"You know it's kind of being like Barry Bonds and...Albert Pujos playing on the same team," Lopez-Alegria, an avid baseball fan, said referring to professional ballplayers. "I have a feeling my record isn't going to last very long, and I know exactly who is going to break it."
While the US may have broken its own record, it still has a long way to go to catch up with the world record of 438 days held by Valery Polyakov, a MIR crew member. You can view the article located at space.com here."
The proposed new law would cover depictions of child sex abuse that have either been created on a computer or are cartoons, drawings or other "artwork".
The article then mentions several incidents where London Art Gallery owners have been arrested and charged in the past few years for displaying artwork depicting "a photographer's three young children playing while naked" or "a photographer's daughter in the bath". Both were overturned on the basis that "art" is not covered by then current child porn laws.
Presumably, this exhibition of Donatello's David in London is illegal by some interpretations of the law, since it displays a naked prepubescent child in a pose that has been described as "provocative", "sensual" or "a fetishists dream" by art critics. Statues of Zeus abducting Ganymede may fall even more squarely under the wording of the law. While the police have vowed not to prosecute posession of "genuine artwork", what credentials does the average detective have to determine "genuine artwork"? Would they consider a modern sculpture of the same subject with the same care that they would consider one of the classics?
How does this recent law affect the ongoing effort to digitize British art galleries? Does it have far reaching implications for the physical collections of art galleries as well? Does it make British citizens on legally shaky ground merely visting the national museum? How would someone make that determination in light of this new law and the past history of enforcement and raids on smaller galleries? Does this law go too far?
I have read elsewhere that security organizations have deals with operating system and other software manufacturers to provide back-doors to PC's. How widespread is all of this privacy invasion in reality?"
It was interesting to me to see what he, a cop and a lawyer, thought of various copyright issues. He seems completely oblivious to the importance of the issue in relation to free human society, and cares only about it from a financial aspect. He claims that there are people like him in every school, so have any slashdotters in other universities ever dealt with these so called "DMCA Enforcers"?"
"... Who's to say that they're only gathering basic information about your router? Will they also gather whether it uses encryption or not? Will they grab other information as well? One thing is very clear: Skyhook Wireless isn't spending all this money just so it can support an AOL plug-in. Its ultimate goal, it says on its Web site, "is to expand the market for Location-Based Services (LBS) by making precise location information accessible to users and application providers." In other words, the data will be made available to the highest bidder.