HH
Posts:
447
Registered:
12/6/04
|
|
Re: Can a law firm sue Google over "New Google Newsgroups"
Posted:
Aug 1, 2012 10:53 PM
|
|
On 8/1/12 8:45 PM, Bill Graham wrote:
> Gordon Burditt wrote:
>>>> I want him to pay for repainting my house to make the mural not
>>>> visible. He and his lawyer claim he has the right to prohibit me
>>>> or anyone else from repainting my house. Does the "artist" have
>>>> rights here to preserve his work?
>>>>
>>>> Note that I cannot say "take your work and go away". The work is
>>>> painted on the house and can't be removed without destroying the
>>>> house.
>>>
>>> There must be a distinction between the "Artistic Expression" and
>>> the canvas its painted on... This reminds me of Nixon's tapes. The
>>> information on them was his private "papers" and should have been
>>> protected by the forth amendment, but SCOTUS said that since he
>>> purchased the tape and recording equipment with government money,
>>> everything belonged to them, and so they tromped on his forth
>>> amendment rights to be secure in his personal papers and effects.
>>
>> If one of the "little guys" tried the same approach, I'd suspect
>> that they'd be told that since the conversations recorded were done
>> on the job that the information on the tapes was a "work for hire"
>> or some such thing and belonged to the government.
>>
>>> Since the artist painted on your house, you can now trash his
>>> work with impumity according to SCOTUS.....
>
> Yes. I used to work for a government financed physics laboratory. We had
> an office supplies locker. Occasionally, I would take a steno pad out of
> that locker. Suppose I kept a personal diary on these steno pads. And
> suppose the police confiscated one of my pads, and used the information
> on it against me in a court of law. My attorney might argue that this
> was a violation of my forth amendment rights to be secure in my papers
> and personal effects, but the proswecution could argue that, since the
> steno pad was government property, I had no right to the information on
> that pad, and it could be used against me in a court of law. If this is
> the case, then everyone out there take notice: If you keep a personal
> record of your activities, be sure to keep it on paper that you purchase
> with your own money, and keep the receipt you got when yuou bought it,
> preferably pasted on the book itself, since our judges are apparently
> too stupid to be able to tell the difference between data and the medium
> it is recorded on, and/or think that the framers of the constitution
> couldn't tell that difference.
Gawd, what an ignoramus you are. When the prosecution gets a valid
search warrant for your papers, it doesn't matter who bought the pad.
|
|
