(Not to be taken seriously)
He has been pro-government in the past, and his government supports Putin's invasion of Ukraine. As a good citizen, he probably never heard of an eminently forgettable reactionary event that occurred when he was only three years old.
Justice Breyer has been SCotUS's most reliable vote for free speech, and for IP law limited to its Constitutional purpose. I will miss him.
(No disrespect intended for Justice-designate Jackson. As far as I know, she does not have a distinctive record on these issues.)
In case anyone didn't see it earlier, I link to "Popehat" Ken White's satire of a Parma PD press release. Since Ken is an attorney, not a single line is libelous. Yet somehow it conveys (most unfairly!) the idea that Parma PD's management are humorless morons.
Every plea bargain agreement in the country is coerced. ("Either you sign here, or we have enough evidence to convict you in court and get you a more severe sentence.") Are you saying that all plea bargains must be disbelieved?
The US Supreme Court had already stated that these cops and prosecutors were untrustworthy. If the defendant really was innocent, even if he had no money to pay a lawyer, plenty of excellent lawyers would have been ready to carry on the fight for him.
In return for promising to "play nice" with Hong Kong until 2047, China gained privileged access to Western investment and Western markets (especially the American one) -- a true "great leap forward" rather than a deranged famine that killed 30 million Chinese. China obviously has the power to repudiate that promise, but it is causing Americans to reevaluate other promises from the Chinese government.
Thanks for this clarification.
I favor the death penalty for cops who frame an innocent man on a first-degree murder charge (call it "civil treason"?), but the "innocent" part does not seem to apply here. Even so, the extreme "zeal" of these cops needs to be punished.
Retailers facing crime against themselves and their customers might find this law useful, to sidestep threats of looting (or worse) if they voluntarily install surveillance or allow cops to access it.
(2) It depends what the surveillance is used for. Solving real crimes and scaring predators away? Harassing honest citizens for victimless offenses? Doing nothing? (more expensive and useless safety-theatre?)
"Thank you sir! Please give me another!"
aka winning by losing.
I thought Disney's string of perpetual copyright extensions was finally coming to an end. On the 20th anniversary of the 1998 Sony Bono 20-year extension a couple of years back, it seemed like no one had the effrontery to try again.
But Disney may have found a way after all, by jerking the chain of Republican culture warriors.
With a little luck, naive liberals, progressives, and libertarians can be convinced that extending Disney copyrights (and everyone else's?) is indispensable to defend First Amendment values from Trumpish bullying.
My impression is that even without this proposed extension, Disney can use trademark law to protect their brand from unethical competitors.
As others have noted, videotaping the writing session won't protect against claims that the defendant was subconsciously exposed to the plaintiff's music elsewhere.
One useful change (which would have to come from Congress or the courts) would be to allow the defendant to introduce third-party music that predates the plaintiff's alleged source. Jurors would be encouraged to think that if the plaintiff borrowed in his time, then he has no legitimate complaint against the defendant.
IIRC, there may already be such a doctrine, but subject to stringent gatekeeping by the judge. If so, remove the gatekeeping and let the jury decide.
I share the OP's desire for truth-in-advertising for prices, so dismally absent in the USA. Europeans correctly build "value added tax" into advertised prices, while the US custom of adding "sales tax" to the advertised price became a first step for scammers.
The DC AG's lawsuit is a step (one in thousands needed) in the right direction.
Nevertheless, during the pandemic, there seemed to be widespread unrealistic expectations about the cost of home delivery, that it should cost the restaurant customer nothing. Really? But I suppose outfits like Grubhub may have been at the bottom of it, planning to make profits from both customers and restaurants with hidden price hikes and surprise fees.
The Russian language has one of the World's richest treasuries of obscenities, perhaps because so many have served in the army over centuries. Is it all to be locked up behind copyright? That would indeed be casus belli...
Surely, since he wished for the jury to reach a verdict, the judge should have waited before releasing his own decision? Since the jury were not sequestered, they were bound to learn of the judge's decision and be influenced ("tainted") by it.
The judge claims that the plaintiff's attorneys OK'd the early release of his decision, but the whole episode sounds strange, risky, and totally unnecessary.