13 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
 |
| 13. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 11, 2013, 23:00 |
killer_roach |
|
|
InBlack wrote on Jan 11, 2013, 09:24:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:17:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
No, they don't. DDoS is not a protest. It's denying access to others, which is illegal. A protest at, say, Walmart is perfectly fine. A protest at Walmart which tries to prevent people from actually entering said Walmart is illegal and will be broken up by the police in a heartbeat.
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston
Sooo. Unions are dead in the US now? I mean they cant legally strike anymore? Lets say Walmart employees were to stage that hypothetical protest...Could the police come and beat the shit out of them for refusing to work?? Because wouldnt that be akin to refusing shoppers entry to the store right? If there is no one working at the store isnt that the same thing?
You can't beat them, but they could still, in certain circumstances, be arrested, depending on their employment contracts with Walmart (since Walmart is completely non-unionized, then yes - such demonstrations could be subject to legal action, although would more likely just be resolved privately by means of a mass firing). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 11, 2013, 10:03 |
RollinThundr |
|
|
InBlack wrote on Jan 11, 2013, 09:24:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:17:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
No, they don't. DDoS is not a protest. It's denying access to others, which is illegal. A protest at, say, Walmart is perfectly fine. A protest at Walmart which tries to prevent people from actually entering said Walmart is illegal and will be broken up by the police in a heartbeat.
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston
Sooo. Unions are dead in the US now? I mean they cant legally strike anymore? Lets say Walmart employees were to stage that hypothetical protest...Could the police come and beat the shit out of them for refusing to work?? Because wouldnt that be akin to refusing shoppers entry to the store right? If there is no one working at the store isnt that the same thing?
Reaching a bit on that one Black. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 11. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 11, 2013, 09:50 |
Beamer |
|
|
InBlack wrote on Jan 11, 2013, 09:24:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:17:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
No, they don't. DDoS is not a protest. It's denying access to others, which is illegal. A protest at, say, Walmart is perfectly fine. A protest at Walmart which tries to prevent people from actually entering said Walmart is illegal and will be broken up by the police in a heartbeat.
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston
Sooo. Unions are dead in the US now? I mean they cant legally strike anymore? Lets say Walmart employees were to stage that hypothetical protest...Could the police come and beat the shit out of them for refusing to work?? Because wouldnt that be akin to refusing shoppers entry to the store right? If there is no one working at the store isnt that the same thing?
Wow. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 10. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 11, 2013, 09:24 |
InBlack |
|
|
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:17:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
No, they don't. DDoS is not a protest. It's denying access to others, which is illegal. A protest at, say, Walmart is perfectly fine. A protest at Walmart which tries to prevent people from actually entering said Walmart is illegal and will be broken up by the police in a heartbeat.
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston
Sooo. Unions are dead in the US now? I mean they cant legally strike anymore? Lets say Walmart employees were to stage that hypothetical protest...Could the police come and beat the shit out of them for refusing to work?? Because wouldnt that be akin to refusing shoppers entry to the store right? If there is no one working at the store isnt that the same thing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I have a nifty blue line! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 9. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 11, 2013, 08:34 |
RollinThundr |
|
|
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 22:20:
Lots of protest is illegal, like the occupy protest camping out in various parks across the nation. They have ordinances that the parks close after dark, but the protesters are still camped there. Also, when protesters chain themselves to the gates to nuclear power facilities, that's also illegal.
And I agree it should stay that way. But maybe this will result in punishments that aren't as draconian? When you lock yourself in protest to a gate to prevent entry to Walmart or a nuke plant for a few hours you will be arrested, and maybe fined a few hundred dollars, but jail time for such a protest is extremely rare (breaking into a nuke plant is another story, however). When protesters do a DDOS attack on a company the result is almost the same as locking yourself to a brick and mortar: shoppers can't access the site for a few hours. But the punishments are much more severe: up to 5 years in jail and a fine of $250K.
Most of the targets of Anon have been legitimately controversial entities: Scientology, the Australian gov't after it tried to censor the internet, the Tea Party, Master Card & Paypal for refusing to honor donations to Wikileaks, gov'ts of Tunisia and Iran during the Arab Spring, etc. Illegal? Sure, but so is speeding, but you don't expect to get fined $10,000K and spend 3 months in jail for doing so. A DDOS is inconvenient, and it can cost companies money, and it should carry a penalty, but they make a good argument that it's a legitimate form of protest and the current penalties seem too steep.
lol Master Card & Paypal for refusing to honor donations to Wikileaks. ROFLMAO
You know what else Anonymous does? Steal innocent people's credit card info among other things. They're a bunch of criminals parading as some sort of "freedom fighters"
It also costs these companies money when some douchenozzle snot nosed hacker DDOS'es a site, then those costs get passed on to consumers of said companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 8. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 22:20 |
jdreyer |
|
|
Lots of protest is illegal, like the occupy protest camping out in various parks across the nation. They have ordinances that the parks close after dark, but the protesters are still camped there. Also, when protesters chain themselves to the gates to nuclear power facilities, that's also illegal.
And I agree it should stay that way. But maybe this will result in punishments that aren't as draconian? When you lock yourself in protest to a gate to prevent entry to Walmart or a nuke plant for a few hours you will be arrested, and maybe fined a few hundred dollars, but jail time for such a protest is extremely rare (breaking into a nuke plant is another story, however). When protesters do a DDOS attack on a company the result is almost the same as locking yourself to a brick and mortar: shoppers can't access the site for a few hours. But the punishments are much more severe: up to 5 years in jail and a fine of $250K.
Most of the targets of Anon have been legitimately controversial entities: Scientology, the Australian gov't after it tried to censor the internet, the Tea Party, Master Card & Paypal for refusing to honor donations to Wikileaks, gov'ts of Tunisia and Iran during the Arab Spring, etc. Illegal? Sure, but so is speeding, but you don't expect to get fined $10,000K and spend 3 months in jail for doing so. A DDOS is inconvenient, and it can cost companies money, and it should carry a penalty, but they make a good argument that it's a legitimate form of protest and the current penalties seem too steep. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Man is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness from which he emerges and the infinity in which he is engulfed. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 7. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 22:20 |
Bard |
|
|
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:17:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
No, they don't. DDoS is not a protest. It's denying access to others, which is illegal. A protest at, say, Walmart is perfectly fine. A protest at Walmart which tries to prevent people from actually entering said Walmart is illegal and will be broken up by the police in a heartbeat.
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston
I don't think it's illegal.
It IS legal in Germany (last i heard).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 6. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 18:43 |
LittleMe |
|
|
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 18:17:
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston
1. Eleven-Foot Pole
This is the thing you use to touch things that you wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 5. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 18:17 |
Creston |
|
|
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
No, they don't. DDoS is not a protest. It's denying access to others, which is illegal. A protest at, say, Walmart is perfectly fine. A protest at Walmart which tries to prevent people from actually entering said Walmart is illegal and will be broken up by the police in a heartbeat.
No judge is going to rule otherwise, and the EFF / ACLU know this full well, which is why they'll never touch this entire thing with a ten foot pole.
Creston |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 4. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 18:15 |
RollinThundr |
|
|
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
Yeah because breaking the law and hurting innocents in the process is a good argument.  librul logic derp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 3. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 17:32 |
killer_roach |
|
|
jdreyer wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 16:59:
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause.
It would be akin to barricading a private business or a highway, both of which are illegal activities. It's hard to classify an act as protected speech when it is designed to cause external costs as a direct result of the actions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 16:59 |
jdreyer |
|
|
Creston wrote on Jan 10, 2013, 13:23:
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston
Actually, they make a good argument. I wonder if EFF or ACLU will take up the cause. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Man is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness from which he emerges and the infinity in which he is engulfed. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 1. |
Re: Morning Legal Briefs |
Jan 10, 2013, 13:23 |
Creston |
|
|
Hahahaa. Yeah, good luck with that, anonymous.
Creston |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
13 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
