...try, try again.
I like this one better:
If at first you don't succeed,
Keep on suckin' 'til you do suck seed.
Juxtapositions of various members of this debacle are left as an exercise for the student.
Well, it has the word "No" in its name, so it must be bad.
At first after reading this I was worried about trauma to the hypthetical driver, but then I changed my mind. I mean, it's not like he'd be running over a collie or something.
He can pay for my bandwidth while he's at it. And the rent on my MODEM.
Why not just shoot the kid right there in the principle's office as soon as he's brought in, and get it over with as quickly as possible? Why drag out the torture? It's not like they wasted any due process on him anyway.
"To compel disclosure on that basis would trivialize FISA?s necessity standard and work a sea change in FISA litigation."
FISA trivializes the sixth amendment. Your move.
Not much to add, but it bears repeating that this is a typical abuse dynamic and has nothing to do with technology nor the current political situation. It's been that way pretty much forever.
And if less than half are reporting it, it's MORE than half that aren't reporting it, you seem to have stumbled during the rephrasing.
"It?s why you don?t need a license to sing in the shower..."
But for Heaven's sake, do NOT leave your window open.
I think there is a certain logic to claiming damages on the copies that have been taken down, since they're also claiming that those copies need to be erased, and that blocking is insufficient. It's their premises that are flawed.
All of them.
"...there's no specific protection in place for these contents, which some courts have argued contain no "expectation of privacy" thanks to constant "checkins" with third party providers and services."
The is no expectation of privacy for things I do inside my home with the doors locked, lights off and shades drawn because I do other things in public.
Anything I tell my bank is also public knowledge, including my PIN. Because they're a third-party provider or service.
If the posted recordings have been edited, then the works are clearly transformative, and therefore protected under fair use. ;)
So I recently found a reference that got me interested in a particular film, and noted that when I searched Google for it that film, I got a number of DMCA notices in place of download links.
Using my mouse (and my astonishing Internet P0w0rz) I selected the next search engine in the browser-provided pull-down list and clicked Search. In three mouse clicks and as many seconds I had more download links than I could possibly use.
Forcing Google to filter search results is SO effective because, you know, Google Is The Internet.
Dodd's halfway point seems to be halfway between where copyright is now and where he wishes it would be.
Steampunk? Sir Reginald would disagree.
I like Ike!
It isn't actually entrapment but it looks like entrapment.
Just get it to the Supreme Court and that should be close enough, yes?