The better advice is don't make explicit videos ever then there will be nothing to safeguard. In the original situation here, I presume the the partner of the complainant had a copy and posted them, but in other situations the female could do the same thing to a male. In that part of our society that's sexist, such videos might enhance the reputation of the male unless he's married or in a serious relationship with another, but who knows.
Perhaps a bit off topic, but if you make videos of very intimate interactions or any thing else and put them on a Web site, much less YouTube, they're likely to be there forever and available for anyone to see via a link. If you want those videos to be truly private, record them using a device that uses removable storage, not a device connected to the Internet like a smart phone, and never attach that storage to a device connected to the Internet - never! Of course this advice is almost useless because the folks who need it don't read techdirt and those who read techdirt already know it.
Generally, there are specific rules about placing a copyright notice within a printed document. The placement is specified as is the format of the the notice including the C within a circle icon. I looked at the document in the original post above and didn't see a such a character string. Maybe I missed it. I'm not sure there can be any copyright claim regarding the ticket document.
Although $20 is not a huge sum, some folks needing a new computer might just go to a neighboring state to buy it if they live close to the border. For inexpensive hardware such as a $150 to $200 (plus or minus) Chromebook, tablet or phone, a longer trip might be worth it, especially if one were planning a trip anyway. Other scenarios are also possible.
Furthermore, this bill sounds like a violation of the Constitution's provisions about states taxing interstate commerce and the federal government's exclusive right to levy tariffs on goods imported from foreign countries. Pretty much all computer hardware will come to a US state from abroad and may pass through other states as well.
I've followed this fascinating tale for some time on this site and was wondering if Mike has ever seen any legal action or other harassment from these guys. I can't remember if he's reported such in the past. Techdirt is probably not read by "normal" people so maybe these guys ignored it as not worth the effort since other activities were more profitable.
Besides the TV viewer that has absolutely no interest in sports, a TV viewer might be at home thinking of watching something and is mildly interested in sports so checks the listings. The home team (basketball, baseball, hockey, football, whatever) isn't on so looks elsewhere for some entertainment. The viewer finds a couple of good movies not seen, checks out IMBD for ratings and forgets about sports. After some years of finding home teams are almost never on ESPN and isn't interested in Frisbie golf, decides money can be saved by not subscribing to a package that includes ESPN. Of course, the high cost of the subscription is what ESPN has spent "billions and billions" of dollars for - sports, like basketball, that few will watch. Advertisers must also be ticked off because fewer and fewer eyes see their ads but are unwilling to pay higher fees to subsidize a failing network. ESPN has cash flow problems and starts firing it's high paid analysts. Even sports fanatics become upset at the lower quality of on-air "talent" and move away. ESPN needs a new business model as well as the sports team industry.
First, Congress doesn't regulate anything, Executive Branch agencies write regulations based on laws passed by Congress and signed by the President or overridden by Congress of a presidential veto. Congress certainly may influence regulators, though, and laws may require regulation.
Second, this shows how up to date members of Congress and its staff persons are when it comes to business and particularly businesses focused on technology issues.
The DOJ wants existing Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) modified so the FBI, etc. can continue to compel the production of communications stored overseas without tripping over reluctant US service providers or statutory limitations built into the SCA.
Not sure what these are but if they're real, legally binding treaties approved by the Senate and with foreign countries then the foreign countries need to approve a new treaty as well as the U. S. Senate. Could be tricky.
For electronic voting machines or central tabulating computers having a USB port the system doesn't need to be hacked. It can be destroyed with that $50 USB thumb drive that destroys the machine. Maybe it really is a hack if a concerted effort is made by a nefarious group to vote late in the day at selected precincts where voting histories are known. At least in my county in Colorado we vote using mail in paper ballots or paper ballots at precincts. They can be counted by hand if the readers break down.
It seems to me credit card companies have done the same thing in order to maximize interest charges. Can't remember the exact details so maybe someone else can chime in here with the details. I think those processes have been stopped, but not sure.
How about any commerce site such as Amazon, if it exists in France, big box stores with purchase sites such as the French versions of Best Buy, Macy's, Walmart, etc., or an online clothing merchant? Folks want to see pictures of what they're buying especially if color choice is important.
Maybe this is ridiculous, but will this law affect folks who want to view their cloud saved photo archives or those of others who have given permission to do so? Google, for instance, allows those with an account to save an unlimited number of pics on Google Drive for free if they are acceptable using their compression algorithm. If that's the case, Google should just block access to those archives if a URL points to France. Worse case, delete the archives with a warning about what's to happen and why.
I'm not sure if this is still the situation but it has been the case that the cost of a cable Internet plus low end TV package can be less than the cost of Internet alone. If folks are opting for that pay TV/Internet subscription instead of completely dropping TV while maintaining Internet, the situation for Pay TV may be worse than these numbers show.
The posting asserts, " ...the business of newspapers has never really been "the news business" (no matter how much they insist otherwise). It's always been the community and attention business."
It was Josef Pulitzer in the 1880s who came up with the idea that the profit in newspapers would come from advertising and not from subscription fees. I would maintain the news in newspapers was and is a sideline to advertising, though the news content has some value to subscribers. Maybe today's on line newspaper web sites should return to the Pulitzer business model. They have a problem though: ad blockers derail this idea. Seems to me we have a successful, huge tech company that has adopted Pulitzer's business model. It provides content and applications for free that that have great value to users paid for by advertising.
As others have noted and I see is that newspapers have very little news these days and what pretends to be news is actually features. And they have ad placement as news.
I always thought the BBC could detect the RF emissions from TV sets. Perhaps this is more likely from CRT based sets. Do flat panel displays not having a TV receiver output detectable RF at TV frequencies? If that's the case, the BBC will be knocking on a lot of doors because of all the computer monitors in private homes and millions and millions in businesses.