Looking at a screen IS a search. Because the devices connected to that screen are looking at you and your bags. Just because they don’t use their hands (which they still regularly do) doesn’t mean it’s not a search.
And yes they can and regularly do seize property. Tends to be cash and valuables because “drug enforcement “ but yes, they do seize things.
If the homeowner took pictures for her rental, but one of the offending wallpaper included her flipping the bird at the paper/walls, would that be transformative enough to skirt copyright?
I read all the comments, even the hidden ones, to see the alternative point of view. Usually I diasgree with yours, however I did, in principle, agree with your comment on another article about facial recognition. But that was the lone time. And I normally don't comment on the articles as usually someone else gets to a similar point that I would make. However, this 2Aer argument always amuses and amazes me. Putting aside that 2Aers always willfully ignore the whole "well regulated militia" part of the text (and Cletus, Zeke and Jed playing GI Joe on the weekend doesn't constitute a militia), I agree in principle with the reasoning behind the Second Amendment, to stand against a tyranical government. But, 2Aers ignore the logical practicalities of it meaning...
The "government" is not at all scared of you 2Aers and your 300 million guns.
"They" are not worried about you, Cletus, Zeke and Jed bounding around with your ARs and Glocks. You are not a "well regulated militia." You are not large, well organized or well trained wearing your cast-offs from the local army surplus store. Because if, IF they came for your precious guns, it won't be two guys in a Crown Vic. As the police have been militarized, it'll be 20 guys in several MRAPs with greanades and automatic weapons. Or a drone strike that craters your house or an air strike that levels your street. These are the tactics and strategies "they" have been perfecting for decades overseas. The tactics of asymmetrical and guerilla warfare. Because in that moment you are not a patriot, you are a domestic terrorist, radical or insurgent. Just like they were on January 6th.
The 2Aer argument is the last flail in the losing side of a discussion that just says "well I may not be right, but I'll shoot anyone who dares say so." I accept you don't think that you're wrong, but at least accept you aren't going to win your argument here.
Could the reason their pushing 5G so hard and connecting it to things that broadband and WiFi traditionally cover is that the long term goal is to wipe out wired internet entirely?
It's called a warrant "application." You can "plan" to get a warrant all day, they are skipping over the part where someone has to "approve" the application.
And if this is now the standard, then planning on going to jury duty is the same as going to jury duty therefore I don't need to show up for jury duty.
I know that Yik Tak is gone, but if it was still in business, wouldn't the obvious work around to being blocked to simply turn off WiFi and use Yik Yak on the cellular data connection? The net result is still the same and the school is outside of their ability to post it. But I can see the two avenues the retaliatory lawsuit would take, sue the school because you were standing on their property when you posted (nevermind you weren't using their network), or sue the cell carrier as THEY are the obvious problem. I'm thinking Verizon would have an easier time getta suit like this thrown out.
I'm trying to picture what their approach must be, especially at a bus station. I keep picturing the scene in The Fugitive where Harrison Ford is being chased by US Marshals in a Chicago govt building and yells to some nearby cops "Officer, there's a man in a blue topcoat waving a gun and screaming...at a woman."
(Couldn't find it on YouTube)
My first reaction would be to tell them to stay away and call 911.
Can the case be made that since they are holding public records at the request of a public entity that they are a state actor? I would think that would invalidate any contract.
I know how to get the artists their fair share of all that money. Take the labels and publishers out of the loop and have Youtube, Spotify, etc., pay them directly. That'll mollify the RIAA and MPAA in a big hurry.
The job of a congress-person is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Seeing as McConnell is advocating policy that is in contradiction to the Constitution, he is in violation of his sworn responsibilities. Law enforcement should surveil him, "detain" him, and "interrogate" him using only the most enhanced techniques and then share all the information collected to the citizenry. Then he can understand personally what it would feel like to live in a totalitarian society where you have no privacy and are subject to vague interpretations of secret laws.
I haven't seen this discussed anywhere yet (which doesn't mean that discussion hasn't happened), but why does the concept of Hilary as a state actor not come into play thereby her server (or at least the content) isn't hers but an extension of the State Department and then discoverable by FOIA?
In short, she shouldn't have to turn it over, the gov't should be able to just go get it as their property.
Does this type of activity ever rise to a level or anti-trust, or other such behavior that starts to violate federal law? Given Apple's market share that is quite the sword to wield against software developers. It isn't like they have a lot of choices for mobile app development. If you want to make any money it's Apple, Android or nothing.
Hmm, I'm seeing Hunted Cow somehow using TPP or some such agreement to drain money from Apple (or the US) now...
Looking at a screen IS a search. Because the devices connected to that screen are looking at you and your bags. Just because they don’t use their hands (which they still regularly do) doesn’t mean it’s not a search. And yes they can and regularly do seize property. Tends to be cash and valuables because “drug enforcement “ but yes, they do seize things.
Tranformative
If the homeowner took pictures for her rental, but one of the offending wallpaper included her flipping the bird at the paper/walls, would that be transformative enough to skirt copyright?
I read all the comments, even the hidden ones, to see the alternative point of view. Usually I diasgree with yours, however I did, in principle, agree with your comment on another article about facial recognition. But that was the lone time. And I normally don't comment on the articles as usually someone else gets to a similar point that I would make. However, this 2Aer argument always amuses and amazes me. Putting aside that 2Aers always willfully ignore the whole "well regulated militia" part of the text (and Cletus, Zeke and Jed playing GI Joe on the weekend doesn't constitute a militia), I agree in principle with the reasoning behind the Second Amendment, to stand against a tyranical government. But, 2Aers ignore the logical practicalities of it meaning... The "government" is not at all scared of you 2Aers and your 300 million guns. "They" are not worried about you, Cletus, Zeke and Jed bounding around with your ARs and Glocks. You are not a "well regulated militia." You are not large, well organized or well trained wearing your cast-offs from the local army surplus store. Because if, IF they came for your precious guns, it won't be two guys in a Crown Vic. As the police have been militarized, it'll be 20 guys in several MRAPs with greanades and automatic weapons. Or a drone strike that craters your house or an air strike that levels your street. These are the tactics and strategies "they" have been perfecting for decades overseas. The tactics of asymmetrical and guerilla warfare. Because in that moment you are not a patriot, you are a domestic terrorist, radical or insurgent. Just like they were on January 6th. The 2Aer argument is the last flail in the losing side of a discussion that just says "well I may not be right, but I'll shoot anyone who dares say so." I accept you don't think that you're wrong, but at least accept you aren't going to win your argument here.
The whole truth
Mike, you seem particularly interested in this story. Is there a Techdirt After Dark channel we don’t know about? :-D
There's a super easy and inexpensive way for a person to fix a treadmill problem. Buy a pair of $100 sneakers and go run outside.
Here’s hoping Aria doesn’t recognize the claim when the Feds try to cash in the chips
Planned Obsolescence?
Could the reason their pushing 5G so hard and connecting it to things that broadband and WiFi traditionally cover is that the long term goal is to wipe out wired internet entirely?
Warrant Application
It's called a warrant "application." You can "plan" to get a warrant all day, they are skipping over the part where someone has to "approve" the application.
And if this is now the standard, then planning on going to jury duty is the same as going to jury duty therefore I don't need to show up for jury duty.
Work Arounds
I know that Yik Tak is gone, but if it was still in business, wouldn't the obvious work around to being blocked to simply turn off WiFi and use Yik Yak on the cellular data connection? The net result is still the same and the school is outside of their ability to post it. But I can see the two avenues the retaliatory lawsuit would take, sue the school because you were standing on their property when you posted (nevermind you weren't using their network), or sue the cell carrier as THEY are the obvious problem. I'm thinking Verizon would have an easier time getta suit like this thrown out.
I'm trying to picture what their approach must be, especially at a bus station. I keep picturing the scene in The Fugitive where Harrison Ford is being chased by US Marshals in a Chicago govt building and yells to some nearby cops "Officer, there's a man in a blue topcoat waving a gun and screaming...at a woman."
(Couldn't find it on YouTube)
My first reaction would be to tell them to stay away and call 911.
State actor?
Can the case be made that since they are holding public records at the request of a public entity that they are a state actor? I would think that would invalidate any contract.
What if someone FOIAs the info?
I am Negan.
Thank you thesaurus.com
Authoritative Cipher of the Fourth State of the United States with Comments
Find and replace Georgia with "State with capital city of Atlanta"
Transformative enough?
Not a good policy
Everyone with an account should send a payment with a restricted word in it. With no transactions PayPal would close down after a day.
The Artist's Fair Share
I know how to get the artists their fair share of all that money. Take the labels and publishers out of the loop and have Youtube, Spotify, etc., pay them directly. That'll mollify the RIAA and MPAA in a big hurry.
I don't own a smartphone or tablet. How am I supposed to get into the game?
-sent from my iPhone
Violation of the oath
The job of a congress-person is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Seeing as McConnell is advocating policy that is in contradiction to the Constitution, he is in violation of his sworn responsibilities. Law enforcement should surveil him, "detain" him, and "interrogate" him using only the most enhanced techniques and then share all the information collected to the citizenry. Then he can understand personally what it would feel like to live in a totalitarian society where you have no privacy and are subject to vague interpretations of secret laws.
State Actor?
I haven't seen this discussed anywhere yet (which doesn't mean that discussion hasn't happened), but why does the concept of Hilary as a state actor not come into play thereby her server (or at least the content) isn't hers but an extension of the State Department and then discoverable by FOIA?
In short, she shouldn't have to turn it over, the gov't should be able to just go get it as their property.
Where does the jurisdiction end?
If I'm a citizen of Spain, but I'm in another country and leave a comment on Facebook that violates that law. Am I still liable?
Would Spain try to extradite me if I'm an American citizen and posted from America?
Anti-trust or monopolistic behavior?
Does this type of activity ever rise to a level or anti-trust, or other such behavior that starts to violate federal law? Given Apple's market share that is quite the sword to wield against software developers. It isn't like they have a lot of choices for mobile app development. If you want to make any money it's Apple, Android or nothing.
Hmm, I'm seeing Hunted Cow somehow using TPP or some such agreement to drain money from Apple (or the US) now...