Do I have a first amendment right to sell pirated Disney cartoons? on edit: obviously not because I'm not in the U.S but if I were?
US courts recognize many exceptions to the first amendment. IP rights fall into that category.
Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
61–70 of 150 posts
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#62Sure. Just get the corporate entity to say a single word. No representatives. No notes. No proxies. No robots. No automated voices. The actual corporate legal entity. Not even the CEO. No clever stand-ins with same name. Just one mouthed, audible word to confirm the entity can qualify for speech. Then we can consider "free speech" for that entity. I can only dream this would hold up even as I know there are likely do…
What about the flip side of that. If the NYT prints a slanderous story about you, can you sue the deep-pocketed times, or do you have to go after the underpaid reporter?
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Furniture movers do have that free speech right. It's completely kosher for them to chat with some friends in a bar about how weird your possessions are or how hard it was to get to your address. Maybe ISPs should have special restrictions the same way medical providers do, but there's no general principle that people who discover private things about you aren't allowed to talk about it.
But I suspect people would be perturbed if the moving companies sold that information.
Of course, and many people are perturbed that telecom companies sell their information. However, perturbed != illegal.
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Defeatist attitude aside, what would happen if we crowd funded a wikileaks-type organization that operates "as an ISP" and doxxed politicians/lobbyists/lawyers/isp executives?
You’d go to jail like weev did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weev AT&T put hundreds of thousands of subscriber emails on the web with no password or firewall or meaningful authentication of any kind. (They were server-sent autocompleted values in the username field of a login form that had a sequential integer URL argument.) He and a conspirator downloaded them all and sent them to the media to run stories about AT&…
The Wiki article makes it hard to feel bad for this guy.
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’d go to jail like weev did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weev AT&T put hundreds of thousands of subscriber emails on the web with no password or firewall or meaningful authentication of any kind. (They were server-sent autocompleted values in the username field of a login form that had a sequential integer URL argument.) He and a conspirator downloaded them all and sent them to the media to run stories about AT&…
It's pretty clear the crime here was unauthorized access to the server, not the sending of the information on to the media.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weev
> It's pretty clear the crime here was unauthorized access to the server, not the sending of the information on to the media.
I think this is a good place as any to reassert that the CFAA is irrepairable and irredeemable at this point and MUST be scrapped with no replacement.
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#66> “Maine's decision to impose unique burdens on ISPs' speech—while ignoring the online and offline businesses that have and use the very same information and for the same and similar purposes as ISPs—represents discrimination between similarly situated speakers that is impermissible under the First Amendment,” the lawsuit claimed. I agree. The law should apply to everyone, not just ISPs.
Haha yep. It's lovely when the filer of the lawsuit raises a great point on how to throw out their case and further citizen protection, isn't it?
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#67If municipalities stop giving them local monopolies they can have rights again. Until then, they should be beholden to strict rules.
What monopoly? Here in Palo Alto I have full consumer “choice”: comcast or att. I have to use crapcast (though goes down each night) as att, despite their ads, will only provision me 768kb DSL though I’m less than a mile from the CO/DSLAMS (and the PAIX for that matter) I assume elsewhere the two companies have a deal where comcast is slow and att is faster. Of course the competition authorities and fcc are utterly s…
You're lucky that you have that many options. You don't have to go too far into rural areas to find places where there isn't any coax on the poles.
24 million Americans don't have any options that the FCC considers as fixed broadband service (25/3mbps)
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#68For those that are unaware, if you live in California the recently passed CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act) gives you a lot of new power to force companies to delete your data and let you opt-out of them selling it. For Comcast: https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/ccpa It's a little tedious since you have to do it with each company, but so far I've found that it largely works. You can also do it for equifax…
>You can also do it for equifax, experian, and transunion.
what, precisely, are the implications of this?
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corporate personhood is a centuries old idea. It is what enables you to sign a contract with a company, for example. As a counter example that shows they are still not fully "people": a corporation cannot adopt a child or get married.
It is what enables you to sign a contract with a company, for example. We'd be better off if we couldn't do this. Predatory credit would disappear.
The entire financial system would disappear.
Re: Telecoms say they have a First Amendment right to sell private data
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corporate personhood is a centuries old idea. It is what enables you to sign a contract with a company, for example. As a counter example that shows they are still not fully "people": a corporation cannot adopt a child or get married.
It is what enables you to sign a contract with a company, for example. We'd be better off if we couldn't do this. Predatory credit would disappear.
Well yeah, an absolute ton of things would disappear if we essentially made every company a sole proprietorship.