It seems like just yesterday that the Ashley Madison site became big news. The Ashley Madison site claimed that it was the world’s largest place on the Internet for married people to find adulterous partners. Indeed, the site boasted that it had more than 38 million users. And importantly, the Ashley Madison site claimed that people looking for affairs could do so anonymously. Unfortunately for Ashley Madison users, the site was hacked in July, 2015, and some of the personally identifiable information of some of the site’s users was leaked.
What are we going to do about climate change? Can government get the job done to protect us? Well, some children do not believe so, and they have taken the matter to federal court. Indeed, a federal magistrate has just ruled that their climate change lawsuit may proceed.
Thomas Coffin, U.S. Magistrate Judge for the federal district court in Eugene, Oregon, has ruled in the case Juliana v. United States, that a climate change lawsuit, brought by twenty-one youth from the ages of 8 to 19 years-old, may proceed. The lawsuit specifically asserts that the federal government of the United States is in violation of their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property by allowing and supporting ongoing production and combustion of fossil fuels.
Drones have become cheap and fun to operate for many people. Operators love to fly their drones up into the sky, maneuvering them around while taking photos and videos from aerial vantage points. But do these activities come with risk? Absolutely!
Indeed, last week it was reported that on just one day, April 1st, three drones almost collided with aircraft that were landing at the Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam, Netherlands. And one of these drones apparently came within a mere 300 meters of a plane as it was heading toward a runway. Continue reading Drones Pose a Real Threat to Commercial Flights
Consumer review website Pissed Consumer posted on its blog the results of an investigation that, it says, suggest that attorneys in California are filing suspicious defamation lawsuits in an attempt to help their clients remove unfavorable reviews from major search engines.
The Electronic Information Privacy Center (EPIC) has just filed a third-party intervention brief before the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) to help challenge the surveillance activities of intelligence organizations of the United States and the United Kingdom.
The case, according to EPIC’s brief, “impacts the human rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression of people around the world …,” and is of “broad international importance because it involves arrangements to transfer personal data between the United States and European counties.” A core purpose of EPIC’s intervention is to show the Court that “current trends in U.S. and European surveillance law … are undermining privacy, data protection, and security.” Continue reading EPIC Helps Challenge Surveillance by US and British Intelligence Agencies
The love affair with smartphones has led to further rapture with smartwatches. Right now, we can act like Dick Tracy, with the world on our wrists within these tiny smartwatch gadgets. But these smartwatches might not all be about work, communications, and fun and games. Why? Because there is the potential that smartwatches might evolve soon to have the capability of saving lives.
We know that smartwatches presently have health sensors that can monitor steps taken, flights climbed, and heartbeat rates for exercise and physical fitness purposes. And Apple, ever on the cutting edge, apparently believes that it can go further to use such monitoring capabilities to facilitate calls for help during health emergencies.
It already seems like the Presidential campaign has been going on forever. There have been countless debates, speeches and statements by and among the candidates. Some topics such as immigration and whether to build a wall have been rehashed over and over – beating dead horses further to death. But what is the one topic the candidates consistently ignore?
Sure, the candidates talk tough, and each seems to suggest that he or she will be the mightiest of the mighty when it comes to dealing with the likes of Russia, North Korea and ISIS. But hardly ever, and almost never, do they talk about cyber security.
Continue reading Cyber Security – The Topic Avoided by the Presidential Candidates
In a lawsuit combining the financial fallout of the decline of traditional telephone directories with the perils of mass company emails, the Eastern District of New York ruled late last week that a former executive’s defamation claim based on an email sent to thousands of employees regarding his termination can go forward.
Within moments of the untimely passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the political posturing began in terms of what should happen next with respect to the open seat on the high court. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell came out of the box immediately, stating that President Obama should defer selecting a Supreme Court candidate, so that the next elected President could handle that responsibility in accordance with the apparent wishes of the electorate as part of the upcoming Presidential election.
President Obama, on the other hand, followed up quickly by stating that it is his full intention to carry out his presidential responsibilities during his presidency by naming a Supreme Court candidate to be considered by the Senate. So, now what?
An appellate court in Paris has ruled recently that Facebook can be sued in France and a case thus can proceed against the social media giant in France with respect to Facebook’s decision to remove the account of a user in France who posted a well-known 19th century nude painting, according to Reuters.
This legal decision could be of concern to Facebook, as it has more than 30 million users in France, and because the French appellate court rejected the clause contained in Facebook’s terms and conditions, that requires worldwide lawsuits to be heard in Santa Clara, California, as “unfair.” Facebook still has the option to seek review by the highest appellate court in France.