Joe 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (147)

• On the post: Judge Admits She Was Wrong To Order Playstation Jailbreaker To 'Retrieve' Code From Elsewhere

  

  Joe ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2011 @ 04:27am

  Re: Re:

  She didn't tell him to be forthcoming about what's on his computer, she just told him to turn it over and not delete or alter anything related to the case. If they can't find what they're looking for, it's on them. ;)

• On the post: Judge Admits She Was Wrong To Order Playstation Jailbreaker To 'Retrieve' Code From Elsewhere

  

  Joe ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2011 @ 04:23am

  Re: Re: Re:

  That's exactly what the whole lawsuit is about. They want to make an example of him but they _really_ want the fail0ver guys.

• On the post: UK Commission Explains That Public Tweets Are Public

  

  Joe ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 08:16am

  Re: Re: it's all relative

  I'll see your "citation needed" and raise you a "citation needed."

• On the post: Syria & Sudan Hoping That Greater Social Network Use Will Keep Regimes In Power

  

  Joe ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 08:13am

  Re: The wind is blowing and the stench is horrible at the top...

  Oh, the horror!

• On the post: Did The Record Labels Kill The Golden Goose In Music Video Games?

  

  Joe ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2011 @ 07:47am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Look back at the Sony rootkit article. After it was posted, he went back and said that after reading what others were saying and digging into it further, it appeared not to be as bad as originally portrayed.
  
  There are other examples, that one was the most recent that I remember off the top of my head.
  
  But I suppose you really didn't want an example, did you?

• On the post: Can A Judge Force A Juror To Reveal Facebook Account Info?

  

  Joe ( profile ), 08 Feb, 2011 @ 03:31pm

  Re:

  The same comments could have been made by someone at his place of employment when he informed them that he had been selected for jury duty and wouldn't be at work because of that. Where do you draw the line? Last time I checked, simply being on a jury wasn't supposed to be regarded as "Top Secret."

• On the post: Judge Bans Handing (Factual) Pamphlets To Jurors; Raising First Amendment Issues

  

  Joe ( profile ), 08 Feb, 2011 @ 05:28am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  But you can't take it?

• On the post: Homeland Security Tries And Fails To Explain Why Seized Domains Are Different From Google

  

  Joe ( profile ), 06 Feb, 2011 @ 04:59am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  My thoughts exactly, but you said it better than I could.

• On the post: Homeland Security Tries And Fails To Explain Why Seized Domains Are Different From Google

  

  Joe ( profile ), 06 Feb, 2011 @ 04:54am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Due diligence?

  ICE said so. Duh. ;)

• On the post: Senator Wyden Asks WTF Is Up With Homeland Security Domain Seizures

  

  Joe ( profile ), 04 Feb, 2011 @ 03:50am

  Re: Re:

  And providing the funding for their activities.

• On the post: Senator Wyden Asks WTF Is Up With Homeland Security Domain Seizures

  

  Joe ( profile ), 03 Feb, 2011 @ 04:04pm

  Re: strap-on ((arguably) adult content)

  Don't Bogart that joint!

• On the post: Senator Wyden Asks WTF Is Up With Homeland Security Domain Seizures

  

  Joe ( profile ), 03 Feb, 2011 @ 03:59pm

  Re: Re: Re: If they ever _get_ to court. (Correction)

  From a legal standpoint, the standard for a warrant (including the seizure of evidence or even putting an enterprise under government control) isn't "beyond a reasonable doubt" but rather "reasonable suspicion".
  
  Ummm, no. The standard for a warrant is "probable cause." BIG difference.
  
  You might want to read the 4th Amendment:
  The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

• On the post: Brazilian Telecom Authority Claims Sharing WiFi Is A Criminal Offense

  

  Joe ( profile ), 03 Feb, 2011 @ 03:40pm

  Re:

  But the service IS already paid for.

• On the post: Metered Bandwidth Isn't About Stopping The Bandwidth Hogs; It's About Preserving Old Media Business Models

  

  Joe ( profile ), 01 Feb, 2011 @ 02:13pm

  Re: Re: Re: I hope metered plans don't last

  Or raise the rates while giving worse service, as they have done to me. ;)

• On the post: Has The Fourth Amendment Been Dismantled By Technology And The Courts?

  

  Joe ( profile ), 31 Jan, 2011 @ 05:00am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  No, there is a distinction between a stop and a search. Reasonable suspicion is the standard for a stop, but probable cause is still necessary for a search (unless consent is given).

• On the post: New Twist On Mass Pre-Settlement Copyright Shakedown Letters: Porn Company Asks Downloaders To Confess… And Pay

  

  Joe ( profile ), 27 Jan, 2011 @ 06:40pm

  Re:

  Yeah, y'all com back now, ya hear!

• On the post: Will Google's New Hamfisted Censorship On Autocomplete Raise Questions Of Human Meddling?

  

  Joe ( profile ), 27 Jan, 2011 @ 06:34pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  You've not met my sister, I assume. ;)

• On the post: Obama Nominates Former Top RIAA Lawyer To Be Solicitor General

  

  Joe ( profile ), 25 Jan, 2011 @ 10:46am

  Re: Re: Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat

  Next thing you know, the RIAA will be suing toaster manufacturers for taking 'their' money.

• On the post: Sony Gets Restraining Order Against Guy Who Restored PS3 Feature Sony Deleted

  

  Joe ( profile ), 13 Jan, 2011 @ 06:01am

  Re: Re: Re: Future of IP laws.

  Or a TV that will automatically shut off if someone other than the purchaser is in the room.

• On the post: Mimi & Eunice: Ye Olde Technologie Killing Culture, Scribes

  

  Joe ( profile ), 09 Jan, 2011 @ 10:12am

  Re:

  no way am I going to one of the grody theaters in town

  I didn't think anyone said "grody" anymore. Cool!

Next >>