If this were true the first amendment would make copyright void.

There are several key issues with this case.

One, she made minimum wage, any loss of pay due to unavoidable fees on top of taxes, etc. would reduce her pay below that legal rate.
Two, the state she worked in has a requirement that “The wages shall be paid in lawful money of the United States or check."
Three, there appears be have been no notice given that she would be paid in a non-standard way.

I hope she wins and this predatory practice ends before it gains too much momentum.

This one makes the point well.

http://consumerist.com/2013/06/17/ex-mcdonalds-employee-sues-because-she-doesnt-want-her-paycheck-on-a-prepaid-debit-card/

Maybe Android phone users have better things to do.

I'm am also 46, and it was required reading for my 6th grade daughter this year.

I welcome this trend, a few extra confirmation boxes would help.

Can we also get rid of excessively long sigs, embedded graphics, comic sans and outlook stationary too? Or at least made them more difficult to automate.

So by that definition, I guess you are a Christian too.

Intermediate Black Masshole? Sounds racist.

He should have compared blocking BitTorrent to closing freeways because people might exceed the posted speed limit.

Sure a lot of people do it, but we only care about the ones that really abuse it.

I agree the analogy does not quite fit. He should have compared blocking BitTorrent to closing freeways because people might exceed the posted speed limit.

Sure a lot of people do it, but we only care about the ones that really abuse it.

I don't know about other countries, but in the US, employers may not ask about the following.

        Race
        Color
        Sex
        Religion
        National origin
        Birthplace
        Age
        Disability
        Marital/family status

Let the person asking the question know that by asking for the Facebook information, they are using a back door approach to gather information they are not entitled to ask and that you object to giving that information.

Any reasonable employer would not want that legal liability.

Video of the Information Design Lab electronic newspaper.

http://youtu.be/JBEtPQDQNcI

Their only option would be to ask the photographer to leave and put them on trespass notice. They would not gain any control of the images taken, those become protected property of the photographer as soon as the image is recorded. Malls are restaurants are treated the same way.

It sounds like they are trying to Trademark the floor itself in an attempt to prevent photographers from photographing it. That is BS, even if the Trademark is upheld, using it in a news story is an acceptable use of the Trademark.

Other trademarked structures are photographed all the time, there are guidelines on how they may be used, but news organizations are given a lot of latitude.

Remember that Trademarks are primary designed to protect consumers and to prevent confusion in the marketplace.