IIRC during the Vietnam war the government directly kept databases on individual people and other entities related to their lifestyles, credit, relatives, friends, neighbors, economic activities, political affiliation, FBI interview transcripts with neighbors, ... the list is endless. When some of the worst abuses of this came to light congress passed legislation and the president signed it into law that prohibited the government from possessing such databases.
The result was the government passing legislation that created "opportunities" for private companies to do exactly what the federal government had been doing on its own and for the government to buy access to these databases. The government is in compliance with the letter of the law, but not the spirit.
So, does the 10th Circuits ruling apply to the numerous entities that build and maintain these databases for the government's convenience?
Or laws like the Entertainment industries bought from congress: mandatory, extortionately high payments to the affected persons for their trouble dealing with malware spreading advertizing. -- Think of it: a website gives you some malware that changes your DNS setting nets you $250,000(U$D) and all you have to do is file a claim with the FTC and it is done. Net effect you'll never see a malware spreading ad again. Ever.
How about the FCC/FTC et al set up a "Hit Squad", much like the CIA/NSA bunch. Then, if the fine is not paid in 30-days after the imposition of said fine, then they "activate" the hit on all the officers, directors and senior managers at the offending company.
[Note: For the humor impaired, This is Satire. However, it also makes for pleasant wishful thinking.]
A lot of the anti-pr0n heat is coming from feminists. The "feedback" counted and analyzed, they concluded that there are more men and their supporters who like porn than there are feminazis who want the exclusive monopoly on human sexuality.
Has an agenda. Feels strongly about it. Makes up stories supporting the agenda. Makes up statistics supporting the agenda. Suppresses countering arguments. Attacks character of those making counter arguments.
Well, it is true. Your constitutional rights are worthless because there is no penalty to anyone or any entity that violates them. The case of MJC's violation of the First Ammendment is a perfect example thereof.
Suppose you rob a bank. That's against the law. Associated with the prohibition are penalties for violating the law. You are going to pay restitution, pay a fine and will likely go to prison.
Suppose you prohibit some activity clearly spelled out in the Constitution as a "Right". What happens. Somebody or entity goes to court to get you to stop doing that. Courts hear the case as a "civil" matter. The court (if it is not coerced by the USDOJ or some other deep-pocketed person or entity) orders you to stop doing that and (only maybe) makes you promise to stop doing that. -- End of story.
What should happen is that you (the entity or person, by name) should be charged with Treason! Yes, treason. You have tried to subvert the supreme law of the land: The US Constitution. If convicted, you should do at least 20 years (every goddamned minute of it) in SuperMax, have all your assets confiscated and barred from ever working in any government agency of any sort ever again. -- You have committed Treason by subverting the US Constitution.
At the time the Sony rootkit came to light, the Canadian government in extracting its settlement with Sony made them promise to never do it again or they would open Sony up to tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of individual lawsuits.
In the USA, however, Sony fought tooth and nail to keep "promise not to do it again" provision out of the FTC settlement. ... So, in the USA, there is nothing to prevent Sony or anyone else from installing a rootkit on your PC.
Maybe US Attorney Carmen Ortiz should go after the chairman at Sony like she did with Aaron Schwartz.
Political and not-for-profit RoboCalls are not exempt from the DoNotRoboCall law.
Penalties for political RoboCalls are the imprisonment of the candidate for 20 years, no exceptions. In the case of RoboCalling on behalf of ballot initiatives the the vote goes against the desired outcome of the RoboCaller. The officers and directors of the payor for the RoboCall are presumed to be the initiators of the RoboCall; penalties are the same as commercial RoboCallers. In the case of "front" organizations, strict liability is passed through to the real backers of the initiative.
Penalties for not-for-profits is the same as previously stated for [presumably] for-profits. In addition, the not-for-profit is dissolved with all proceeds from its liquidation going to the US Treasury.
A facility implemented by the telcos and enabled by default would put every phone number served by the telco on a DoNotRoboCall list. Consumer could un-subscribe to the DoNotRoboCall list by using a *xx facility the telcos use to let consumers tweak their own telco service options to enable or disable this feature.
Telcos would implement an out-of-band signaling mechanism where a signal is sent to the originator of the all calls. RoboCallers would have to implement technology to recognize the out-of-band signal and terminate the call immediately before the call rings through to the consumer; a timeout facility is implemented by the telco that if the call does not terminate in (2 seconds (pick a number)) then the telco puts the call through to the consumer. The consumer on detecting a RoboCall presses a *xx number on the telephone keypad. The remainder of the call is recorded by the telco. The telco is required to listen to each call recorded by the DoNotRoboCall facility and determine its validity. RoboCall operators would have to upgrade/replace their existing RoboCall equipment immediately; no grandfathering of existing equipment is allowed. If the RoboCaller lets a call go through to someone on the DoNotRoboCall list, then the RoboCaller is considered in violation of the law.
National legislation would be necessary that says that any RoboCaller that dials a phone number with anti-robocall enabled is liable for payment, say $10,000 per call, via the telco to the consumer. The telco is permitted to take a small portion of the payment to implement the DoNotRoboCall feature.
Violation of the DoNotRoboCall mechanism is also a criminal offense where the officers and directors of the robocalling entity are strictly and personally liable for each and every violation. Financial penalties become the personal liabilities of the owners, officers and directors of the RoboCalling entities and are not shielded by normal "corporate shield" law. After a first conviction, mandatory sentencing of 20 years for ALL owners, officers and directors is the law of the land. Fines cannot be discharged by bankrupcy. Community property laws do not shield spouses under the principle that the spouses benefitted from the ill-gotten gain of the RoboCaller. The US Marines may be deployed to any nation that shields assets of a RoboCaller.