http://www.techdirt.com/ Easily digestible tech news.... http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130606/23054823349/intelligence-boss-claims-real-villain-here-is-press-revealing-his-secret-spying-program.shtml#c944 Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:08:48 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130606/23054823349/intelligence-boss-claims-real-villain-here-is-press-revealing-his-secret-spying-program.shtml#c944 > have very little difference from Russia or China
> in terms of freedom of speech

Oh please. At least you can't be jailed in the US merely for offending someone and telling an off-color joke, like you can in most European countries.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130606/23054823349/intelligence-boss-claims-real-villain-here-is-press-revealing-his-secret-spying-program.shtml#c937 Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:02:28 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130606/23054823349/intelligence-boss-claims-real-villain-here-is-press-revealing-his-secret-spying-program.shtml#c937 > but I don't really think a different President would
> make any difference.

That's why I enjoy the frowny-faces of the idealistic young Obama supporters who have watched their man]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c2834 Wed, 5 Jun 2013 23:55:17 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c2834 > taking fingerprints with DNA!

Sucks to be you, then, since you can't do anything to stop it.

> A couple of questions for you:
> - Can you avoid leaving fingerprints at a crime scene?

Yes.

> - Can you avoid leaving DNA?

Yes.

> And for the slow among you the answers are
> yes to the first and no to the second.

Weird, that there are so many crime scenes from which no suspect DNA is recovered.

You're full of crap.

> you are the reason why the USA is going down the tubes
> with regards to civil rights.

And you're apparently the reason why the USA is bottoming out in basic education and common sense.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c2826 Wed, 5 Jun 2013 23:43:56 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c2826
http://www.tullahomanews.com/?p=15360]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c2801 Wed, 5 Jun 2013 23:23:23 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c2801
There's no such thing as 'probably cause'.

The term is probable cause.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c885 Tue, 4 Jun 2013 09:51:00 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c885
Why would one be constitutional and the other not? Both searches operates on the same level of probable cause, so I'm not sure why Scalia (and Mike) object to the latter but not the former.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c806 Tue, 4 Jun 2013 09:43:35 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130603/16534123300/horrifying-supreme-court-ruling-lets-police-collect-dna-because-you-might-just-be-horrible-criminal.shtml#c806 > the decision here, decimating the basics of the
> 4th amendment. I mean absolutely decimating it.

Well, at least that means we still have 90% of the 4th Amendment left...]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130530/07591323252/italian-court-overturns-seizure-cyberlocker-rapidgator.shtml#c163 Thu, 30 May 2013 16:09:21 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130530/07591323252/italian-court-overturns-seizure-cyberlocker-rapidgator.shtml#c163
Which is bullshit on its face. I use a cyberlocker all the time to transfer large files (photos, videos, compositions, etc.) that *I* create (which means non-infringing) to family and friends.

In fact, such a service is the only practical way to do it, since my ISP puts ridiculously low file-size limits on email attachments.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/09321723228/piano-instructor-claims-copyright-writing-letters-piano-keys.shtml#c417 Wed, 29 May 2013 16:31:19 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/09321723228/piano-instructor-claims-copyright-writing-letters-piano-keys.shtml#c417 > those at truly obscene levels from minor efforts,

In other words, you're for more and greater legalized theft.

Understood, comrade.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/09321723228/piano-instructor-claims-copyright-writing-letters-piano-keys.shtml#c394 Wed, 29 May 2013 16:29:09 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/09321723228/piano-instructor-claims-copyright-writing-letters-piano-keys.shtml#c394
Excellent...]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/09321723228/piano-instructor-claims-copyright-writing-letters-piano-keys.shtml#c373 Wed, 29 May 2013 16:07:35 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/09321723228/piano-instructor-claims-copyright-writing-letters-piano-keys.shtml#c373 > coupled with horendous YouTube policies
> that are quick to label accounts an infringing
> allows anyone to claim ownership of almost
> anything on YouTube

If anything, I'm surprised it's not abused more often.

Judging by the comments on just about every single video that allows them, you literally can't put up anything on YouTube without pissing someone off somehow.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/07105123227/hollywood-studios-send-dmca-takedowns-over-kim-dotcoms-mega-service.shtml#c580 Tue, 28 May 2013 19:35:05 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/07105123227/hollywood-studios-send-dmca-takedowns-over-kim-dotcoms-mega-service.shtml#c580 > obviously do not hold copyright on. This is called plagiarism.

No, it's not. It's copyfraud. Plagiarism is something else entirely.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130527/21352923220/dumb-idea-dumbest-idea-letting-companies-use-malware-against-infringers.shtml#c768 Tue, 28 May 2013 14:43:14 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130527/21352923220/dumb-idea-dumbest-idea-letting-companies-use-malware-against-infringers.shtml#c768 > if an incorrect file gets onto one seems even more ridiculous.
> Given how often DRM causes problems for legitimate users
> of the content, you can imagine the headaches (and potential
> lawsuits) this kind of thing would lead to.

This would be a helluva weapon for disruptive groups like Occupy that hate big corporations and banks. They could easily send one of these protected files to the entire corporate email list, and every secretary, mail boy, and assistant will then try and open it, resulting in a huge percentage of the company's computers locked down for a day or so.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/10400023230/why-are-uk-police-allowing-entertainment-industry-employees-arrest-interrogate-people-with-their-help.shtml#c592 Tue, 28 May 2013 14:35:15 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130528/10400023230/why-are-uk-police-allowing-entertainment-industry-employees-arrest-interrogate-people-with-their-help.shtml#c592 > longer lived at the address, but it didn't stop police from
> taking the guy to the police station where he was interrogated
> mainly by FACT employees with the police just sitting back
> and taking notes.

That's not what the linked article says. It says the cops went to the first address, found out that the suspect didn't live there anymore, then went to the place where he currently lives and arrested him there. They didn't arrest anyone at the first address.

> The person they were looking for no longer lived at the address
> but in the space of 15 minutes three cars, four detectives and
> two FACT officers HAD MADE IT TO THE CORRECT LOCATION.

> Armed with an emergency search warrant issued out of hours
> by a judge, police and FACT officers entered the suspect]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/10255023186/vermont-declares-war-patent-trolls-passes-new-law-sues-notorious-patent-troll.shtml#c228 Mon, 27 May 2013 09:17:22 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/10255023186/vermont-declares-war-patent-trolls-passes-new-law-sues-notorious-patent-troll.shtml#c228 > trolls to send threat letters demanding settlement

Well, that makes more sense. The wording of the article quoted above-- "it enumerates factors to help judges distinguish legitimate from illegitimate patent assertions"-- made it sound like they're talking about cases that have already gone to court.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c323 Fri, 24 May 2013 22:50:23 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c323
Not really. It's actually fairly mess-free, considering there is no copyright law (or any other law, for that matter) on Mars.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c308 Fri, 24 May 2013 22:48:04 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c308 > likely will be) American, and so will the rocket and lander,
> that US style copyright law does apply.

Disney can say whatever it likes. Doesn't make it true. The fact that a person is an American citizen doesn't mean U.S. law follows them around the universe wherever they go. A U.S. citizen can go to Amsterdam and legally smoke pot even though it's illegal to do so in the U.S. Likewise, a U.S. citizen could go to Mars and copy, play, and sell (if there was anyone else to sell to) the entire Disney DVD library and no law would be violated.

Despite the recent delusions of grandeur by a few Justice Department officials, U.S. law only applies in the U.S. It doesn't even apply 20 feet over the border in Canada. Why the hell would it apply on Mars?

To claim otherwise would essentially be claiming that the U.S. Congress has the legal authority to bind the entire universe with its laws, and that's laughable on its face.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c12 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:53:00 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c12 > decides to launch into "A Whole New World",
> the rights will need to have been cleared
> with Disney first.

I don't see why. Neither the United States nor any other country have jurisdiction on Mars. Their laws don't apply on Mars. There is *no* copyright law on Mars. Any person who happens to be there is free to do anything they like with any song they like.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130521/10401723156/if-you-think-you-should-actually-own-products-you-bought-now-would-be-good-time-to-call-congress.shtml#c1913 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:17:17 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130521/10401723156/if-you-think-you-should-actually-own-products-you-bought-now-would-be-good-time-to-call-congress.shtml#c1913 > contract is far more difficult than shutting
> down the parties that supply the tools that
> make it all too simple for their customers to
> breach.

Ah, so you apparently believe making things easy for big companies at the expense of citizens' property rights is the proper purpose of the criminal justice system.

Gotcha.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/10255023186/vermont-declares-war-patent-trolls-passes-new-law-sues-notorious-patent-troll.shtml#c26 Thu, 23 May 2013 12:17:14 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/10255023186/vermont-declares-war-patent-trolls-passes-new-law-sues-notorious-patent-troll.shtml#c26
But here I have to ask about this bit:

> Factors that suggest a bad faith patent assertion
> include not identifying the patent(s)-at-issue,
> and exactly how the recipient's behavior violates
> the patent

How the hell can someone sue, claiming a violation of their patent without even identifying the patent at issue? Or how the defendant is violating it?

How would such a suit even work? Does the plaintiff go into court and just say, "Defendant is violation a patent I own. Not gonna say how, or even which one. Just trust me, I own it, and they're violating it."

While I don't know much about patents, I do know basic civil procedure, and that seems ripe for a summary judgement ruling in favor of the defense.]]>