These field tests are also used in multiple other countries with exactly the same bogus results. So this is actually a GLOBAL problem where innocent people are being locked up for food crumbs and other things, and the resulting skewed arrest records make crime rates look worse than they actually are.
Which is good if you are a law enforcement agency who can point to increasing crime rates as you ask for more and more tax dollars. You don't want things to get better or else people might say they don't need so spend so much on policing.
An old joke in advertising is the ad exec who says "I KNOW half of my advertising dollars are wasted. But I don't know WHICH half!"
And so it goes.
The fact is, TV and radio have been sponsored by advertisers since the very beginning, and they always will be. The very reason we HAVE TV seasons at all is because those were the times of the year car makers had new models in stores, so they wanted hot, new TV shows to run at the same time and provide a place to run ads for the new cars.
TV is not nearly as tied to new cars but we still have TV seasons married to the car seasons and car ads are still the biggest advertisers on TV.
TV itself is married to this broken and obsolete model of having affiliates. Middlemen in cities and towns hired to distribute their shows and ads. These days, you COULD get your shows directly from the production companies. The idea of local stations isn't needed at all, in that case. Yet it persists.
Before or after 1972 depends on exactly when the actual recording they used was originally recorded, and by whom.
If it was after 1972, OR if a cover band did the performance, then the license applies and it's game over for the band.
It also depends on WHO actually owns the performance. If the band, like most bands, signed away those rights, then that may have absolutely no say in anything because they don't own it any more.
Every time a band complains they aren't getting paid for performances or use on streaming services or digital music stores or Youtube, ask them who OWNS the song. That is who gets paid. So many bands don't understand any of this stuff. If they want to get paid, sell shirts at the back of the concerts like everyone else. OR don't sign away your rights. It's simple.
Yes it is NICE if controversial events ASK permission but they don't have to and it would establish a bad precedent if events suddenly had to begin asking every single artist or rights holder before using their songs. Crap like that is what ASCAP/BMI/SESAC licenses are supposed to effing prevent. The licensing agencies promised to streamline this and make it easy to cut a check to ONE party and know you are covered and and be done with the hassle.
If THAT is not the case and we are heading into a world where you really do have to chase down millions of individual rights holders, then ASCAP and BMI and SESAC and the other agencies call all go to hell. Thanks for NOTHING! Thanks for promising this would never happen and letting it happen anyway.
The Summer Olympics were held in my city 20 years ago this summer. I saw how the thing worked from the inside and the Olympics were already an irrelevant marketing machine long before then. Anything that could be sold was sold, often with big promises to sponsors that their marketing would be allowed and protected from competing companies -if only they forked over more money. MONEY is all the USOC cares about, not representing the country or even supporting the atheletes beyond whatever minimal work it takes to make sure they show up for the games. Hell they make the athletes pay for a lot of stuff too.
And ATHLETES are the other issue: most people probably think the games are all about amateurs but in fact professional atheletes are brought in for some sports and quietly downplayed. So the people you see are not necessarily starving and struggling amateurs. They might be completely pro with millions of dollars in income. It's a big fraud.
So once again I will go out of my way (it's not very hard) to not watch any of the games or pay even the slightest attention to it. Screw them. The IOC cares so little about the athletes, they're going to make the rowing crews perform in lakes of sewage where they will have to be taken to hospital and decontaminated if they fall in the water. WHAT THE HELL!? They're so bold, they are toying with lives this year.
8 years is a long time. In Internet years, that's about a million years. I would not be at all surprised if Google no longer even had the records of who controls that blog, as it is beyond any reasonable length of time to retain such data.
And if an IP was recorded, the provider behind that IP themselves probably no longer have records back that far.
And even if they did, courts have held that IP is not the same as proving it was a particular person.
So they're asking for information that probably does not exist and can't be used even if it did.
Well OF COURSE their lawyers are going to chase this. They're getting paid by the hour and all they have to do is file motions on this one and they might even win if somebody defaults.
Ironically, if the owner of the blog came forward and revealed themselves, I think they'd have a great grounds for a 1A defense anyway. Which means the case is hoping they DON'T come forward and that Google just cuts a check.
Audiosocket took on the responsibility to sue and defend the copyright because they were the ones who sold the songs that were misused. The artist, or copyright holder, entrusted them to maintain the copyright for songs licensed via that site. So Audiosocket has to bear the brunt of suing regardless if they keep the money or have to pass it on.
IANAL and I have not read the suit, but I suspect Audiosocket would get to keep the $25K for breech and most or all of any damages would go to the copyright holder. Which may also be Audiosocket. Looking at the song on the website, it does not actually show who owns it.
FWIW, the Cruz campaign claim that the copyright had not been filed is laughable. Copyright applies the moment the work is created, whether it is filed or not. Copyright is not like a patent.
Those "warranty void if broken or removed" stickers are illegal?
I'm guessing they're not actually "illegal", but rather "unenforceable", otherwise there'd be a rash of class action lawsuits against companies that put them on their products.
Actually yes, they are illegal. The law -and there REALLY is one- says you can open your stuff. It is illegal to deny support or services because you broke the seal. They may give you a hard time but that's why they have lawyers sitting around and so should you. Their legal reps will darn well know they can't forbid this -but not before billing their client for a few hundred hours. Meanwhile your lawyer won't have to do much beyond writing a letter. Good stuff.
Lots of low-end jobs pay their employees via prepaid cards. Many McDonalds stores pay this way because it's easier than paying by check, and in any case, many of the workers don't have traditional bank accounts. I don't see why this should make them guilty of anything. Seizing their money without trial is just ludicrous.
There have also been times when I've legitimately carried large amounts of cash. A group I used to work with held an annual event of sorts and I ended on on the crew counting ticket proceeds and packaging them to make a bank deposit. As it happened, the people on that crew including myself were all licensed weapon holders and we were, in fact, very well armed as we carried nearly $200,000 in cash to a bank deposit drop chute.
Would have been a real pain to get stopped by the cops. Several heavily armed men with a lot of cash? Surely they can't simply be trying to protect themselves and their honestly-acquired money!?
Joined up with Comcast last fall and yes I may be the ONE happy Comcast customer, sitting along side the "one funny German Joke" or something but here I am.
During the install process, at NO time did Comcast obtain my SSN or run my credit. I opted to have them verify my ID in person, but when the installer was here running wires, he never asked for my ID and I didn't sign anything.
They took me as a customer without having any actual idea who I was. I was shocked.
This idea is DOA. Criminals assigned to ankle-trackers have repeatedly demonstrated great skill in defeating, evading and otherwise getting out of the tracker and back into whatever sort of crime they wish. And often the people paid to monitor those trackers don't even notice.
SO even if a rice-grain injectable device existed, we can assume that crafty criminals would likewise find ways of removing the tracker and going about things as they wish.
Injected things are easy to remove with a knife. Surgical implants might be harder but no cheapass police agency is going to pay for surgeons to work on this.
It DOES remind me of a sci-fi story I read years ago, and I cannot remember the name or author and I cannot find the damn book. But the premise involved a couple human astronauts who ended up in prison on an alien planet for some sort of contraband charge. Stuff in the ship medkit was illegal or something. Anyway these alien prison critters would inject a device into their inmates. It caused some sort of change to the blood which was harmless until or unless the inmate tried to remove the thing, at which point their blood would instantly crystallize and kill them. Or something like that.
I wish I'd actually read that book. All I remember is reading the first chapter or so.
Was it not clear Reynolds himself leaked the footage? He's been championing this project for years. It's not a mere ROLE for him. It IS him. This is his dream, his baby, his nightmare, and his passion, in a way I have never seen before with any actor. He also happens to have NAILED the role solid. And oh yeah, brought home $150M in box office in four days.
Reynolds can be forgiven any rules he broke. He broke enough records to make up for it several dozen times over. Hell, he deserves some kind of Oscar for this.
Props also to the director and editor for making it all work. This movie could have trainwrecked a dozen different places but it didn't, and mostly all works well. Cast and crew all did a great job.
Look, this is coming from the businesses that use their Hollywood Account to make every film and TV show look like it loses money. Everything loses money. The studios are always almost bankrupt.
Somehow Disney WILL find a way to declare the new Star Wars film a total loss and a failure even as it brings in $2bn even before home video is counted or revenue from any of the co-branded crap that came with it. It's going to lose way more than it earns. They'll make it happen.
So of course they see piracy as a loss area. Every damn thing is a loss area. Sure they lost millions of dollars on stolen copies of the Star Wars Christmas Special on DVD, which then never actually made and nobody ever pirated. But if they HAD made those DVDs, they'd have lost money on it, so claim a loss against something that never existed but would have been pirated or lost money if it had existed.
Hollywood accounting IS that full of bullshit. Just wait and watch as Disney simultaneously talks up Lucasfilm results to their shareholders AND declares the whole thing and the movie as terrible, awful, no good lousy losses.
Facts like names and addresses and locations comprising a location database cannot be copyrighted because they are facts and not a creative work eligible for copyright.
Similarly records of FCC radio licenses, telephone listings, licence plate records, voter records, etc, are all facts and cannot be copyrighted.
Cited court discussions or decisions are public domain facts which anyone could obtain by going to the court and pulling whatever records are needed to display the relevant facts.
So I don't see how there was ever a copyright given to this book. Perhaps they can get a patent or copyright on the design or presentation or appearance, but not in the fact content which is immutable and irrefutable.
The monkey can author this photo but he has no rights and is not a citizen and therefore he isn't entitled to a copyright. But since the other parties in this didn't take the photo, they are also not entitled to claim copyright. They didn't make the photo. The monkey did, but he can't own it. So nobody can.
By the way, this whole system is going to cause a mess if or when a space alien (Have to use Space alien instead of just alien in case people think I mean like from Somalia) lands and begins distributing bible tracts. A space alien has no rights to patent or copyright or indeed to property at all, so there won't be anything stopping some human from walking over and claiming they own the alien, his or her ship, and of course the bible tracts. The alien won't be able to defend themselves under our laws. But perhaps their ray gun may be a good defense.
Similarly if or when human make it to other planets, we have no rights to claim we own it. And especially if the planet has life forms, we have no right to trespass, take samples, plant flags or claim ownership or start naming things, mining for materials, etc. Other beings would already have property rights.
And as well, since humans have no ownership of any bodies in the Sol system, if aliens decided to settle on Mars, we'd have no grounds to object -well we have no ability to stop it anyway but Mars doesn't belong to us.
That's because the sales staff are at least partly on commission and under tremendous pressure to sell sell sell!
They're hungry, desperate for sales. Any sales. And you walk in with money. To a hungry salesperson, you look like a steak dinner. So please understand they mean YOU personally no harm. But they want you well-done with a side of buttered baked potato.