Slashdot Mirror


PC Repair In Texas Now Requires a PI License

JohnnyNapalm writes "In some shocking news out of Texas, PC repair will now require a PI License. Surely this stands to have a substantial impact on small repair shops around the state if upheld. Never fear, however, as the first counter-suit has already been filed."

15 of 729 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because there are a lot of crooks in this country, and was the reason these kind of laws were put into place in the first place. We all expect doctors to have a certain level of training, and just because someone says they have the equivalent, doesn't mean they do.

  2. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by Jartan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We require licenses of many different professions, doctors, medical professionals, accountants even.

    Uhh yea but those licenses actually pertain to the profession in question.

    I don't know why the summary says "small repair shops". In reality such a requirement will throw a total wrench into any big chain that does computer maitenance. Theres no way the kids who work in Best Buy have PI licenses.

  3. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by loraksus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We require licenses of many different professions, doctors, medical professionals, accountants even.

    I'm sorry, but that's a crap argument. In all of those cases, the licensing requirements are related to the actual job. In this case? Completely unrelated.

    And Louisiana law is fairly different from Texas law. Louisiana is sort of the red haired bastard stepchild when it comes to the law because of the heavy French influence.

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  4. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by e4g4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No argument there. I certainly expect my doctor to have medical training, my lawyer to have law training - but do I expect my local PC tech guy to have investigative training? Do you really want to hand your computer to someone who is trained at gleaning information? When I fix a computer - I make a studious effort to ignore the personal contents of a machine...this is just ridiculous.

    --
    The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
  5. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by Spacepup · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doctors require a license as a way for laymen to distinguish between a quack who might kill you and someone learned who might kill you. Structural engineers need a license so you can have a reasonable expectation that what they design wont fall down on people. It isn't unusual to have to have a license to work in a particular field. What is unusual is to be required to have a license for a field relatively unrelated. It's rediculous to require structural engineers to get a medical license just because they build hospitals.

  6. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And if the patients know this, what exactly is wrong with it?

    To play liberal's advocate for a moment, the US health care system as it stands today requires licensing to get malpractice insurance. This is a pretty reasonable expectation should say, your leg be accidentally amputated during an annual checkup. This same policy applies to your insurance payables for eg. massage therapy. Registered therapist's services are invariably insured, whereas non-licensed massage services (teehee) are almost never covered.

    The subtle reason for any of this concern is the principle of "informed consent". Without a medical degree, how can you effectively evaluate (in advance, no less) the skills of someone whose actions potentially put your life in definite, immediate risk? The liberal mindset is that you are not allowed to choose, even if you actually are informed, since other uninformed people will frequently make "the wrong choice".

    As for my personal opinion, I think that the vast majority of medical conditions can be dealt with by someone with significantly less training/licensing (eg. nurses, online/telephone professionals, etc) than is currently demanded; heart surgeries are much less common than colds, as dreamy as McDreamy is.

  7. BAD headline/article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All this means is in order for Geek Squad (or anyone) to perform forensic data recovery for example, on behalf of your local PD, or even a PI, the Geek Squad technician would also need a PI license.

    No. Shit. It would be an obvious loophole otherwise.

    Every computer repair person in the damned state doesn't qualify under (a)(1), sorry pcmag/slashdot. It doesn't take a lawyer to understand this, but you DO have to have more than a 5th grade reading level to backtrack from (b) to (a)(1) I guess. Besides, your shit is "public" as soon as you hand your PC to the repair person. This is not some sinister, evil law, douche bags.

    Sec. 1702.104. INVESTIGATIONS COMPANY.
    (a) A person acts as an investigations company for the purposes of this chapter if the person:
            (1) engages in the business of obtaining or furnishing, or accepts employment to obtain or furnish, information related to:
                    (A) crime or wrongs done or threatened against a state or the United States;
                    (B) the identity, habits, business, occupation,knowledge, efficiency, loyalty, movement, location, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of a person;
                    (C) the location, disposition, or recovery of lost or stolen property; or
                    (D) the cause or responsibility for a fire, libel, loss, accident, damage, or injury to a person or to property;
           
    (2) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, evidence for use before a court, board, officer, or investigating committee;
            (3) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, the electronic tracking of the location of an individual or motor vehicle other than for criminal justice purposes by or on behalf of a governmental entity; or
            (4) engages in the business of protecting, or accepts employment to protect, an individual from bodily harm through the use of a personal protection officer.

    (b) For purposes of Subsection (a)(1), obtaining or furnishing information includes information obtained or furnished through the review and analysis of, and the investigation into the content of, computer-based data not available to the public.

    And please stop posting news of new laws that are obviously not reviewed by real lawyers or people who can fucking read at least. PLEASE.

  8. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by snowgirl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are no evidence collection rules about trash. The owner of that item has already released ownership and rights to keep it from search and seizure.

    Here is a hint for you. If you throw something illegal away, you're an idiot, because cops don't need anyone's permission to collect that evidence anymore.

    --
    WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  9. Re:This law is to prevent me from perv catching by Mr2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am a contractor that operates outside the box, almost a vigilante. I cannot name what software I use or I would be easily identified. I do not engage in corp espionage but this law would stop me in my tracks if I were to ever have stepped foot in Texas.

    Good! You have no right to snoop around other people's computers, even if you think you're doing it for a noble cause. (Which you aren't, by the way -- if you really wanted to help people, you'd go after the ones creating these images in the first place.)

    I hope to turn in many more.

    And I hope that when your vigilante game finally lands you in prison, you'll meet up with some of your victims.

    --
    Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  10. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by jlarocco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Repairing a computer is much more likely to produce evidence against someone.

    What? That's most ridiculous thing I've heard all day.

    Not that I'm particularly worried about this law. The black market for computer repair people without PI licenses will be HUGE. Computer savvy neighbor kids who know how to reinstall Windows and upgrade RAM are going to love this law.

  11. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So I guess my Dr. should have a PI license so that if I use drugs he can tell the police then. Or my mechanic should have PI so if he finds child porn in my trunk I can be reported. Lets just make a PI license a requirement for entering the country... that'll work!

  12. RIAA by deraj123 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So...ignoring the headline and considering the actual law - does this affect the folks doing RIAA's investigations? It sounds (from my uninformed point fo view) like it's written almost specifically for that sort of situation.

  13. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by letxa2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Liberals" seem to fight a hell of a lot more often and with more passion to protect the right to choice in virtually every situation, while the "conservatives" want more laws restricting what people can do.

    Actually both liberals and conservatives want to protect choice--just on different issues. Conservatives want to protect your choice to spend your money but want to apply their concepts of morality on society. Liberals, meanwhile, don't really care what you do morally speaking as long as you do what they tell you to do with your money.

    Which is better? In my opinion a moral society in which people can do what they want with their money is desirable to a morally corrupt society where everything goes as long as you're paying extortion money to the liberal government. But that's just my opinion.

    The only ones that really have a passion for freedom of choice across the board are libertarians. They have some good ideological points, though I think their platform is lacking from a practical standpoint.

  14. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by arminw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..... Look at the requirements to be a barber or beautician....

    It seems that equating those who work on computers with those who work on people is gross foolishness. It is especially foolish to require a PI license for someone who repairs a computer. By the rationale that supposedly went into this law, anybody who has access to data should need such a license. After all, they may come across some data that the cops might need that must be preserved properly and pristine, in order to be stand up in a court of law.

    It might be instructive to learn who the monied interests are that lobbied for this law. There is very little law made anywhere these days, that does NOT have some money reason behind it. Laws generally get suggested by those who stand to gain financially by the existence of said laws. If such people or companies have the money to put behind the appropriate politicians, they won't hesitate to do so. As the saying goes, "Follow the money".

    --
    All theory is gray
  15. Re:Slaughterhouse Cases by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But my health insurer is able to make that judgement and also has a clear incentive to steer me away from doctors who are likely to place me in bodily danger.

    You're kidding, right? What your health insurer has is a clear incentive to send you to the cheapest dumbass they can find, and then simply disbelieve you and deny your claim when you complain that he screwed up.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz