This reminds me of all the cries of waste the military in the mid 1980s citing $400 hammers and $800 step ladders as proof. Then on further investigation, we find that the hammer was a specially made brass hammer used to do field repairs on jet engines in a highly flammable environment and the step ladders had railing locks to lock them to the floor of a navy or coast guard boat so some repairs could be done while the boat was in rough seas or under way.
There is probably a lot of things this system was designed for that we just haven't thought of.
Wrong, if I commit a crime in your country and flee to another, extradition happens whether that is a crime or not in the other country.
Now, the long arm jurisdiction is a concept that was created specifically because of situations you described. If you target citizens of a certain country for your scam, you have now technically entered the jurisdiction of that country for the purposes of committing the scam. Very few countries will use the fact that it isn't illegal here yet as an excuse for you to evade punishment for it.
Australia did this over a copyright violation years ago with Hew Griffiths. He even fought extradition claiming it wasn't a crime in Australia for what he was accused of. This has been going on long before the internet has been around too. The only difference now is that we hear about it more and it's easier to get caught up in something when there is no clear borders.
The Xbox was set as bail to ensure the kid showed up to face the charges and dispose of them properly. That is the reason why bail is even set at all.
Having the kid learn a lesson in the process could be one of those simple ancillary things that was pointed out.
As for the speculation about him fleeing or taking his Xbox with him, you are again trying to read more into it then is known. We do know that bail is there to allow people who are not convicted of a crime, to be released while reassuring they will return to face the charges and dispose of them properly. Otherwise, we would simply release the accused criminals on their own recognizance. For reasons not discussed in this story, the judge decided that asking the kid what he valued the most and setting that as his bail was the way to achieve this contract for his release known as bail and comfortably assume he would be returning to face the charges. Anything outside of that is purely made up by either of us.
But lets walk outside this known reality for a minute, let's suppose the judge did think this kid was guilty of the thefts and did arrange the Xbox as bail as punishment before he was convicted. Wouldn't the judge expect the kid to just steal another and thereby defeating the punishment? Wouldn't the judge have ordered him not to play anyone else' Xbox games as part of that punishment? I mean that's a pretty flimsy punishment there, Gimme you Xbox, now you will have to play games on the computer or your friends Xboxes.
I'm reading those things principles and it doesn't look like the Patriot act is complicating anything.
Those principles state unauthorized access. A NSA letter, warrant, or any other access granted by the patriot act would by default be authorized by law in the same way that a UK court warrant would be authorized by law.
Either there is a lot of misconception running around with this, or I'm missing something very important that simply was not listed in those principles.
Actually, the president signing the bill isn't necessary for it to become law. He can just let it set on his desk for 10 or so days and it becomes law automatically.
The existence of the vast majority of war weapons has deterred and stopped many more wars and saved many more lives then any war has taken. Wars are shorter now with a far lower percentage of the populations dieing then at any other time in history.
Well, no. You are reading into the article and attempting to associate two separate statements as a cause and effect for each other. The judge said Give the Xbox to the authorities and it will be returned when the charges are disposed of as a means for bail. He then said it would teach him a lesson. He didn't say the Xbox as bail was to teach him a lesson, he said it would teach him a lesson.
This is little different from setting a bail for 1 million dollars and forcing the kids family to put everything on hock to get him released. well, except that it was something of the kids instead of the family that is put through the hardship.
Why don't you hold your knee back long enough to read the entire statement and ponder on it a bit because you let it jerk so hard your teeth fall out.
This is not about breaking any foreign laws, it's about jurisdictional reach in which you are targeting a foreign land, you will need to obey the laws of that land. This is no different then sending snail mail to french citizens in France in violation of french laws (perhaps some sort of fraud) and being charged with something and extradited to face those charges. It happens all the time and has been happening long before any internet has been around.
Look up a term called long reach jurisdiction. Most other countries already do this. The only main stipulation is the cooperation of the foreign lands in which most countries will not render a person charged if the death penalty is on the table or they do not view the justice system as being fair.
The DMCA was an international treaty before it was a bill or a law. The entire reason why it went through was because no one paid attention to that detail and allowed congress to ratify the WIPO- WPPT and WTC.
Many other nations signed onto that those treaties too which is why they are all getting DMCA style laws that they need to fend off all the time. If people would realize that it's because of a treaty, then maybe the treaty can be changed and the DMCA can go good bye or become something sane.
Well, bail is something of value taken under the condition you show to face the charges against you. This saying can have a duel meaning because as a juvenile, his parents would have paid the bail and the boy would have remained one step separated from it.
In other words, the kids parents would have been the ones out of something of value. Perhaps this kid is a repeat offender and the lesson was more to this is what your parents are going through then it was, you deprived these people when you stole from them.
The article doesn't go into much detail and I am guessing there. But I can logically see the kid getting into trouble repeatedly and the judge wanting to make it real for him as the motivation for the confiscation. If their legal system is anything like in the states, the juvenile system is much more relaxed with the judges having much more leeway then they would with adults. When I was 14-15, I was accused of vandalizing a teachers house based solely on knowing who lived in the house that had been spray painted and TP'd as we drove by it on the bus in the morning. The judge in that case basically put me on house arrest and said I couldn't leave the house except for school unless a parent was with me the entire time. This is before any trial that ever took place and before the prosecutor looked at the charges and decided there was nothing to pin on me.
That's not much different then anywhere else. This is how a bail bondsman works in the US. You put your house up as collateral with the private bail agency, they bond you out with a surety bond, if you don't show, they collect pay the courts and then take your home to recoup the losses. If they can track you down and produce you to the courts, they get their money back as well as get to keep your home.
We can tiptoe around the same effect calling it different all day long. But the start and end is generally the same so it's more of a non issue if you ask me.
I don't know if it says what you think it says. The part that strikes me is where it's an opt in program.
In other words, it's not the intent of the law, it's the intent of following the laws. It's an opt in program and is not required to do business in the EU, but rather to say it follows the EU privacy guidelines.
What you linked to is little more then a stamp or credential much like the energy star green logo
This is pretty much what has happened. According to the article, (I know, slashdot RFTA) the kid has to surrender this as a condition of release until the charges against him are disposed of.
So he was being held in jail or detention anyways. Went in front of a judge and the judge basically said, gimme your X-Box for bail money.
harsh? really? johnny jackoff is involved in a series of robberies and you consider taking his fucking video games away harsh
To be fair, he is only accused of being involved in a series of robberies at this point. The article did not say how this accusation came to light. It could be that he was caught leaving a burglarized home with stolen items in his hands, it could be he was walking down the street, someone ran passed him and dropped an item, he picked it up right about the time the cops came around the corner and busted him.
and yes, I know people that has happened to. A club some of us were at was raided for employees supposedly dealing drugs out it. When the cops came barging in, everyone and their brother started dumping anything illegal they had on them and kicking it as far away from them as possible while trying to not be noticed. The cops simply associated everything on the ground with whoever was closest and arrested them for it. There was a big write up in the paper about it complete with everyone's names. My friend got hit for possession of paraphernalia used to process a drug and possession of a narcotic.
He fought the charges and had them all dropped and triggered a problem with the search warrant (it was set for the bar employees not patrons) which a lot of the others used to get the evidence against them tossed out.
Actually he did. He told the child that it would be returned to him when the charges were disposed of.
The only difference between this and something that would be normal everywhere, is that instead of paying money for bail, or making the parents put up collateral or something for his release pending the case's conclusion, the child had to surrender something he valued to the authorities.
If that information resides in a Chinese server, EU privacy laws wouldn't apply either. If you put your information outside the jurisdiction of your laws, why do you expect those laws to trump other laws. The cloud is global and if you put your information in a UK cloud, and part of it, including the command and control is in the US or any other country, you better expect those local laws to apply too.
Who said anything about the US wanting to end all terrorism. We are just happy with fighting a campaign to defeat it when it's used against us or our allies.
Besides, your premise is completely wrong to boot. Bin Laden said that 9/11 was because we supported Israel. Had nothing to do with inequality. religion maybe, but that's a fundamental human right recognized by every single human rights group out there. waging a campaign to end a human right in order to stop something is a bit ridiculous isn't it.
That went out of fashion decades ago. Do you think it's the woman's fault for being raped?
As for religions, there are a variety of reasons outside of fear of being raped. Some of those reasons do have to do with sexuality but most do not place the blame on the woman if they are raped.
Lol.. Since when is it illegal to walk down the road with a Rolex watch and your wallet hanging half out of your pocket? Until it is illegal to do that, I would say the person who got mugged is not to blame at all. He might have been stupid, careless, but he isn't to blame.
You do not blame someone who is doing legal actions for the immoral and illegal actions of another. I mean seriously, we don't blame the woman for her own rape just because she wore a miniskirt and halter top in public.
I had to look up what a 3ds was to find out how it was different then the consoles I am vaguely familiar with. That's how out of touch with gaming I guess I am.
Actually, I believe those numbers were the number thrown around at the time of the auto bailout and was cited as reasons to why the Unions had to make some concessions. It's not that just because the employees are unionized that the costs are there, it was the extra costs of irregular demands by the UAW to why those costs were there. One of those demands was that X amount of employees being permanent full time employees when the plants in question only needed seasonal employees. What ended up happening was 15% of the plants work force would show up to an enormous break room and do an honest days worth of nothing for an honest days worth of pay.
I don't think those numbers were made up at all. Not cited, and I didn't bother citing them either- might be an issue. But they were tossed around as legitimate at the time of the bailouts.
Slashdot Mirror
This reminds me of all the cries of waste the military in the mid 1980s citing $400 hammers and $800 step ladders as proof. Then on further investigation, we find that the hammer was a specially made brass hammer used to do field repairs on jet engines in a highly flammable environment and the step ladders had railing locks to lock them to the floor of a navy or coast guard boat so some repairs could be done while the boat was in rough seas or under way.
There is probably a lot of things this system was designed for that we just haven't thought of.
IT depends on the power and wave length of the laser, and the heat properties of the material used to deflect it.
A laser can cut through a mirror in case you were wondering. Not reflective surface will be purely reflective in all wavelengths.
Wrong, if I commit a crime in your country and flee to another, extradition happens whether that is a crime or not in the other country.
Now, the long arm jurisdiction is a concept that was created specifically because of situations you described. If you target citizens of a certain country for your scam, you have now technically entered the jurisdiction of that country for the purposes of committing the scam. Very few countries will use the fact that it isn't illegal here yet as an excuse for you to evade punishment for it.
Australia did this over a copyright violation years ago with Hew Griffiths. He even fought extradition claiming it wasn't a crime in Australia for what he was accused of. This has been going on long before the internet has been around too. The only difference now is that we hear about it more and it's easier to get caught up in something when there is no clear borders.
The Xbox was set as bail to ensure the kid showed up to face the charges and dispose of them properly. That is the reason why bail is even set at all.
Having the kid learn a lesson in the process could be one of those simple ancillary things that was pointed out.
As for the speculation about him fleeing or taking his Xbox with him, you are again trying to read more into it then is known. We do know that bail is there to allow people who are not convicted of a crime, to be released while reassuring they will return to face the charges and dispose of them properly. Otherwise, we would simply release the accused criminals on their own recognizance. For reasons not discussed in this story, the judge decided that asking the kid what he valued the most and setting that as his bail was the way to achieve this contract for his release known as bail and comfortably assume he would be returning to face the charges. Anything outside of that is purely made up by either of us.
But lets walk outside this known reality for a minute, let's suppose the judge did think this kid was guilty of the thefts and did arrange the Xbox as bail as punishment before he was convicted. Wouldn't the judge expect the kid to just steal another and thereby defeating the punishment? Wouldn't the judge have ordered him not to play anyone else' Xbox games as part of that punishment? I mean that's a pretty flimsy punishment there, Gimme you Xbox, now you will have to play games on the computer or your friends Xboxes.
I'm reading those things principles and it doesn't look like the Patriot act is complicating anything.
Those principles state unauthorized access. A NSA letter, warrant, or any other access granted by the patriot act would by default be authorized by law in the same way that a UK court warrant would be authorized by law.
Either there is a lot of misconception running around with this, or I'm missing something very important that simply was not listed in those principles.
In fact, after some further examination, it appears the original directive gives exemptions specifically for the patriot acts and laws like it.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:EN:HTML
Check out article 13
Actually, the president signing the bill isn't necessary for it to become law. He can just let it set on his desk for 10 or so days and it becomes law automatically.
How does humanity lose?
The existence of the vast majority of war weapons has deterred and stopped many more wars and saved many more lives then any war has taken. Wars are shorter now with a far lower percentage of the populations dieing then at any other time in history.
Dandruff, can you imagine getting eye lice or some other pest on these things?
Well, no. You are reading into the article and attempting to associate two separate statements as a cause and effect for each other. The judge said Give the Xbox to the authorities and it will be returned when the charges are disposed of as a means for bail. He then said it would teach him a lesson. He didn't say the Xbox as bail was to teach him a lesson, he said it would teach him a lesson.
This is little different from setting a bail for 1 million dollars and forcing the kids family to put everything on hock to get him released. well, except that it was something of the kids instead of the family that is put through the hardship.
I'm not sure I care what it sounds like to you. Perhaps you could explain the nature of it better then I might care.
Why don't you hold your knee back long enough to read the entire statement and ponder on it a bit because you let it jerk so hard your teeth fall out.
This is not about breaking any foreign laws, it's about jurisdictional reach in which you are targeting a foreign land, you will need to obey the laws of that land. This is no different then sending snail mail to french citizens in France in violation of french laws (perhaps some sort of fraud) and being charged with something and extradited to face those charges. It happens all the time and has been happening long before any internet has been around.
Look up a term called long reach jurisdiction. Most other countries already do this. The only main stipulation is the cooperation of the foreign lands in which most countries will not render a person charged if the death penalty is on the table or they do not view the justice system as being fair.
The DMCA was an international treaty before it was a bill or a law. The entire reason why it went through was because no one paid attention to that detail and allowed congress to ratify the WIPO- WPPT and WTC.
Many other nations signed onto that those treaties too which is why they are all getting DMCA style laws that they need to fend off all the time. If people would realize that it's because of a treaty, then maybe the treaty can be changed and the DMCA can go good bye or become something sane.
Well, bail is something of value taken under the condition you show to face the charges against you. This saying can have a duel meaning because as a juvenile, his parents would have paid the bail and the boy would have remained one step separated from it.
In other words, the kids parents would have been the ones out of something of value. Perhaps this kid is a repeat offender and the lesson was more to this is what your parents are going through then it was, you deprived these people when you stole from them.
The article doesn't go into much detail and I am guessing there. But I can logically see the kid getting into trouble repeatedly and the judge wanting to make it real for him as the motivation for the confiscation. If their legal system is anything like in the states, the juvenile system is much more relaxed with the judges having much more leeway then they would with adults. When I was 14-15, I was accused of vandalizing a teachers house based solely on knowing who lived in the house that had been spray painted and TP'd as we drove by it on the bus in the morning. The judge in that case basically put me on house arrest and said I couldn't leave the house except for school unless a parent was with me the entire time. This is before any trial that ever took place and before the prosecutor looked at the charges and decided there was nothing to pin on me.
That's not much different then anywhere else. This is how a bail bondsman works in the US. You put your house up as collateral with the private bail agency, they bond you out with a surety bond, if you don't show, they collect pay the courts and then take your home to recoup the losses. If they can track you down and produce you to the courts, they get their money back as well as get to keep your home.
We can tiptoe around the same effect calling it different all day long. But the start and end is generally the same so it's more of a non issue if you ask me.
I don't know if it says what you think it says. The part that strikes me is where it's an opt in program.
In other words, it's not the intent of the law, it's the intent of following the laws. It's an opt in program and is not required to do business in the EU, but rather to say it follows the EU privacy guidelines.
What you linked to is little more then a stamp or credential much like the energy star green logo
Let's not ignore some things in order to insert what we want to believe.
http://www.theage.com.au/world/bin-laden-says-us-support-for-israel-prompted-911-monitors-20090914-fnht.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glHHWCyZ9zc
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5inV15sHG8BPu-lEEM2m3PtNI9QPA
While 9/11 might have been in line with what you posted, Bin Laden himself stated that there were reasons for 9/11 and what those reasons were.
This is pretty much what has happened. According to the article, (I know, slashdot RFTA) the kid has to surrender this as a condition of release until the charges against him are disposed of.
So he was being held in jail or detention anyways. Went in front of a judge and the judge basically said, gimme your X-Box for bail money.
To be fair, he is only accused of being involved in a series of robberies at this point. The article did not say how this accusation came to light. It could be that he was caught leaving a burglarized home with stolen items in his hands, it could be he was walking down the street, someone ran passed him and dropped an item, he picked it up right about the time the cops came around the corner and busted him.
and yes, I know people that has happened to. A club some of us were at was raided for employees supposedly dealing drugs out it. When the cops came barging in, everyone and their brother started dumping anything illegal they had on them and kicking it as far away from them as possible while trying to not be noticed. The cops simply associated everything on the ground with whoever was closest and arrested them for it. There was a big write up in the paper about it complete with everyone's names. My friend got hit for possession of paraphernalia used to process a drug and possession of a narcotic.
He fought the charges and had them all dropped and triggered a problem with the search warrant (it was set for the bar employees not patrons) which a lot of the others used to get the evidence against them tossed out.
Actually he did. He told the child that it would be returned to him when the charges were disposed of.
The only difference between this and something that would be normal everywhere, is that instead of paying money for bail, or making the parents put up collateral or something for his release pending the case's conclusion, the child had to surrender something he valued to the authorities.
If that information resides in a Chinese server, EU privacy laws wouldn't apply either. If you put your information outside the jurisdiction of your laws, why do you expect those laws to trump other laws. The cloud is global and if you put your information in a UK cloud, and part of it, including the command and control is in the US or any other country, you better expect those local laws to apply too.
Who said anything about the US wanting to end all terrorism. We are just happy with fighting a campaign to defeat it when it's used against us or our allies.
Besides, your premise is completely wrong to boot. Bin Laden said that 9/11 was because we supported Israel. Had nothing to do with inequality. religion maybe, but that's a fundamental human right recognized by every single human rights group out there. waging a campaign to end a human right in order to stop something is a bit ridiculous isn't it.
That went out of fashion decades ago. Do you think it's the woman's fault for being raped?
As for religions, there are a variety of reasons outside of fear of being raped. Some of those reasons do have to do with sexuality but most do not place the blame on the woman if they are raped.
Lol.. Since when is it illegal to walk down the road with a Rolex watch and your wallet hanging half out of your pocket? Until it is illegal to do that, I would say the person who got mugged is not to blame at all. He might have been stupid, careless, but he isn't to blame.
You do not blame someone who is doing legal actions for the immoral and illegal actions of another. I mean seriously, we don't blame the woman for her own rape just because she wore a miniskirt and halter top in public.
thank you for the information.
I had to look up what a 3ds was to find out how it was different then the consoles I am vaguely familiar with. That's how out of touch with gaming I guess I am.
Actually, I believe those numbers were the number thrown around at the time of the auto bailout and was cited as reasons to why the Unions had to make some concessions. It's not that just because the employees are unionized that the costs are there, it was the extra costs of irregular demands by the UAW to why those costs were there. One of those demands was that X amount of employees being permanent full time employees when the plants in question only needed seasonal employees. What ended up happening was 15% of the plants work force would show up to an enormous break room and do an honest days worth of nothing for an honest days worth of pay.
I don't think those numbers were made up at all. Not cited, and I didn't bother citing them either- might be an issue. But they were tossed around as legitimate at the time of the bailouts.