Wouldn't the fact that Katy Perry was already selling merchandise with her name for years before Katie even came along (i.e. prior use in commerce) provide a pretty solid defense on this?
Techdirt has been dunking on Elon Musk for years, long before his purchase of Twitter and his buddying up to Donald Trump. Remember the kids who got trapped in a cave in Thailand? That was six years ago and Techdirt had some choice things to say about him then too.
He's already basically said that if you don't advertise with us (or you stop advertising with us), we're going to sue you for...something. I'm sure it's not far from there to making it mandatory to advertise on his platform. Let's not give him any more ideas.
But… how are they going to access those if the school is required by law to block access to such sites? Most schools are going to do a blanket ban, and teachers are going to be left to do what? Show kids useful YouTube science videos on their phones? Or maybe some schools will implement a special teacher code that lets them bypass the block. And by the end of the first week of school half the kids in the school will likely know that password.
This I can answer. You have network-based filtering where things are filtered at the ISP/firewall level. That can be targeted based on username, e.g. students get one set of policies and staff get a different one. You also have filtering software installed on student devices that provides an extra layer of filtering and can also apply it when they are using the laptop outside of the building, e.g. at home. Between the both of them, you can do a pretty good job of blocking. There will still be a few students who setup or find proxies to run through, but it cuts out 99% of it and proxies can be blocked as they're caught.
Oh, you’re looking for a specific article on a specific topic, is that it? Then the proper syntax is site:www.techdirt.com, not ‘domain something something’. (That site:… portion can be placed anywhere on the address bar, it doesn’t matter where.)
And whereas most browsers, and DNS servers, will just automatically insert the ‘www.’ portion for a correct resolution, failing to enter it into the search query can often result in a lack of responsive entries. Just sayin’……
Doing that makes no difference with this current issue.
Hate to break it to you, but Windows is just as secure as MacOS and Linux, assuming a competent administrator (applies to all of them, an incompetent admin can make any of them vulnerable). You hear about Windows more often because it's a bigger target, but the vast majority of infections for any of them are through malware and usually because someone did something stupid and let it through the front door.
(3) an Internet website, platform, or other interactive computer service for downloading any application or software for use on a computer or electronic device that is designed to assist or facilitate efforts to obtain an elective abortion or an abortion-inducing drug; or
(4) an Internet website, platform, or other interactive computer service that allows or enables those who provide or aid or abet elective abortions, or those who manufacture, mail, distribute, transport, or provide abortion-inducing drugs, to collect money, digital currency, resources, or any other thing of value.
So the way this is written, it seems like ISPs will be required to block Google Play/Apple App Store since there are likely apps that will help people find abortion drugs. It doesn't just specify to residents of Texas so if they have them at all they would be blocked. It would also appear to block access to things like Planned Parenthood's website or any company that sells the drugs (Walgreens, CVS etc) AND that of their payment processors.
So, you know, on top of the obvious 1A trampling issues, it would appear to run afoul of interstate commerce laws too as it would appear to regulate legal content in other states.
The bill is also threatening criminal prosecution to abortion funds AND THEIR DONORS. If you have donated to an organization that helps people in Texas acquire an abortion, they are coming to criminally prosecute you.
Agreed. At the moment, CoD sells more on Playstation than Xbox. What Sony is really after, though, is preventing MS from putting Activision games, especially CoD, on Gamepass. And let's be real, if regulators made them divest the CoD IP and Sony snapped it up, what do you think are the chances it became a Playstation exclusive?
If the positions were reversed there's no chance that Sony would keep CoD available on Xbox after the current contract and it would only appear on PC after a year or two when they milked the current version and are ready to release the next.
To voice our dissent with Texas SB-797, we're going to design, print, deliver, and donate 500+ "various" languages (Arabic, Hindi, English Gay Pride, Spanish, Vulcan, Klingon, and others) "In God We Trust" 16x20 posters to schools in Texas, flooding the public school system with our IGWT artwork.
We're also going to rent billboard space across the state -- I'm looking at you Southlake and Mineola!
I'm sorely tempted to donate, especially if I can get a sign written in Vulcan or maybe Klingon.
The next thing they're going to demand is not only that mail providers not classify them as spam, but a requirement that they MUST pass them through and bypass any spam filters or other rules that might prevent them from being delivered.
If you're talking about voice and data services over satellite then, yes, those would be common carrier-type services. DirecTV is more akin to a cable TV package. It costs DTV money to carry it, why should they be required to subsidize OAN's existence? Bandwidth is not unlimited, they can only carry so many channels on the satellites. Do you think Comcast should be forced to carry every single channel in existence? If not then why should DTV have to?
I don't know how old you are so maybe you weren't around for things then but the whole invasion of Iraq thing happened under George H. W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Biden was just a Senator. He is no more culpable than any of the other 99 Senators.
(A) IN GENERAL.—A covered person may not provide online hosting services or back-end online services to any other entity that is not owned by the covered person.
It would basically make cloud computing illegal. Google, Microsoft, Amazon etc would all have to shut down their cloud computing divisions, they can't even spin them off as a subsidiary. A strained reading of it would potentially make the Apple/Google/Microsoft app stores illegal too.
Wouldn't the fact that Katy Perry was already selling merchandise with her name for years before Katie even came along (i.e. prior use in commerce) provide a pretty solid defense on this?
Techdirt has been dunking on Elon Musk for years, long before his purchase of Twitter and his buddying up to Donald Trump. Remember the kids who got trapped in a cave in Thailand? That was six years ago and Techdirt had some choice things to say about him then too.
He's already basically said that if you don't advertise with us (or you stop advertising with us), we're going to sue you for...something. I'm sure it's not far from there to making it mandatory to advertise on his platform. Let's not give him any more ideas.
It's up to 265,670 views and 2006 comments as of 14:40 UTC on Jan 8. A good quarter of the way there.
Hate to break it to you, but Windows is just as secure as MacOS and Linux, assuming a competent administrator (applies to all of them, an incompetent admin can make any of them vulnerable). You hear about Windows more often because it's a bigger target, but the vast majority of infections for any of them are through malware and usually because someone did something stupid and let it through the front door.
Blocking Apple/Google app stores too?
Agreed. At the moment, CoD sells more on Playstation than Xbox. What Sony is really after, though, is preventing MS from putting Activision games, especially CoD, on Gamepass. And let's be real, if regulators made them divest the CoD IP and Sony snapped it up, what do you think are the chances it became a Playstation exclusive?
I think you misunderstand. They were not making that argument themselves, they were making a prediction of what SCOTUS will say.
Let's be real
If the positions were reversed there's no chance that Sony would keep CoD available on Xbox after the current contract and it would only appear on PC after a year or two when they milked the current version and are ready to release the next.
languages
From his https://www.gofundme.com/f/fight-texas-in-god-we-trust-school-signs for this.
I'm sorely tempted to donate, especially if I can get a sign written in Vulcan or maybe Klingon.Do you have a source on this? It's not that I doubt you, it's just rather vague and I'd like to read more.
next up: you MUST pass political email requirements
The next thing they're going to demand is not only that mail providers not classify them as spam, but a requirement that they MUST pass them through and bypass any spam filters or other rules that might prevent them from being delivered.
If you're talking about voice and data services over satellite then, yes, those would be common carrier-type services. DirecTV is more akin to a cable TV package. It costs DTV money to carry it, why should they be required to subsidize OAN's existence? Bandwidth is not unlimited, they can only carry so many channels on the satellites. Do you think Comcast should be forced to carry every single channel in existence? If not then why should DTV have to?
Not how copyright works
I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned. In the C&D:
That's...not how copyright works.
Re: You REALLY are in so tight propaganda bubble that don't know
I don't know how old you are so maybe you weren't around for things then but the whole invasion of Iraq thing happened under George H. W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Biden was just a Senator. He is no more culpable than any of the other 99 Senators.
Do you want to destroy the internet? This is how you do it.
Did anyone catch this wonderful bit of the bill?
It would basically make cloud computing illegal. Google, Microsoft, Amazon etc would all have to shut down their cloud computing divisions, they can't even spin them off as a subsidiary. A strained reading of it would potentially make the Apple/Google/Microsoft app stores illegal too.