Courts do have the power to order assets be confiscated. Regular bills he can say "sue me" and get away with it, but here the plaintiff already did that.
He probably wont say why he did it, since as a cop he full knows the value of remaining silent.
Yes we do know that the sheriff did the killing. He walked out of the chambers immediately after with hands raised and accepted arrest.
US bans distribution and sale so Kaspersky goes ahead and deletes product the customer already paid for? Yea that may be what the US gov wants, but it doesnt seem legal to me and it wasnt what the US gov ordered. Same thing with installing another AV. Not legal, and arguably the customers would be better served by just using Windows Defender.
Deepfakes are like defamation. In the past, some have tried to defend against libel by saying its just parody. When its not parody courts reject that defense. As they should.
Really, they have a job to do and no where in that job description is anything about copyright. So where are they getting this idea that that is part of the job? Maybe someone should ask them who told them to do that.
No its not talking in circles. If you want to operate in Brazil you must have a physical presence and a local director that is able to direct operations and is responsible for making sure the division operates according to the law. The local director was ordered to break the law so he quit.
Do you think a company that operates on the internet should be considered above the law? Untouchable, so to speak?
I think the point is that cloudflare has facilities in Brazil that are subject to closing and/or taking. They ARE subject to the law.
I answered your question now answer mine. Do you think internet corps should be considered above the law?
I dont think Brazil cares about most websites. The law does not require all websites to have a local division with a local division head. Just certain businesses. And this is not about the division head being a hostage. In any business the division head is responsible for what his division does. And if the ceo orders you to break the law its your job to tell the ceo NO.
Do you think a company that is entirely on the internet should be considered above the law?
If they want to operate in Brazil they do have to abide by the law. Otherwise they will be blocked.
Internet corps want to be above the law if they have no property or personnel in that country that law enforcement can touch. Making them have someone in the country directing and responsible for what is done in that country solves that loophole. If you think there is another solution to that problem lets hear it. Be specific.
Its required that there be a local representative that has the putative power to control what goes on from the local office. He can be arrested because he directs and is responsible for the local operations. If he doesnt have that power then he should quit. And he did.
If you dont like being fact checked dont lie so much.
for a neutral news site
I think Reuters is the best one for unbiased reporting.