PRK 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (210) comment rss

  • On the post: Lawyers Gearing Up To Hit UK With Corporate Sovereignty Claims Totalling Billions Of Dollars Over Brexit

    PRK ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2017 @ 05:38pm

    Removing Corporate Sovereignty in Trade Deals

    By removing the CS provisions from trade deals is the EU now opening themselves up to a Corporate Sovereignty claim based on the fact that the provision was removed?

    :-)

  • On the post: Monkey Selfie Case Reaches Settlement — But The Parties Want To Delete Ruling Saying Monkeys Can't Hold Copyright

    PRK ( profile ), 13 Sep, 2017 @ 04:41am

    STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES......

    STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES......

    I can only wonder why Slater would agree to an obligation to report all income from the image. Net result: PETA - who had no real standing has now obtained a contractual right to a perpetual royalty stream. I can only imagine the "demands" Slater will be receiving in the future to have his finances audited for compliance.

  • On the post: Google Asks US Court To Block Terrible Canadian Supreme Court Ruling On Global Censorship

    PRK ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2017 @ 05:16am

    Canada is Correct Legally

    Most comments miss the real issue here - jurisdiction. Google was indeed subject to the jurisdiction of the Canadian courts. As such, Canada could order Google to do whatever the court was legally permitted to order under the laws of CANADA. The fact that this required Google to undertake actions outside of Canada is irrelevant.

    What this case does show is that while the Internet is global, the judicial system is inherently linked to specific jurisdictions. In several areas treaties were created to deal with similar issues - an example is maritime shipping.

    Here Google's only available option is to go from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and obtain court orders that actual prohibit Google from undertaking the action within each specific jurisdiction.

  • On the post: NSA Boss: Section 702 Should Be Renewed Because It Helped Prove Russia Hacked Election

    PRK ( profile ), 16 May, 2017 @ 06:01am

    Informs ???

    What does informs mean? It could be "sorry nothing here to see, move along". It could mean we looked but there was just so much shit in the files we could not find anything......

  • On the post: Chris Dodd 'Stepping Down' From MPAA

    PRK ( profile ), 02 May, 2017 @ 03:43am

    Chris Dodd To Run New Copyright Office

    NEWS FLASH ------

    The MPAA in conjunction with the White House announced today that Chris Dodd has been nominated as the director of the newly minted Department of Copyright (a/k/a MPAA East)..........

    And now for other news.....

    Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.

  • On the post: Artist Sues Church For Moving His 9/11 Memorial Sculpture

    PRK ( profile ), 21 Apr, 2017 @ 03:53am

    Waiver vs Assignment

    He may have waived his moral rights. HOWEVER, even if he neither waived nor assigned his moral rights, he ASSIGNED all of his "causes of action" which would include any right to recover anything. This was extremely clear from the language:

    TRANSFERS and ASSIGNS ..... all right, title and interest to the Sculpture and all materials related thereto ..... including but not limited to the copyright therein, and any CAUSE OF ACTION that Tobin may have with respect thereto.

    One can retain all rights BUT also assign the benefits of a claim based upon those rights.

  • On the post: California Lawmakers Looking To Make Bad Law Worse By Banning 'False' Political Speech

    PRK ( profile ), 21 Mar, 2017 @ 05:36am

    Re: Goodbye Politicians, Too bad you are criminals

    I think this is a great law!! Think if the roar of silence. No more politicians promising shit they can and will never provide. No more PACs. It would be truly wonderful. And with the politicians and PACs silenced there is no reason for Joe or Joan public to publish anything. So no risk of harm to the masses.

    Sort of like a law that obligates advertisers to state "claims not independently substantiated" if they cannot link to an I dependent laboratory proving the product performs as advertised.

  • On the post: Court Tells Melania Trump She Can't Sue The Daily Mail In Maryland, So She Refiles In New York

    PRK ( profile ), 08 Feb, 2017 @ 09:25am

    Defaming a famous person

    In the US he has to show malice because his allegations for damage admit she is.

    He filed in the US to obtain discovery that he can then use in the U.K. action - the U.K. Does not require malice to be proven and in fact imposes the burden upon the defendant to show truth.

  • On the post: Chicago Mayor Promises To Turn Over Emails From His Private Accounts Following Courtroom Losses

    PRK ( profile ), 20 Jan, 2017 @ 05:44am

    Transparency # Voluntary Disclosure

    Duh.......Its all about timing. People who claim to be transparent do so only when it is beneficial OR it is mandated by some authority. If you remember that rule it is easy to understand Chicago's belief that it is "transparent" and at the same time requiring each request to proceed to litigation.

  • On the post: EU MEPs Call Again For 'Robot Rules' To Get Ahead Of The AI Revolution

    PRK ( profile ), 20 Jan, 2017 @ 05:39am

    Measure 2 times - cut once

    Before we launch into creating rights we need to fully understand what we are actually addressing.

    AI - this is as yet a largely undefined term that means anything from generating responses based upon rapid search metrics and the ability to adjust those metrics based upon observed input. This is not "intelligence" IMHO. This is repetitive behavior no different than a mouse learning to navigate a maze based upon rewards.

    Sencient. When is anything deemed to be sentient and under what standards?

    Robot. And exactly what is a robot? Is it any machine or a machine that has human-like features?

    GO SLOW. This is an area where we need to go it slow. We in the US are still reeling in many respects from court decisions granting "personification" to corporate entities (e.g. Family United and political contributions).

    Some point to the difficulties in making the "creators" responsible for behavior of an "AI" ("Is it Microsoft's fault? They just created the base AI. If later interactions teach it bad behavior, that's not their fault. No more than they're responsible for crimes committed using Windows or Word.). In my view the current legal structure already provides for this. MS may be at fault if it can be shown that they should have inserted protective programming limitations (just as any manufacturer could be responsible for not building in protection devices or a pharma company could be responsible for adverse reactions to drugs).

    Going slow may result in more moderate advances in this field. However, if we have learned anything from the LOT craze it is measure 2x and cut 1x.

  • On the post: Tanzanian Farmers Face 12 Years In Prison For Selling Seeds As They've Done For Generations

    PRK ( profile ), 16 Jan, 2017 @ 05:35am

    Seeds and First Sale

    I had always thought that generically altered seeds would produce sterile plants.


    I don't understand how a patent can apply to prevent seeds that have been created by the plant. The seeds are not a derivative work and the farmer did not "create" the seed as a copy. How can infringement occur? If Monsanto did not prevent the 1st generation plant from producing seeds that could germinate that seems to be its own decision not to interfere with the natural reproduction system of the plant.

    There must be a contractual obligation created in the purchase agreement for the underlying seeds. However, as a contract it would be subject to the laws of the various jurisdictions (or the jurisdiction specified in the contract). It would be interesting to see if the underlying agreement clearly specifies this AND whether is properly presented so as to be enforceable against farmers who I (ignorantly) presume to be illiterate.

    How would this stand up with other genetic uses? For example, I sell you genetically altered sperm for a bull and you use it to artificially insimonate a cow. How does this restrict the use of any offspring of the 1st calf who was given birth by natural processes?

  • On the post: Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life

    PRK ( profile ), 12 Jan, 2017 @ 06:08am

    Contributions to Litigation

    Mike, I would like to offer whatever services might be appropriate. I am a California licensed attorney and am happy to help with strategy, drafting etc in connection ith your defense. I can be reached at paul@law.es.

  • On the post: Austrian Teenager Sues Parents For Posting Pictures From Her Childhood To Facebook

    PRK ( profile ), 24 Sep, 2016 @ 11:48pm

    Ugly baby

    She must have been an ugly baby.

  • On the post: Austrian Teenager Sues Parents For Posting Pictures From Her Childhood To Facebook

    PRK ( profile ), 24 Sep, 2016 @ 11:46pm

    Photos of my child

    I am the legal guardian of my minor child. As such I may (and in many cases must) exercise his legal rights. I may (and in many cases must) approve or consent to the waiver of his rights. This should include the right of privacy as noted in the daughter's lawsuit.

  • On the post: More Details On How Corporate Sovereignty Provisions, Like Those In TPP & TTIP, Are Dangerous

    PRK ( profile ), 14 Sep, 2016 @ 09:31am

    ISSA. APPLE. IRELAND

    So I wonder if Apple isn't planning an ISDA claim to recover the billions it must pay in taxes?????

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    PRK ( profile ), 04 Jul, 2016 @ 10:43am

    Foreign travel

    Using a burner phone also makes for a far better reason to search you upon return. Who uses burner phones except terrorists.....

  • On the post: Federal Judge Says Internet Archive's Wayback Machine A Perfectly Legitimate Source Of Evidence

    PRK ( profile ), 19 May, 2016 @ 10:32am

    Not so fast

    The main issue with Archive.org is that it preserves the underlying hamlet and NOT the actual image. Thus html code that "calls" another file from another location will display whatever that file currently contains. An example is a d date code call.

    A far better solution is screenshots.com which captures an actual static image of the homepage. While it doesn't capture other pages it does a great job of showing how tha ho epage actually appeared.

    So, is archive.org evidence? Yes. BIT it is open to a great deal of attack in depending on what the archive actually contains and whether or not there have been changes.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    PRK ( profile ), 01 May, 2016 @ 06:25am

    Copyright damages are a disaster

    The problem is not only statutory damages. Actual damages presumes all dfendant's revenues are the result of infringement. The plaintiff is only required to provide evidence of defendant's gross revenues. The defendant then has the burden of proving profits that are unrelated and expenses that should be used as offsets.

    Complete reality disconnect and one of the only areas in which the defendant has virtually the entire burden of proof.

  • On the post: Priceline Throws A Fit And Sues USPTO For Not Granting Them Booking.com Trademark

    PRK ( profile ), 28 Apr, 2016 @ 09:57am

    The Real Grab

    There are over 17,947 domain names registered that BEGIN with the word "Booking" (source https://research.domaintools.com/research/domain-search/?query=booking&registration=all&exclude=&position=front&input-min=&input-max=99999&hyphen=1&number=1

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    PRK ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2016 @ 02:51am

    Copyright damages are a disaster

    The problem is not only statutory damages. Actual damages presumes all dfendant's revenues are the result of infringement. The plaintiff is only required to provide evidence of defendant's gross revenues. The defendant then has the burden of proving profits that are unrelated and expenses that should be used as offsets.

    Complete reality disconnect and one of the only areas in which the defendant has virtually the entire burden of proof.

Next >>