Sunday, 24 March 2013
Verizon Win In FCC Net Neutrality Case Seen Roiling Industry VZ - Investors.com: "King wrote: "While pigeonholing is imperfect, we generally believe Republican-appointed judges would be better for the challengers and Democratic judges would be better for the FCC, and there are more Republicans on the court." Nice to see blind justice - or rather one-eyed. Whereas English judicial politics is almost all on the side of private property rights against government and citizens (though more hypocritical in rarely explicitly challenging democratic institutions)! 'via Blog this'
Is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act the 'worst law in technology'? | Dan Gillmor | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk: "In the end, people who want change in bad laws have to work for it. This is doubly hard given Congress' pay-to-play system of legal bribery, where dollars translate into votes. Maybe that will have to change first, as the "United Re:Public" coalition says, but we need to get started or get used to a system that puts everyone at risk. We could begin by calling our legislators and insist they get behind "Aaron's Law". 'via Blog this'
Saturday, 2 March 2013
EMI Records Ltd & Ors v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & Ors  EWHC 379 (Ch) (28 February 2013): "Turning to question 4, the Oberster Gerichtshof expresses concern at [4.1] that Courts in different Member States have reached different conclusions on the proportionality of blocking orders. It suggests at [4.2] that the question "should be judged in a uniform manner throughout Europe" in accordance with "guidelines for assessing the proportionality of specific blocking measures" laid down by the CJEU. I would respectfully suggest that, whether or not the CJEU accedes to the invitation to issue guidelines, the proportionality of a blocking order is bound to be a context-sensitive question. As I hope my judgments in 20C Fox v BT, Dramatico v Sky (No 2) and the present case demonstrate, this Court does not make such orders without thorough consideration of whether it is appropriate to make an order in the light of the specific facts of each case. Question 4 suggests that blocking orders "require not inconsiderable costs and can easily be circumvented without any special technical knowledge". I shall address these points in turn." 'via Blog this'