I really, really have to wonder what sorts of logic knots the courts had to use to get these laws past the 4th amendment of the consitution.
The best sort of Internet filter I've ever seen is putting the computer in the living room with the screen placed so anyone in the room can see it.
Unless the NFL has something in writing saying they got the copyright on the game, then they don't have it.
The TV cameraman might have a claim on it. The TV network probably would have a stronger claim as a work for hire, especially if there were multiple cameras used.
If the network broadcast the game live, and didn't make a recording, then the person who made the fixed recording would also have a claim for the copyright.
It would be an interesting question to run through the courts. Anyone willing to make a few million dollars available to pay the lawyers?
and they were mainly kept around in case other police needed them
There really is a simple solution to get to the bottom of this. Too bad the politicians aren't brave enough to use it.
1) Send a list of questions to the head of a government department, along with a date, time, and location where the head is to present the answers. Order the head of the department to bring his second in command along for the presentation.
2) If the head of the department fails to show up, or fails to answer the questions, fire the head of the department, and revoke any and all security clearances. Promote the second in command to head of the department. Give the new head of the department the same list, a new date and time, and orders to return with a new second in command of the department.
3) Repeat until either the answers are forthcoming, or the department runs out of personnel.
Copyright law still applies. Back when the statue was commisioned, the city had the option of adding a clause to the contract that would turn the copyright over to the city. The city chose not to do this, so the artist keeps the copyright.
Probably because it's not a criminal offence for a government official to knowingly violate the constitution. at worst, the punishment is a slap on the wrist followed by a fine that the taxpayers have to pay.
But...but...but.. If we release all this information to the terrorits in the administration, we might actually face punishment!
Given the pace at which the industry is investing in advanced capabilities, there is no present need to redefine “advanced” capabilities
So if I write a book called "Murder Mystery" and register the copyright with the US government, does that immediately give me a patent on the concept of writing a murder mystery story?
The FBI is obviously worried about terrorists.
They're terrified that if the public finds out what the FBI is up to, they will take drastic steps in an attempt ti influence political decisions.
From Facebook's terms of service...
Under Safety
You will not solicit login information or access an account belonging to someone else.
You will not share your password (or in the case of developers, your secret key), let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account.
It is a life lesson for the students. The lesson is that this is what the world will be like with a corporate owned internet.
If the union wants to strike over the issue, they're going to have a hard time putting up a picket line inside a jail cell.
The police activity has to be kept top secret. After all, if terrorists knew the procedures used by the police, they'd be able to find ways around them. This means that anyone releasing video of police activities is revealing police procedures, and must be treated as a security leak
/sarc
To start with, Obama CAN'T send in the national guard. That requires a request from the state government, not the federal government.
Secondly, the National Guard is a military force, not a police force. They are neither trained, nor equipped to handle civil protests. Most of the protests can be traced to the local police using military tactics to solve a civil problem, the National Guard wouldn't change anything.
What would that software do if someone were to hire a botnet of infected US government computers, and use it to attack the NSA?
Let me see if I've got this right. The fact that a police officer killed someone isn't a problem. The problem is a result of the officer getting caught killing someone.
If they really want to create a jail that big, it's going to be easy. Just have all those border patrol guards turn around, and call them prison guards.
One possible solution is to require that records of any and all donations to the police be posted where the public has free access to them. This would include money donations, as well as equipment and services donated.
That would have to be at least state level laws, possibly forced, or backed by federal laws, so I'm not gonna hold my breath until it happens.