Die Clubs in Berlin profitieren nicht von den neuen Lockerungen, die der Berliner Senat beschlossen hat.

Für die Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer besteht keine Testpflicht.

Luisa: Yes. There came a point. We were in the [Pause] process of getting our permanent residency card in order to be able to go to school, and the lawyer let my mother know that me and my sister—my other sister—were not going to make it because once you hit eighteen, you're no longer under the case that you originally filed, so the best option for us would be adoption. We would be adopted by an American citizen in order to get our American status fixed, and that was something my mom and I contemplated for a long, long time, and she was going to go through with it, but my dad put a huge stop to that and was like, "That's not happening. You're stupid. That's not a thing. These are my kids. You're not letting that happen."Luisa: It was going to be a family member, not a close family member, but these were the lengths that you go through to try to get through this. I didn't have a normal childhood. I never got to learn to drive. I didn't go to drivers ed. I didn't get to travel with my best friend to DisneyLand because my mom was so scared of—

We can expect the role of free markets in areas of public policy such as pensions, health, education and transport to be questioned.

 Regulation 2016/679

Directive 2002/58

 Directive 2002/21

 Directive 97/66

 Directive 95/46

Code de la sécurité intérieure (Internal Security Code)The CPCELoi n° 2004 575 du 21 juin 2004 pour la confiance dans l’économie numérique (Law No 2004575 of 21 June 2004 to promote trust in the digital economy)Decree No 2011 219

Directive 95/46Directive 97/66Directive 2000/31Directive 2002/21Directive 2002/58Regulation 2016/679

 Paragraph 17 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (kriminaalmenetluse seadustik, RT I 2003, 27, 166 ; RT I, 31.05.2018, 22)

Paragraph 1111 of the elektroonilise side seadus (Law on electronic communications, RT I 2004, 87, 593; RT I, 22.05.2018, 3)

Recitals 2 and 11 of Directive 2002/58

 Regulation 2(1) of the European Communities (Freedom to Provide Services) (Lawyers) Regulations, 1979

Article 1 of Directive 77/249

Code is law, and that code is misogyny.

At the very least I would have expected the Court to have held back from making sweeping conclusions about his intentions and desires without first hearing from him under examination and on oath on the witness stand during his trial.

In saying this it is essential to stress that the protection of witnesses and complainants in sexual assault cases is a paramount priority, and that the need to take steps to provide them with protection by securing their anonymity is not at issue.  However, to use this obligation to prevent balanced reporting of a case, especially one like Salmond’s, which had important public and political implications, seems to me to go too far and looks oppressive.  It appears to extinguish the right to a fair and open trial, which can only be secured by fair and balanced reporting. 

‘This morphological law can always be expressed in the same general form: X—>r (A,B, ... 3, which means: Within a context of type X, the parts A, B, . .. are related by the relationship r.

τον λεγόμενο τρίλογο ή τριάλογο (trilogue ή trialogue), τις τριμερείς διαπραγματεύσεις μεταξύ της Κομισιόν, του Συμβουλίου και του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, στις οποίες αποφασίζεται το 75% της νομοθετικής παραγωγής της Ε.Ε. σε συνθήκες πλήρους αδιαφάνειας.

Η οργάνωση προσέφυγε στο ΔΕΕ το οποίο αποφάσισε το 2013 ότι τα έγγραφα έπρεπε να δημοσιευθούν. To ΔΕΕ υποστήριξε ότι το Συμβούλιο δεν είχε δικαίωμα να απαλείφει ή να καλύπτει τα ονόματα των κρατών-μελών στα έγγραφα που αναφέρονταν στις διαπραγματεύσεις μεταξύ των κρατών-μελών, καθώς οι πολίτες είχαν το δικαίωμα να γνωρίζουν τι λέει η κυβέρνησή τους όταν τους εκπροσωπεί.

«Το Συμβούλιο βλέπει τον εαυτό του σαν μια ομάδα διπλωματών που λειτουργεί σε μια διπλωματική σφαίρα με όρους εμπιστευτικότητας», σχολιάζει η κ. Ο’ Ράιλι. «Και αυτό, παρά το γεγονός ότι από τεχνική και νομική πλευρά είναι ένα νομοθετικό όργανο».

not to abuse emergency powers to pass legislation unrelated to the COVID-19 health emergency objectives in order to surpass parliamentary oversight;

"an officer or employee of the United States Federal Government as part of that person’s official duties."

As of Jan 1, 2021 many countries now require KS creators to show Shipping AND VAT/Fees/Taxes on Kickstarter Rewards - not just 1 price for "shipping". So we will do that in our Pledge Manager, after the campaign. Yea, we know...this sucks and is against everything Kickstarter used to be about (the world now views KS as a store, not as a creative platform sending rewards to backers for helping bring the vision to life)

One person writing a tweet would still qualify for free-speech protections—but a million bot accounts pretending to be real people and distorting debate in the public square would not.

και κατέγραφε τους αστυνομικούς με το κινητό του

με τη δημιουργία της ΕΑΔ καταργήθηκαν όλα τα ελεγκτικά σώματα της διοίκησης, όπως ο γενικός επιθεωρητής Δημόσιας Διοίκησης, το Σώμα Επιθεωρητών – Ελεγκτών Δημόσιας Διοίκησης και το Σώμα Επιθεωρητών Υπηρεσιών Υγείας και Πρόνοιας

ο επόμενος «σταθμός» του σχεδίου είναι η ενοποίηση της ΕΑΑΔΗΣΥ με την Αρχή Εξέτασης Προδικαστικών Προσφυγών, σκοπός της οποίας είναι η επίλυση των διαφορών που ανακύπτουν κατά το στάδιο που προηγείται της σύναψης των συμβάσεων δημοσίων έργων, προμηθειών και υπηρεσιών, ύστερα από την άσκηση προδικαστικής προσφυγής.

infringing on Marvel's copyrights

The urgent argument for turning any company into a software company is the growing availability of data, both inside and outside the enterprise. Specifically, the implications of so-called “big data”—the aggregation and analysis of massive data sets, especially mobile

το Δικαστήριο της Ε.Ε. αναφέρει ότι οι τροποποιήσεις στον τρόπο λειτουργίας του KRS «μπορούν να παραβιάσουν το δίκαιο της Ε.Ε.» και ενώ δηλώνει αναρμόδιο για να εκδώσει το ίδιο απόφαση για το ζήτημα, αλλά πρέπει να το κάνει πολωνικό δικαστήριο

5、Uber 司机属于雇员 英国最高法院最近裁决，Uber 司机应该被视为雇员，而不是承包商。这意味着，这些司机可以享受最低工资、带薪休假、社保等待遇，这会使 Uber 的经营成本大增。法院理由如下： Uber 制定价格，决定了司机可以赚多少钱。 Uber 设定了合同条款，司机没有协商权。 Uber 限制了工作的灵活性，如果司机拒单，Uber 将对其进行处罚。 Uber 通过星级评定来监控司机的服务，如果不满意司机的表现，则可以终止司机的行车资格。 国内的网约车司机、代驾员、送餐员等等，都满足上面的标准，似乎也可以主张被当作企业员工。

Those who are responsible for upholding this system profess to want to fight crime, but they do so by destroying communities.

oicing can alsoentail publicly calling ‘bullshit on bullshit’ orseeking help from an outside agency, such as aunion or government office. Employees are morelikely to choose to voice when they perceive thatthe organization offers sufficient psychologicalsafety; that is, when employees sense that theywill not be embarrassed or punished if they speakup (Frazier, Fainshmidt, Klinger, Pezeshkan, &Vracheva, 2017). The propensity to voice also de-pends on the extent to which employees haveorganizational commitment; that is, whether theycare for and believe in the organization enough towant to counter the harm of bullshit, combinedwith their perceived ability and capacity to make adifference. Such conditions are necessary foreffectively confronting bullshit. A principle knownas Brandolini’s Law states that the amount of en-ergy needed to refute bullshit is an order ofmagnitude larger than is needed to produce it(“Brandolini’s Law,” 2014).

Because the Berne Convention in most countries by default grants copyright holders monopolistic control over their creations, copyright content must be explicitly declared free, usually by the referencing or inclusion of licensing statements from within the work.

Benford’s Law is a theory which states that small digits (1, 2, 3) appear at the beginning of numbers much more frequently than large digits (7, 8, 9). In theory Benford’s Law can be used to detect anomalies in accounting practices or election results, though in practice it can easily be misapplied. If you suspect a dataset has been created or modified to deceive, Benford’s Law is an excellent first test, but you should always verify your results with an expert before concluding your data has been manipulated.

Instead of trying to educate everyone on the complexities of copyright law, we’d rather make our intentions clear with this simple statement:

Creating more legally binding licenses and contracts just perpetuates the problem of law – a.k.a. state force – intruding where it doesn’t belong.

Cunningham’s Law

what is allowed

However, we are unable to support one route to compliance offered by Plan S,

The bedrock upon which the American political system is built is the rule of law.

Secular Kemalist rhetoric relieved some of the international concerns about the future of Armenians who had survived the 1915 Armenian genocide, and support for Kurdish self determination similarly declined.

In adjudicating the status ofAfricans and their descendants, such as Fernando, the English colonistscould follow the lead of the Iberians and conclude that slavery was apermanent condition, and apply the principle ofpartus sequitur ventrem,according to which slave status passed from mother to child.

oned and evenreenslaved if he remained in the state in which he was born. In Louisianaor Virginia, when a person sought to prove in court that he was not aperson of color, he would bring evidence of civic acts, because citizenshipand whiteness were so linked in political thought and legal doctrine thatit was believed a citizen must be a white man, and only a white man couldbe a citizen.

Ariela had written a book about the history of theeveryday law of slavery in the U.S. Deep South that emphasized localculture and law,

Visualize Brooks's Law: When More People Makes a Late Software Project Later

The first is that the presence of surveillance means society cannot experiment with new things without fear of reprisal, and that means those experiments—if found to be inoffensive or even essential to society—cannot slowly become commonplace, moral, and then legal. If surveillance nips that process in the bud, change never happens. All social progress—from ending slavery to fighting for women’s rights—began as ideas that were, quite literally, dangerous to assert. Yet without the ability to safely develop, discuss, and eventually act on those assertions, our society would not have been able to further its democratic values in the way that it has. Consider the decades-long fight for gay rights around the world. Within our lifetimes we have made enormous strides to combat homophobia and increase acceptance of queer folks’ right to marry. Queer relationships slowly progressed from being viewed as immoral and illegal, to being viewed as somewhat moral and tolerated, to finally being accepted as moral and legal. In the end it was the public nature of those activities that eventually slayed the bigoted beast, but the ability to act in private was essential in the beginning for the early experimentation, community building, and organizing. Marijuana legalization is going through the same process: it’s currently sitting between somewhat moral, and—depending on the state or country in question—tolerated and legal. But, again, for this to have happened, someone decades ago had to try pot and realize that it wasn’t really harmful, either to themselves or to those around them. Then it had to become a counterculture, and finally a social and political movement. If pervasive surveillance meant that those early pot smokers would have been arrested for doing something illegal, the movement would have been squashed before inception. Of course the story is more complicated than that, but the ability for members of society to privately smoke weed was essential for putting it on the path to legalization. We don’t yet know which subversive ideas and illegal acts of today will become political causes and positive social change tomorrow, but they’re around. And they require privacy to germinate. Take away that privacy, and we’ll have a much harder time breaking down our inherited moral assumptions.

Some legislation allows for treatment to be given in certain circumstances without the patient's volition. For example, irresponsible people with communicable diseases may be treated against their objection, as in the case of patients with tuberculosis who are noncompliant with treatment. Also, all provinces allow for the involuntary admission of patients to psychiatric facilities, provided they present an immediate risk to themselves or others, or are unable to take care of themselves

Voluntariness is a legal requirement of valid consent. In Beausoleil v. Sisters of Charity[8] a young woman about to undergo spinal surgery repeatedly requested a general anesthetic and refused a spinal anesthetic. After the patient had been sedated, the anesthetist convinced her to have a spinal anesthetic. The patient was subsequently paralyzed as a result of the procedure and successfully sued the anesthetist. In testimony, a witness said that the patient "refused [the spinal anesthetic], but they continued to offer it to her; finally she became tired and said: 'You do as you wish' or something like that."[9] The judge stated that the patient's agreement to the spinal anesthetic was involuntary, because it rested on "words which denote defeat, exhaustion, and abandonment of the will power."

because we are all equal and independent, no-one ought toharm anyone else in his life, health, liberty, or possessions

For the law ofnature, like every law concerning men in this world, would befutile if no-one had power to enforce it and thereby preservethe innocent and restrain offenders

Horwitz argued a fairly radical point, which I think never received wide enough recognition due to the subject matter and his extremely difficult (dense and dry) style.  He said, “I seek to show that one of the crucial choices made during the antebellum period was to promote economic growth primarily through the legal, not the tax, system, a choice which had major consequences for the distribution of wealth and power in American society”

“Change brought about through technical legal doctrine,” Horwitz said, “can more easily disguise underlying political choices [than] Subsidy through the tax system” (101).

Think about fundamental tools for thought such as writing and the number system. Obviously, it’s good that those spread throughout society, unencumbered by IP concerns! More broadly, many tools of thought become more valuable for society as they become more ubiquitous.

The origin of these commandments follows the law of negative entities impressing information upon positively oriented mind/body/spirit complexes.

Announcing the New Law and Political Economy Project

of course there’s 7 guys per girl, but it’s not like I wanted any friends who weren’t guys, right?

Yet another disadvantage to poorly chosen metrics is that they can lean into something called Goodhart’s Law, a subset of the moral hazard of gameplay specific to measurement. A good summation of the law comes from British anthropologist Marilyn Strathern, who describes it like this: “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure”

When a former psychiatric patient killed two people on the streets of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, and then sued the psychiatrist who had treated him for failing to prevent the murders, the mental health world dismissed the suit as frivolous. But when a jury agreed with the killer and awarded him $500,000 in damages, bewilderment was the order of the day (1). Can it be true, psychiatrists asked, that murder pays—as long as you can blame your psychiatrist for your deed?

What if, as in the case of anonymous résumés, the DA had no clue about the race of the accused? For that matter, what if you also removed identifying information on the victim and even the location of the crime? In 2019, the San Francisco DA’s office began anonymous charging, removing potentially biasing information from crime reports DAs use to decide whether or not to bring charges (http://bkaprt.com/dcb/02-30/). It’s too soon to tell the outcome of that experiment but, again, the removal of a decisive element may enhance an experience rather than detract from it.

Defamation law walks a fine line between the right to freedom of speech and the right of a person to avoid defamation. On one hand, a reasonable person should have free speech to talk about their experiences in a truthful manner without fear of a lawsuit if they say something mean, but true, about someone else. On the other hand, people have a right to not have false statements made that will damage their reputation.

Perhaps most significantly, these latest guidelines clearly state that Cookie Walls are prohibited and that the EDPB does not consider consent via scrolling or continued browsing to be valid. 

These criminal acts are frequently planned and supported by agitators who have traveled across State lines to promote their own violent agenda.  These radicals shamelessly attack the legitimacy of our institutions and the very rule of law itself.

The lesson here is that it's never too late for tax laws to change. It's rare to have tax breaks restored this late

The legal system, Horwitz argued, was used to not only change the rules of the game to benefit an increasingly elite class, but also to hide the fact that these changes were being made.  This is a great argument. What it needs is some people in the story to show how it happened and how people reacted, assuming anyone on the short end of the transaction knew it was happening. This raises an interesting question: how do we tell stories about things we now see were happening, but that people of the time were unaware of, either because the evidence was hidden, or they just didn’t see things the way we do? Especially when people knew something was wrong, but couldn’t quite put their finger on it -- or blamed it on the wrong thing? The story isn’t just about unintended consequences, it’s about misunderstood consequences.

He used to say: At five years of age the study of Scripture; At ten the study of Mishnah; At thirteen subject to the commandments; At fifteen the study of Talmud; At eighteen the bridal canopy; At twenty for pursuit [of livelihood]; At thirty the peak of strength; At forty wisdom; At fifty able to give counsel; At sixty old age; At seventy fullness of years; At eighty the age of “strength”; At ninety a bent body; At one hundred, as good as dead and gone completely out of the world.

Security agency frustration at the lack of lawful interception for encrypted messaging is understandable, but the problem with global over-the-top platforms is that once those weaknesses are inbuilt, they become potentially available to bad actors as well as good.

EFF describes this as “a major threat,” warning that “the privacy and security of all users will suffer if U.S. law enforcement achieves its dream of breaking encryption.”

Once the platforms introduce backdoors, those arguing against such a move say, bad guys will inevitably steal the keys. Lawmakers have been clever. No mention of backdoors at all in the proposed legislation or the need to break encryption. If you transmit illegal or dangerous content, they argue, you will be held responsible. You decide how to do that. Clearly there are no options to some form of backdoor.

While this debate has been raging for a year, the current “EARN-IT’ bill working its way through the U.S. legislative process is the biggest test yet for the survival of end-to-end encryption in its current form. In short, this would enforce best practices on the industry to “prevent, reduce and respond to” illicit material. There is no way they can do that without breaking their own encryption. QED.

Governments led by the U.S., U.K. and Australia are battling the industry to open up “warrant-proof” encryption to law enforcement agencies. The industry argues this will weaken security for all users around the world. The debate has polarized opinion and is intensifying.

Such is the security of this architecture, that it has prompted law enforcement agencies around the world to complain that they now cannot access a user’s messages, even with a warrant. There is no backdoor—the only option is to compromise one of the endpoints and access messages in their decrypted state.

As EFF has warned, “undermining free speech and privacy is not the way to protect children.”

“not only jeopardizes privacy and threatens the right to free expression, but also fails to effectively protect children from online exploitation.”

the encryption debate continues to rage in the U.S., with proposed new legislation representing the clearest threat yet to the security underpinning WhatsApp and iMessage, as well as Signal, Telegram and Wickr

Legal Ensure compliance