"To promote the progress of science and useful arts..."
As in the purpose of copyright is to promote progress as a benefit to society. It is not for the purpose of lining the pockets of large companies who leach off the creative works of others.
I understand that this is really about ratcheting up the surveillance, but what is the argument?
Call and texts? The carrier has that info. What apps are installed? Apple has that info. Individual app content? You know what was installed, go talk to them. The pictures they took? Do they expect he carefully documented his road to killing in selfies?
No only is this about increased access for police. This is about plain laziness. They don't want to have to put in the footwork. They just one a simple single entry point to his entire digital life.
Of course describing how a crime is committed is illegal. If it wasn't you could: 1) Hiddenly plan out a crime. 2) Anonymously tell people how to commit the crime 3) ?? 4) Profit!
Clearly all parts of this are illegal. The real trick from from this thing called KNOWLEDGE. You see speaking transfers KNOWLEDGE which is bad, thankfully you clearly lack it.
Shouldn't the judge have known this was an invalid request? Isn't that the whole point of judicial review, a check on the FBI and other agencies? Isn't the point of a warrant to force these agencies to go through a check to make sure what they are doing is legal?
There should be sanctions placed on judges that issue such invalid warrants.
Sorry, but you are vastly underestimating the search space we're looking at. In addition you are skipping over areas of computer science that are still not solved as if they are trivial.
This seems like a bit of a cheap shot. Sure the language in their TOS is laughable, but I'd bet it's some boilerplate language from whatever cheap way the managed to come up with a TOS. I doubt they sat around and talked about anything in there.
This would be a much more interesting article if we had some response from them about that section, or if they had actually tried to enforce that part of their TOS against somebody.
You mean 'only the abuses the NSA has voluntarily admitted to, while our only means of verification is leaked documents.'
Given that congress is only getting what information the NSA deems it needs, and the FISC is only getting the information the NSA gives it, there is (as far as I know) no oversight to the NSA that actually has access to information on the NSA that doesn't come from the NSA.
I'm not sure where all this USTR bashing is coming from. We are all aware that these TPP negotiations are taking place. We are usually aware of where they are happening and some of the groups participating. We even know the general topic of the treaty.
How can you just discount all of that information being shared and not see that as the transparency it is?!?
That has to be some really soul destroying work for the engineers involved. Knowing that you will never do anything productive. You will only ever be a drag and leach on successful companies.
We didn't just call him, we started a petition that he had to respond to.
He thanked us all for our concern, expressed that he shared the same concerns, checked his wallet for which businesses had given him large checks, and then said he would look for broad bi-partisan solutions.
As bad as I think this kind of fee/tax would be i'd enjoy seeing some country actually put this in place and then see a court case ruling that files over that network are not infringing as the license has been paid.
I know it'll never happen, but it'd be fun to watch.
One thing is missed at first that exaggerates the problem. The width % is not of the longest bar, but of the enclosing element. The max-width: 300px actually cuts the bars down so that they hit their longest length somewhere around width: 55%.
If I were him my next blog post would be something along the lines of...
Apparently The Observer Dispatch believes that have a trademark on the name, The Observer Dispatch, grants the right for The Observer Dispatch to have complete control of all uses of the name The Observer Dispatch. They appear to believe that any use of The Observer Dispatch that is not officially approved by The Observer Dispatch violates their trademark on the name The Observer Dispatch. What the folks at The Observer Dispatch seem to not understand is my use of the name, The Observer Dispatch, is not in a manner that could be found confusing by those looking for The Observer Dispatch and in no way does my use of The Observer Dispatch constitute trademark infringement.
The Observer Dispatch has no legal authority to force me to stop referring to The Observer Dispatch as The Observer Dispatch. All my uses of the name The Observer Dispatch are done in reference to The Observer Dispatch and in no way imply that I represent The Observer Dispatch.
Re: "little fanfare" -- I hope much wailing by pirates!
As in the purpose of copyright is to promote progress as a benefit to society. It is not for the purpose of lining the pockets of large companies who leach off the creative works of others.
Oh come on...
Can't we have a little hope that we've passed the half way mark?
What are they looking for?
Call and texts? The carrier has that info.
What apps are installed? Apple has that info.
Individual app content? You know what was installed, go talk to them.
The pictures they took? Do they expect he carefully documented his road to killing in selfies?
No only is this about increased access for police. This is about plain laziness. They don't want to have to put in the footwork. They just one a simple single entry point to his entire digital life.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BoingBoing clearly wrong
Of course describing how a crime is committed is illegal. If it wasn't you could:
1) Hiddenly plan out a crime.
2) Anonymously tell people how to commit the crime
3) ??
4) Profit!
Clearly all parts of this are illegal. The real trick from from this thing called KNOWLEDGE. You see speaking transfers KNOWLEDGE which is bad, thankfully you clearly lack it.
See I can make up crap too.
Re: Re: Re: BoingBoing clearly wrong
That's like saying if I make a blog post saying "There's a crack house at 123 Overthere St." I'm now a crack dealer and should go to jail.
What about the judge?
There should be sanctions placed on judges that issue such invalid warrants.
Re: Re: That's not their business plan.
That's not their business plan.
That said, I think they've found a way to sucker some quick cash from a few wealthy folks.
Justice
Justice: If you're not rich or a personal friend, you've done something wrong and we will find out what it is.
(untitled comment)
This would be a much more interesting article if we had some response from them about that section, or if they had actually tried to enforce that part of their TOS against somebody.
As it stands it seems more like nitpicking.
(untitled comment)
You mean 'only the abuses the NSA has voluntarily admitted to, while our only means of verification is leaked documents.'
Given that congress is only getting what information the NSA deems it needs, and the FISC is only getting the information the NSA gives it, there is (as far as I know) no oversight to the NSA that actually has access to information on the NSA that doesn't come from the NSA.
(untitled comment)
How can you just discount all of that information being shared and not see that as the transparency it is?!?
Poor Engineers
I almost feel sorry for them. Almost.
Just wondering...
Re: ???
He thanked us all for our concern, expressed that he shared the same concerns, checked his wallet for which businesses had given him large checks, and then said he would look for broad bi-partisan solutions.
Seems a bit of hyperbole
Or they could just use the cell connection data for that.
(untitled comment)
I know it'll never happen, but it'd be fun to watch.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It looks like they give a percentage width to the bars where width% = just under 2* vote %
With Ron Paul over 50% he is maxed at 100% width.
O'rly
Apparently The Observer Dispatch believes that have a trademark on the name, The Observer Dispatch, grants the right for The Observer Dispatch to have complete control of all uses of the name The Observer Dispatch. They appear to believe that any use of The Observer Dispatch that is not officially approved by The Observer Dispatch violates their trademark on the name The Observer Dispatch. What the folks at The Observer Dispatch seem to not understand is my use of the name, The Observer Dispatch, is not in a manner that could be found confusing by those looking for The Observer Dispatch and in no way does my use of The Observer Dispatch constitute trademark infringement.
The Observer Dispatch has no legal authority to force me to stop referring to The Observer Dispatch as The Observer Dispatch. All my uses of the name The Observer Dispatch are done in reference to The Observer Dispatch and in no way imply that I represent The Observer Dispatch.
More comments from Steven >>
Steven’s Submitted Stories.
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