I believe there is a constitutional amendment requiring all US Bills to either have a cutesy title or be named after a victim to a crime that was already covered by other legislation.
Is the dissenting judge worried that she has been misapplying the law for years and is worried that someone might think a judge should know that throwing-people-in-jail-because-you-don't-like-them-even-though-they've-not-broken-any-laws was wrong and she could end up in trouble? I REALLY hope that isn't the case and she is simply an idiot but who knows?
The argument against fact checkers contains an interesting little snippet. If doing research can constitute fact checking and it is illegal to post fact checks it follows that anything published on the internet cannot be researched but has to be made up by the author or else it is illegal.
Since the law requires that training material for Police officers is made public then surely any material that cannot be published cannot be used for training police officers and thus has no commercial value as training material.
Is a decision by the EU court that multinational companies cannot be allowed to exist. Facebook choose to do business in the EU and in other countries, the European Courts have decided that "Facebook" is an individual and has decided to be in the EU so is subject to their laws. A US court can make the same decision and a British Court and a Chinese Court. All these judgements could be contradictory yet Facebook must obey them all. The only alternative they have is to do no business and have no assets in the EU or any other coun try that expects its judgements to be enforced Worldwide. A case the other way around with the US government demanding data from Microsoft that it would be illegal for Microsoft to give in the EU (where the data resided) was decided in the US courts as applying US law to that circumstance.
If we want the World to continue as it does now we need some new international treaties to limit this stupidity. Until then we must get used to the idea that multinationals are doomed.
Twitter has a relatively easy get out here, just stop autocropping images if doing so could cause their users a problem. I am not saying I believe (I don't) that all such alleged infringements of copyright should be acted upon or should be able to be acted upon, merely that Twitter's own actions, entirely voluntary actions, put their customers at risk and they do not have to.
Call themselves the Washington Americans. They claimed the name 'honoured' native Americans, this still would and I'd love to see the looney right get upset about that name!
Why unreasonable? Police departments are all in favour of putting cameras everywhere they aren't, to quote far too many policemen far too often. If they are behaving themselves they have nothing to fear. The only people with access to the cameras would be the police and anyone who can obtain a court order, based on appropriate evidence of misbehaviour.
The police assure us they would never abuse their access to private data, so that cannot be their problem, so if the police are still objecting it must mean they don't respect the courts.
When rightly criticising this madness is why it exists. Partly to punish "those horrible Americans" is true but it is mainly because governments and big business blatantly abused the freedom they used to have.
Most of life works like a pendulum, one side swings it hard there way and then the other side pushes back just as hard. Neither want a reasonable resolution, both want to win. Until we all learn that compromise isn't a dirty word we will have these problems. Not everything governments do should be public as it happens, not everything governments do is entitled to secrecy. Not all of our data should be private nor should all of it be on the front page of the paper.
The GDPR is a terrible law but no GDPR was worse law.
Nielson have always been market leaders, or only players, in the USA, but not in the rest of the World. The other players have had huge problems with reporting on non-linear viewing but they have at least been trying for years.
I, of course, no nothing about the background of either case. However i do know the two cases are not entirely similar. Kate Scottow used two separate twitter accounts in what was described in court as a campaign of harrassment. "Dead naming" was not her sole attack, there were also allegations of racism, xenophobia, being a crook and a fake lawyer.
It would also help if Americans would remember that a visit from the police in the uk doesn't often involve stun grenades and battering rams, it does mean a polite chat with a single unarmed man or woman, who will not force entry if not invited in. And, we value free speech highly, but we don't worship it as some Americans do. Most people here accept more limits on what you can say in public, and we expect our police to "keep the peace" rather than come to see who shot who. They aren't angels, some are thugs, some are racist bastards, but many of them are nice helpful people.
As the article makes clear the ruling makes dash buttons illegal for making it easy for Amazon to con customers so I assume the title was supposed to be "Amazon Dash Buttons Ruled Illegal In Germany For... Making It Too Easy To Fleece Consumers"
It is entirely possible that 3 out of 4 defendants don't actually exist and non-existent defendants frequently keep their own council. Personally I have always regarded the American worship of free speech above all else as downright silly but I've not seen Techdirt wandering from that stance. The IDF are far too often a bunch of vile thugs who use the excuse that there are vile thugs on the other side as an excuse to do whatever the hell they like but it is hardly relevant here. Sending pictures of the outcome of gunshots to an advocate of everyone carrying and using their weapons is even in my jaundiced anti-American view of Free Speech so completely clearly uncriminal that I can't understand why you bothered posting it, still you have the right to your opinion, however silly.
Re: Re: I just hope…
I believe there is a constitutional amendment requiring all US Bills to either have a cutesy title or be named after a victim to a crime that was already covered by other legislation.
Worrying thought
Is the dissenting judge worried that she has been misapplying the law for years and is worried that someone might think a judge should know that throwing-people-in-jail-because-you-don't-like-them-even-though-they've-not-broken-any-laws was wrong and she could end up in trouble? I REALLY hope that isn't the case and she is simply an idiot but who knows?
Re:
The argument against fact checkers contains an interesting little snippet. If doing research can constitute fact checking and it is illegal to post fact checks it follows that anything published on the internet cannot be researched but has to be made up by the author or else it is illegal.
When do we expect
The perjury prosecution?
Re: Public and private, and SEPARATE.
Just remember you get the lizards you voted for.
(See Douglas Adams' So Long and Thanks for All the Fish for details)
Re:
"Clarence Thomas" and "sounds insane" in one sentence. Where have I seen or thought that before ...
Re: I'm Having Trouble Keeping Up
Surely it would be more apposite to ask if DevinNunes'cow has a Devin Nunes?
MArket for training materials
Since the law requires that training material for Police officers is made public then surely any material that cannot be published cannot be used for training police officers and thus has no commercial value as training material.
Re: Re:
Re: Keystone Kops
The Keystone Kops were funny, these clowns are not.
What this decision is really about
Is a decision by the EU court that multinational companies cannot be allowed to exist. Facebook choose to do business in the EU and in other countries, the European Courts have decided that "Facebook" is an individual and has decided to be in the EU so is subject to their laws. A US court can make the same decision and a British Court and a Chinese Court. All these judgements could be contradictory yet Facebook must obey them all. The only alternative they have is to do no business and have no assets in the EU or any other coun try that expects its judgements to be enforced Worldwide. A case the other way around with the US government demanding data from Microsoft that it would be illegal for Microsoft to give in the EU (where the data resided) was decided in the US courts as applying US law to that circumstance.
If we want the World to continue as it does now we need some new international treaties to limit this stupidity. Until then we must get used to the idea that multinationals are doomed.
but ...
Twitter has a relatively easy get out here, just stop autocropping images if doing so could cause their users a problem. I am not saying I believe (I don't) that all such alleged infringements of copyright should be acted upon or should be able to be acted upon, merely that Twitter's own actions, entirely voluntary actions, put their customers at risk and they do not have to.
Keep the spirit of the old name
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Camera is off = You're not a cop'
Why unreasonable? Police departments are all in favour of putting cameras everywhere they aren't, to quote far too many policemen far too often. If they are behaving themselves they have nothing to fear. The only people with access to the cameras would be the police and anyone who can obtain a court order, based on appropriate evidence of misbehaviour.
The police assure us they would never abuse their access to private data, so that cannot be their problem, so if the police are still objecting it must mean they don't respect the courts.
Re:
If they have evidence there is no need to trust them. Trust is for when there is no evidence and that is what this group of criminals has abused.
What one must remember
When rightly criticising this madness is why it exists. Partly to punish "those horrible Americans" is true but it is mainly because governments and big business blatantly abused the freedom they used to have.
Most of life works like a pendulum, one side swings it hard there way and then the other side pushes back just as hard. Neither want a reasonable resolution, both want to win. Until we all learn that compromise isn't a dirty word we will have these problems. Not everything governments do should be public as it happens, not everything governments do is entitled to secrecy. Not all of our data should be private nor should all of it be on the front page of the paper.
The GDPR is a terrible law but no GDPR was worse law.
Only in America ...
Nielson have always been market leaders, or only players, in the USA, but not in the rest of the World. The other players have had huge problems with reporting on non-linear viewing but they have at least been trying for years.
Re:
I, of course, no nothing about the background of either case. However i do know the two cases are not entirely similar. Kate Scottow used two separate twitter accounts in what was described in court as a campaign of harrassment. "Dead naming" was not her sole attack, there were also allegations of racism, xenophobia, being a crook and a fake lawyer. It would also help if Americans would remember that a visit from the police in the uk doesn't often involve stun grenades and battering rams, it does mean a polite chat with a single unarmed man or woman, who will not force entry if not invited in. And, we value free speech highly, but we don't worship it as some Americans do. Most people here accept more limits on what you can say in public, and we expect our police to "keep the peace" rather than come to see who shot who. They aren't angels, some are thugs, some are racist bastards, but many of them are nice helpful people.
Typo in the title
"Amazon Dash Buttons Ruled Illegal In Germany For... Making It Too Easy To Fleece Consumers"
Re: So, 3 out of 4 so accurate that aren't contested.
Personally I have always regarded the American worship of free speech above all else as downright silly but I've not seen Techdirt wandering from that stance. The IDF are far too often a bunch of vile thugs who use the excuse that there are vile thugs on the other side as an excuse to do whatever the hell they like but it is hardly relevant here.
Sending pictures of the outcome of gunshots to an advocate of everyone carrying and using their weapons is even in my jaundiced anti-American view of Free Speech so completely clearly uncriminal that I can't understand why you bothered posting it, still you have the right to your opinion, however silly.
More comments from Jeff Green >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Jeff Green.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt