Jurisprudence Category Archives
I’m the other
15 September 2013 | Jurisprudence, Politics, Security | No Comments
I believe a free person needs no excuse whatsoever to keep communications secret from the government, whether those communications are weighty or frivolous. <...> I believe the mantra “what do you have to hide” is a contemptible and un-American sentiment that fundamentally misconstrues the proper relationship between citizen and state.
welcome to the New Dark Age.
mergers and acquisitions
3 September 2013 | Economics, Google, Hardware, Jurisprudence, Microsoft | No Comments
итак, давно ожидаемое случилось, Microsoft купил мобильный бизнес Nokia. как говорится, “if this isn’t commitment [to smartphones] not sure what is?” более того, проклинаемый годами Стивен Элоп[1] теперь, похоже, будет одним из основных претендетов на кресло Баллмера.
но вот, что так же бросается в глаза:
The deal structure is the opposite of the Google-Motorola deal: Google acquired Motorola, according to what it told the world at the time, primarily for its patent portfolio and was just required to take over the product business as well because Motorola’s then-CEO told Google that, stripped of its patents, the device business wouldn’t be able to defend itself against patent-wielding rivals. Google grossly overpaid for Motorola’s patents. It currently has only one enforceable patent injunction in place against Apple (in Germany) and none against Microsoft, and the one against Apple will be history long before the end of the year. By contrast, Microsoft merely licenses Nokia’s patents, but the remaining Nokia company, which will keep the HERE mapping and location software (of which Microsoft is expected to become a top three customer) and the NSN infrastructure business, will still own them.
<...>
8,500 design patents are indeed acquired, but not Nokia’s utility (technical) patents. Design patents are typically not licensed to third parties.
<...>
The fact that Microsoft would pay EUR 1.65 billion (almost $2.2 billion at the current exchange rate) for a 10-year license (including the option for a future extension) is a boost for Nokia’s patent monetization aspirations. And Nokia’s patent monetization — which I’ve been watching (particularly the related litigations) for some time now — will obviously continue. Other prospective licensees will deal with a company that is financially strengthened by this deal and can point to yet another “blue chip” licensee that has recognized the value of Nokia’s portfolio.
-
могу лишь догадываться, что фанаты Nokia думают о нем сегодня. ↩
ингсоц в действии
27 August 2013 | Culturology, Jurisprudence, Politics, Privacy, Security | 2 Comments
к слову о Гленне Гринуолде и Дэвиде Миранда — Эндрю Салливан сформулировал мои ощущения максимально точно:
In this respect, I can say this to David Cameron. Thank you for clearing the air on these matters of surveillance. You have now demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that these anti-terror provisions are capable of rank abuse. Unless some other facts emerge, there is really no difference in kind between you and Vladimir Putin. You have used police powers granted for anti-terrorism and deployed them to target and intimidate journalists deemed enemies of the state.
You have proven that these laws can be hideously abused. Which means they must be repealed. You have broken the trust that enables any such legislation to survive in a democracy. By so doing, you have attacked British democracy itself. What on earth do you have to say for yourself?
именно.
this is how totalitarianism starts
21 August 2013 | Jurisprudence, Politics, Privacy, Security | 1 Comment
о нашем общем будущем:
[A] “terrorist” is anyone the spooks say is a terrorist. In the past, we might reasonably assume our intelligence agencies targeted people who presented a potential threat to us. With the Miranda detention, it’s clear that a “terrorist” is anyone who presents a threat to them.
о предъявленном ультиматуме:
I think even lifelong British bureaucrats understand that destroying the Guardian’s hardware did nothing to destroy the data that lives on it. Encrypted copies abound – if not in England, then certainly in Russia, Germany, and Brazil.
No, they did it to send a message. And that message is, Your debate is inconsequential. We control the horizontal and the vertical. We’ll do what we want, and there’s nothing you can do to stop us.
о начале гражданской войны:
[Y]anking David Miranda out of a queue at Heathrow, tossing him into an interrogation room, and sweating him for nine hours <...>, too, was sending a message.
It was a warning to Greenwald but also to journalists and whistleblowers in general: The gloves are coming off. Or as the kids like to say, s**t just got real.
все изменилось
17 August 2013 | Cryptography, Jurisprudence, Politics, Privacy, Security | 2 Comments
как известно, среди последствий истории Эдварда Сноудена было так же и закрытие одного из почтовых сервисов, что он использовал, Lavabit:
I have been forced to make a difficult decision: to become complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit. After significant soul searching, I have decided to suspend operations. I wish that I could legally share with you the events that led to my decision. I cannot. I feel you deserve to know what’s going on–the first amendment is supposed to guarantee me the freedom to speak out in situations like this. Unfortunately, Congress has passed laws that say otherwise. As things currently stand, I cannot share my experiences over the last six weeks, even though I have twice made the appropriate requests.
что ж, остальные[1] добровольно решили последовать той же дорогой:
[W]e have reconsidered this position. We’ve been thinking about this for some time, whether it was a good idea at all. Today, another secure email provider, Lavabit, shut down their system lest they “be complicit in crimes against the American people.” We see the writing the wall, and we have decided that it is best for us to shut down Silent Mail now. We have not received subpoenas, warrants, security letters, or anything else by any government, and this is why we are acting now.
иными словами, любой, кто захочет предоставлять аналогичные услуги, должен будет подумать не дважды, а сто крат. и без должной юридической помощи, без соответствующего финансирования, готового противостоять безграничным возможностям государства, безопаснее и спокойнее окажется даже не начинать.
we see the writing the wall. подобный сервис больше просто не допустят.
-
президент и со-основатель Silent Circle — Фил Циммерманн. ↩
nice try
8 August 2013 | Censorship, Copyright, Economics, Jurisprudence, Lifeform, Politics | 2 Comments
вот, пожалуйста:
In the case of a Texas man accused of massive Bitcoin-based fraud, a federal judge has ruled that bitcoins are “a currency or form of money,” and are therefore subject to relevant US laws. [emphasis mine]
есть и постановление, само собой:
It is clear that Bitcoin can be used as money. It can be used to purchase goods or services, and as Shavers stated, used to pay for individual living expenses. The only limitation of Bitcoin is that it is limited to those places that accept it as currency. However, it can also be exchanged for conventional currencies, such as the U.S. dollar, Euro, Yen, and Yuan. Therefore, Bitcoin is a currency or form of money.
ну да, железная логика, очень смешно. хотя на самом-то деле все как раз очень просто:
The Bitcoin network is a peer-to-peer payment network, and nobody can intefere with it. The only real value of a Bitcoin comes from its users. Because Bitcoin owners are treating it as a currency, it becomes one. That’s what makes it beautiful and scary at the same time. Yet, Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto probably didn’t think that even the U.S. government would treat it as a currency and try to regulate it.
невольно вспоминается Рейган с хрестоматийной формулировкой:
Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
ну, то есть, очевидно же, что государства, разумеется, не допустят угрозы своей монополии на насилие. и в известном смысле, биткойны тоже можно трактовать, как нарушение копирайта. и наблюдаем мы теперь последовавшую репрессивную цензуру.
о патентной политике
6 August 2013 | Apple, Copyright, Jurisprudence | No Comments
Reading between the lines, it sounds like Samsung had refused to license its standard-essential patents (SEPs) unless Apple offered its non-essential iPhone patents — the company’s crown jewels — in return.
WikiLeaks and Assange were mentioned repeatedly during the trial
31 July 2013 | Jurisprudence, Politics | No Comments
Bradley Manning, the source of the massive WikiLeaks trove of secret disclosures, faces a possible maximum sentence of 136 years in military jail after he was convicted on Tuesday of most charges on which he stood trial.
<...>
The one ray of light in an otherwise bleak outcome for Manning was that he was found not guilty of the single most serious charge against him – that he knowingly “aided the enemy”, in practice al-Qaida, by disclosing information to the WikiLeaks website that in turn made it accessible to all users including enemy groups.
как сказал когда-то Филип Киндред Дик, “this has been a novel about some people who were punished entirely too much for what they did.”
к сожалению, это больше не роман.
can’t be easily ignored
24 July 2013 | Copyright, Jurisprudence | No Comments
и, пожалуйста, с другой стороны:
Finland is the first country in the world in which Parliament will vote on a “fairer” copyright law that has been crowdsourced by the public. The proposal, which obtained the required 50,000 Finnish votes just a day before the deadline, seeks to decriminalize file-sharing and legalize the copying of items that people already own.
мне кажется, всем нам в очередной раз стоит поучиться у Финляндии.
происходит натравливание одних детей на других
29 June 2013 | Culturology, Jurisprudence, Politics, Sex | 1 Comment
откровенные разговоры:
Совет Федерации в среду, 26 июня, одобрил закон об ответственности за пропаганду «нетрадиционных сексуальных отношений среди детей». Документ, который ждет подписи президента Владимира Путина, запрещает распространение информации, «направленной на формирование у несовершеннолетних нетрадиционных сексуальных установок». Об этом законе «Лента.ру» поговорила с подростками-гомосексуалами. Они рассказали о том, как осознали свою ориентацию; пожаловались на страх и бессилие, которые чувствуют из-за давления общества; поделились своими мечтами создать семью и вступить в брак, а также водрузить радужный флаг на законодательное собрание Санкт-Петербурга.
вот, например, прекрасная Елизавета, лучше многих из нас:
Я на днях призналась маме. Было это так.
— Мам, нам нужно поговорить.
Через полчаса:
— Мам, в общем, я завтра иду к журналистам. Ты же знаешь, что я занимаюсь ЛГБТ-активизмом, все дела.
Она такая:
— А почему ты?
— Я как бы ЛГБТ-подросток, привет!
И я сидела, очень улыбалась.Она притихла и говорит: «Лиза, ну как же…» Она просто переживает за меня, что я буду на виду и что привлеку лишнее внимание гомофобов. И что может быть какое-то насилие.
просто дочитайте хотя бы. все они замечательнейшие люди. и им так необходимы наше внимание и поддержка.
via.