Wouldn't this case fall under Probable Cause since she invited the officers into the home (and she had reasonably apparent use of or control over the property)?
I guess the act of picking up a phone without the owners consent to view it would require a search warrant or at the very least, verbal permission from the owner to view its contents. I'm really torn her. I don' want anyone violating our 4th Amendment rights, but I have to think that Probable Cause would fall into the initial discovery of evidence. If they failed to get a search warrant after the initial discovery, and proceeded with their investigation without a SW. Yeah, they really screwed up big time.
Let's face it, judges are failed lawyers. Couldn't make in in the private sector so they run for public office.
I just wonder what class taught them that if they don't like the letter of the law (or even the spirit of the law), they can and should use their own bias and personal opinion to come to a summary judgement.
I believe Michael O'Leary's home page is Google.com. He opened up his handy Internet Explorer browser, and saw the black bar over "Google". He clicked on it, read the information it directed him to and immediately came to the conclusion that: 1) He isn't comfortable with the message he was being presented with; and 2) Since it was the first link he clicked on, Google must control this magical land called "The Internet".
I agree. I purchased all of the software and movies (music is half and half) I have and use/watch. That's right... I am one of those that supports the devs and likes having a DVD or BlueRay of what I purchased.
They pass this shit, and you're gonna see me become one pirating fool. I'll have to upgrade all the hard drives in my NAS to hold all the shit I'll be downloading and pirating!
This is the same group of retards that said "pass the healthcare bill (aka: Obamacare) so we know what's in it". Shouldn't surprise anyone that the Dumbocrats are stating that they continue to support SOPA and PIPA but will "work to fix it". Yeah... they'll work to fix it alright... after it's law and then there's nothing anyone can do about it.
You support the CrApple monopoly on hardware AND software as well as the method for distribution (the "App Store" which they control with an iron fist), you deserve whatever you get or do not get, from them. Just make sure you bought CrApple Care, 'cause you're gonna need it!
And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know My name is the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon thee.
Operating anything that has spent more money than it has taken in for 69 out of 80 years is not what I call "responsible". An individual, family, organization or business could not operate this way for very long. Why do we allow our government to get away with it?? 14.5 trillion dollars! Does anyone really think that debt is ever going to get paid off? Does anyone really think the US will even be able to pay back 25% of it?
I have to agree that iFlow should have seen this coming since iBooks was already in development and the giant red flag should have been "Apple's response to our detailed inquiries was to tell us that our plans did not infringe their rules in any way".
That said, just because it is legal for Apple to practice business this way does not mean it's ethical. I guess since CrApple caters to hippies with situational ethics, they wont loose much in market share because of this.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by f0nZi3.