Jeff Green’s Techdirt Profile

cricketjeff

About Jeff Green




Jeff Green’s Comments comment rss

  • Aug 7th, 2019 @ 2:39pm

    Only in America ...

    Nielson have always been market leaders, or only players, in the USA, but not in the rest of the World. The other players have had huge problems with reporting on non-linear viewing but they have at least been trying for years.

  • Feb 12th, 2019 @ 1:22am

    Re:

    I, of course, no nothing about the background of either case. However i do know the two cases are not entirely similar. Kate Scottow used two separate twitter accounts in what was described in court as a campaign of harrassment. "Dead naming" was not her sole attack, there were also allegations of racism, xenophobia, being a crook and a fake lawyer. It would also help if Americans would remember that a visit from the police in the uk doesn't often involve stun grenades and battering rams, it does mean a polite chat with a single unarmed man or woman, who will not force entry if not invited in. And, we value free speech highly, but we don't worship it as some Americans do. Most people here accept more limits on what you can say in public, and we expect our police to "keep the peace" rather than come to see who shot who. They aren't angels, some are thugs, some are racist bastards, but many of them are nice helpful people.

  • Jan 16th, 2019 @ 2:25pm

    Typo in the title

    As the article makes clear the ruling makes dash buttons illegal for making it easy for Amazon to con customers so I assume the title was supposed to be
    "Amazon Dash Buttons Ruled Illegal In Germany For... Making It Too Easy To Fleece Consumers"

  • Nov 28th, 2018 @ 11:36am

    Re: So, 3 out of 4 so accurate that aren't contested.

    It is entirely possible that 3 out of 4 defendants don't actually exist and non-existent defendants frequently keep their own council.
    Personally I have always regarded the American worship of free speech above all else as downright silly but I've not seen Techdirt wandering from that stance. The IDF are far too often a bunch of vile thugs who use the excuse that there are vile thugs on the other side as an excuse to do whatever the hell they like but it is hardly relevant here.
    Sending pictures of the outcome of gunshots to an advocate of everyone carrying and using their weapons is even in my jaundiced anti-American view of Free Speech so completely clearly uncriminal that I can't understand why you bothered posting it, still you have the right to your opinion, however silly.

  • Sep 28th, 2018 @ 12:53pm

    Re: Iv looked it up..

    I wish someone had told me years ago you couldn't use 1000X without an oil setup. Would have saved me hours of looking down my nice Russian made microscope at the bugs in dirty water and wings of butterflies, all sorts ...

    1000X magnification is better with the right gear but just use a bright light and it works OK.

  • Sep 27th, 2018 @ 2:44pm

    The trouble is ...

    I am British.
    Why does that matter here? Well we Brits don't actually have "legal names". We have a system for changing names, called a deed poll which doesn't change your name at all it just provides a form of evidence as to what your real name is, you can change your name any time you like, as often as you like, to (almost) anything you like.
    If you want proof of your name you pay £14 for a deedpoll and fill it out. Then you can change your mind 2 minutes later, pay another £14 and prove you have a new name.
    Your name, as far as the UK is concerned is the name by which you are known. You are entitled to change it when you want, certain actions (like getting married or divorced) allow you proof of a new name for free, but you don't need to actually do anything official, simply let everyone who needs to know your name what you wish to be called and that's done.
    So if a Brit has 6,000 facebook accounts in different names every single one of them could be in their "real name".
    It's a funny old World.

  • Aug 2nd, 2018 @ 7:11am

    Sauce for the goose

    A great many Americans get very upset about the EU courts trying to impose EU law outside their jurisdiction, the same things can be said in reverse. In almost all the world these weapons are illegal, maybe not in the few counties working with pre-industrial revolution systems of law, but for modern countries definitely illegal.
    A written constitution does this. In the modern world courts wrestle with attempting a sane balance between competing rights. We tend to feel our right not to be shot by madmen trumps the right of nitwits to distribute firearms, and full instructions to produce a weapon from systems with genuine alternative uses with no particular skill are in all sensible definitions weapons.
    If these people made strenuous efforts to prevent people outside the USA accessing the information there may be a decent argument for applying US only law to websites but I'd like to see a site of which I am very fond not forgetting that not everything in US law is entirely rational!
    Neither of the first two amendments to the constitution should in the eyes of many rational people be applied without regard to balance. And ant document that needs to be amended to ensure it applies to 20% of the World's population probably needed a complete rewrite a long time ago!

  • Jul 30th, 2018 @ 10:29am

    Re:

    I can see a genuine use and need for qualified immunity, what seems to me totally absurd is the presumptions US courts appear to base it on.
    There are laws where the interpretation could conceivably be debated, in those cases a police officer should not be held personally responsible for making a reasonable interpretation of the law (that does not mean his employer should not be responsible!).
    However courts should always assume that (save in dire emergency split-second cases) that police officers know the laws they are applying. If they don't know the law what the fried-cucumber-sausages are they doing pretending to be officers of the law?
    These people are PAID TO KNOW THE LAW! It should be assumed they do under almost all circumstances and if they know the law and break it that should not entitle them to nice treatment as police officers it should be a reason to treat them more harshly than a non-police officer would be treated in the same circumstances!

  • Jul 24th, 2018 @ 3:53am

    Well not quite ...

    What the BBC reported was "accurate", sort of. If I call the police local to you and report that you are a paedophile and abused me on several occasions when I was a child I hope the police will investigate. What I suspect you would hope is that on your local TV station your house isn't filmed as the police drop in, that pictures of them going through your underwear aren't included along with a final line statement that you haven't yet been charged.

    The BBC even submitted the report for a "scoop of the year award" which is a bit unlikely given what the story turned out to be, fantasist made outrageous claims about renowned star, famous for christian values and celibacy, claims turned out to be false.

    Had the BBC reported that Police searched a property belonging to a public figure in the wherever-it-is area after allegations of historical sex abuse there would have been no case. The reporting was not balanced and factual it was blatantly sensational.

  • May 21st, 2018 @ 11:31am

    (untitled comment)

    They are called irregular verbs.
    I compete fairly
    You take advantage of my work
    They steal everything we do.

    I call for fair and balanced regulation
    You call for restrictions
    They want full blown censorship

    I am a free marketeer
    You show worrying tendencies to state control
    They are communists

    We are freedom fighters
    They are terrorists

    I use enhanced interrogation techniques
    They torture innocent bystanders

    Identical actions can attract very different descriptions ...

  • May 15th, 2018 @ 11:20am

    Re: Re: Re: definining terrorism by splitting hairs?

    There is absolutely no genetic evidence of human races, there may be lots of "scientific" evidence for them, the problem is that none of it is actually scientific, just produced by silly people who like to pander to the ignorant and the hate-filled.

    There are conditions that are more common in particular groups of individuals, this is not evidence of races but of the fact that you can only inherit genes from your parents and thus some genes are more common in some places than in other, but that doesn't make them "genes for race", these same genes exist in other populations from elsewhere in the world, just at different frequencies.

  • Apr 17th, 2018 @ 2:26am

    Re: Cloudy outlook indeed

    Could quickly lead to an exodus of companies from the US, I bet the authorities in Vancouver are rubbing their hands, not too far up the same coast, only need to move "head office" and financial operations and become a fully fledged Canadian company and you can do business Worldwide. Stay put and be US only.

  • Apr 11th, 2018 @ 3:40am

    (untitled comment)

    The proposal strikes at another "fundamental right". If intellectual property is property, which is of course debatable, the law should not ban its owner from giving it away freely.
    I would be more than a little upset if the EU were to tell me that I wasn't allowed to give my money away to a charity or a friend.

  • Apr 2nd, 2018 @ 1:29pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    I'm still pretty sure you'd own the copyright, unless some other agency were to change those settings. You chose what to photograph, in that you chose to photograph "whatever was in front of the camera in half an hour" and you chose to photograph it using the cameras self timer. These were foreseeable things.
    Many nature photographers do more or less this regularly and have no trouble asserting their copyright. The problem the monkey picture guy had was to tell the world that another agency had got involved.

  • Mar 6th, 2018 @ 8:54pm

    Re: Re:

    Nothing hypocritical at all, I will however stick to my principles and not say exactly what I think of your reply exactly how I want to say it.

    You see? I just for the sake of civilised debate restricted my own free speech. Your (tongue in cheek) compromise is an example of what I complained about, a wish for black and white in a grey world.

  • Mar 6th, 2018 @ 1:48pm

    (untitled comment)

    I have no sympathy with the stupidity of this prosecution nor with the still greater stupidity of Le Pen for her crass posting but that doesn't mean I can agree with everything in the article :

    "The posting was questionable and in poor taste, but it certainly shouldn't be illegal. "

    Certainly? You may not believe it should be illegal, and I may not believe it should be illegal but there's no certainty about it. I can see an arguable case that making deliberately provocative postings should be not be allowed.

    Just because the USA raises free speech above almost any other freedom does not mean that's the right thing to do under all circumstances, it isn't. I find a problem with almost all absolute assertions, a good life requires that we all get along and if that means you aren't always free to say exactly what you want exactly how you want to say it, that's not an overwhelming price to pay.

  • Feb 27th, 2018 @ 11:13am

    This could be an excellent idea (with a couple of changes)

    In essence the idea seems to be if someone has a good idea and someone else uses it badly then the good idea guy must be pay unless he fixes things fast. Oooooooookaaaayyyyyyyyyy

    So if say someone thought of a good idea for a law and it was used badly unless that law is fixed fast, say within 2 days, and by fixed clearly we mean in such a way that the law cannot be broken again and the perpetrators will be model citizens from now on all the failing lawmakers must be fined.

    Let's see. The second amendment could arguably be called a good idea but some people are abusing it. So for everyone who uses a gun to kill or maim or rob anyone else we fine the politicians!

    Or maybe governments and legislatures are supposed to see that budgets are reasonably in balance, this is clearly easy billions of people round the world do it for their own budgets so the smartest politicians in America must be able to do it in an instant, they haven't? Fine them, lets say a million a day each until the budget balances. That'll fix things quick.

    I'm sure we can keep on extending this legal principle in many many directions surely no legislator would think it a bad idea ...

  • Feb 27th, 2018 @ 2:58am

    Re: Re: EECK! not "Metro"

    And even that's not the Metro!
    We have a Met line but the Metro is what they call the transport systems in Manchester and Paris amongst other places. Ours is The Underground or the Tube.

  • Jan 6th, 2018 @ 12:46pm

    What would happen if ...

    A concerned group of citizens sent DMCA takedown notices to every major cinema (Movie theatre?) chain on the release of each new Disney movie claiming multiple copyright breaches and demanding DMCA takedowns?

  • Dec 11th, 2017 @ 5:53am

    Re: Re:

    My only modification would be that allowing these officials a whole day is overdoing it, jail an official every 2 hours, and if after 2 days they haven't complied start a draw from all senior police and legal department employees of the NYPD. It should take a year or two before the whole department have been jailed.

More comments from Jeff Green >>