Kasky v. Nike Inc., 02 C.D.O.S. 3790, began when Marc Kasky filed a private attorney general action claiming that Nike violated California laws prohibiting unlawful business practices and false advertising by issuing press statements refuting claims that workers in Nike's Southeast Asian factories toiled in slave-like conditions. Kasky said those statements were deliberately deceptive. "

PR Campaigns Lose Speech Protection

"Sharon's policy is scorched-earth. Under his command, the Israeli army has engaged not in isolating the infrastructure of the suicide terrorists. What he is engaged in is wanton damage. "

Even William F. Buckley thinks Isreal has crossed the line...

William F. Buckley Jr. on Mideast & Sharon on National Review Online

" LOS ANGELES -- Hundreds of Web radio stations are planning a "silent" protest on Wednesday against proposed royalty rates they say could bankrupt many members of the fledgling industry. "

Web radio silent today...

'Silence' Greets Webcasting Fees

"Proceedings of CFP2002"

Computers, Freedom, and Privacy is the most important computer conference ever. Unfortunately its sometimes too important to be terribly useful. There are still a few gems in here, however.

Continued questions about the changing nature of copyright. A little bit further out on this subject then other sources, but only by a small step.

Some stuff about CyberSLAPP suits intended to uncover the identity of anonymous posters. California apparently banned these.

A presentation on the importance of reputation systems that offers few conclusions. :)

Proceedings of CFP 2002

In his lengthy report, Justice Gerard La Forest writes that comprehensive and continuous video surveillance permits the police to systematically observe everyone present within the camera's range. He says the cameras violate section 8 of the Charter, which guarantees a "broad and general right" to privacy, as laid out by Justice Dickson in Hunter vs. Southam. Section 8 of the Charter states: "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

Security Cams Not OK in Canada?

"We haven't received one e-mail in support of the Hollings bill," said Judiciary Committee spokeswoman Mimi Devlin. "It seems like there's a groundswell of support from regular users."

Interesting to see the word "users" where often the word "consumers" or formerly "citizens" might have been placed. :)
How very "TRON."

Hollings bill strongly opposed by voters

"The provision that you say I violated is unconstitutional"? This claim, of course, can always be made, but it is rarely if ever made and if it's made, it's almost always thrown out because it's the last refuge of a scoundrel.

I hope the court doesn't find this guys arguements any more compelling then I do. He contradicts himself on the subject of whether stronger copyrights incent or disincent the creation of derivative works, and seems to be of the opinion that there is no such thing as checks and balances. Every 3rd grader knows that the supreme court has the right to strike down congressional decisions when congress breaks the law.

Salon.com Technology | In defense of copyright

"(CNN) -- Computer security expert Chad Harrington regularly surfs Internet Relay Chat (IRC), one of the oldest chat technologies on the Web. The IRC networks have names like Dalnet and EFnet, but he agrees that another name works just as well: eBay for hackers. "

A call to bring the law into IRC. What I find interesting is the idea the jurisdictional problems will require federal law enforcement to get involved with crimes that are "petty." Usually the feds deal with major crime and the local cops deal with unruly kids. On the net, the FBI has to handle everything. That will probably require major changes over there. (So far, they seem to just ignore "petty" internet crime. A serious law enforcement effort concerning SMTP relay abuse is needed, but its too lame for an FBI thats designed to fight bank robbers.)

CNN.com - Experts: Chat rooms a haven for hackers - April 10, 2002

"If we do not follow this framework, we risk being sued ... regardless of the merits of such a suit," Google said in a statement.

This is the number 1 problem with civil law. I beleive there should be a criminal penalty for filing a fraudulent cease and desist order.

CNN.com - Service providers as speech police? - April 7, 2002

""We believed strongly that we could win," says Resler, "but I was not prepared to spend $50,000 to do it. So, I settled."
"This is a big problem with our court system in general," says Lohmann. "Many of these people might well have a good defense, but the problem is going to court, and raising the defense can cost thousands of dollars." "

Salon.com Technology | Free speech and the Internet: A fish story