Granberry's Parlor
tomierna
(Admin)
– December 07, 2007 09:46PM
Politics. Don Granberry on the old Spork Boards was quite fond of talking about them, and here we continue on in that fine tradition.
John Willoughby
– November 30, 2011 07:22AM
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
If a gene controlled a propensity for piety, where does that leave faith?
Tony Leggett
(Moderator)
– November 30, 2011 06:21PM
So, atheism is by intelligent design?
Personally, I think there may be a gullibility gene rather than a piety one...
John Willoughby
– December 07, 2011 12:42PM
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
The Supreme Court's about to make a decision that
may literally kill you. Even if you're not a US citizen, the precedent may influence your legal system.
Tony Leggett
(Moderator)
– December 07, 2011 01:36PM
Oh well, back to the village shamans and witch doctors we go...
John Willoughby
– December 07, 2011 03:33PM
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
"I'm sorry, but the theory that the common cold is caused by elfshot, leading to an excess of black bile, and treatment with leeches has been patented by Pfizer."
Cloudscout
– December 07, 2011 04:42PM
˙pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ʎɯ ɥʇıʍ ƃuoɹʍ ƃuıɥʇǝɯos sı ǝɹǝɥʇ ʞuıɥʇ ı ?ɹǝʇndɯoɔ ʎɯ ɥʇıʍ ǝɯ dlǝɥ ǝuoǝɯos uɐɔ
If the causes of cold and flu are intellectual property I guess that makes me The Pirate Bay of disease right now.
Tony Leggett
(Moderator)
– December 07, 2011 06:33PM
Coming soon, the Pfizer common cold™!
ddt
– December 08, 2011 06:28AM
Man, that may seem like an obvious (and obviously wrong) decision in the single case, but it's so sticky to make precedent that will be generalized when it becomes case law. This may be one area where legislation is better than judicial decision.
As always, go to the EFF. Go directly to the EFF:
https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/journalists/privilege
And remember CA has a shield law. Though ask
Josh Wolf how simple that is.
ddt
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/08/2011 06:29AM by ddt.
porruka
(Admin)
– December 08, 2011 06:49AM
I didn't want to say it in the first post lest the message get clouded, but defending one's self in a case involving unclear and evolving law seems like *such* a bad idea. I hope she decides to get competent help for the appeal.
ddt
– December 08, 2011 03:04PM
Heh, I hadn't even noticed that.
Well, a couple of things. First, this was a defamation case, and the judge made clear that the shield law doesn't shield even journalists from being sued for defaming someone. Second, that would seem to make this a very narrow precedent, if one at all.
But I'm not a lawyer. Haaaaave you met my friend... Mr. Cooper?
ddt
Jeff Cooper
– December 09, 2011 04:23AM
Fool for a client, indeed. Yes, porruka has it absolutely right: this is a hideous case in which to represent oneself, with murky law and potentially enormous (for an individual) exposure to damages. Penny wise and pound foolish.
In terms of precedent, I don't see much here. The decision is under a particular state's media shield law; it's a federal court decision (meaning state courts are free to ignore it); it's a federal district court decision (meaning it has no binding precedential effect on anyone but the particular parties in the particular case); it is, according to the article at least, a minority position among courts that have decided similar cases. As a former blogger, though, I do find the decision chilling.
ddt
– December 27, 2011 06:49AM
Well, some actual good news and moves from the US legislative bodies, voting to
end ethanol subsidies. Wonder what concessions the corn lobby is going to get to offset this, though. Or has it been weakened, in part due to Michael Pollan?
ddt
Tony Leggett
(Moderator)
– December 27, 2011 07:34PM
Hmmm... I'd like my ethanol subsidised but I wouldn't waste it on my car...
Tony Leggett
(Moderator)
– December 27, 2011 07:49PM
Mokers
(Moderator)
– January 01, 2012 09:52AM
Formerly Remy Martin
The price is still artificially high due to the ethanol mandate, but I guess you take what you ca get.
In other news, NDAA passed.
ddt
– January 01, 2012 06:39PM
Mokers, what do you think of the NDAA
signing statement? It reads in more detail than the many from the previous admin. And does seem to suggest this admin will ignore the more heinous provisions.
ddt
