Comment Re:Prude police officer? (Score 2) 372
Free speech is not about protecting the ability of professionals acting on behalf of the state to pass comment (in their professional capacity) on the public.
Free speech is not about protecting the ability of professionals acting on behalf of the state to pass comment (in their professional capacity) on the public.
Which judgement did you read? See footnote 2 on page 7.
Although the City of Boston is formally included in the
caption to this appeal, the parties agree that the City has no
right to immediate interlocutory appeal from a denial of qualified
immunity, as it did not -- and could not -- assert such a defense.
See Walden v. City of Providence, 596 F.3d 38, 55 n.23 (1st Cir.
2010). In referring to the appellants, then, we refer only to the
individual defendants appealing the denial of qualified immunity.
Mind you, this isn't really about the case - this is just legal wrangling to see if the officers can use the defence of ignorance to squash the entire case from the outset. As the second paragraph on page 5 notes, they have to get the argument about this out of the way before they can get into arguing the actual case about whether a violation occured.
Under current laws, it's not going to happen. It's not illegal to disseminate information that's part of the public record. What are you going to sue for? Defamation of character? You did get arrested. Libel? Posting a mug shot that was taken by Law Enforcement is hardly slanderous, after all, you *DID* get arrested. Expecting one aspect of the justice system to essentially rule against another aspect is just the height of ignorance and optimism.
This website is available in the UK. Sue in London. Problem solved. (But do it quick, before Parliament fixes the law.)
"arrest == guilty, but might wriggle out of it on a technicality" I think you mean...
Time to start flinging those broadcasts across the Atlantic, and have a little man in Cornwall sit in a shack watching them 24/7...
That's not the only way to read it. It could be something he did on his own time, and proposed to his manager that it (HIS gpl code) be incorporated into a project they were working on in the company which would inevitably force the whole project into gpl licensing. That would explain the 'we' without automatically making everything the property of the company.
The real upshot is that we don't have nearly enough detail here, and the only real advice we (the
no, no, no. There's [Andariel, Duriel, + the other 5] -> [Diablo, Mephisto & Baal] -> IRS
If you join the army journalism corps, and are paid to write newspaper articles, who owns the articles?
The ones you write during your on-duty hours? The Army. The ones you write on your own time? You.
How did we get to the situation where this question is even being asked?
If this is a USA originated problem then "getting a lawyer" seems to be the default approach to everything rather than actually solving the problem.
It's a sad result of the fact that trying to resolve the problem amicably, and without engaging a lawyer first, can result in you making all sorts of mistakes which will leave you unable to resolve the problem in the courts later if it has to go that far.
Code you write at home belongs to your employer if those are the terms of employment, and if a judge buys that in court
This is City of London Police. They're a tiny force who police only the Square Mile (and are not to be confused with the Metropolitan Police). It was one of their officers who seized that chap's anti-scientology placard a few years ago.
The Royal Navy used to sail back into port with the pirates still swinging from the yardarm. Icky.
But seriously, given that we're talking about a handful of people, the expense is trifling for any Western government - the problem is jurisdictional issues. Essentially, many of the European countries doubt that their constitutions would allow them to exercise jurisdiction; others doubt that a case could be proven beyond reasonable doubt; Kenya is fed up of being a dumping ground for sufficient numbers of pirates as actually do make them a financial burden and Somalia has no functioning government to do anything.
When you nuke a country do you think the leaders are the only ones that get hurt?
They have hardened bunkers, they probably won't get hurt at all.
It was fair game in 1945. The political fallout from making a nuclear first strike on a city today would probably be 1000 worse than the radioactive fallout.
Well that's some nice attention for David Milliband who is leader of the opposition.
perhaps you missed this. The Mr Millibean who is leader of the opposition is Ed, not David. I know, not much difference...
Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. -- Ambrose Bierce
