I think any internet user savvy enough to hire a referral company via the web understands that there are terms and conditions. In this case every page she viewed on the site had a link to the terms, and the final click even stated she agreed to the terms and conditions. As the original article stated, this decision is based on the reality of people's use of the internet. The true measure of enforcability in these situations should be the reasonable availability of the terms to the user. What is the difference between posting the terms on a page with an 'accept' button and saying 'accepting is agreeing to the terms linked HERE'?
but this time you are a bit off. While in principle I agree that a radio contest to give away tickets should not offend a trademark or license, the station went to far. If you look at the complaint that is linked in Mike's original article on the subject, you will see that actual promotional material used by the broadcaster. They are using the tickets as part of their "score a touchdown for your business" advertising push. The material has the Eagles logo on it and is clearly implying a connection between the entities. This goes far beyond a simple "be caller number 'x' and win tickets to the Eagles game" promo.
The law exists as a companion to the rules on searches and seizures. It is actually a way for citizens to work around being unknowingly taped by police informants. Believe it or not, the police informant can record an encounter without a warrant. the reasoning for this is that the informant could simply recount the conversation (which requires no warrant) so not record it. The charge for possessing wiretapping equipment is a charge after the fact. He got caught with the equipment on his person after he taped the conversation. The analogy to the screwdriver from a previous post was quite accurate.
Finally some sense!! I think if you are going to let them out treat them like anyone else. I personally think that no child rapist should ever see the light of day. One strike and you are out. If these people are so dangerous that every email and chat needs to be monitored they should not be released.
...the bloggers are going to win something here, even i fonyl a pyrrhic victory. the mainstream media is being expanded everyday to include bloggers. press credentials are there to allow legitimate reporters access. No one can deny that SOME bloggers are legitimate reporters. the court has the opportunity to redefine media here officially. NY is traditionally pretty conservative, judicially speaking, so they may shy away or they may do the right thing. Time will tell, and I look forward to reading the opinion.
Hegemon is incorrect. While it is true that MOST people would not rob or stab someone, stiff penalties adjust the level of desperation or sadism needed to break the law. The guy who really want a wii would be more likely to rob or steal to get it if there was no/light repercussions. The guy who needs to feed his family or buy medication for a sick child is probably going to weigh those consequences against a far more pressing need for the funds. Whether you like it or not the wrold is more like Hobbes said it was.
because no matter how silly this particular law is, you can's it in prison for an act that is no longer criminal. How pissed off would you be if you were rotting in jail for wiretaps while the guy who took your jobs is serving them up like government approved big macs?
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by Lawyer Lance.
I think any internet user savvy enough to hire a referral company via the web understands that there are terms and conditions. In this case every page she viewed on the site had a link to the terms, and the final click even stated she agreed to the terms and conditions. As the original article stated, this decision is based on the reality of people's use of the internet. The true measure of enforcability in these situations should be the reasonable availability of the terms to the user. What is the difference between posting the terms on a page with an 'accept' button and saying 'accepting is agreeing to the terms linked HERE'?
Re: Re:
Also, these laws could be part of some EU legislation on commerce; then they are effectively pan-European laws.
Normally I agree with Mike...
but this time you are a bit off. While in principle I agree that a radio contest to give away tickets should not offend a trademark or license, the station went to far. If you look at the complaint that is linked in Mike's original article on the subject, you will see that actual promotional material used by the broadcaster. They are using the tickets as part of their "score a touchdown for your business" advertising push. The material has the Eagles logo on it and is clearly implying a connection between the entities. This goes far beyond a simple "be caller number 'x' and win tickets to the Eagles game" promo.
Wire Tapping Device
The law exists as a companion to the rules on searches and seizures. It is actually a way for citizens to work around being unknowingly taped by police informants. Believe it or not, the police informant can record an encounter without a warrant. the reasoning for this is that the informant could simply recount the conversation (which requires no warrant) so not record it. The charge for possessing wiretapping equipment is a charge after the fact. He got caught with the equipment on his person after he taped the conversation. The analogy to the screwdriver from a previous post was quite accurate.
Re: re: sex offender
Finally some sense!! I think if you are going to let them out treat them like anyone else. I personally think that no child rapist should ever see the light of day. One strike and you are out. If these people are so dangerous that every email and chat needs to be monitored they should not be released.
warm up your laminator...
...the bloggers are going to win something here, even i fonyl a pyrrhic victory. the mainstream media is being expanded everyday to include bloggers. press credentials are there to allow legitimate reporters access. No one can deny that SOME bloggers are legitimate reporters. the court has the opportunity to redefine media here officially. NY is traditionally pretty conservative, judicially speaking, so they may shy away or they may do the right thing. Time will tell, and I look forward to reading the opinion.
Re: Re: It means the punishments are out of alignment
Hegemon is incorrect. While it is true that MOST people would not rob or stab someone, stiff penalties adjust the level of desperation or sadism needed to break the law. The guy who really want a wii would be more likely to rob or steal to get it if there was no/light repercussions. The guy who needs to feed his family or buy medication for a sick child is probably going to weigh those consequences against a far more pressing need for the funds. Whether you like it or not the wrold is more like Hobbes said it was.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
because no matter how silly this particular law is, you can's it in prison for an act that is no longer criminal. How pissed off would you be if you were rotting in jail for wiretaps while the guy who took your jobs is serving them up like government approved big macs?