Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Semi-automatic weapons (Score 5, Informative) 404

by danb35 (#43234279) Attached to: Digging Into the Legal Status of 3-D Printed Guns

Yes, if it's a manufacturer's FFL (TFA didn't specify, but it seems to be the case from context), it does cover production of semi-automatic firearms as well as pump-action, bolt-action, revolvers, and most others. Machine guns are separate, being (as TFA notes) covered by the National Firearms Act, not the Gun Control Act. For right now, federally speaking, domestically-made semi-automatic firearms don't have any special or unique status. If Senator Feinstein gets her way, of course, that will change, but it's the case currently.

Comment: Re:That is seriously an unhealthy amount (Score 1) 642

by danb35 (#41650899) Attached to: Lawsuit Challenges New York Sugary Drink Ban

Simply put, you thought wrong. It also is not illegal to attempt suicide in the United States. If you attempt suicide, you can expect to be locked up, but that won't be because you broke the law--it'll be for your protection, and you'll be "locked up" in a hospital. And generally, that will be for no more than a few days.

Comment: Re:Wiring the money unsafe? (Score 3, Informative) 179

by danb35 (#41546951) Attached to: Shakedowns To Fix Negative Online Reviews

I suspect the poster you're replying to is actually talking about the money transfer services like Western Union, not true bank wire transfers. Wire transfers have to go into a bank account, and the ownership of that bank account is known (by the receiving bank, at least, if not by the sender). They're not used very often in the U.S., though, because they tend to be expensive--$25 to send, and $15 to receive, seem to be common fees, though they can vary.

Comment: Re:Only compared to the utopic myth of USA (Score 1) 105

by danb35 (#40477489) Attached to: Firm Threatens To Sue Consumer Websites For Harrassment

So if I were to dig up dirt on someone to damage their reputation, EVEN THOUGH true, I can be sued for libel because my intent wasn't to spread information necessary but to damage someone (the difference being the Halloween Documents vs your credit card details.

You're right, you can't be sued for libel in the U.S. for that. You can, however, be sued on one of the invasion of privacy torts (publication of private facts, most likely). Just because it's true doesn't mean that you have absolute license to print it.

Comment: Re:Certain victory? (Score 1) 156

by danb35 (#37298040) Attached to: Court Renders $3 Judgment Against Spamhaus

No, the "merits" had already been decided--due to Spamhaus' default (for whatever reason, they didn't properly argue to the court that they weren't subject to its jurisdiction), e360 had already "won" on the merits. The only question remaining was how much harm they had suffered from Spamhaus' actions--and since they didn't produce any appropriate evidence on that subject, they were awarded $3.

Spamhaus almost certainly would have won on the merits, if they had competently argued them. Alternatively, they probably would have gotten the case dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction, if they had competently argued that. As it was, they didn't competently argue anything until it was too late to avoid judgment against them.

What the world *really* needs is a good Automatic Bicycle Sharpener.

Working...