Jim Harper 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (51) comment rss

  • On the post: Lobbying Group Issues Takedown For Parody Political Ads By Student Group

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2010 @ 08:13am

    There's Plenty of Astroturf to Go Around

    Campus Progress is organized by the Center for American Progress, a left-wing think-tank/activist group in Washington, D.C. I'd wager that there are more citizens associated with Citizens Against Government Waste than students associated with Campus Progress.

    This says nothing about the copyright merits. I'm just saying there's no need to over-flavor the story with a David and Goliath theme that probably doesn't bear up.

  • On the post: ACLU Suing Homeland Security Over Laptop Searches… Even Though Other Cases Have All Failed

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 09 Sep, 2010 @ 08:07am

    4th Amendment Law Gone Bad

    You've captured what the cases hold: that people don't have Fourth Amendment rights at the border. They've gotten here despite the plain language of the Fourth Amendment which bars unreasonable searches without exception or reservation.

    What courts have done in case over case is slip from finding border searches reasonable --- they often are --- to finding that all border searches are reasonable, to finding that the prohibition on unreasonable searches does not apply at the border. It's a nice illustration of how doctrine misleads courts and lawyers, eroding our rights over time.

    I hope it works, but I'm not a big fan of using First Amendment arguments to prop up the Fourth. We must wave the words of the Fourth Amendment in front of courts until they apply it again.

    The government should be able to search for contraband, dutiable items, and crime evidence that it has reasonable belief it will find. But asserting the power to search and copy data held by any U.S. traveler returning to the country is unreasonable.

  • On the post: How Involved Should The Government Be In Protecting Online Privacy?

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 30 Aug, 2010 @ 06:46pm

    So everyone go vote "No" in support of Jim right now!

    [Caution: That subject line was a little self-serving.]

    I've just submitted my final statement in the debate, which goes up at Economist.com Thursday, with a "decision" to be rendered on Friday. You can vote (or change your vote) any time before then.

    I don't expect to win --- too many people want privacy protection to be a free lunch handily provided by a few governmental tweaks. But it's a fun debate format, and a good opportunity to sort through some of the issues.

  • On the post: Why Does The NY Times Rely So Often On Single Anecdote Trend Pieces Not Supported By The Data?

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 27 Aug, 2010 @ 07:18am

    Re: Bogusity

    I thought the word was "bogosity"—and either way I think the word is, uh, bogus...

  • On the post: Treasure Trove Of Jazz To Be Blocked, Perhaps Forever, Thanks To Copyright

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 19 Aug, 2010 @ 10:14am

    Re:

    I don't think Post is talking about the legal aspects as such. He's talking about the avoidance of legal risks that businesspeople, curators, and their legal advisors rightly engage in. Legal niceties don't matter for squat if someone sues you. Unclear rules fertilize risk aversion, that's what you have here, and that's Post's point.

    I wouldn't blame counsel if they advise against creating unknown thousands of potential plaintiffs, any one of whom could cost a company or project $$thousands.

  • On the post: Abundance And Scarcity In Privacy

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2010 @ 10:49am

    Re: Re: How About "Publicity"?

    Turns out I had more to say on the word choices. Try this on, cross-commented straight from Jarvis:

    A further thought: With my preference for “publicity,” I’m focusing attention on the human actors involved, what they’re doing, and why. To illustrate: When I switch my Facebook status to “single,” I give publicity to that fact, probably because I’m out looking. I’m in charge of whether it goes out, and it’s availability is something I’m responsible for.

    When we talk about “publicness,” the focus is on the data, treating it as the object of other (possibly hidden) forces. A change of status on Facebook has a “publicness” that’s different from similar announcements on other media in the past. That’s worth talking about, of course, as such.

    In sum, each term may be useful in its way. I want people to be responsible for taking steps to protect their privacy — yes, many are woefully uninformed as to how — because it’s the best way to get their privacy adequately protected across all media and circumstances. Thus, my preference for focusing on people with the word “publicity.” ...

  • On the post: Abundance And Scarcity In Privacy

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2010 @ 10:27am

    Re: Re: How About "Publicity"?

    These are very interesting thoughts, thanks, and I'm enjoying the many fine and funny comments on this thread.

    Another favorite non-word making its way into the lexicon: "conversate."

  • On the post: Abundance And Scarcity In Privacy

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 06 Aug, 2010 @ 09:31pm

    Re: Re: How About "Publicity"?

    Word. I wrote a long-ass comment over on his post about "publicness" vs. "publicity."

    Thinking out loud about the substance of his post, I also concluded that I don’t think talking about these two human interests as being *categorically* scarce or abundant is actually helpful. So I seem to want complexification along a different axis.

    Now can I get a shout-out for coming up with the stupid verb "complexify"? I'm having a really good time with the irony of doing that while I go all primly semantic on Jarvis! (Chronic joke-explainer, I am...)

  • On the post: Abundance And Scarcity In Privacy

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 06 Aug, 2010 @ 08:19pm

    How About "Publicity"?

    Such an awkward locution Jarvis uses --- "publicness" --- rather than the word that describes what he means: "publicity."

    He says "publicity" is too "freighted with marketing meaning," but the marketing sense is correct. When they go to bars to see and be seen, people are seeking publicity, marketing themselves to the audiences there. When they Tweet or post pictures online, same deal.

    Scott Cleland made up a word, "publicacy," rather than publicity.

    I think these folks are complexifying concepts that are fairly simple.

  • On the post: Techdirt Saves* Journalism (And Sells Some T-Shirts)

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 28 May, 2010 @ 08:56pm

    Oh, hell yeah!

    That is all.

  • On the post: WashingtonWatch Needs Help Crowdsourcing Earmarks

    Jim Harper ( profile ), 22 Jul, 2009 @ 05:41am

    1,600+ Earmarks in the Database

    Thanks for the write-up, Mike.

    I'm excited about the response this project has gotten - we're already up over 1,600 earmarks, and the complete earmark requests of many Members of Congress are in the database.

    An unanticipated side-benefit is the fruitcake related discourse here on TechDirt....

    Once again, the earmarks map is here, contest info here, and entry form here.