Grok Headline matches for Internet free speech laws, Chapter Whatever
Internet free speech laws, Chapter Whatever (SiliconValley.com)
Internet free speech laws, Chapter Whatever (SiliconValley.com)08/29/2004 07:09 AM SiliconValley.com - Maybe you were out of town last week, or maybe you
just weren't paying attention. That's OK. Here's a quick rundown of
what you missed, culled from reports by our staff and wire services.
Free-Speech Protection Sought for Internet Casino Ads
The latest research shows that
when prospects search for your company on the Internet, the top 10
listings are likely to include the following:
a) 3 listings
from consumer posts to blogs, message boards, and opinion sites,
b) 2 listings from experts,
c) 2 listings from your
own corporate site,
d) 1 listing from an online
publication, and
e) 2 listings from other sources.
This confirms the need for immediate business intelligence to
constantly monitor and evaluate the prospects ongoing searching
results for your company, brand, and product.
Marcus P. Zillman, M.S.,
A.M.H.A., Executive Director of the Virtual Private
Library™, Internet expert, author, speaker, consultant and
creator/founder of BotSpot.com
will be speaking on the latest happenings on the Internet with
emphasis on the growing areas of bots and intelligent agents, blogs
(weblogs), and news aggregators. Mr. Zillman will be discussing these
new resources about the Internet and how they will relate to helping
you search and find the information you require for both personal and
academic research. His presentations are designed both for the
“newbie” to Internet searching as well as the seasoned
“Internaut”. The Internet continues to change at a record pace,
and discovering the latest tools to make your Internet search both
easy and competent is the goal of this presentation. Will eMail soon
be replaced by RSS and news aggregators? Are blogs, currently the
fastest growing area of the Internet, a fad or will they change the
entire Internet landscape? These and other questions will be discussed
during this presentation by one of the Internet’s pioneers and bot
and artificial intelligence experts, Marcus P. Zillman. His latest
links and resources are available by clicking here.
WiFi Toys book -- free downloadable preview chapter
WiFi Toys book -- free downloadable preview chapter07/21/2004 11:29 PM Mike Outmesguine, tech guru and Southern Calilfornia Wireless Users
Group cofounder, has a new book out called "Wi-Fi Toys." It's a
compendium of hands-on projects involving "extreme wireless
technology." There's great stuff in here. It's just broad enough to
avoid intimidating non-geeks, but just geek enough so that the
experiments will actually work. Mike says:
This book attempts to bring readers into the fray by
teaching them, step-by-step, how to build fun, useful, and k001
projects using Wi-Fi. Thanks to Wiley Publishing, the entire first
chapter is available for download as a non-DRM'd PDF file here.
This chapter teaches the basics of Wi-Fi and shows you how to
terminate a cable and choose a pigtail for any wireless project.
Also, at the last SOCALWUG meeting, I gave a highly interactive (i.e.
Comments/Questions/Answers) presentation about the book. Slides here,
Video here,
Meeting notes here.
Link
Hand-free laws sweeping the nation
Hand-free laws sweeping the nation08/07/2004 03:42 AM Throughout the nation drivers operate in heavy, fast-moving traffic
with one hand on the steering wheel and the other trying to handle a
cellular phone call. Without the complete obliteration of cell phones
and portable communication devices, which we know is quite impossible
in this day and age; there is no way of solving this problem entirely.
Hands-Free laws are beginning to sweep the nation, such as the one
recently enacted in Washington D.C. barring cell phone users from
driving and talking at the same time, unless they use an earpiece and
microphone or some other form of hands-free technology. The Travel
Mount hopes to eliminate the new problem of where to put your device
once you are using hands-free technology. [PRWEB Aug 7, 2004]
Woman finds freedom laws mean no free man (Reuters)
Woman finds freedom laws mean no free man (Reuters)03/19/2005 02:20 AM Reuters - When the government introduced its new freedom of
information laws, Angela
Wright seized on them as a chance to find an unattached man in
uniform.
Britain Woman Finds Freedom Laws Mean No Free Man (Reuters)
So, about all this lawsuit stuff about revealing sources: it's not
about bloggers being journalists. You're a fool if you're looking at
it from that angle. They're suing to learn which person they trusted
broke that trust; which person signed a contract and broke the terms
of that contract.
In short, they're not terrorizing the bloggers, they're going after
their own employees and/or developers to show that the NDA has teeth. As such, don't expect negative
press to shut it down. They're going to keep going because the future
of the NDA is at stake, not the future of
blogging. I believe that Apple honestly couldn't give a rat's ass
about that. You can bring free speech and journalism and sources and
all that shit into this all you want, but in the end, Apple is
protecting its right to hold people to contracts they sign. Don't
expect this to go away any time soon, and especially not from public
opinion.
If you sign a piece of paper, you better damn well read what you
signed. That's all this comes down to. No need to lament the "death"
of free speech (which was intended to mean you can't get arrested for
speaking your mind, not revealing corporate secrets that you promised,
in a contract, that you wouldn't, or conspiring with that person to
reveal them); free speech isn't dead. You can lambast the government
all you want, or be the whistle-blower at a corporation all you need.
What's at stake here is Joe Blow saying he won't say a word and then
telling the world everything he heard.
So much for free speech in the US II
So much for free speech in the US II10/29/2003 12:09 AM I can't help but wonder what goes on in the heads of the airlines
staff throwing off people because of buttons. No matter the text...
Free Speech
Free Speech07/04/2004 08:54 AM Chicago Tribune Jul 4 2004 12:13PM GMT
Suppressing Free Speech
Suppressing Free Speech03/29/2005 06:02 PM Suppressing
Free Speech On "...Monday, March 28, the Secret Service called
three everyday people into their offices to discuss why we were kicked
out of a presidential event in Denver last week where Bush promoted
his plan to privatize Social Security. What they revealed to us and
our lawyer was fascinating.
There we were - three people who had personally picked up tickets
from Republican Congressman Bob
Beauprez's office and went to a presidential event. But as we
entered, we were told that we had been 'ID'ed' and were warned that
any disruption would get us arrested. After being seated in the
audience we were forcibly removed before the President arrived, even
though we had not been disruptive. We were shocked when told that this
presidential event was a "private event" and were commanded to
leave....The Secret Service revealed that we were 'ID'ed' when local
Republican staffers saw a bumper sticker on the car we drove which
said 'No More Blood For Oil.'" Related Associated Press story.
Speech isn't free if it's critical.
Speech isn't free if it's critical.05/20/2004 10:17 AM Poetry isn't free speech for these
students. Bill Nevins, a New Mexico high school teacher was fired
last year and classes in poetry and the poetry club at Rio Rancho High
School were permanently terminated because he refused to censor a
student's poetry that was "un-American."
Free Speech -- Virtually12/19/2002 05:39 PM Late last year, John Stanforth posted to his personal Web site a
reminiscence about software he had developed for internal...
"I seek to defend a particular
conception of democracy — a deliberative conception — and to
evaluate, in its terms, the outcome of a system with perfect power of
filtering."
Fair use = free speech07/11/2004 03:35 PM Lessig points out a documentary on Fox News, one that makes extensive
use of clips from Fox, without permission, to make its point, and what
this means:
As the Times article describes, Greenwald's style for distributing
documentaries may be the beginning of something new -- political
criticism, using interviews and clips, making a strong political
point, distributed through DVDs and political action groups. (See some
other examples here). On what theory does he, and others, have the
right to use such material without permission? On the free culture
theory we call the First Amendment: Copyright law must, the Court told
us in Eldred, embed "fair use"; "fair use" is informed by First
Amendment values; the values of the First Amendment most relevant here
are those expressed in New York Times v. Sullivan. As with
news-gathering, critical political filmmaking needs a buffer zone of
protection against the overreaching of the law. And if the potential
of this medium -- now liberated by digital technology -- is to be
realized, we need clear precedents that establish that critics have
the freedom to criticize without having to hire a lawyer first.
Nikken opposed to free speech01/27/2004 12:37 PM Jarle Dahl Bergersen recently received a Cease and Decist letter from
the Nikken bullies for alleged copyright infringement. Nikken
writes:...
High schoolers on free speech
High schoolers on free speech02/01/2005 08:38 PM David Pescovitz:
A new study reveals that far too many US high school students don't
seem to understand the meaning of free speech, aren't taught about the
First Amendment, or simply don't care. A few choice excerpts from the
AP story:
...When told of the exact text of the First Amendment,
more than one in three high school students said it goes "too far" in
the rights it guarantees. Only half of the students said newspapers
should be allowed to publish freely without government approval of
stories...
Three in four students said flag burning is illegal...
About half the students said the government can restrict any indecent
material on the Internet.
UPDATE: Fortunately at least some students
aren't being entirely short-changed by their schools, as this
email from BB reader Maxx Garrison points out:
"I am a junior (11th grade) at Cocalico High School. Our
school has a mandatory course named Principals of Democracy. In this
class, we are taught everything about the Constitution including an in
depth study of the Bill of Rights. The students must also write a
essay about a section of the bill of rights and also conduct a formal
debate against fellow classmates. On this essay we must use at least
34 sources and my paper turned out to be 16 pages on the second
amendment right to bear arms. So, just to clarify, some of us do know
a thing or two about the constitution. Also, as students, we do not
have the right to free speech, protection from unreasonable search or
seizure, or freedom of assembly."
UPDATE: As reader Steve Jones points out, the
common "principals" vs. "principles" spelling error in Maxx's email is
particularly ironic in this case.
Students do have the right to free speech, protection from
unreasonable search or seizure, and freedom of assembly. The rights
are more restricted than those of adults, but we have them. The extent
depends on your state and school district.
I'm in 12th grade at a high school in the horrible Los Angeles Unified
School District. My friends and I started an underground newspaper
because the principal insisted on prior review if we did an official
one. She can't stop us from publishing and distributing our paper as
long as it is not disruptive, libelous, or obscene. We can only be
searched randomly or if there is reasonable suspicion. We are free to
assemble on and off campus as long as it is not disruptive.
The problem is that students don't have the resources to protect their
rights. We get suspended if we don't wear the school uniform -- even
though mandatory uniforms are illegal -- and we can't do much about
it. The District bureaucrats don't care and legal action is out of
reach for most of us.
But we write about it. High school journalism is still alive -- and
the best way for us to learn what our 1st Amendment rights really
mean.
Is A Ban On Gambling Ads A Violation Of Free Speech?
Is A Ban On Gambling Ads A Violation Of Free Speech?08/17/2004 03:50 AM Earlier this year, we noted that the Justice Department was telling
websites they might be "aiding
and abetting" illegal activity by running ads for online gambling
operations, even if those operations were perfectly legal and run
outside of the US. Now, the operator of a casino news website, Casino
City, has filed a a lawsuit to have it declared that running such ads is protected free speech, and that
the government can't tell them to stop. Of course, there are some
precedents, such as bans on liquor and tobacco advertising, but it
doesn't appear that any specific law has been put in place banning
gambling ads. Still, all of this makes you wonder if the Department
of Justice doesn't have slightly more important things to be worrying
about than if a casino news site has ads from online casinos.
StopFCC.Com - The campaign for free speech.
StopFCC.Com - The campaign for free speech.05/03/2004 03:57 AM Stop FCC - Free Speech Campaign Petition First Amendment Rights ..
Here's how you can help do something about it .. Props to the 1st
amendment .. sign the petition .. StopFCC.org
free speech gagged--thanks to the Patriot Act05/30/2004 11:21 PM National Security Letters and John Doe --once only issued
against suspected terrorists and spies, NSLs now can be used, thanks
to the Patriot Act, against all and any of us. John Doe, the currently
gagged owner of a small ISP was targeted for the political speech of
his customers and is fighting, along with the ACLU and others.
More here (and more inside)
Diversity! Tolerance! Free speech!
Diversity! Tolerance! Free speech!09/17/2004 12:30 PM Score one for tolerance and diversity.
Three-year-old Sophia Parlock cries while seated on the shoulders of
her father, Phil Parlock, after having their Bush-Cheney sign torn up
by Kerry-Edwards supporters on Thursday, Sept. 16, 2004, at the
Tri-State Airport in Huntington, W.Va. Do the smirking people in this
photo really feel proud for terrorizing a three-year-old girl?
sad state of free speech in Canada
sad state of free speech in Canada12/03/2003 06:22 AM Bernstein: "You Can't Say That" .. their PC-speech-code laws .. David
E. Bernstein writes ..
NRO
nationalreview.com/comment/bernstein200312020910.asp track this
site | 7 links
Free Speech Behind the Razor Wire
Free Speech Behind the Razor Wire07/27/2004 06:16 AM A so-called free-speech zone has been set up to contain protesters at
this week's Democratic National Convention. But it's ringed with chain
link and barbed wire, and it looks a lot like a gulag. Mark Baard
reports from Boston.
Free Writing and Music - as in Speech
Free Writing and Music - as in Speech01/11/2004 02:42 AM I'd like you all to take a moment to browse the Common Content
catalog. It is a categorized index of work which has one of the
several Creative Commons licenses. Free licenses aren't just for
software anymore. The top-level categories in the index are images,
movies, audio, text and web sites. I'm taking the trouble to
recommend Common Content just now because I don't think either the
catalog or the Creative Commons licenses are as well known as they
deserve to be.
The October 10, 2003 issue of MIT's student newspaper, the Tech, carried some
articles about a group of unfortunate students who decided to hold
a ghetto/rap-themed party in their dorm. The invitation email
started "Callin all you playas, pimps, hos, gangstas, and
bitches...". Various campus functionaries indicated their
displeasure at what they viewed as an assault on the sacred principle
of diversity. The students immediately issued a craven apology to
the community but nonetheless Chuck Vest, the president of MIT,
responded by noting that his administration would "deal swiftly and
fairly with those responsible for the event."
Today's issue of the Tech carries some more invective from the
administration directed as these allegedly racist students.
There was no actual evidence of racism by the students holding the
party and in fact the only people involved in this dispute who are
known to judge others by the color of their skin are the MIT
administrators themselves.
A very similar situation occurred in the 1990s at University of
California Riverside. A fraternity held a "South of the Border"
party advertised with a poster featuring a sleeping Mexican,
complete with sombrero and tequila bottle.The frat boys were harshly
disciplined until a lawyer sued the school, pointing out that
(a) half of the fraternity brothers were Mexican-American, and
(b) the First Amendment prohibited a state institution
from editing the fraternity's party posters. A federal
judge sided with the students.
So many university administrations have tried to muzzle their
students that an entire non-profit organization, http://www.thefire.org, exists to
fight back.
Perhaps, however, the university bureaucrats are doing the right
thing after all. The U.S. Constitution guarantees that the
government won't interfere with your right to free
speech. Private employers, however, are free to say "You will
continue to receive a paycheck so long as you stay in your cubicle
with your head down and your mouth shut." Only a tiny fraction
of Americans have a practical right to free speech and these are
primarily the very rich and the very poor. A primary mission of
a college is to prepare young people for the real world. Does it
really make sense to delude kids into thinking that they can say
whatever they want and still have a paycheck and health
insurance? Perhaps it would be better for a university president
to address the incoming freshmen thusly... "This is my plantation and
if you want to stay here for four years you'll learn to say 'Yes,
Massah'".
Tim Rutten (LA Times; reg req): Free speech under fire all around the nation. At some
point over the last decade the words "I think you're wrong about that"
were replaced by the dismissive "you can't say that." The opponents of
free speech always have a higher value that must be maintained by
silencing somebody else patriotism for the Las Vegas louts; a
woman's right to sexual privacy in Colorado; a distaste for
politicized airwaves in Washington. But this isn't a discussion that
admits a distinction between regrettable means and a desirable end.
Speech is free for everyone or it's free for no one. There is a long
and painful history to teach us that when liberty of expression is
suppressed, the public square does not become a silent place but one
where the only sound is the voice of authority.
