Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
As much as I would like to agree with you, you cannot read the language "to the extent permitted by law" as referring solely to the "treaty law" (sic). If the drafters wanted that limitation, they would have said, "to the extent provided by this Document" or similar. The phrase "to the extent permitted by law" is a nod to the local laws wherever the election is taking place, so that the observers do not interfere with the process. Guess who decides what "interference is": the local legislature.
It does not make sense to say that the only limitations on the observers arise from the Document itself. Can observers hover over local officials? Can they touch and inspect every ballot? These actions are all regulated by local laws. The 100 foot distance is Texas is asinine, but it's the local law.
3. Unauthorized resale: Authentic goods being sold in some manner that makes the manufacturer a sad, sad, panda.
[T]hey will also bust you for importing authentic Rolexes, legally purchased outside the US, if the trademark holder doesn't want you selling them in the US, despite them being 100% genuine product, with no theft or fraud in the distribution chain
The Supreme Court will decide this issue next term in the context of a student importing legally purchased textbooks in Thailand and reselling them in the US. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kirtsaeng-v-john-wiley-sons-inc/
Your Content in our Services: When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content
The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”
Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.
The clauses go hand in hand. Yes, you maintain ownership because you are not assigning all of your rights to Google when you upload a file. The problem comes with the overly broad grant of a license from you (as owner) to Google (as licensee). The limiting language used by Google is not enough to ensure that you do not intend to give them permission to make your otherwise private material public in ways you hadn't anticipated.
Google does not need to own your IP to do (almost) anything it wants with your material; all they need is a broad enough license.