“Comply first, and, if warranted, complain later.”
This only applies if you comply with an order. If you comply with a request, then by complying you've waived any right to complain about it later.
... that then goes back to the search engine.If the person wants to find something on the web, then yes, they'll go back from the news site from to the search engine, because search engines and news sites fulfill different purposes.
How are people who don't already visit a news site meant to find articles on that site, if not for search engines?
The security issue with HTTPS is that if a certificate authority has their key stolen (or secretly cooperates with a third party) you can be tricked into establishing a connection with an impersonator, since the impersonator will have what appears to be a valid certificate. However, this is an issue with any end-to-end system which uses a certificate authority type scheme. The only way to avoid this is to personally validate the private key of the other party, like with key signing parties.
By "attack", I'm assuming you mean the accusation that Shiva is a liar/fraud? If so, I don't think Shiva agrees with you. That is, I don't think that Shiva's attitude is:
"I might be mistaken in my belief that I invented email, and if Mike Masnick merely said that I was mistaken in my belief I'd have no problem with him."That's not at all the impression I'm getting from him.
the video culminates with Goodarzi stating that the company has ceased hiding the free to file site
Will it stay that way come next tax season?
If all creators are in favor of taking current copyrights and extending them, at what point will they be extended enough? Or are creators all in favor of perpetual copyrights?
I think his position is that calling Ayyadurai a liar doesn't legally count as opinion based on disclosed fact.
DE FACTO he's out some hefty sumIf you defend yourself against a lawsuit and win, the fact that winning cost money doesn't make you wrong.
By the way, DE FACTO, he's wrong on defamation law too.What did he get wrong about it?
Polygraphs are used regularly because they can be used to apply psychological pressure to the questionee. Not because they have any sort of accuracy.
Hypothetical: there's multiple groups of attackers, each acting against a single election machine vendor. If the particular vendor was disclosed, that particular group would be alerted that they have an information leak that they need to fix. But if the disclosure is kept to "some county in Florida", then there's so many counties with so many different vendors that it doesn't pin things down enough.
Also, I'm annoyed when you do things like claim that intelligent conservatives have been silenced but refuse to name those conservatives, or claim that something goes against common law but refuse to name what parts of common law, areas where not backing up your claims have nothing to do with maintaining your anonymity.
So those reviews of lawyers you're talking about are reviews that you have written? Otherwise I don't see why citing those reviews would imperil your anonymity.
I know you don't answer to me. I'm merely expressing annoyance that you keep making claims without backing them up.
Non-disparagement agreements aren't going to help with that.
Hopefully the laws barring these contracts are what will be thrown out. Otherwise, the white-collar professionals are sitting ducks for "reputation blackmail."Makers of false statements can already be sued under current defamation laws.
Gee I should postYes. Put up or shut up. Please.
Why? I link to a page put up by the copyright holder wouldn't be in any way infringing.
Re: you have been warned