they believe the use of encryption is only good for covertly conducting in criminal and terroristic activity but they use it anyway?
At least we give them the benefit of reasonable doubt by suggesting this is a contradiction. We believe it is because we know better, but the possibility it is not a contradiction to them is a far scarier notion.
What we think it means:It is embarrassing that only 3% of law enforcement agencies regularly report their shootings. Obviously we need to make more of them participate. What Comey and the FBI's response appears to really mean: It is embarrassing that 3% of law enforcement agencies regularly leak shooting data that put our officers in a bad light. Obviously we need to add more paperwork to the voluntary process.
If any country were to be allowed to dictate what search results can and cannot appear, they all must, and it only takes one of them to say "Do not show ANY sites not approved by our state." And then one country's propaganda would be the only message allowed anywhere.
Obviously the latter would be unacceptable to the rest of the world, so why would the former be? No, France, you cannot control what appears on the Internet. No country can.
Given the few degrees of separation between anything on the Internet, if you elevate linking to infringing materials to be the exact same thing as infringement you might as well declare the whole Internet illegal after about 6 hops.
Remember, violent groups out to silence critics need only use an automated DMCA system to get their targets' contact information and issue targeted death threats. Laws that forcibly de-anonymize people on the internet are a boon for anyone wanting to deprive others of something far, far more serious than anything the publishing companies can even imagine to gain from it.
Don't know which emails you need to release in that request?
COLLECT THEM ALL.
"If we make a mistake, you will hear about it."- just remember, to Adm. Rogers, "mistake" is defined here as "leak". Like a little boy facing his mom with chocolate sauce smeared all over his face, the only thing he considers a mistake is getting caught.
The courts are having a difficult time trying to draw a line between Cablevision and cable companies to find out which side of the line Aereo must be on. Maybe this dividing line does not belong anywhere between them at all. If Aereo wins this, cable would have no reason NOT to use the same model. Why? Because being charged fees to give free, over the air broadcasts to the people who could get them for free anyway just doesn't make much sense. It's convoluted, but it may be because the reasonable methods were already unfairly struck down.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Tavis.