Ah, but in a judicial law system traditions and precedents can be overturned in one ruling by a judge deciding that it no longer, or never did, make sense.
While the world clamours for "clarifying" legislation (which will just produced question marks over something else) we should be really praying for test cases like this.
In the end it is only a Supreme Court that can really screw up the law with a bad interpretation of legislation. Once the Supremes have ruled new legislation is required to overturn it (unless a new set of Supremes decide to revisit it). There really should be a mechanism by which lower courts can begin to treat Supreme Court rulings as simple precedents again after a certain period of time.
In the US, of course, there is one particular Supreme Court ruling that ensures that will never be considered.
Re: And another thing... SOPA vs Robin Hood vs Skynet
Fewer more considered transactions with a level of diligence attached ironically mean more stable markets.
Not true: those fewer transactions will also be large and unbalanced by lots of smaller transactions - which would be economically unviable. Fewer, larger, transactions leads to more volatility not less.
The only reason they exist at all is so they can *claim* to be self-regulating whenever external regulation is discussed.
Perhaps because the press SHOULD NOT BE REGULATED!
The phone hacking scandal has actually shown that newspapers are regulated - by the market and laws unrelated to journalism.
The newpaper that was primary culprit no longer exists - that's the market at work.
Most of the "hacking" that took place is hardly worth the name. Is what has been done unethical? Yes. Should it be illegal (with the government dictating journalistic behaviour)? No.
Does anybody really then government and, therefore, police, involvement in journalism and newsworthyness is a good idea?
No, it is the country that didn't bail out its banks but instead let the market do its work. If the rest of the world had followed Iceland's example we'd all be better off.
It looks like they're going for the current trend of writing constitutions outlining all the things the government should be doing for it's people. i.e. the granting of social, legal, rights.
A constitution should be about restricting the power of government. i.e. safeguarding natural, inalienable, rights
The latter is far, far more important than the former.
If you want to hold up the BBC as something to emulate in a "Ministry of Truth" you might want to find out how true people think there "truths" are. Googling "bbc truth" returns a link to http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/ on the first page.
Note to the FBI, the DOD, and others demanding more powers to combat cyber-terrorism and cyber-warfare:
a) The ability of foreign powers to shut down power plants and, other computer based infrastructure, over the internet is not real - and, therefore, this cause of action is safe but your demands for more power are based on lies.
OR
b) Whoops - you accidentally disabled the control system of a nuclear power plant because it was infected with a botnet.
The Times "won" that war by putting up a paywall. My guess is that this is part of an editorial campaign to convince their readers that the Mail Online is worth paying for.
Markets do not have a natural tendency toward monopolies. In a truly free market the very possibility of a monopoly being created creates an incentive to break it.
Re: Re: Re: You don't want to be considered a piracy supporter? Condemn some sites.
Oh, for a world where this had only occurred with copyright.
The conflating of natural rights and unnatural, granted, rights is at the root of the erosion of those natural rights. See the Canadian Human Rights Commission vs. Mark Steyn (or the right not to be offended vs. freedom of speech).
On the post: Righthaven Appeals The Idea That Using Entire Work Could Be Fair Use
Re: Re: Fair use only a defence
On the post: Righthaven Appeals The Idea That Using Entire Work Could Be Fair Use
Re: Fair use only a defence
While the world clamours for "clarifying" legislation (which will just produced question marks over something else) we should be really praying for test cases like this.
In the end it is only a Supreme Court that can really screw up the law with a bad interpretation of legislation. Once the Supremes have ruled new legislation is required to overturn it (unless a new set of Supremes decide to revisit it). There really should be a mechanism by which lower courts can begin to treat Supreme Court rulings as simple precedents again after a certain period of time.
In the US, of course, there is one particular Supreme Court ruling that ensures that will never be considered.
On the post: The Definitive Post On Why SOPA And Protect IP Are Bad, Bad Ideas
Re: And another thing... SOPA vs Robin Hood vs Skynet
Not true: those fewer transactions will also be large and unbalanced by lots of smaller transactions - which would be economically unviable. Fewer, larger, transactions leads to more volatility not less.
On the post: New Head Of UK's Newspaper Regulators Thinks Bloggers Are A Bigger Problem Than Phone Hacking Tabloids?
Re:
Perhaps because the press SHOULD NOT BE REGULATED!
The phone hacking scandal has actually shown that newspapers are regulated - by the market and laws unrelated to journalism.
The newpaper that was primary culprit no longer exists - that's the market at work.
Most of the "hacking" that took place is hardly worth the name. Is what has been done unethical? Yes. Should it be illegal (with the government dictating journalistic behaviour)? No.
Does anybody really then government and, therefore, police, involvement in journalism and newsworthyness is a good idea?
On the post: Times Change; Dominant Tech Firms Change
Re: Had these been regulated, perhaps they'd have been more cautious:
On the post: Why Didn't UK Deal With Ridiculous Copyright Term Lengths?
Re: For only one of the reasons I thought
On the post: Why Didn't UK Deal With Ridiculous Copyright Term Lengths?
For only one of the reasons I thought
Unfortunately I was correct in my other assumption: the EU. The EU/a> now controls the term lengths in the UK. I think there is a possibility of shortening (slightly) the length of copyright on works published prior to 1995 - but that is all.
On the post: Why Is The Justice Department Pretending US Copyright Laws Apply In The UK?
Re:
It does have to go through a court though, which is one step up from the European Arrest Warrant.
On the post: Iceland (a.k.a. The Transparentest Place On Earth) Crowdsources Its New Constitution
Re:
On the post: Iceland (a.k.a. The Transparentest Place On Earth) Crowdsources Its New Constitution
Rights vs. "Rights"
A constitution should be about restricting the power of government. i.e. safeguarding natural, inalienable, rights
The latter is far, far more important than the former.
On the post: Bill Clinton Thinks The Internet Needs A Taxpayer Funded Ministry Of Truth
The BBC's "Truth"
On the post: Supreme Court Says Business Favorable Arbitration Clauses Can Block Class Action Lawsuits
Be careful when advocating the reform of arbitration
On the post: Is It Rude To Link To Someone Without First Asking Permission?
Re: Permission Culture
On the post: Summit Entertainment Sues Fans Who Tweeted Images From Upcoming Twilight Flick
Re: Re: Re: Not in their "proper context"?
On the post: Hugh Grant: Investigative Reporter
Journalists found at News of the World
On the post: FBI Hijacks Botnet, With Court Order... Then Issues Kill Signal To Millions Of Computers
But.. but... cyber-warfare
a) The ability of foreign powers to shut down power plants and, other computer based infrastructure, over the internet is not real - and, therefore, this cause of action is safe but your demands for more power are based on lies.
OR
b) Whoops - you accidentally disabled the control system of a nuclear power plant because it was infected with a botnet.
On the post: UK Paper Insists Google Is Out To Destroy British Culture
Google was also the enemy of The Times
On the post: UK Paper Insists Google Is Out To Destroy British Culture
Re: Re:
Wrong paper; you want the Daily Express for your Daily Diana Updates.
On the post: If AT&T Puts A Meter On Your Broadband, But That Meter Is Grossly Inaccurate, Is That Meter Really There?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Need for government oversight
On the post: If This Is 'Piracy' Then I Support Piracy
Re: Re: Re: You don't want to be considered a piracy supporter? Condemn some sites.
The conflating of natural rights and unnatural, granted, rights is at the root of the erosion of those natural rights. See the Canadian Human Rights Commission vs. Mark Steyn (or the right not to be offended vs. freedom of speech).