Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Sunday Legal Briefs

View
20 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

20. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 9, 2018, 00:37 Brazor
 
Quboid wrote on Oct 8, 2018, 15:15:
Brazor wrote on Oct 8, 2018, 09:43:
None of the political parties are trustworthy. It's going to get screwed up at some point. Even if it's not on paper. If a Rep doesn't do it then a Dem will.

True. One is objectively considerably worse than the other but there are no saints in politics.

I presume NamecaF though I was asking which party NotOneOfUs was referring to, which would indeed be missing the point. I wasn't, I was asking who in this thread he was referring to.
I view them as equal. How bad they get depends on the subject.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 8, 2018, 15:15 Quboid
 
Brazor wrote on Oct 8, 2018, 09:43:
None of the political parties are trustworthy. It's going to get screwed up at some point. Even if it's not on paper. If a Rep doesn't do it then a Dem will.

True. One is objectively considerably worse than the other but there are no saints in politics.

I presume NamecaF though I was asking which party NotOneOfUs was referring to, which would indeed be missing the point. I wasn't, I was asking who in this thread he was referring to.
 
Avatar 10439
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 8, 2018, 09:43 Brazor
 
None of the political parties are trustworthy. It's going to get screwed up at some point. Even if it's not on paper. If a Rep doesn't do it then a Dem will.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 8, 2018, 01:35 Quboid
 
NamecaF wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 23:25:
Quboid wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 21:34:
NotOneOfUs wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 21:22:
Ahhh, politics. Criticize one side, get thrown in as a supporter of the other.

Who are you referring to?

Woosh!

What? One of us isn't understanding the other's comment.
 
Avatar 10439
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 23:25 NamecaF
 
Quboid wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 21:34:
NotOneOfUs wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 21:22:
Ahhh, politics. Criticize one side, get thrown in as a supporter of the other.

Who are you referring to?

Woosh!
 
"I hope those bastards get inoperable brain cancer that they have passed on to their children."
-RedEye9
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 21:34 Quboid
 
NotOneOfUs wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 21:22:
Ahhh, politics. Criticize one side, get thrown in as a supporter of the other.

Who are you referring to?
 
Avatar 10439
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 21:22 NotOneOfUs
 
Ahhh, politics. Criticize one side, get thrown in as a supporter of the other.  
Avatar 13188
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 21:01 Creston
 
FAKE NEWS!!! Too burdensome for the poor corps! SAD! We will repeal and replace with a Bill of Rights with just one right

1) The right to be raped at the whim of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Ajit Pai.

#MAGA #COVFEFE

 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 19:09 jdreyer
 
ISPs especially, but other internet companies as well will be opposed to this. Our political system runs on corporate money. As such, it's going nowhere, even once Dems take power. Corporations were able to water down a similar law in California, of all places.  
Avatar 22024
 
The only thing that flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 17:50 Dev
 
The bill of internet rights on its own sounds great. I don't care which party brings it forward. The question is how it will be implemented and tested. That's where the chance comes in for people or organizations to twist it.

Edit: Thinking about it, why not lets add this puppy in as a constitutional amendment? With hopefully clear and easy to understand language like this? Going forward, internet and privacy is literally that important to the future.
#5 and #8 for instance would have huge positive implications.

Here's the bill:

Set of Principles for an Internet Bill of Rights

The internet age and digital revolution have changed Americans’ way of life. As our lives and the U.S. economy are more tied to the internet, it is essential to provide Americans with basic protections online.

You should have the right:

(1) to have access to and knowledge of all collection and uses of personal data by companies;

(2) to opt-in consent to the collection of personal data by any party and to the sharing of personal data with a third party;

(3) where context appropriate and with a fair process, to obtain, correct or delete personal data controlled by any company and to have those requests honored by third parties;

(4) to have personal data secured and to be notified in a timely manner when a security breach or unauthorized access of personal data is discovered;

(5) to move all personal data from one network to the next;

(6) to access and use the internet without internet service providers blocking, throttling, engaging in paid prioritization or otherwise unfairly favoring content, applications, services or devices;

(7) to internet service without the collection of data that is unnecessary for providing the requested service absent opt-in consent;

(8) to have access to multiple viable, affordable internet platforms, services and providers with clear and transparent pricing;

(9) not to be unfairly discriminated against or exploited based on your personal data; and

(10) to have an entity that collects your personal data have reasonable business practices and accountability to protect your privacy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 17:32 RedEye9
 
NKD wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 16:30:
SirKnight wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 14:26:
ignored

If these laws are so good for corporations and they use them to profit, then why do corporations always oppose these laws and spend millions electing people who will vote no?
One word of the Democrats trying to do something for Americans and the conspiracy wacko pizzagaters come out of the woodwork.
 
Avatar 58135
 
https://www.lawfareblog.com/topic/russia-connection
The game’s afoot.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/fact-checker-most-repeated-disinformation/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 16:30 NKD
 
SirKnight wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 14:26:

These kinds of laws are not needed. Just look at how the internet exploded and how it changed peoples lives before net nutrality took place. All of the innovation and reshaping of how the world works all happened before those laws. They are not needed at all. They are nothing but a smokescreen to protect the rich and their monopolies for the sake of profit at any cost.

If these laws are so good for corporations and they use them to profit, then why do corporations always oppose these laws and spend millions electing people who will vote no?
 
Avatar 43041
 
I keep warning you. Doors and corners, kid. That's where they get you. Humans are too fucking stupid to listen.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 16:29 Quboid
 
SirKnight wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 14:26:
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 13:16:
RedEye9 wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 13:04:
Sorry dems, but just like healthcare, those things are good for the common man and will never get past the gop.


Sorry RedEye9, but somebody has to take care of those poor, suffering, multi-billion dollar international corporations!

lol


That fact that this comes from liberals is a huge red flag right off the bat. These days, nothing trustworthy comes from them. Like usual, they mask it as something good, right and fair to the people - but it's actually a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing kind of situation (like many other popular things the libs do).

These kinds of laws are not needed. Just look at how the internet exploded and how it changed peoples lives before net nutrality took place. All of the innovation and reshaping of how the world works all happened before those laws. They are not needed at all. They are nothing but a smokescreen to protect the rich and their monopolies for the sake of profit at any cost.

Cowardly idiots like you are why the US is turning into a banana republic.
 
Avatar 10439
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 16:01 Cutter
 
SirKnight wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 14:26:
lol


That fact that this comes from liberals is a huge red flag right off the bat. These days, nothing trustworthy comes from them. Like usual, they mask it as something good, right and fair to the people - but it's actually a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing kind of situation (like many other popular things the libs do).

You mean unlike repiglicans who believe putting a drunken rapist on the SCOTUS is a good thing. Or obstructing the President's pick for the SCOTUS simply because he was black and a democrat? Is there a name for this little fantasy world of yours? Sounds like Oppositeworld.

These kinds of laws are not needed. Just look at how the internet exploded and how it changed peoples lives before net nutrality took place. All of the innovation and reshaping of how the world works all happened before those laws. They are not needed at all. They are nothing but a smokescreen to protect the rich and their monopolies for the sake of profit at any cost.

Are you trolling are just ignorant and stupid? Both most likely. If there's one thing the Greedy Old Party has demonstrated repeatedly over the last several decades is that where these sorts of laws aren't in place they'll do their earnest best to destroy the environment and the economy all out of a complete psychopathic and myopic greed.

Please, explain in detail how these are a smokescreen to protect the rich? I guess words like neutrality, competition, and accountability mean something else on Oppositeworld, but here on earth they work to stop the rich from exploiting the rest of us. Slavery is freedom, war is peace, it's all doubleplus good, right, comrade?
 
Avatar 25394
 
"If the snow begins to fall and you can't find the fire, let the water wash away your sins." - Hope County Choir
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 15:43 RedEye9
 
DangerDog wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 14:50:
If you like your internet provider, you'll be able to keep your internet provider.
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."
Prezident Donald J. DumbFuck February 27, 2017
 
Avatar 58135
 
https://www.lawfareblog.com/topic/russia-connection
The game’s afoot.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/fact-checker-most-repeated-disinformation/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 15:28 Simon Says
 
SirKnight wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 14:26:
That fact that this comes from liberals is a huge red flag right off the bat.

Progressives /= neoliberals
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 14:50 DangerDog
 
If you like your internet provider, you'll be able to keep your internet provider.  
Avatar 6174
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 14:26 SirKnight
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 13:16:
RedEye9 wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 13:04:
Sorry dems, but just like healthcare, those things are good for the common man and will never get past the gop.


Sorry RedEye9, but somebody has to take care of those poor, suffering, multi-billion dollar international corporations!

lol


That fact that this comes from liberals is a huge red flag right off the bat. These days, nothing trustworthy comes from them. Like usual, they mask it as something good, right and fair to the people - but it's actually a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing kind of situation (like many other popular things the libs do).

These kinds of laws are not needed. Just look at how the internet exploded and how it changed peoples lives before net nutrality took place. All of the innovation and reshaping of how the world works all happened before those laws. They are not needed at all. They are nothing but a smokescreen to protect the rich and their monopolies for the sake of profit at any cost.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 13:16 MoreLuckThanSkill
 
RedEye9 wrote on Oct 7, 2018, 13:04:
Sorry dems, but just like healthcare, those things are good for the common man and will never get past the gop.


Sorry RedEye9, but somebody has to take care of those poor, suffering, multi-billion dollar international corporations!
 
Avatar 54863
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Oct 7, 2018, 13:04 RedEye9
 

Sorry dems, but just like healthcare, those things are good for the common man and will never get past the gop.

 
Avatar 58135
 
https://www.lawfareblog.com/topic/russia-connection
The game’s afoot.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/fact-checker-most-repeated-disinformation/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo