velox 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (149) comment rss

  • On the post: Infringing Panties So Important To DHS, That It Intimidated Print Shop Owner Into Warrantless Search

    velox ( profile ), 03 Nov, 2014 @ 11:39am

    Re: Re: I hate DHS and their actions, but these jerks aren't innocent, either...

    I completely agree. Why is baseball burning up both our tax-dollars and our freedom merely to protect a trademark.

  • On the post: Police In Ferguson Set Up No-Fly Zone Solely To Keep Journalists Out, According To FAA Audio Recordings

    velox ( profile ), 03 Nov, 2014 @ 06:48am

    Re: Why didn't the police deploy their anti-aircraft guns?

    "...should have just deployed their anti-aircraft batteries against the agrressors" [sic]
    What??... "aggressors"??
    Did I read that right?
    Were you really advocating that law enforcement shoot at, and potentially murder, members of the news media in aircraft?

    Please tell me you were just being sarcastic, because it sure doesn't sound like it.

  • On the post: FDA Is Angry That ICANN Won't Just Censor Websites On Its Say So

    velox ( profile ), 30 Oct, 2014 @ 01:33am

    Damned Lies and Statistics

    The WSJ article would have us believe there are between 30,000 and 40,000 illegal online pharmacy websites in the world, although no standard of what constitutes an illegal pharmacy is given. The WSJ then drops clues to who is behind this supposed FDA initiative to get rid of "illegal" online pharmacies. The article quotes the opinion of legal counsel to the pharmaceutical firm Eli Lilly, and also the Portland firm LegitScript which consists of former drug prosecutor John Horton, who is a consultant to pharmaceutical companies regarding "illegal" distribution of medications online.

    A quick browse to LegitScripts' website reveals that there are exactly 35,610 illegal online pharmacies in the world, but only 212 legal pharmacies.
    Wow! Who knew that 99.4% of the entire online world was so completely over-run with crooks?
    LegitScript tells us that only online pharmacies who have pledged to follow the regulations issued by the FDA and the DEA are legal.

    If you read a bit more about LegitScript you find that its chief reason for existence is to help pharmaceutical companies keep inexpensive medications out of the mailboxes of US consumers, and thereby ensure that the US drug pricing scheme is maintained.
    Dubious made-up scare-mongering statistics - they're not just for media copyrights and trademarks anymore, they work for pharmaceutical patents too.

  • On the post: IRS Also More Than Willing To Steal Money Under The Pretense Of Crime Fighting

    velox ( profile ), 28 Oct, 2014 @ 01:04pm

    This is a Congress problem more than an IRS problem.

    Congress created asset forfeiture law, and Congress has proceeded to make it worse time after time. Members of Congress need to be held responsible - individually, and by name.

    The IRS lost a forfeiture case at the Supreme Court in 1994 (Ratzlaf v. US) when a defendant was able to successfully make the case that he hadn't known he was "structuring" deposits in a way that could be considered illegal. The execrable federal prosecutors then complained to Congress who shamefully obliged them and changed to law to remove the requirement that the offence be "willful".
    I haven't done the research to see exactly which members of Congress sponsored that legislation, but this information should be sought, and they should be exposed as being responsible for this nonsense. Any time legislators seek to remove Mens Rea (intent) from the law, they are weakening respect for the law, because eventually such a law will be unjustly abused by regulators, law enforcement and prosecutors.
    See the discussion of the IRS and Ratzlaf v. US at the Volokh Conspiracy.

  • On the post: Judge: The Supreme Court Has Said Aereo Must Die, So Go Die

    velox ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2014 @ 07:39pm

    Re: And another branch of technology killed before it could grow

    "The SC's ruling basically made it impossible for Aereo to exist, and now the lower court judge is just following their instructions."
    ...however, one gets the impression that this outcome may not actually be what the Supreme Court expected. If Aereo believes that to be the case, and if Barry Diller is stubborn enough to keep paying lawyers, then this battle might yet go on for a while.

  • On the post: Tons Of Sites, Including WhiteHouse.gov, In Unwitting AddThis Experiment With Tracking Technology That Is Difficult To Block

    velox ( profile ), 22 Jul, 2014 @ 06:34am

    Re: Where are you, Firefox?

    Mozilla is dependent on the Google money that supports them.

    Some things in Firefox that would be safer for the user are off or unconfigured by default. For example Do Not Track is not active by default.
    I suspect (of course I have no proof) it's because Google prefers it that way.

  • On the post: Years Later, Google Finally Dumps Its Ill-Advised Real Names Policy: Drops All Restrictions On Names

    velox ( profile ), 15 Jul, 2014 @ 03:08pm

    Google can track you despite your Pseudonym.

    Most likely Google is willing to drop this policy because they are now so sophisticated at tracking users across the web that they believe they will be able to identify users as unique individuals, even when a user displays a pseudonym on Google+.
    This is an improvement - so long as you aren't afraid of what Google itself does with your personal information, or what a government agency might do with it after extracting the information from Google, but at least a person can now discuss issues, and express an opinion without everyone else knowing who they are in the rest of their life.
    Even in a country that supposedly has freedom of speech, professionals who want to keep their career persona separate from their political expressions have stayed away from Google+, and have curtailed their Facebook activity precisely for this reason. Note that Twitter, which does allow anonymity, has certainly benefited from this dynamic.

  • On the post: Disaster Preparedness Company Thinks People Shouldn't Be Allowed To Use The Words 'Emergency Essentials'

    velox ( profile ), 12 Jun, 2014 @ 04:07pm

    The owner of a mark is not required to constantly monitor every nook and cranny of the entire nation and to fire both barrels of his shotgun instantly upon spotting a possible infringer

    Owners of law degrees however, must monitor every nook and cranny for the existence of billable hours.

  • On the post: Former NSA Lawyer Asks Google To 'Forget' All Of Techdirt's Posts About Him

    velox ( profile ), 09 Jun, 2014 @ 12:27pm

    For years Stewart Baker would post his views quite regularly on the Volokh Conspiracy blog, and then get skewered in the comments section. Eventually thin-skinned Stewart blocked all comments on his posts there, but now that the Volokh Conspiracy has moved to the Washington Post, he can't block comments any more.
    Poor Stewart.

  • On the post: The Three Big Lies: How The Federal Government Kept Its Post-9/11 Spying On Americans A Secret

    velox ( profile ), 14 May, 2014 @ 09:29am

    Re:

    *** THIS ***

  • On the post: Canadian Law Enforcement Asking For ISP Subscriber Data Every 27 Seconds; Pending Legislation Looking To Up That Number

    velox ( profile ), 05 May, 2014 @ 11:45pm

    ISP 'compliance' isn't really the right word. 'Customer Service' is the more appropriate term, since the ISP's are selling this data to law enforcement. Anything that makes their customers happy is good for business.

    Think about it. The ISP's are charging you for the right to sell-out your own privacy and freedom. (And they likely aren't just selling your private information to government, but also to advertising and analytics companies as well.)

  • On the post: NSA About Attorney-Client Privilege Concerns: We'll Probably Grab Your Communications But We'll Try Not To 'Listen In'

    velox ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2014 @ 08:28pm

    The legal profession likes to talk about "failure to take reasonable precautions" when discussing liability. It's pretty tough to argue now that reasonable precautions wouldn't include encryption. Will lawyers now get serious about encryption in their own communications?

  • On the post: Will 3D Printing Transform The World — Or Just Fill It With Non-Biodegradable Personalized Junk?

    velox ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2014 @ 07:41pm

    A step backward? That is needlessly pessimistic.

    What about the ability to make on-demand replacement parts so that an entire item doesn't have to be replaced when one small component breaks? I thought that green activity was supposed to be one of the principal attractions of 3D printers.

  • On the post: Ignorant NY Times Reporter Argues That The Public Domain Is Damaging Film

    velox ( profile ), 19 Feb, 2014 @ 01:20pm

    1. Media industry insiders cultivate film critic whose reviews have appeared in the NYT, NY Sun, WSJ and LA Weekly, etc.
    2. Film critic enjoys his inside access to the glamorous movie business.
    3. Film critic loses objectivity and becomes a reliable mouth-piece for the industry agenda.

  • On the post: Open Letter To Data Brokers Are A Bunch Of Idiots Or Current Business

    velox ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2014 @ 02:43pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Irony

    Yes and look at a map of that [Street Name] in Menlo Park. You can use OpenStreetMap for instance There are only 4 houses on the odd side of the street in the block given when that zip+4 is search

  • On the post: Open Letter To Data Brokers Are A Bunch Of Idiots Or Current Business

    velox ( profile ), 07 Feb, 2014 @ 02:34pm

    Re: Re: Irony

    Actually for most residential addresses you can get the exact address.
    In the case of Lisa you can quickly find a free online tool that gives you which street, which block, and which side of the street she lives on. There are only 4 houses that fit the description. If you pay a fee, then you can get the exact house she lives in.

  • On the post: Washington Post Columnist Says 'Complainers' Will Be At Fault For Next Terrorist Attack

    velox ( profile ), 31 Dec, 2013 @ 01:59pm

    Re:

    When a person has a budget which is very large, and very secret (an therefore unassailable), he never has to worry about the cost side of things. Such a person may never have had to develop the thought-processes associated with "cost/benefit" analysis.
    Perhaps this is even more likely to be true if that person has the ability to make adjustments to bank accounts ... and happens to be the owner of the bank account in question.

  • On the post: Facebook Is Tracking When You Write Something… And Then Decide To Delete It Rather Than Post It

    velox ( profile ), 16 Dec, 2013 @ 11:28am

    What about wrong password attempts?

    Do they keep track of your wrong password attempts as well? Since most people have a small number passwords they reuse, recording the wrong password entries could soon give them the list of passwords you use on other sites.

  • On the post: Pressure Mounts Against Telcos To 'Fess Up About Their Involvement In NSA Surveillance

    velox ( profile ), 22 Nov, 2013 @ 01:33pm

    Re:

    "the fault here lies with... the telcos lawyers for not instructing the telcos to fight plus the heads of the telcos for caving..."
    I think you're misunderstanding what is happening.
    Fight vs. Cave is not the question.
    They have no interest whatsoever in fighting the government's requests for your data. The question for the telcos has always been how to sell your data, and the only function that their lawyers have had is how to ensure that such sales are accomplished without incurring legal liability.

    The telcos are in the business of selling American citizens' private data to the government. Therefore saying, as Mike did, that they "volunteered" your data to the NSA is kind of like saying they 'volunteer' to sell you phone or internet service. Your data is a marketable product and the various federal 3-letter agencies, as well as state and local LEO's are their enthusiastic customers -- spending your own tax dollars to surveil you.

  • On the post: Google Gets Total Victory Over Authors Guild: Book Scanning Is Fair Use

    velox ( profile ), 14 Nov, 2013 @ 11:36am

    What about old books?

    Does this mean that Google can restore scans of old books that are clearly in the public domain, and which were formerly (but no longer) available on Google Books, or is that a completely separate issue pertaining to contracts Google made with universities when the scanning was done? Can anyone explain what's going on with books that are hundreds of years old?

Next >>