The internet is a wild west at the moment, where anybody is free to shoot (sorry, sue) anybody else for no reason other than they feel like it, and they have a gun (lawyer at hand)
Didn't like a product your bought at Amazon? Want to help others spending money at a restaurant with rude waiters? Better check if you can afford the lawsuit before posting a comment.
Trolling may be a nuisance occasionally. Until we can protect commenters from malicious prosecution and other harassment, there are plenty of other options available to keep trolls in check without threatening the right to free speech.
Would this be the same UK Government that scrapped the ID card scheme in 2010 as part of their measures 'to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties under the Labour Government and roll back state intrusion'?
with a) the lobbyists on the two sides largely representing the same global interests and b) the NSA likely to have access to all information deemed to be relevant, it would seem the the public are the only ones completely in the dark, and the EU severely disadvantaged. While it is understandable that the US want to preserve their NSAdvantage, why would the EU support them in this?
They are getting away too easy. Why not attach conditions to keep EFF and defendants on equal footing - waive the 'no standing' defense in return - reverse the burden of evidence. The DOJ can still decide if that is a price worth paying, of if they can find a way to preserve the evidence after all - run any search the EFF may want to run, and preserve any data that may result - turn over to the court very detailed metadata of the data destroyed (quantity, origin, data stored, reason stored, legal basis for storing, ...) - order storage of representative samples, i.e., keep x% data selected in a statistically meaningful way
Amazon website 7 May 2014, 8 pm GMT (http://www.amazon.com/Medialink-Wireless-N-Broadband-Internal-Antennas/dp/B00A3YN0Z0/ref=cm_rdp_ product) Most Helpful Customer Reviews 10,466 of 10,507 people found the following review helpful This company threatened me for my negative review By TD on September 26, 2013
and a quote highlighted by Amazon at the top of the comments section: "Company harrasses and threatens to sue people when they post a negative review of this product....do you really want to buy from someone like that?"
Stop picking on the guy! Totally not justified! His post on Popehat makes it perfectly clear that the accusations are ridiculous: - "[he has not] "shacked up" in a motel with a so-called "notorious furry. - [he has] not hired any sex workers. [and he hopes they will] stop being such fucking liars about important people. - [he does] not have a "drug problem." [which is a ridiculous accusation anyway, since Arden is] fortunate to be affluent, to have friends, and to know many people in the criminal justice system. - [he has] not accepted cash in low denominations for political favors, as has been claimed. That's ridiculous.
[And please note that] Interns hallucinate and are prone to sudden unconsciousness. It's a thing. You can Google it."
The government has arrived at a crossroad where they can either own up to what happened, clean out the rotten apples and rebuild what used to be great institutions, or continue meddling further into the quagmire they have worked themselves into. The State Department seems to have made their decision.
... and after all this, ASCAP gets to keep the original rate of 1.85 %? No damages, no fine, no compensation.
A kid downloads a single MP3 file worth 50 cents, and pays $160.000 just to teach him respect for the law, and the guys who break all sorts of laws and agreements on a massive, commercial scale get no sanction at all? They'll be stupid not to do it again!
It would appear that armed police are terrorists, too: "(3) The use or threat of action falling within subsection (2) which involves the use of firearms or explosives is terrorism whether or not subsection (1)(b) is satisfied."