Your mass murderer is someone else's freedom fighter. Certainly a number of countries would feel that way about George Washington for example.

There's no global morality. Chile certainly disagreed about morality of extraditing Pinochet - that makes it not "global". What's the rule for "global" then, 50%? 75%? What if all Islamic countries decide that since usury is *very* clearly immoral, all US bankers should be extradited there for a trial?

I'm referring to Pinochet case, obviously.

I hope the irony isn't lost on /. crowd of the fact that Garzon attempted to extradite Pinochet asserting "universal jurisdiction" for crimes that weren't prosecuted in Pinochet's home country. It isn't all that much of a stretch from Pinochet to Kim Dotcom or Assange.

My point is, let's be consistent. If Pinochet case was a good precedent, then Dotcom and Assange are in trouble. Otherwise, Garzon is talking with both sides of his mouth.

well, it is what it is. all of the above believed that 'the end justifies the means' without regard to justice.

This is becoming more and more media circus. Garzon has no credibility, as he acted as political activist, not a judge. But, perhaps, the best defense attorney for a mediawhore is another mediawhore - see also, fighting bullshit with bullshit, Michael Moore style.

In US, closest equivalent to Garzon would be Kenneth Starr or Spiro Agnew, or Lynne Stewart.

Yeah, oops. :)

I meant, Astrolabe can claim it doesn't apply.

So, it appears that ACS is trying to claim copyright on the timezone historical data that they've compiled - and that's used in the TZ database.

Under Feist v Rural, information which has no "creative expression" is not copyright-able - but in this case, Olson can easily claim it doesn't apply.

This will be interesting.

I've pulled the complaint from PACER and uploaded it to docstoc:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/98231225/ACS-Atlas

I completely agree that number of cops initially deployed was unreasonable compared to number of protesters. However, cops had to work with 20-50k estimate that was provided by organizers - in which case, number of cops would have been right.

Police presence was reduced the next day, but it is still, in my opinion, excessive - there is no need to have a cop every 20 feet, however, it was reduced from 'ridiculous' to 'excessive'. I'll grant the NYPD the benefit of the doubt - the only harm from having too many cops is paying for their overtime.

Just to clarify, I I only wrote down things that I personally observed - that's the "eyewitness evidence" that was requested. If you notice, other /. posters who live/work in the area have generally agreed with me.

From the publicly available videos of pepper-spray use during Union Sq protest, it is very clear that a cop used excessive force against a protester - which is unprofessional at best and assault at worst. Cops aren't perfect - but neither are protesters.

1) Sorry, I did see claim of 20k as an actual number in at least one [clearly misinformed] report. The "projection" was 20-50k. Actual number on Sep 17 was ~2k, including all tourists in the area.

2) I think that having organized video team would be helpful - and educating them on how to stay out of the way of cops being taped.

3) Absolutely, I said so myself. Most protesters are calm and want no trouble.

4) Sorry - thanks for clarification. I wasn't listing the actual rules, I was just pointing out that there *are* rules, cops enforce them, and protesters are not always aware of them.

5) Actually, its not Midtown, its Downtown. And, 150-1000 people protesting here are not *that* unusual - unions routinely bring more, Wall St is their favorite place to protest.