;
2. If you violate the EULA, you're infringing our copyright;
3. If you infringe our copyright: 10 years in prison.
...So don't do anything we won't like. Or else.
On the post: Activists Cheer On EU's 'Right To An Explanation' For Algorithmic Decisions, But How Will It Work When There's Nothing To Explain?
Re: Re: Re: Magic 8-Ball
But now that you bring it up, yep, they better show that algorithm. It might be choosing answers based on race.
On the post: DEA Finally Decides To Do Something About Its Wiretap Warrant Abuses
Funny
Hee-hee-hee-haw-haw-haw...! Whoa, that's a good one! I haven't heard a joke like that since Hee-Haw! folded!
On the post: As UK Piracy Falls To Record Lows, Government Still Wants To Put Pirates In Jail For 10 Years
Compromise
On the post: Activists Cheer On EU's 'Right To An Explanation' For Algorithmic Decisions, But How Will It Work When There's Nothing To Explain?
Re: Magic 8-Ball
On the post: TSA Scores Another PR Win With Assault Of Nineteen Year Old Brain Tumor Patient On Her Way To Treatment
Re:
No, you're wrong, there's a very good reason. The taxpayers are paying for the TSA abuse. If the airlines did their own security, they would have to pay.
On the post: 'Circumstances' So 'Exigent' Narcotics Agents Could Have Watched 'Gone With The Wind' And Had Time To Spare
Want to be suspicious? There's always an excuse
Somehow, I don't think "frequency" mattered here. What if he'd only bought it only once in three and a half months? I bet LCNA would have considered that suspicious, too.
In fact, I bet if NPLEx had shown zero purchases LCNA would have found that suspicious on the grounds that he was clearly buying pseudoephedrine under a false name.
On the post: Appeals Court: A Bunch Of Mostly-Irrelevant Information Is Not 'Probable Cause'
How much is enough? (Take #2.)
On the post: Appeals Court: A Bunch Of Mostly-Irrelevant Information Is Not 'Probable Cause'
Re: How much is enough?
1) If the cursor is in "Subject" and you accidentally press enter, the comment is published...
2) ...Even if the comment body happens to be empty.
On the post: Appeals Court: A Bunch Of Mostly-Irrelevant Information Is Not 'Probable Cause'
How much is enough?
Next >>