Robocalling, or the act of using automated dialers and automated messages, is illegal. The trick is catching the companies using them, especially when they're spoofing their number. Then once the company is caught, the second trick is prosecuting them, especially if they're operating out of Russia, China, or India.
However, it seems like the solution to stopping robocalls is the same as stopping spam: people need to stop buying the products. As soon as robocallers and spammers realize it's not profitable to do these things, then they'll stop.
Who are the people responsible for this and why did they think there wouldn't be a backlash?
Did did they really think the public would approve of paying for police officers to check (and rob) unlocked cars rather than doing traditional police work? Don't the police have enough to do than to wander around a parking lot or people's driveways?
And I agree with one of the previous posters: what's going to happen when a homeowners hears his car alarm go off at 3:00am and finds someone robbing his car? Chances are good that he's going to shoot before the officer can explain that he's being robbed for his own good.
However, this also sounds like yet another example of the old "Let's pass a law that blatantly defies the US constitution. We know the state supreme court will invalidate the law, but it'll take a few years and that gives us plenty of time to do what we want".
I've said before in similar articles, but the obvious solution is to change the name to something that reflects Washington. This way, everyone can save face. For example, the Senators (baseball) or the Capitols (hockey).
How about the Washington Representatives, with a cartoon senator on the helmet? Or the Washington Beltways, with a cartoon highway? Or the Washington Monuments, a team so strong they can't be pushed around?
As people are saying, Mein Kampf is copyrighted by the German government, which just muddies the waters.
Instead, how would these Senators react if someone like China told US sites to take down any information that wasn't positive towards the communist government, like coverage of the Tiennamen Square protests? Would the US order the sites down to please the Chinese government? Or would they argue "free speech"?
Of course pot is a gateway drug. After pot was legalized in Colorado, the whole state is now hooked on hardcore drugs. Just look at Denver- the whole city is nothing but a druggie wasteland.
Oh, wait, that didn't happen? And Colorado is bringing in tons of tax revenue from the sale of pot? And the number of people in prison has been reduced since they're not arresting casual pot users?
Nah, it's definitely a gateway drug.
How does any company, especially a fertility clinic, not have legal counsel? Even if they can't afford a legal department, don't they have someone on retainer? Of the top of my head, I can think of 50 different legal issues that could occur, yet they think it's okay to start looking for a lawyer when they have an issue?
If they had tried this with bigger teams or at a different time, would the servers have been able to handle it? So instead of people complaining about watching lower-ranked teams, people would be complaining about how the servers went down and connection speeds were down, and so on.
In other words, there's always something to complain about. ;)
I hate to be pedantic, but when referring to the toys, they're called "LEGO bricks" or "LEGO toys", never "LEGOs". This is even on the LEGO site, but I can't find the actual page.
So, expect LEGO to come after you for a correction. :)
Let me fix this for you:
The person in the photos would like these photos removed (and presumably the posts themselves). Who should they approach sue about this that their lawyer thinks has the most money?
1. The party that posted the photos and text?
Nope, the party that posted the photos probably don't have much money.
2. The website hosting the photos and text?
No, they may only have a few million.
3. Google.
4. And Bing... I guess.
There we go- they have billions, so let's sue for everything we can.
I agree.
Did people try to confirm this by going to any other news source or did they immediately lose their minds?
According to this article in Slate from 2013:
"The supposed panic was so tiny as to be practically immeasurable on the night of the broadcast. Despite repeated assertions to the contrary in the PBS and NPR programs, almost nobody was fooled by Welles’ broadcast."
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/history/2013/10/orson_welles_war_of_the_worlds_panic_myth_the_infamous_radio_broadcast_did.html
So I don't think the "marketing strategy" of comparing a tweet about a terrorist attack compares to the "War of the Worlds" broadcast.
Far more people care about terrorist attacks in 2015 than they cared about supposed alien invasions in 1938.
Call me a cynic, but I think this is someone's way of setting YouTube up for a fall.
First, Paramount (a subsidiary of Viacom) uploade the movies. Next, Viacom has one of its "find infringing content" subsidiary company file take-down notices with YouTube. Then Viacom resumes suing YouTube for hosting infringing content.
And as for the question of whether these movies would be available online if YouTube wasn't around? Of course! The movies would be available on Paramount's site, playable only with their proprietary video player designed to be as hard to use as possible, preferably on systems running Windows ME with IE 7 or Netscape 5.
The low traffic and viewership numbers would then prove to executives that people don't want to watch movies online.
I'm sure this is a rhetorical question, but:
1) She's an elected official so she can't be fired. I'm guessing the people in her district would have to file official impeachment charges. If she's not upholding the laws set by the Supreme Court, then I don't see why this isn't happening, other than the fact that the people in her district enjoy what she's doing.
2) As reported by a lot of media outlets, she's making around $80,000 a year. She's never going to voluntarily walk away from an income like that.
3) Vote her out of office when her term ends. However, see item #1 above: the people of her district may very well re-elect her.
While the response from AT&T may have been heavy-handed, their policy is in line with Disney, ILM, Pixar and other companies.
The problem is two-fold:
1) People think they own every little thing they create and they want credit for it, even if it's an obvious idea that other people could have thought up.
2) We live in such a litigious society that people sue over the littlest thing that companies have to protect themselves.
And like other posters said, one or two lawsuits could start to take up a chunk of change, even if the suing-person is wrong.
How many times have we heard stories that go something like this:
"I made a suggestion that cast members on this ride should wear hats. Now they're wearing hats and they didn't give me credit for coming up with the idea, so now I'm mad and I'm suing."
That sounds like a lot, but how many of these were contested on legal grounds versus "I don't want to pay it".
If most of these were disputed on legal grounds, then the city has a larger problem than just the app. In fact, why isn't the media picking up on this issue?
Who's the DA for that area of the state? How much would it cost to file the necessary paperwork to file a complaint with him against Davis?
Or is there a risk that he would side with her and agree to the pages and pages of redacted print-outs?
Or is he looking for some publicity by going against her? :)
No offense, but if you're satisfied with a clip reel or highlights, then you're probably not their target market. And if you're not their target market, why in the world are they doing what they're doing? Does the NFL think taking highlights down from Twitter will convince people like you to purchase an NFL/ DirectTV package?
This is kind of like the MPAA going after file-sharing sites to convince people to buy DVD's.
So where's the "bread" part of it? :)
But, yes, I would agree that this counts as a way of distracting the population for a few hours every week or every night.
Is this spam or not? The rough Google Translation is:
"Core work - Core applications are used in many areas and offers solutions.
Carotene work is done with machines called karotc machines shaped drill. The function is responsive to the needs of applications in many fields due. These machines will be removed with the cylindrical part of the concrete structure. This is called coring."
Re: Sad to say, but the only REAL way to deal with this is...
I agree, especially when read in this context:
That's about 500 students based on the initial stages of the investigation.
So how many total students will this come to?
As much as it would hurt all the students, I sort-of wish the DA would simply say "Sorry, that's the law and I have to enforce it". Then maybe we'll see some outrage as that town (and school) get the reputation as home to over 500 sex offenders.
How does it work when you have to tell your neighbors that your son or daughter is now a sex offender when their sons and daughters are also sex offenders?
And how does getting a job work out when every single one of these kids are now on the sex offender registry and companies aren't allowed to hire them?
"Sorry, that's the law and it has to be enforced."