The spokesman for the Portland police department claims it's not the department's problem if these laws are violated.And all these years I've been thinking that the problem of laws being violated was pretty much the raison d'etre for police departments.
The byline of the linked article says it was written by editor Taylor Carlier, not by Michael Takeda.
To that end, the Teaching, Learning, and Advising Committee, which originally brought teaching evaluations online, will take up the question of how to respond to these developments,...
My guess is their response will be to no longer make the evaluation data available.
Moreover, the "camel" comment in the letter and the report is pure hearsay. Swartz's lawyer is the only one who has said this is what the lead prosecutor said. Just because he says so does not make it true.
This is incorrect on a couple of counts.
First, it was not Aaron Swartz's lawyer who quoted the lead prosecutor, it was MIT's lawyers (in a memorandum provided by MIT?s outside counsel to its Office of General Counsel, dated August 10, 2012).
Second, MIT's counsel recited what the lead prosecutor stated directly to them -- in order to qualify as "hearsay" they would have to had quoted something that they heard that the prosecutor said to someone else.
One of the most contentious aspects of the NSA's surveillance is the central belief by General Alexander and presumably many others at the agency that it must "collect it all" in order to protect the public. To stand a chance of overturning that policy, those against this dragnet approach need to come up with a realistic alternative.A realistic alternative? How about "don't collect it all". Fire the people who have based the organization's operations on this failed policy of "collect it all" and hire people who can run the NSA in a manner that doesn't do massive harm to U.S. technology companies, doesn't subvert the efficacy and reputations of cybersecurity standards bodies, doesn't embarrass the U.S. government in the eyes of foreign leaders, and doesn't violate the U.S. Constitution.
"But he set aside his own decision, as he said 'likely to be overturned'Rogers is wrong on two counts.
This reminds me of the petulant and childish response of movie theaters when filmmakers started trying to release films online at the same time they were in the theaters. Like in that situation, ...It might be "like in that situation" were Target seeking to have their physical copies released in advance of the Itunes release, but the fact they are objecting to not receiving equal treatment suggests it's a rather different situation and hardly deserving of being called petulant and childish.
a somewhat angry questioner in the audience insisted that some comments written on Techdirt by some of our users were "illegal in Germany" and that, under German law, I was liable for them. He stood at the microphone with a laptop reading the comments ...So was the questioner arrested for doing something that was "illegal in Germany"? Or is there some reason that his sharing of the comments was legal while Techdirt's was not?
Judging by the current political climate, no sane politician would sign it now, I think.We're not worried about sane politicians; we're worried about Congress.
... But there is every reason now to believe that millions of consumer records were unlawfully obtained by the National Security Agency.Well, first the courts would need to rule that what the NSA did was unlawful -- so I wish them best of luck in this aspect of their lawsuit.
The RIAA lawsuit was settled after a finding of guilt was made. The movie studios' lawsuit was "dropped" before there was any finding of guilt.
It is a shame that the U.S. government doesn't have a massive data center that has been intended to be used for collection and storage of its citizens private data -- in violation of the U.S. Constitution -- and instead could be re-purposed by Congress for archiving of such historic public collections.
In discussing Dave Allen's article, Mr Gillmore states:
Allen's deconstruction of several famous musicians' songs of woe is worth reading...
They don't trust anything that comes from the government."So not much different than the U.S.
Hopefully the TCB are right in their prediction, that this will indeed be the first in a long overdue trend toward expanding users' rights (or rather, a reduction in the taking away of users' rights).
A shame this "appearance of impropriety" standard doesn't likewise apply to comparing rescinding of bad patents to genocide.
"People who would consider it a bizarre breach of conduct to expect anyone to give them a haircut or a can of soda at no cost"
And yet that is invariably how members of our species spend the first 16-odd years of our lives (just ask your parents).
I am astounded by the fact that, "Four scenarios were carried out that day with the incident occurring during the third scenario."
How comforting to know that after a student has been injured and sent the hospital, none of the officials thought to stop the exhibition.
Maybe Techdirt should start working weekends and use Wednesday and Thursday for Posts of the Week and Insight Comments Reviews.
I think that by non-negotiable the USTR means "you don't get any say in the matter".