The EFF is making a serious blunder in saying nayh nyah Australian law does not apply in the US because that would cripple legal process between Australia and the US in both directions.
Actually, no. The EFF is doing just fine. They reason they don't give a shit about what some court rules on the other side of the world is that they don't have a legal reason to give a shit.
But enforcement in the US was the bulk of the nit that was being picked.
The EFF is an organization that is focused on American laws. Australia has its own EFA.
I suppose that, if they want to be overcautious, any EFF staffers traveling to Australia on EFF business should insure they are taking personal laptops rather than organization-owned ones, but it's really difficult to imagine any enforcement of this particular default verdict would actually occur inside Australia.
and contempt of court rulings aren't covered by the SPEECH act even if the contempt is based on an original case which is, so any fines issued under contempt of court *can* be pursued in US courts against its US assets.
We have a loser. Contempt doesn't work that way in Australia, and even if it did, a US court wouldn't separate costs, fees, or fines from the underlying judgment.
If the court fines the EFF, then that fine can be pursued in the US under separate law, but it probably wont need to be.
Have you actually read the SPEECH act?
Or even the very first sentence of the wikipedia article on it?
People like you frothing at the mouth and putting words in other peoples' mouths are unlikely to convince anybody of anything, same as those who you notice are frothing at the mouth on the other side.
Google's not perfect, and they have financial reasons to do this, but I agree with them on this issue.
Whether Facebook, with 2.8 billion users, should be somehow regulated is a different question than whether the ISP should be able to listen in on my internet traffic.
They don't (didn't?) let the phone company listen in; why is the ISP different?
Oh, wait -- that's normal.
The cynic in me says they work for the NSA or ISPs when they do that. (Sure, https can't be cached, requires more CPU, etc. but the technical problems seem more and more like the 640K of RAM issue.)
Yes, Facebook already sees your other Webtraffic, because it has the ad networks bugged to track you. Google does. All of them do.
You can throw up speedbumps to what they can see, and limit the sharing quite a bit. But you can't do that with your ISP, and in a lot of places you have very little choice.
Or did you think that the price on Amazon is what everyone sees?
Yeah, actually, I do. Because they tried price discrimination once, and it blew up on them badly. Because people share information as well. Now, if you have evidence they are managing to do this more subtly now, I'd certainly be interested in seeing it.
If you don't want the government tracking you, go offgrid. Though I hear that is illegal in some places.
I see this all-or-nothing bullshit all the time. Is this some sort of trollish astroturf campaign? It certainly doesn't mirror real life.
How can my ISP see all my web traffic? Pretty easily, if it's not encrypted, which is one reason why google is pushing https everywhere, and there's a lot of astroturfing here and elsewhere about why this is a bad thing.
Every young man should have a hobby: learning how to handle money is the best one. -- Jack Hurley