This just in. My turkey sandwiches are absolute the best in the world! No one beats my turkey sandwich.

How do I know? i made 3 and my family ate them all! Every single one!

The courts have consistently upheld that position, yes. You might have to go through some hassle with that specific officer, however.

What problem is this technology suppose to solve again? Do we have a use case?

They are leased but the rights to the lease are owned and sold.

You really have to try hard to come up with a headline that makes even the most hardcore slashdotter scream "OMG what a NERD" when reading it.

As if having more dissenting opinions changes the truth. That stance sounds familiar.

You think a man-in-the-middle attack is particularly likely when I'm plugging my laptop into my Tesla in my driveway?

Interesting. I noticed just the other day than, when I dimmed the dash light intensity on my rental that the speedometer disappeared. So it appears that lots of cars "violate federal law." So I looked up the standards (not laws) you cited and couldn't find the reference to "at all times."

So, I see two scenarios are possible:
A. It appears this is a chronic problem across the industry and none of the engineers, regulators, or lawyers has caught it until slashdot anonymous coward saved the world with his post.
B. This particular AC is a egotistical blowhard who wants to sound authoritative.

Let me think for a moment... which is the more likely scenario?

Well... of course you can sell it if you want. It would not be against the law to do so. You did buy the hardware. It will, however, stop working for the new owner at some point in the future.

Let's be clear. "You're not allowed" does not mean men from black helicopters coming through your skylight denying you your resale rights.

A lie.

The letter from the district, posted on Infowars no less, showed no such condition for stopping the disenrollment. She merely had to wear the [chipless] id.

The family's story has since changed, upon further questioning by real journalists, to that they believe carrying the [chipless] id would be the same as condoning the program.

Bullshit. That is what the father may have claimed initially. His story, after subsequent interviews by actual journalists who cared to ask the right questions, changed to [paraphrased] "carrying the non-chipped ID would be equivalent to our endorsement of the RFID program." He lied to the initial reporter to get media traction and is backtracking.

The letter from the district, posted on Infowars, whack-a-doodle site itself, made it quite clear how she could stop disenrollment and outlined the specific steps required. Stop objecting and publicly support the program were nowhere to be found in those conditions.

Man. Not only didn't read the article, but didn't read the post either! This is new heights for lazy mother______.

Then, somehow, got Score 5: Informative for it too. ___ you slashdot.

... says the father. The district response letter informing them of the disenrollment, and how to stop it, contained no such condition.

The father claims this to a reporter. None of the paperwork from the district carried any such language as a condition of her disenrollment.

A lawsuit really isn't for the money, but to force the mall authority and the police to refresh their officer training on laws of photography, trespass, and private property.