4 ms·
I desperately want to read a lawyer's answer to the questions raised by the author. My bet is that most of the gray areas exist simply because no cases involvin
by chroma 10y ago
I desperately want to read a lawyer's answer to the questions raised by the author. My bet is that most of the gray areas exist simply because no cases involving them have been litigated. If such cases ever go to trial, courts will probably rule in a rather common-sensical way, such as by creating a bright-line rule[1].
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright-line_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright-line_rule
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- sandworm101 10y agoLawyer answer (in general terms and without citations): All intellectual property rights are limitations on free speech. Courts rule against the publication of exact copies, or identical copies in different media, every day. IP law requires courts to prevent copying else it be meaningless. The flag is not an expression of a new idea, it is a facsimile of a protected number, protected data little different than a copyrighted movie or patented design. Its publication could only be legal as some sort of "fair use", but exact copies that directly impact the financial viability of protected material rarely fall within fair use. They would rule against the flag. If persons want to express themselves using this material, they need to add some form of comment so as to avail themselves of fair use protection. Add a stripe to the flag and get back to us.
- j2kun 10y agoWhat about the computational power question? At what point does it become illegal to publish an encrypted SSN/illegal number if you know it takes 1 day to break the encryption using current computational power? What about 10 days? a year? ten years? a hundred years? a thousand years? And what if computational power changes, and a thousand years turns into 1 day? Does the action become illegal retroactively?
- roel_v 10y agoThose are meaningless questions. It's trivial to think of 100's of hypos and go 'is this legal? Is that legal?' 1000's of first years do that every year because they think that's what being a lawyer is about, not to mention the amateurs. A judge however considers one specific case, with arguments as to what is the objective reality as presented by the parties. 'What ifs' don't matter. Law is not a closed rule-based system. 'Loopholes' (I loathe thay word) are not like buffer overflows. (have law degree, not practising lawyer)
- jwatte 10y agoThis is why companies with weak crypto can perhaps avoid liability for disclosure, because the crypto shows that they "intended to" protect the information, and it's not zero work to break, even if it's /now/ cheap.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- j2kun 10y agoWait, but aren't so many of the important US supreme court rulings so contested because they have to consider the ramifications, e.g., of whether a ruling will take power away from the state and give it to the federal government? How is that not a "what if" scenario? Isn't the Baston rule just a big loophole?
- evgen 10y agoAppellate courts get to make such considerations, but not the lower court. The lower court judge can say "I believe the facts say X and therefore law Y should apply" but the appellate courts can say that the interpretation or Y or even law Y itself is incorrect and tell the lower court judge to reconsider the outcome of using law Y in that manner given facts X.
- j2kun 10y agoWait, but aren't so many of the important US supreme court rulings so contested because they have to consider the ramifications, e.g., of whether a ruling will take power away from the state and give it to the federal government? How is that not a "what if" scenario? Isn't the Baston rule just a big loophole?
- jwatte 10y agoThere is a minimum bar for what is a protectable "work" under copyright. It also has to be creatively produced, not machine generated in singles. (Not taking about collections here) Rolling a die and publishing a number between 1 and 6 is not copyrightable. Would a single number of 20 bytes be a "work?" Even if it's almost certainly generated through strong random? That seems unlikely. What Sony could do would seem be civil action under "trade secrets" and/or the EULA. Dunno if that's the actual interpretation though?
- jwatte 10y agoThere is a minimum bar for what is a protectable "work" under copyright. It also has to be creatively produced, not machine generated in singles. (Not taking about collections here) Rolling a die and publishing a number between 1 and 6 is not copyrightable. Would a single number of 20 bytes be a "work?" Even if it's almost certainly generated through strong random? That seems unlikely. What Sony could do would seem be civil action under "trade secrets" and/or the EULA. Dunno if that's the actual interpretation though?