Realistically, if you have a plausible story, they almost certainly won't hold you for contempt. They can't weather the political fallout of holding someone indefinitely for failing to produce an item that was lost or forgotten. They certainly wouldn't want to risk having a higher court overturn this ruling because of it.
They've actually already covered this. They're requiring the defendant to provide access to the decrypted data by, for example, entering the password. They are not requiring that the defendant actually reveal the password itself to anyone.
(To stave off the obvious: yes, they *could* keylog the passphrase, but if they used that for anything, someone would find out, and likely the entire contents of the hard drive would be thrown out as evidence and whoever came up with that brilliant idea would lose their job.)
Actually, everyone who is allowed to touch evidentiary hard drives is that competent. Field cops are trained that they need to simply pull the plug on a computer and deliver it whole to a forensics lab (though this is changing a bit) -- you might call in an expert for a really serious case. The first thing the lab does is duplicate the drives.
There are a fair number of tethering apps in the Android Market, actually. However, carriers have an option to filter out some apps -- generally, they're the ones that the carrier charges for (like tethering). Ostensibly, the built-in feature of the system (which is much better now than it used to be) checks with the carrier to ensure that the feature is enabled on the account.
When lectures can be saved to a video format on the Internet, why pay the teacher to deliver the same lecture every year?
If a video of a lecture is as useful as the live lecture, it's a bad lecture.
When books can be copied for free, why pay 200$ for a physical version of the book?
If all of the distributed copies are free, I'm thinking the major problem is going to be finding people to write and edit them. Don't get me wrong, there are some older math texts you could probably use for ages, but that will only get you so far.
No, I mean that it's physically impossible for a GPS receiver, such as a car or handheld GPS unit, to be used for the purpose of tracking. They do not transmit data and do not contain the antennas necessary to transmit data. They can only be used against you by seizing the device and analyzing its contents.
Your GPS receiver can only be used against you if you are arrested and it is confiscated, at which point any history stored in the device may (depending on the warrant) be obtained and admitted as evidence.
You can leave the security checkpoint area at any time, though they may ask you to leave the airport if you do so. TSA agents can't legally arrest you, they can only bar you from entering the secure area of the airport.
They're also covered by dramatically different laws. Hopefully they employed a lawyer that recommended that removing a link complies with the letter of the DMCA. Also, the DMCA is only in the US, while they're not, so it's a bit safer. Child porn is not legal to possess under, more or less, any circumstances and is illegal in pretty much every country. You're pretty much screwed if anyone ever finds out you knowingly allowed it to remain on your server.
The simple fact that a DMCA notice is submitted automatically causes content to be removed immediately and subject to lengthy proceedings regarding the rights of that content.
If implemented well, the person who posted the content (assuming they're using a third-party host) should be immediately notified and can file a counter-notice with the host to have it immediately put back online. Of course, then they're on the hook for defending themselves in court, which was more or less the point of the claim-counterclaim system -- anonymous uploaders can't hide behind a third-party host, but the host retains their immunity to copyright liability.
Various members of the RIAA have been notorious in submitting DMCA takedown letters for content that is very clearly covered by things such as fair use and sometimes even for content they don't even remotely have the rights to. But the creative individuals creating these parodies, or even original material, have limited recourse and the recourse they do have is time-consuming, difficult and sometimes expensive, not to mention it destroys their business (if the content is related to a business).
Unfortunately, while there are potentially very serious penalties under the DMCA for knowingly filing illegitimate takedown notices, they're not pursued.
Actually, it's very rare for criminal charges to be filed in the US for copyright infringement. (Patent infringement is equally almost always civil, so the government does not act on your behalf.) There are a few laws that are unfairly useful to the media companies, but for the most part they add weight to or expedite civil complaints. For the most part, the media companies do defend their own IP at their own cost -- it's just that their position in this matter is much better than your position when you're defending your patent at your cost.
You can have an excellent credit score by holding a single credit card that you never use. (This is true of any other kind of loan, but credit cards are generally the only credit you can hold at zero cost.) The only time this would be a problem is that these days, some credit card companies will close your account if you don't use your card occasionally. Many, however, don't.
In fact, many never-using-credit behaviors positively influence your credit score. If you don't request credit, you should have no recent credit inquiries (which reduce your score). If you don't use credit, your credit utilization ratio should be 0% (as good as it gets) and you should have zero late payments (as good as it gets).
When I got a home loan, I had a single credit card with a very low limit that I never used and was in the top rate bracket.
No problem. Incidentally, most compilers these days treat a lot of the C and C++ keywords as either hints or things to ignore. For example, "inline" and "register". In general, the optimizing compiler is smarter than the programmer about when it's efficient to inline. (Some compilers do treat "static inline" as a hint that, if all instances of the function are inlined, it should not bother emitting a non-inlined copy of the function. You can also get this effect with "static" and the appropriate compiler flag. This makes "static" a very important keyword to put on your functions.)
SOPA's primary stated purpose is to affect sites that are hosted outside the US, particularly those that don't cooperate with the US.
In this case, the people charged are accused of a number of crimes other than copyright infringement, which is probably the only reason they were actually arrested. Of course, their servers were in the US, so US law enforcement could easily shut them down.
What SOPA is trying to address is the very common situation where the servers are outside the US and the people who run the servers, if they can even be readily identified, have done nothing questionable beyond running the infringing site -- which means that trying to get them arrested is futile.
No. That's the situation in which you're almost guaranteed to be extradited. (Well, if it's illegal in both countries and the one country believes the evidence of the other.) You can still be extradited for acts that are not crimes in your current country.
That's because we control them. Seems like kind of a dick situation now that the Internet is international, but it was reasonable at the time, when we were building the Internet.
Xray and other medical data is notoriously large files, a job for which file lockers are useful, because of size limits on emails.
At least in the US, transmitting medical data by either means is illegal. In other countries, it certainly should be. Posting your medical data on Megaupload? What the hell?
Parent is actually combining two different "this". Functions that don't need the full calling system can use an alternate fast calling system that's less expensive. Optimizing compilers can do this automatically. Separately, small functions (or functions called once, or non-small functions) can be inlined, usually automatically. It's usually documented in the compiler optimization options, for one.
Yes, like I said, using only non-US search engines, avoiding all the major payment processors, and not doing business in the US is possible. It's just a very inconvenient way of doing business. It's unlikely to have the effect you claim, though, because most of your competition doesn't care about the regulations nearly as much as they care about having that much more market share, so they'll go along with the regulations, even if they disagree with them.
What you're recommending is (a) to have a domain name that is under a country-code TLD, (b) potentially not be indexed by major search engines, (c) not accept payment through credit cards / PayPal / Amazon, and (d) be blocked to any users in the US.
While this is technically possible, this is a rather inconvenient way of doing business.
Slashdot Mirror
Realistically, if you have a plausible story, they almost certainly won't hold you for contempt. They can't weather the political fallout of holding someone indefinitely for failing to produce an item that was lost or forgotten. They certainly wouldn't want to risk having a higher court overturn this ruling because of it.
They've actually already covered this. They're requiring the defendant to provide access to the decrypted data by, for example, entering the password. They are not requiring that the defendant actually reveal the password itself to anyone.
(To stave off the obvious: yes, they *could* keylog the passphrase, but if they used that for anything, someone would find out, and likely the entire contents of the hard drive would be thrown out as evidence and whoever came up with that brilliant idea would lose their job.)
Actually, everyone who is allowed to touch evidentiary hard drives is that competent. Field cops are trained that they need to simply pull the plug on a computer and deliver it whole to a forensics lab (though this is changing a bit) -- you might call in an expert for a really serious case. The first thing the lab does is duplicate the drives.
There are a fair number of tethering apps in the Android Market, actually. However, carriers have an option to filter out some apps -- generally, they're the ones that the carrier charges for (like tethering). Ostensibly, the built-in feature of the system (which is much better now than it used to be) checks with the carrier to ensure that the feature is enabled on the account.
When lectures can be saved to a video format on the Internet, why pay the teacher to deliver the same lecture every year?
If a video of a lecture is as useful as the live lecture, it's a bad lecture.
When books can be copied for free, why pay 200$ for a physical version of the book?
If all of the distributed copies are free, I'm thinking the major problem is going to be finding people to write and edit them. Don't get me wrong, there are some older math texts you could probably use for ages, but that will only get you so far.
No, I mean that it's physically impossible for a GPS receiver, such as a car or handheld GPS unit, to be used for the purpose of tracking. They do not transmit data and do not contain the antennas necessary to transmit data. They can only be used against you by seizing the device and analyzing its contents.
Sort of. They can make their ruling broader than the specific instance brought before them.
Your GPS receiver can only be used against you if you are arrested and it is confiscated, at which point any history stored in the device may (depending on the warrant) be obtained and admitted as evidence.
They cannot be used to track you.
You can leave the security checkpoint area at any time, though they may ask you to leave the airport if you do so. TSA agents can't legally arrest you, they can only bar you from entering the secure area of the airport.
They're also covered by dramatically different laws. Hopefully they employed a lawyer that recommended that removing a link complies with the letter of the DMCA. Also, the DMCA is only in the US, while they're not, so it's a bit safer. Child porn is not legal to possess under, more or less, any circumstances and is illegal in pretty much every country. You're pretty much screwed if anyone ever finds out you knowingly allowed it to remain on your server.
The simple fact that a DMCA notice is submitted automatically causes content to be removed immediately and subject to lengthy proceedings regarding the rights of that content.
If implemented well, the person who posted the content (assuming they're using a third-party host) should be immediately notified and can file a counter-notice with the host to have it immediately put back online. Of course, then they're on the hook for defending themselves in court, which was more or less the point of the claim-counterclaim system -- anonymous uploaders can't hide behind a third-party host, but the host retains their immunity to copyright liability.
Various members of the RIAA have been notorious in submitting DMCA takedown letters for content that is very clearly covered by things such as fair use and sometimes even for content they don't even remotely have the rights to. But the creative individuals creating these parodies, or even original material, have limited recourse and the recourse they do have is time-consuming, difficult and sometimes expensive, not to mention it destroys their business (if the content is related to a business).
Unfortunately, while there are potentially very serious penalties under the DMCA for knowingly filing illegitimate takedown notices, they're not pursued.
Jail nothing. You can fine the hell out of a company for perjury. They'd care about that.
Actually, it's very rare for criminal charges to be filed in the US for copyright infringement. (Patent infringement is equally almost always civil, so the government does not act on your behalf.) There are a few laws that are unfairly useful to the media companies, but for the most part they add weight to or expedite civil complaints. For the most part, the media companies do defend their own IP at their own cost -- it's just that their position in this matter is much better than your position when you're defending your patent at your cost.
You can have an excellent credit score by holding a single credit card that you never use. (This is true of any other kind of loan, but credit cards are generally the only credit you can hold at zero cost.) The only time this would be a problem is that these days, some credit card companies will close your account if you don't use your card occasionally. Many, however, don't.
In fact, many never-using-credit behaviors positively influence your credit score. If you don't request credit, you should have no recent credit inquiries (which reduce your score). If you don't use credit, your credit utilization ratio should be 0% (as good as it gets) and you should have zero late payments (as good as it gets).
When I got a home loan, I had a single credit card with a very low limit that I never used and was in the top rate bracket.
No problem. Incidentally, most compilers these days treat a lot of the C and C++ keywords as either hints or things to ignore. For example, "inline" and "register". In general, the optimizing compiler is smarter than the programmer about when it's efficient to inline. (Some compilers do treat "static inline" as a hint that, if all instances of the function are inlined, it should not bother emitting a non-inlined copy of the function. You can also get this effect with "static" and the appropriate compiler flag. This makes "static" a very important keyword to put on your functions.)
SOPA's primary stated purpose is to affect sites that are hosted outside the US, particularly those that don't cooperate with the US.
In this case, the people charged are accused of a number of crimes other than copyright infringement, which is probably the only reason they were actually arrested. Of course, their servers were in the US, so US law enforcement could easily shut them down.
What SOPA is trying to address is the very common situation where the servers are outside the US and the people who run the servers, if they can even be readily identified, have done nothing questionable beyond running the infringing site -- which means that trying to get them arrested is futile.
Well, the fact that exit nodes can snoop on unencrypted Tor connections is well-known and a lot of exit nodes are located in northern Virginia.
No. That's the situation in which you're almost guaranteed to be extradited. (Well, if it's illegal in both countries and the one country believes the evidence of the other.) You can still be extradited for acts that are not crimes in your current country.
That's because we control them. Seems like kind of a dick situation now that the Internet is international, but it was reasonable at the time, when we were building the Internet.
Xray and other medical data is notoriously large files, a job for which file lockers are useful, because of size limits on emails.
At least in the US, transmitting medical data by either means is illegal. In other countries, it certainly should be. Posting your medical data on Megaupload? What the hell?
The printers and bookstores add a lot more than 30%. So, yes?
Parent is actually combining two different "this". Functions that don't need the full calling system can use an alternate fast calling system that's less expensive. Optimizing compilers can do this automatically. Separately, small functions (or functions called once, or non-small functions) can be inlined, usually automatically. It's usually documented in the compiler optimization options, for one.
Yes, like I said, using only non-US search engines, avoiding all the major payment processors, and not doing business in the US is possible. It's just a very inconvenient way of doing business. It's unlikely to have the effect you claim, though, because most of your competition doesn't care about the regulations nearly as much as they care about having that much more market share, so they'll go along with the regulations, even if they disagree with them.
What you're recommending is (a) to have a domain name that is under a country-code TLD, (b) potentially not be indexed by major search engines, (c) not accept payment through credit cards / PayPal / Amazon, and (d) be blocked to any users in the US.
While this is technically possible, this is a rather inconvenient way of doing business.
So, in your system, who holds the top-level certificates for the TLDs, and why aren't they subject to US laws?