anonymousanonymouscoward 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (3524) comment rss

  • On the post: The Ellen Show Issues Copyright Takedown On Transformative Video Commenting On Her Friendship With President Bush

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 10 Oct, 2019 @ 07:15am

    Re:

    It is difficult, if not impossible, to see something as being "transformative" when one fails to recognize the purpose of copyright as explained in the Constitution, or is blind to the fact that the background video is the commentary. Unless, of course, one is simply a copyright maximalist who misses no opportunity to rail against any use clearly allowed by the longstanding fair use rules.

  • On the post: FISA Court Finds The FBI Is Still Violating The Fourth Amendment With Its Abuse Of NSA Collections

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 09 Oct, 2019 @ 09:47am

    Re:

    While 'evidence' collected might not be allowed in courts, there is always parallel construction. Beyond that, re-read the last paragraph in the article. So, for now, nothing.

  • On the post: Turkish Gov't Demands US Embassy Apologize For 'Liking' A Tweet The Turkish Gov't Didn't Like

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 09 Oct, 2019 @ 09:40am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Who are you talking about???

    To which MBS do you refer?

  • On the post: Turkish Gov't Demands US Embassy Apologize For 'Liking' A Tweet The Turkish Gov't Didn't Like

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 09 Oct, 2019 @ 07:08am

    Re: Re: Re: Who are you talking about???

    That's more jealousy than admiration, though he tries hard at emulation.

  • On the post: FISA Court Finds The FBI Is Still Violating The Fourth Amendment With Its Abuse Of NSA Collections

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 09 Oct, 2019 @ 07:53am

    Depends upon ones definition of 'national security'.

    "...the FBI was using the intelligence information to vet its personnel and cooperating sources."

    That is in the interest of national security. The problem comes in the interpretation of the data found. This is explicitly shown in that the process failed to exclude those people who were not only doing the illegal searches, but their supervisors as well. Then there is the question of cooperating sources who helped build cases against marginal folks in the FBI's sting operations.

    What's not to like, from the FBI's standpoint?

  • On the post: CBP Official Refuses To Give Journalist His Passport Until He 'Admits' He Writes 'Propaganda'

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 08 Oct, 2019 @ 12:55pm

    Re: Signs of the future

    I wish I had thought of this earlier, appended to the end: Traveler: "Do you talk to monkeys often?" CPB officer: "No." Traveler: "Then how did you understand me?"

  • On the post: The DOJ Is Conflating The Content Moderation Debate With The Encryption Debate: Don't Let Them

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 08 Oct, 2019 @ 12:52pm

    Re: Re: Nonsense

    Why would anyone want to do that? Now if your talking about being forced to, or done clandestinely, then it is something else, and not legal in this country. China maybe.

  • On the post: CBP Official Refuses To Give Journalist His Passport Until He 'Admits' He Writes 'Propaganda'

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 08 Oct, 2019 @ 12:48pm

    Re: Some day,

    Oh I think that many humans understand other humans to a large degree. But certainly not when they deliberately close eyes, ears, and brains in the furtherance of their agenda. Whether that agenda is part of a personal ideology, or a paid for ideology then becomes a part of the essential questions, of which there are many.

  • On the post: CBP Official Refuses To Give Journalist His Passport Until He 'Admits' He Writes 'Propaganda'

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 08 Oct, 2019 @ 10:37am

    Signs of the future

    CBP officer, holding Traveler’s passport: “What are you?”

    Traveler: “Human being.”

    CBP officer: “So you’re a monkey, right?”

    Traveler: “No.”

    CBP officer: “You’re a Human being?”

    Traveler: “Yes.”

    CBP officer: “You are really a monkey, right?”

    Traveler: “No. I am a Human being. Traveling for tourism.”

    CBP officer: “You’re a Human being?”

    Traveler: “Yes.”

    CBP officer: “You’re really a monkey, right?”

    Traveler waited five seconds. Then: “For the purposes of expediting this conversation, yes.”

    CBP officer, a fourth time: “You really a monkey, right?”

    Traveler, again: “For the purposes of expediting this conversation, yes.”

    CBP officer: “How did you get a passport?”

  • On the post: The DOJ Is Conflating The Content Moderation Debate With The Encryption Debate: Don't Let Them

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 08 Oct, 2019 @ 08:40am

    Out of sight, out of their minds

    Isn't content moderation concerned with things other people can see, while encryption is about preventing other people from seeing what is encrypted? I can understand government types getting this wrong, but technologists?

  • On the post: Appeals Court Denies Qualified Immunity For Transit Cop Who Arrested A Journalist For Taking Pictures Of EMS Personnel

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 07 Oct, 2019 @ 04:01pm

    Re: Where's a cloning machine when you need one...?

    The problem with every other court in the country agreeing that LEO's should know the laws they enforce is that the Supreme Court has already said law enforcement officers don't need to know the laws they enforce. While I agree with the 5th Circuits decision in this case, it might be a bit risky, and other courts may not dare to take that risk. Still, if several do, there is the chance that the SCOTUS might revisit their previous decision, and I sure hope they do.

  • On the post: Deputy Attorney General Rosen: Companies Like Facebook Are Making Everyone Less Safe By Offering Encryption

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 07 Oct, 2019 @ 07:14am

    Re:

    Or, interpret the statistics you have based on reality rather than in support of your position. The article does not say that those 16 million reports were about US based users, so 1 in 20 is probably wrong on that alone. Then I would think there is a high probability that there are repeat offenders, who offend often rather than a greater number of offenders. So two things. Get better statistics, AND, interpret them better.

  • On the post: Music Piracy Continues To Drop Dramatically, But The Industry Hates To Admit That Because It Ruins The Narrative

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 07 Oct, 2019 @ 08:43am

    The day the music died.

    The worst case scenario for the IFPI is that those who no longer infringe already have as complete a collection of music as they wish, and therefore no longer have a reason to either 'rip streams' or even use streaming services. Oh, the horror.

    Of course that would also mean that there is a shrinking interest in new music, or the only new music that has interest is from independents who give their music away and get their 'rewards' (financial or otherwise) in other ways.

  • On the post: Deputy Attorney General Rosen: Companies Like Facebook Are Making Everyone Less Safe By Offering Encryption

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 07 Oct, 2019 @ 07:05am

    Probable Cause and the connection to Parallel Construction

    As pointed out n the article, the changes requested will not only impact the US, the only place the 4th Amendment applies (though other countries may have similar rules) those changes will cause impact...everywhere.

    In thinking about Rosen's insistence that they will only use their new power when 'judge approved' means that in order to get access to that power they need to provide probable cause. If they have probable cause then they have enough information to investigate. If they have enough information to investigate then why do they need access to digital records, either live or at rest? Go investigate. If the probable cause thingy is actually valid and not made from smoke and mirrors then they would likely be able to build a case without a warrant for communications. It just take something that seems an anathema to them, hard work.

    And, about that at rest part, if the alleged perpetrators have illegal stuff on their computers, it will likely be encrypted, and nothing Facebook, or Apple, or any other service provider do will impact that. Which leaves us to predict that OS level encryption is the next target on their list.

    Then again, the actual purpose of these demands likely have only a small part based in sex trafficking or child porn which is an artifice to achieve unprecedented access in the furtherance of power and control over the entire populace. There are too many examples of law enforcement 'creating' probable cause scenarios that have little to do with any truth to believe that the requirement for 'judge approval' has significant reality as a protection. Judges can be snowed, and have been snowed, and will be snowed again.

    Do these people really believe that the concept of parallel construction is unknown to those outside of law enforcement? I think they do realize that while parallel construction has not been found illegal (yet), it is certainly immoral, and they don't care. Listening in on what they consider 'juicy bits' will lead them to charging anyone they don't like with something, whether it has anything to do with the original 'probable cause' or not.

    This entire discussion is a parallel construction for the eventual total surveillance state, and antithetical to democracy in general. Just because it might be good for law enforcement does not mean it is good for democracy (yes I know we are a democratic republic and not a true democracy which has nothing to do with my statement).

  • On the post: Appeals Court Takes Immunity Away From Cop Who Entered A House Without A Warrant And Killed The Family Dog

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 04 Oct, 2019 @ 05:13pm

    Re:

    The case is in civil court, it's a lawsuit. The criminal acts were never a consideration, as it appears the officer was not sanctioned by his department, or fired. Shame that that is.

  • On the post: NY Times Opinion Section Gets CDA 230 Wrong AGAIN!

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 04 Oct, 2019 @ 05:10pm

    Re: Re: Re: Set it straight.

    To differentiate from the Baby Boomers who inhabit the editorial suite, that allowed the comment to go through. They, of course, are quiescing to the 'wokeness' of the subscribership (in however small amounts) in an attempt to placate them.

  • On the post: EU Continues To Muck Up The Internet: Approves Broad Filtering/Censorship Requirements

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 04 Oct, 2019 @ 12:36pm

    Re:

    It seems that the CJEU agrees with your assessment.

  • On the post: Surprise! Buzzfeed Links Bogus Net Neutrality Comments Directly To Broadband Industry

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 04 Oct, 2019 @ 10:50am

    Re: Re:

    It might, until it made going outside illegal, to protect the children, you know. The alternative would be to require SPF 4000, which would be a mud pack covering all exposed skin. This, though would be in conflict with the facial recognition industry, as well as the surveillance state.

  • On the post: Surprise! Buzzfeed Links Bogus Net Neutrality Comments Directly To Broadband Industry

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 04 Oct, 2019 @ 09:55am

    Re:

    Is that list > or < than 1? I would be like to see any nominations for that list. Maybe FDIC, or have they committed some nefarious act I am not aware of?

  • On the post: Surprise! Buzzfeed Links Bogus Net Neutrality Comments Directly To Broadband Industry

    anonymousanonymouscoward ( profile ), 04 Oct, 2019 @ 08:36am

    Re: Re: Gee, so many negatives.

    Ah, such a nefarious, underhanded methodology to double (or so) the penalty to the settling company. It will cost them around that much to generate the check and mail it to you. That it does nothing to even make the harmed even feel better is an added, non monetary, bonus.

Next >>