Congresspeople should know better, but perhaps they don't, so I'm willing to give them a little of the benefit of the doubt, but blocking someone who says "it's illegal for you to block people", puts them in the clear realm of no longer being able to claim ignorance? Is that clear grounds for a 1st amendment suit?
(It also affects NBC Comcast through Universal Studios)
Is it just me, or when Amazon bought MGM this week just after the governor signed, did anyone else think about how MGM helped with a theme park in Florida until about 13 years ago?
At the end of the second paragraph, it looks like there's supposed to be a link with the text "build better ai", but the target attribute of the anchor tag isn't properly closed. It's also repeated, which makes me think it's something in your article software that's causing the problem.
IMO, the purpose of encrypted DNS is that the ISPs like Comcast can't get your DNS data. Well, if Comcast is in on it, then they'll be building their own server, and we're back where we started. Sadly, Comcast getting in on it will make all the other dumb ISPs realize they can do the same thing. We can still choose another DNS server, but there'll be a lot of people who just leave it at default through DHCP.
Is take out billboards by police stations that are divided on two:
It should a Cap shield logo on one side that says something like "Captain America represents the good cops. He stands up for what is right."
Then on the other side have the Punisher log with something like, "Punisher represents the rioters, punishing those who they think have been doing evil."
This would possibly shame them into dropping the logo.
(I hereby relinquish whatever rights I have in this idea to Marvel so they can use it without recompense. Although I wouldn't mind a recompense.)
If you're wearing a space suit, your face can be seen, and so should be in compliance with the 19th century law, and if that transparent face covering prevents the spread of disease, you should be good. Everyone has a space suit right?
My kids like plants vs zombies, but all of their new games all state that they require an Internet connection. But heat they really mean is a connection to EA's servers that aren't going to be up forever. I'm not going to rent these games for $60. Or even $20.
If I have freedom of speech, that means I should have the right to jack hammer a message into the garage at the police station? I didn't take anything. I just destroyed something. But speech is a public good, right?
It seems to me like a reasonable position for a company to hold is, “you can say whatever you want on your own streams, and out in public, and in tournaments we don’t support. But on our streams, or at our tournaments, nothing political.” Anything more lenient than this pobably brings problems. Maybe I'm missing something, but allowing all speech on Blizzard's channels doesn't seem mandatory.
"How do you ... actually maintain lawful access to the information ... need[ed]?"
Can't be done. Not possible.
Any developer worth their salt, can make an "unbreakable" communication app in a few hours. If the government makes big players make backdoors (er, bedroom windows?), then the bad guys will start using apps that are less common, and less familiar to law enforcement, which will make law enforcement's job even harder.
If we follow their reasoning to its logical conclusion, paper shredders should keep a log of everything they shred, in case law enforcement needs to get a record of what was shredded. Microwaves will also need to keep a record of CDs and hard drives they destroy.
In one way of looking at it, an IP does actually refer to a single computer. At my house, that's the modem/router provided to me by the ISP. In the case of an "illegal download", the router is "guilty" of (routing requests) to illegally download content, not the users computer. Maybe there's a good legal reason to rent routers from the ISP. The device with that IP address is the ISPs!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a university created by the government. This isn't fake, this is the government helping foreigners legally into the country.
If blizzard uses BitTorrent to distribute their game client, it's not illegal.
If Kim dotcom releases his album on Mega, it's not unauthorized sharing.
Bodycams
Does this mean the FOP is willing to put backdoors in bodycams in case the FBI needs some footage? ;)
I think this action could get him in serious trouble
Congresspeople should know better, but perhaps they don't, so I'm willing to give them a little of the benefit of the doubt, but blocking someone who says "it's illegal for you to block people", puts them in the clear realm of no longer being able to claim ignorance? Is that clear grounds for a 1st amendment suit?
I wouldn't say it just affects Disney
(It also affects NBC Comcast through Universal Studios)
Is it just me, or when Amazon bought MGM this week just after the governor signed, did anyone else think about how MGM helped with a theme park in Florida until about 13 years ago?
So what you're saying is . . .
"I believe my perception was altered due to the high stress of the incident"
So, despite not being attacked, you were under stress, so your recollection can't be trusted?
There you have it. Police can't be trusted with the remembering the truth, even when not being attacked? We shouldn't trust their word of events?
This has more than just 1st amendment problems
Sure. It's got first amendment problems. But I think this I'll has 8th amendment problems.
Hey, you've decided to track your users? okay now you're liable for copyright infringement (and death threats, libel, and ...) of your users!
That seems like a cruel and unusual punishment to me.
Bug in HTML
At the end of the second paragraph, it looks like there's supposed to be a link with the text "build better ai", but the target attribute of the anchor tag isn't properly closed. It's also repeated, which makes me think it's something in your article software that's causing the problem.
Irony
Where police have non-constitutional immunity, and press don't have constitutional immunity.
This scares me
IMO, the purpose of encrypted DNS is that the ISPs like Comcast can't get your DNS data. Well, if Comcast is in on it, then they'll be building their own server, and we're back where we started. Sadly, Comcast getting in on it will make all the other dumb ISPs realize they can do the same thing. We can still choose another DNS server, but there'll be a lot of people who just leave it at default through DHCP.
Perhaps what Disney should do...
Is take out billboards by police stations that are divided on two:
It should a Cap shield logo on one side that says something like "Captain America represents the good cops. He stands up for what is right."
Then on the other side have the Punisher log with something like, "Punisher represents the rioters, punishing those who they think have been doing evil."
This would possibly shame them into dropping the logo.
(I hereby relinquish whatever rights I have in this idea to Marvel so they can use it without recompense. Although I wouldn't mind a recompense.)
Other worries
Sure worry about people who are good at encryption, but that doesn't mean we should abolish it.
I'm similarly worried about people who are good at:
I'm also much more worried about people who are really good at sniper shooting.
And we pay citizens to learn this one.
I think they can be reconciled.
If you're wearing a space suit, your face can be seen, and so should be in compliance with the 19th century law, and if that transparent face covering prevents the spread of disease, you should be good. Everyone has a space suit right?
EA loves to do this
My kids like plants vs zombies, but all of their new games all state that they require an Internet connection. But heat they really mean is a connection to EA's servers that aren't going to be up forever. I'm not going to rent these games for $60. Or even $20.
Taken to its logical conclusion...
If I have freedom of speech, that means I should have the right to jack hammer a message into the garage at the police station? I didn't take anything. I just destroyed something. But speech is a public good, right?
This is reasonable?
It seems to me like a reasonable position for a company to hold is, “you can say whatever you want on your own streams, and out in public, and in tournaments we don’t support. But on our streams, or at our tournaments, nothing political.” Anything more lenient than this pobably brings problems. Maybe I'm missing something, but allowing all speech on Blizzard's channels doesn't seem mandatory.
Mandating backdoors will make things worse
"How do you ... actually maintain lawful access to the information ... need[ed]?"
Can't be done. Not possible.
Any developer worth their salt, can make an "unbreakable" communication app in a few hours. If the government makes big players make backdoors (er, bedroom windows?), then the bad guys will start using apps that are less common, and less familiar to law enforcement, which will make law enforcement's job even harder.
Retracted
Well, it looks like Blizzard just retracted, and gave the money back.
Where does it end?
If we follow their reasoning to its logical conclusion, paper shredders should keep a log of everything they shred, in case law enforcement needs to get a record of what was shredded. Microwaves will also need to keep a record of CDs and hard drives they destroy.
Iowa
"No, no, no, we're not involved with Iowa."
<files lawsuit in Iowa>
smh
We could look at it another way...
In one way of looking at it, an IP does actually refer to a single computer. At my house, that's the modem/router provided to me by the ISP. In the case of an "illegal download", the router is "guilty" of (routing requests) to illegally download content, not the users computer. Maybe there's a good legal reason to rent routers from the ISP. The device with that IP address is the ISPs!
What makes it a fake university?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a university created by the government. This isn't fake, this is the government helping foreigners legally into the country.
If blizzard uses BitTorrent to distribute their game client, it's not illegal.
If Kim dotcom releases his album on Mega, it's not unauthorized sharing.
More comments from McKay >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by McKay.
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