Slashdot Mirror

I don't know if you're entirely correct about consent. Consent isn't an absolute absolution of any legal requirements. You can't consent to being murdered, for instance. (Well, you can, but it's no defense to the person who does it.) But I do concede that it's probably closer than the limited exceptions I was trying to get at.

In any case, consent isn't at play in the particular example of shining a LASER at someone.

Assault is a crime of intent. With no intent, there is no assault. Criminal Negligence, perhaps.

This isn't true. Read the laws in New York (it's the first one listed, 120.00, then 120.05 and 120.10; all three degrees of assault have provisions that don't require intent), Pennsylvania (again, both simple and aggrivated assult have provisions for at least reckless injury under some conditions), Texas, North Dakota (PDF file; simple assault has negligent assault), and New Jersey. I can't link to NJ's because it's in a subscription service (Westlaw), but the relevant portions are the same as PA.

There are jurisdictions where this isn't true (California and Georga (warning: very large and slow-loading version of the entire penal code), the latter of which doesn't even have a crime called assault), but since the Model Penal Code and subsequent revisions of most states' criminal law, they are a minority.

(1) Transmitting or relaying commercial electronic mail or a computer virus from the consumer's computer, where the transmission or relaying is initiated by a person other than the authorized user and without the authorization of an authorized user.
(2) Accessing or using the consumer's modem or Internet service for the purpose of causing damage to the consumer's computer or of causing an authorized user to incur financial charges for a service that is not authorized by an authorized user.
(3) Using the consumer's computer as part of an activity performed by a group of computers for the purpose of causing damage to another computer, including, but not limited to, launching a denial of service attack.
(4) Opening multiple, sequential, stand-alone advertisements in the consumer's Internet browser without the authorization of an authorized user and with knowledge that a reasonable computer user cannot close the advertisements without turning off the computer or closing the consumer's Internet browser.

22947.1. For purposes of this chapter, "spyware" means an executable program that automatically and without the control of a computer user gathers and transmits to the provider of the program or to a third party either of the following types of information: [...]

(d) Nothing in this section shall apply to any monitoring of, or interaction with, a subscriber's Internet or other network connection or service, or a protected computer, by a telecommunications
carrier, cable operator, computer hardware or software provider, or provider of information service or interactive computer service for
network or computer security purposes, diagnostics, technical support, repair, authorized updates of software or system firmware,
authorized remote system management, or detection or prevention of the unauthorized use of or fraudulent or other illegal activities in
connection with a network, service, or computer software, including scanning for and removing software proscribed under this chapter.

I skimmed through the bill text found here, and it seems fairly well worded. However, it doesn't solve the actual problem. An "authorized user" can still be suckered pretty much as before.

Kjella

Among other things, this bans unauthorized installation of keyloggers, spam sending/relaying software, zombies, and disabling your anti-virus or anti-spyware software.

However, and this is a big however, they grant a blanket exception to your ISP or network admins. "Nothing in this section shall apply to any monitoring of, or interaction with, a subscriber's Internet or other network connection or service, or a protected computer, by a telecommunications carrier, cable operator, computer hardware or software provider, or provider of information service or interactive computer service for network or computer security purposes, diagnostics, technical support, repair, authorized updates of software or system firmware, authorized remote system management, or detection or prevention of the unauthorized use of or fraudulent or other illegal activities in connection with a network, service, or computer software, including scanning for and removing software proscribed under this chapter."

You could probably drive a truck through a loophole like that.

I looked. It contains a classic example of the causation fallacy (believing that if A and B both happen, A causes B).

Specifically, the parts saying that immigration wrecked California's bond rating. You also use as support a Pat Buchanan article that says that having too much ethnic diversity wrecks the economy. I suggest checking this link about California's improving bond rating. Guess what? It is improving because of budget policies of the new administration. It is not improving because of a crackdown on immigration or on ethnic diversity. There has been no crackdown.

The "problem" of immigration still plagues California, and the bond rating is improving. Ironically, it is improving under the administration of an immigrant governor.. Blaming the "outsider" for problems they have nothing to do with is older than civilization. Look at Salem, Mass. to see what this can lead to.

Seriously, it needs to go. It's an absolute waste, even for a person like myself who has actually had jobs that required me to be working outside all day long. It's a royal pain in the ass for everyone. It's not even used everywhere in the US. Daylight savings time and it's variants are used in a seemingly random manner across the globe. This page has some good info on it. I don't care if an ancestor of mine was the first to suggest it's use. IMHO the cost and energy savings today are not worth the sheer hassle of it all. DST should go.

Note: Some of these URLs are other cities too.

TANN
Sigalert.com
Metrocommute
MSN Autos
CHP Traffic Incident Info.
Caltrans Realtime Freeway Speed Map (Java)

Any more I missed for Los Angeles area? :)

Note: Some of these URLs are other cities too.

TANN
Sigalert.com
Metrocommute
MSN Autos
CHP Traffic Incident Info.
Caltrans Realtime Freeway Speed Map (Java)

Any more I missed for Los Angeles area? :)

Curb Parking

22502. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter every vehicle stopped or parked upon a roadway where there are adjacent curbs shall be stopped or parked with the right-hand wheels of such vehicle parallel with and within 18 inches of the right-hand curb, except that motorcycles shall be parked with at least one wheel or fender touching the right-hand curb. Where no curbs or barriers bound any roadway, right-hand parallel parking is required unless otherwise indicated.

(b) The provisions of subdivision (a) or (e) do not apply to a commercial vehicle if a variation from the requirements of subdivision (a) or (e) is reasonably necessary to accomplish the loading or unloading of merchandise or passengers on, or from, such vehicle and while anything connected with such loading, or unloading, is being executed.

This subdivision shall not be construed to permit any vehicle to stop or park upon a roadway in a direction opposite to that in which traffic normally moves upon that half of the roadway on which such vehicle is stopped or parked.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (b), local authorities may, by ordinance, prohibit commercial vehicles from stopping, parking, or standing on one side of a roadway in a business district with the wheels of such vehicle more than 18 inches from the curb. The ordinance shall be effective only if signs are placed in the areas to which it is applicable clearly indicating the prohibition.

(d) This section does not apply to vehicles of a public utility when such vehicles are being used in connection with the operation, maintenance, or repair of facilities of the public utility or are being used in connection with providing public utility service.

(e) Upon a one-way roadway, vehicles may be stopped or parked as provided in subdivision (a) or with the left-hand wheels parallel to and within 18 inches of the left-hand curb, except that motorcycles, if parked on the left-hand side, shall have either one wheel or one fender touching such curb. Where no curb or barriers bound any such one-way roadway, parallel parking on either side is required unless otherwise indicated.

The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply upon the roadways of a divided highway.

Amended Ch. 448, Stats. 1971. Operative May 3, 1972.

some links for the google deficient:

from http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/WageOrderIndustries.htm

order number 4. That's the one posted in our breakroom.

http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWCArticle4.html

Look under 1 A 3 (h) and (i)

Enjoy.

some links for the google deficient:

from http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/WageOrderIndustries.htm

order number 4. That's the one posted in our breakroom.

http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWCArticle4.html

Look under 1 A 3 (h) and (i)

Enjoy.

Question: So then why doesn't this individual go to a more 'enlightened' nation to sell his wares? Perhaps one which has no interest in the oil economy, other than being dependent on energy imports, such as Japan?

Answer: Perhaps because the invention is crap?


Possibly, but the process of splitting Hydrogen and Oxygen (electrolysis) with carbon electrodes isn't, there are combustion generators that run off hydrogen, so the theory isn't totally out there.

Here is very simple experiment of using two carbon pencils with a 9 volt battery to split water into h2(hydrogen) and O(oxygen).

Yes you still require electricity to create the the process of "electrolysis", but as asciiwhite pointed out the "bingo reactor" can create enough hydrogen to power a 5hp engine and the cost was $80.

If an average car battery and a regulator could create enough electricity to keep powering the process of electrolysis, i don't see why this could be so unthinkable.

Here's a counter argument. Motorcycles are allowed to park perpendicular to the curb, and yet this isn't seen as a public hazard. At least in California, you ARE required to have red reflectors on the side of the vehicle, but brake lights don't have to act as reflectors, just as lamps.

The applical part of the California Vehicle Code says you have to park parallel, but gives exceptions for motorcycles, public vehicles like garbage trucks, and for loading/unloading cargo and passangers. The bmw might get by on this last claim.

In California, there are no annual inspections. (In some states, you have to get your car inspected to make sure the lights work, etc., but not here.) There are smog inspections that happen every two years after your car is more than four model years old. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vr/smogfaq.htm

IANAL, but I did a little research on this when I left my short unpleasant stint as a 'manager' at EA, so I could pass it along to the people I refused to victimize. I don't believe that any of them followed through, however.

According to California state employment law, the MANAGERS can be fined for requiring unpaid overtime in violation of the California employment laws.

California Labor Code

558. (a) Any employer or other person acting on behalf of an employer who violates, or causes to be violated, a section of this chapter or any provision regulating hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission shall be subject to a civil penalty as follows:
(1) For any initial violation, fifty dollars ($50) for each underpaid employee for each pay period for which the employee was underpaid in addition to an amount sufficient to recover underpaid wages.

They're not the first to open hydrogen fueling stations (with many other examples to be found if you search for them). And based on the estimate in the article of 2015 to 2025, they don't look like they're pursuing hydrogen fuel very aggressively either. My bet is that somebody else will come along and either blow them out of the water, or force them to pick up the pace.

You are a troll. But I will respond anyway.

If that is your only answer, I'd love to see how you are going to live in Redwood City on $7 an hour. That $7 an hour, full time, without subtracting taxes or anything, is not even enough for a median one bedroom apartment. "Sorry kid, no ramen for you this month."

Before you claim I'm full of shit, here are some numbers:
San Mateo County, California general information
San Mateo County housing statistics

Important points to note:
Median income, two person household (2001): $64,100
Average rent for one bedroom apartment: $1415
Average rent for two bedroom apartment: $1764
Median sales price for single family home: $590.000
Average sales price for single family home: $792,735
Housing wage (full time to afford average two bedroom apartment): $33.60
Average wait for Section 8 voucher (subsidized low-income housing): one year.

Oh, wait, San Mateo is too expensive? How about this?

Or these?

Here are the registration PDFs AZ, CA.

The area to draw a map is in the lower right corner on the Arizona form and the lower right corner of the forth page on the California form.

Unfortunatly, this guy is not around anymore if something goes wrong this time.

I live in Kalifornia. . . If I did not have substantial family ties here I *would* move out of state (in my case my horse finished first and I still hate my state). if you look at this map : http://vote2004.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/mapR072.htm you will see that Proposition 72 was voted down (a Good Thing TM) by 50.9 vs 49.1%. Green is the 49.1% of the state. How the hell can anything be fairly voted on when 22% of the counties effectively control 50% of the vote. The ratios get even worse if you look at land area vs. vote%.

I hate^H^H^H^H greatly dislike how liberal my state is. But at the same time I greatly value my proximity to my family.
[/frothingAtTheMouthRant]
br-nB

You obviously have no idea what Kevin Shelley has done for electronic voting reform in California over the past, say, 18 months... check out some of the stuff here: http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/touchscreen.htm

Grr, I'm replying to myself because I screwed up the HTML there, but what it was supposed to say was that I was quoting from the California Vehicle Code, section 27602(a), and that many of the devices described (such as the TV that allows you to watch unless you're going 3 mph or over) would be illegal, not just lawsuit-prone.

While I'm posting, here are the California legal codes in general, and here is the specific one I quoted.

Grr, I'm replying to myself because I screwed up the HTML there, but what it was supposed to say was that I was quoting from the California Vehicle Code, section 27602(a), and that many of the devices described (such as the TV that allows you to watch unless you're going 3 mph or over) would be illegal, not just lawsuit-prone.

While I'm posting, here are the California legal codes in general, and here is the specific one I quoted.

It is very powerful and accurate. In my community, Rancho Cordova, CA, gerrymandering in congressional redistricting is blatent, spliting the community into those in single family housing and those in Multi family housing.

This map shows the community by congressional districts.
http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/cngplan/PDF_CD_ATLAS /CD03_NEW_SAC.PDF

This map shows the community by state senate districts.
http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/senplan/PDF_SD_ATLAS /SD01_NEW_SAC.PDF

Now, This map shows the land use of the planning area.
http://www.saccounty.net/planning/cordova/pdf/cord ova.pdf
(smaller jpeg version)
http://gp.cityofranchocordova.org/documents/vision ing/vision_maps/large/current_land_use_inventory.j pg

Brown is used to represent multi family housing. They basically cut out 80 % of the low income residents out of the city's state senate and congressional districts.

It is very powerful and accurate. In my community, Rancho Cordova, CA, gerrymandering in congressional redistricting is blatent, spliting the community into those in single family housing and those in Multi family housing.

This map shows the community by congressional districts.
http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/cngplan/PDF_CD_ATLAS /CD03_NEW_SAC.PDF

This map shows the community by state senate districts.
http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/senplan/PDF_SD_ATLAS /SD01_NEW_SAC.PDF

Now, This map shows the land use of the planning area.
http://www.saccounty.net/planning/cordova/pdf/cord ova.pdf
(smaller jpeg version)
http://gp.cityofranchocordova.org/documents/vision ing/vision_maps/large/current_land_use_inventory.j pg

Brown is used to represent multi family housing. They basically cut out 80 % of the low income residents out of the city's state senate and congressional districts.

As previously covered, California Governer Schwartzenegger signed into law a bill "requiring anyone disseminating movies or music on the Internet to disclose their e-mail address" as well as the title of the work. Editorial here.

I'm not a lawyer (see, I spelled it out and everything), but this law was likely intended as the **AA's end-run around needing to file a "John Doe" lawsuit and then get the user's information from the ISP. If they can't identify you in a piracy civil action, it seems a **AA-friendly prosecutor can now easily root out your information as part of a criminal investigation. Unlike copyright infringement, I suspect not providing an email address is much easier to show.

Once you're identified, THEN the lawsuit could follow.

Interestingly, the law doesn't say clearly what you need to do if you don't have an email address. It's also very vague about what constitutes a "valid" e-mail address- ""E-mail address" means a valid e-mail address..." (ie, would a mailing list address to which the file-sharer subscribes qualify?).

Also, the law says "Recording" means the electronic or physical embodiment of any recorded images, sounds, or images and sounds, but does not include audiovisual works or sounds accompanying audiovisual works.

It's not just music and movies. The above suggests that anyone in California who runs a website with a copyrighted, commercial image (ie, a photograph) would be subject to this law as well. So any image on a web site would need to be identified by title.

Now, I don't know if every copyrighted, commercial image hosted on a California web site even HAS a title. So I don't see how it's even possible to comply with this.

Read this lame law for yourself.

BTW, for non-minors, the punishment for not having provided your email address is a maximum $2,500 fine and/or a year in prison.

this is the URL I wanted in, well, you know which one.

All the provision says (see here) is that people may not use the UC.* abbreviations to promote things like business/financial enterprises. The code says:

Nothing in this section shall interfere with or restrict the right of any person to make a true and accurate statement of his or her present or former relationship or connection with, his or her employment by, or his or her enrollment in, the University of California...

So there's nothing preventing them from changing their name and just plastering all over the site that they're UCSD students, the site is about UCSD, for UCSD students, etc.

------------------
Rate free iPod offers: RateTheOffers.com
(Flat screens and Desktop PCs too)

Who said anything about it being too cheap to meter?

Lewis Strauss, chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission, in 1955. It's become something of a cliche since then.

Solar is a perfect example of this. Lots of people added solar to their houses in the '80s and now they, and anybody that knows them, wouldn't touch solar with a 10 foot pole (not to mention the fact that 20 years later it's still not quite ready).

WTF are you talking about? Photovoltaic is ready for many applications, and people are using it right now to live off the grid, or to run their meters backward. If Regan hadn't kowtowed to fossil fuel companies and gutted renewables research as soon as he got into office, photovoltaic would be ready for even more applications.

Nuclear technology is mature and ready to solve our current energy problems *today* with practically no additional development.

Fission can't be said to be ready until waste disposal and nuclear proliferation are solved issues; even then it's only good for a few hundred years. Better to put the resources into developing renewables.

Congratulations, you are wrong

Every state in the US has different laws with regards to vehicles.. it's not so much "exempt" as it is "California doesn't have a law like that", much as France isn't "exempt" from Germany's laws; they're different legal systems, even though they're both part of the EU. Indeed, the US is structured much like the EU is, it's just that over the years the central federal government has taken over many more things with sometimes questionable court decisions and things like they give the states money for highways, but only if they set speed limits the federal goverment likes. There's no reason an individual state couldn't decide to have a 200mph speed limit, except the federal government would stop helping them out with highway funds.

As far as I can tell California has smog/emission laws, but not safety inspections. It's illegal to operate an unsafe vehicle on the road in California (as everywhere in the US), but you're not required to prove the car's safety before getting a license plate, as you do in North Carolina.

If one of those cars were stopped by a policeman, they could be given a ticket, and in an accident the driver would be liable due to negligence. Otherwise, it seems there is no penalty for having a broken-down heap of a car.

Prop 62 (pdf) in California would do the same thing. All of the major political parties in California are against it--the Dems, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians, etc. The main supporters seem to be business groups and John McCain.

I brought this up in a diary about this over at Daily Kos a couple weeks ago, and there were some pretty good arguments against the proposition. Some worry that it can lead to extremist candidates (because in a crowded race, fringe candidates that can each get 10% of the vote would end up in the final two).

It seems like a better solution would be some sort of approval voting or instant runoff voting.

I know we sure have a problem with star thistle in CA. Our state even has it's own "Encycloweedia"

California Native Plant Society has a pretty good list of weed sites as well. I never knew how much you see growing in the countryside was a product of an invasion.

The major problem with your theory is that it's empirically false* - cars may indeed be getting slightly more expensive in real terms, but more people have them than before, which puts to the lie the idea that cars are being priced out of reach for more and more people. And you're cherry-picking the data by excluding the lowest end of the current new car market. Other than that, it's a wonderful idea ;)

Aside from the Hyundais and Kias that you ignored, don't forget that there's a vibrant secondary market for used cars. The first car I bought, a few years after your dad's purchase, cost me a whopping $800, or about 10% of what he spent. Was it as nice as his? Probably not. Did it last as long as his? Probably not, but it got me back and forth to my job and enabled me to earn the money to buy something better. Which is just the sort of thing the working poor can do also.

* You can get the big picture from the entire paper here.

The major problem with your theory is that it's empirically false* - cars may indeed be getting slightly more expensive in real terms, but more people have them than before, which puts to the lie the idea that cars are being priced out of reach for more and more people. And you're cherry-picking the data by excluding the lowest end of the current new car market. Other than that, it's a wonderful idea ;)

Aside from the Hyundais and Kias that you ignored, don't forget that there's a vibrant secondary market for used cars. The first car I bought, a few years after your dad's purchase, cost me a whopping $800, or about 10% of what he spent. Was it as nice as his? Probably not. Did it last as long as his? Probably not, but it got me back and forth to my job and enabled me to earn the money to buy something better. Which is just the sort of thing the working poor can do also.

* You can get the big picture from the entire paper here.

Having dug up some info on the California Secretary of State's website at http://kepler.ss.ca.gov/, I discovered the following:

1. Apple Computer is incorporated in California, but owns subsidiaries, such as "Apple Computer Peripherals, Inc." that are incorporated in Delaware. Apple even owned "Apple Computer Domestic Subsidiary No. 4", incorporated in Delaware - I guess that ACDS No's 1-3 were too old to be on the Sec. of State's online records.

2. Sun Microsystems: Almost entirely Californian, but there was a Delaware corporation, Sun Microsystems, Inc. that was created in 1987.

3. HP? Well, there is a Hewlett Packard Retiree's Club incorporated in California. Agilent? Delaware. The old HP was in California. The new one? I couldn't find it.

4. Novell? Incorporated in Delaware.

5. eMachines? Delaware.

6. IBM? Seems to be in Delaware, but there's a "IBM Global Services India Private Limited" in India. Wonder how much IBM phone support comes from there? (Seriously - I don't know).

I'm tired and I'm going to sleep, so I leave additional research as an exercise for the interested. The point here is that most of the big corporations seem to be incorporated in "friendly" states like Delaware, or at least have subsidiaries in Delaware the way Apple Computer seems to have, apparently for the purpose of minimizing tax liability and taking advantage of other laws benefiting corporations.

So is MS ripping off the good people of the State of Washington? Sure. But it's only par for the course, and it's what the other corporations are doing and will keep doing until we amend the constitution, repeal dual soverignty, and eliminate the states as entities with the power to legislate (ie, it ain't going to happen). It's the same thing as "forum shopping" (filing lawsuits in the jurisdiction with the most favorable law, if you can), or even some advanced estate planning techinques (some states have completely repealed the Rule Against Perpetutities, which allows people to create trusts domiciled in those states that can, literally, last forever).

Hell, want to know the biggest corporate scam?

1. Buy an asset owned by a municipality - a bus, subway car, sewer system, for an example.
2. Lease it back to the municipality for an amount roughly equivalent for what you paid for it amortized over a few years.
3. Depreciate the hell out of it and pay little or no corporate taxes, ever.
4. Once you've milked the depreciation, sell the asset back to the municipality for a nominal value.
5. Lather, rinse, and repeat.
6. ??? (couldn't resist)
7. Profit.

The loopholes exist, and corporations (and people) take advantage of them. And when they don't exist, lobbyists convince legislatures to create them. Are we doomed? Not really. Washington may be whining over a few hundred million bucks, but it's not as if the state government has collapsed. Yet...

I have been using this for the last few weeks and it's great.

Local elections.

I don't think San Francisco City/County government has the authority to change how presidential votes are counted.

The Green Party did very well in the San Francisco and many other Bay Area elections; and actually beat the Republicans in many districts (including my own).

During the 2000 Governer Elections, the Greens beat the Republicans

I believe these elections were a large motivator in the IRV movement in San Francisco.

Local elections.

I don't think San Francisco City/County government has the authority to change how presidential votes are counted.

The Green Party did very well in the San Francisco and many other Bay Area elections; and actually beat the Republicans in many districts (including my own).

During the 2000 Governer Elections, the Greens beat the Republicans

I believe these elections were a large motivator in the IRV movement in San Francisco.

Hi All,

Just FYI, there are many links above to the "introduced" version of the bill from February, but it changed a lot before it was "chaptered" September 21st.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_1501-155 0/sb_1506_bill_20040921_chaptered.html

It no longer mentions physical addresses or phone numbers. It doesn't apply to sharing within your "immediate family" or "immediate household." And it is VERY clear on exceptions, like when you own the copyright, or when you have permission to share.

Not that I like this bill, and not that it really holds any water at all... It's definitely abuse.

Your state public utility comission regulates telco tarriffed pricing AND features they can offer. Not your telco. Next.

Do you believe that people killed on California (or any other state) highways are more or less senseless than people killed in Iraq? There will never be any benefit to people killed in these accidents, and the total for all of the US is something like 50,000 a year. Come on, if you want to rally behind some senseless killings, let's solve a problem that we are in control of!

As usual it seems that most of you haven't even RTFA!

A number of points :

1. You have to supply EITHER your TRUE NAME and POSTAL ADDRESS OR your TRUE NAME and EMAIL ADDRESS.
2. There are get out clauses in the bill for swapping material with immediate family or within a personal network controlled by you.
3. There is a clause that says if you hold the copyright / have permission / or the work is non-commerical then you don't have to supply anything.

So, in summary, this only applies if you are swapping known commerical material without the permission of the copyright holder.

Which is fucking stupid because i'd already be commiting a FELONY anyway, so what is an extra $2500 on top of that anyway?

Interesting listening to everyone rant and rave anyway.

No, the bill requires "information that accurately identifies the name of the person who is disseminating the commercial recording or audiovisual work, along with his or her valid e-mail or mailing address."

Actually, the text of the bill says that one must specify either a street address or an e-mail address.

excerpt....

SECTION 1. Section 653aa is added to the Penal Code, to read:
653aa. (a) Any person, except a minor, who is located in
California, who, knowing that a particular recording or audiovisual
work is commercial, knowingly electronically disseminates all or
substantially all of that commercial recording or audiovisual work to
more than 10 other people without disclosing his or her e-mail
address, and the title of the recording or audiovisual work is
punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
($2,500), imprisonment in a county jail for a period not exceeding
one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(b) Any minor who violates subdivision (a) is punishable by a fine
not exceeding two hundred fifty dollars ($250). Any minor who
commits a third or subsequent violation of subdivision (a) is
punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000),
imprisonment in a county jail for a period not to exceed one year, or
by both that imprisonment and fine.
(c) Subdivisions (a) and (b) do not apply:
(1) To a person who electronically disseminates a commercial
recording or audiovisual work to his or her immediate family, or
within his or her personal network, defined as a restricted access
network controlled by and accessible to only that person or people in
his or her immediate household.
(2) If the copyright owner, or a person acting under the authority
of the copyright owner, of a commercial recording or audiovisual
work has explicitly given permission for all or substantially all of
that recording or audiovisual work to be freely disseminated
electronically by or to anyone without limitation.
(3) To a person who has been licensed either by the copyright
owner or a person acting under the authority of the copyright owner
to disseminate electronically all or substantially all of a
commercial audiovisual work or recording.

SB 1506

While this bill is mad and deserves serious criticism, read it before debating it. A lot of the concerns voiced about this piece of legislation are nullified by the bill's actual stipulations. By the same token, if Schwarzenegger passed this thing without further revision, then it's actually even more restrictive in some ways than the articles indicate. Unfortuantely, the press releases just aren't detailed enough; and, personally, I don't know where to find more substantive information.

Here's a nice quote from the bill:

who knows that a particular recording or audiovisual work is commercial, to knowingly electronically disseminate all or substantially all of that commercial recording or audiovisual work to more than 10 other people without disclosing his or her e-mail address, and the title of the recording or audiovisual work

Back to the questions...
Is this only for legal files sharing?

Actually, its for commercial audio/visual recordings only. That seems to mean a work with an audio or visual component to it. Plain text works are not included.

IANAL, but it also implies that the work is copyrighted, and that someone has a commercial interest in the work

c (2) If the copyright owner, or a person acting under the authority of the copyright owner, of a commercial recording or audiovisual work has explicitly given permission for all or substantially all of that recording or audiovisual work to be freely disseminated electronically by or to anyone without limitation.

there you go - if you are the copyright owner, the law does not apply.

If the file sharing app has to provide a way to advertise an email, does this make app incapable of this illegal?

I can't think of a file sharing program that doesn't also let you share (in some way) text files. Even if they aren't found by a search, you'd still be sharing that information for someone who looks for it appropriately.

Are FTP and websites affected by this law?

Yes.

That's all I can help with...

What the bill actually requires people to reveal is their "true name and address, and the title of the recording or audiovisual work. "

If anyone wished to make an example of a California resident flagrantly breaching this law, might I suggest Apple Computer of 1, Infinite loop, who are failing to reveal the title of everything in the iTunes shop that is maked 'untitled'. At $2,500 per violation, they should get a multi million dollar fine. (disclaimer - I'm outside the US and therefore can't get into the US iTunes store to check this)