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

The equivalent practice in the consumer market is that of out-of-warranty appliances, where the customer can pay for repairs as needed (break/fix) or they can buy an extended warranty (managed services).

Though GDPR is primarily a legal challenge, a technological response was also necessary to meet the transparency and control requirements that arise as a result of GDPR implementation.

When evaluating whether or not a legal basis can apply, please be sure to go through them with your lawyer as determining the correct legal basis is very important and can be difficult.

It’s worth saying though that while the law may give you up to 30 days to honor these requests, most subscribers won’t. It is therefore prudent to honor opt-out requests promptly or risk being marked as spam and compromising the total legitimacy of your associated address.

These exemptions include emails in which the primary purpose is: Transactional: These are emails relating to already-agreed-upon transactions, or emails that deliver goods or services as a part of a transaction that the user already agreed to (e.g. License key or E-book delivery).Relationship: These are emails that update users (that already have a relationship with your service) about changes in product / service terms, features or account information; this also includes warranty, recall, safety, or security information about a product or service.Other (Non-commercial) emails.

Under the FTC’s CAN-SPAM Act, you do not need consent prior to adding users located in the US to your mailing list or sending them commercial messages, however, it is mandatory that you provide users with a clear means of opting out of further contact.

Generally, these laws apply to any service targeting residents of the region, which effectively means that they may apply to your business whether it’s located in the region or not.

The principles are broadly similar to the principles in the Data Protection Act 1998 (the 1998 Act).

For residents of the European Economic Area, the Right of Withdrawal applies to any purchase of game software which requires a download and which has not been used for 14 days after purchase.

Where a processing activity is necessary for the performance of a contract.

Generally, such legislations apply to any service targeting residents of the region, which effectively means that they may apply to your business whether it’s located in the region or not

Under the FTC’s CAN-SPAM Act, you do not need consent prior to adding users located in the US to your mailing list or sending them commercial messages, however, it is mandatory that you provide users with a clear means of opting out of further contact.

Under EU law (namely the GDPR) it is mandatory that you obtain the informed consent of the user before subscribing them to the service. Under EU regulations, acquiring consent can be considered a two-part process that includes informing the user and obtaining verifiable consent via an affirmative action.

These rules usually apply to any company selling to EU residents but may vary for international sellers on a case-by-case basis. It is worth noting, however, that in recent cases US courts have chosen to uphold the applicable EU law.

In the US, there is no one national law in regards to returns/refunds for purchases made online as in most cases, this is implemented on a state-by-state basis, however, under several state-laws, if no refund or return notice was made visible to consumers before purchase, consumers are automatically granted extended return/refund rights. In cases where the item purchased is defective, an implied warranty may apply in lieu of a written warranty

The banner is not necessarily required in this specific instance if the cookie policy is easily accessible and visible from every page of the site.

Because using cookies means both processing user data and installing files that could be used for tracking, it is a major point of concern when it comes to user data privacy rights.

In the US, there is no single comprehensive national body of data regulations; there are, however, various laws on a state level as well as industry guidelines and specific federal laws in place. Since online site/app activity is rarely limited to just one state, it’s always best to adhere to the strictest applicable regulations.

it buys, receives, sells, or shares the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers annually for the business’ commercial purposes. Since IP addresses fall under what is considered personal data — and “commercial purposes” simply means to advance commercial or economic interests — it is likely that any website with at least 50k unique visits per year from California falls within this scope.

Is an Impressum legally required? The Impressum is legally required on all commercial websites published in German-speaking countries (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland), whether the website is published via a .de top-level domain or not. The point can be made that if you simply have a personal blog without ads and make no money from it, then the Impressum is not required.

The only reason why your workaround isn't blocked as well is because it has additional steps that don't explicitly breach Mozilla's policies. But it certainly defeats the spirit of it.

Working people generally do not have to be in a recognized union in order to strike.

Legal Forms Library Virginia Legal Forms Welcome to the Virginia Legal Forms Library There are several ways to use this resource. Explore using the buttons below or search by Legal Form category or title in the search area above.

common law (also known as judicial precedent or judge-made law, or case law)

The service offered by iubenda helps the User by providing tools that facilitate compliance with certain legal requirements. In particular, iubenda offers the User the possibility to autonomously create their own legal documents from the provided Templates.

Having said all that, I think this is completely absurd that I have to write an entire article justifying the release of this data out of fear of prosecution or legal harassment. I had wanted to write an article about the data itself but I will have to do that later because I had to write this lame thing trying to convince the FBI not to raid me.

I could have released this data anonymously like everyone else does but why should I have to? I clearly have no criminal intent here. It is beyond all reason that any researcher, student, or journalist have to be afraid of law enforcement agencies that are supposed to be protecting us instead of trying to find ways to use the laws against us.

Ley 23 de 1982

Humans can no longer compete with AI in chess. They should not be without AI in litigation either.

Just as chess players marshall their 16 chess pieces in a battle of wits, attorneys must select from millions of cases in order to present the best legal arguments.

Attorney IO, a provider of an artificial intelligence-driven service that helps attorneys manage their legal documents

The Cookie Law does not require that records of consent be kept but instead indicates that you should be able to prove that consent occurred (even if that consent has been withdrawn). The simple way to do this would be to use a cookie management solution that employs a prior blocking mechanism as under such circumstances, cookie installing scripts will only be run after consent is attained. In this way, the very fact that scripts were run may be used as sufficient proof of consent.

You are also not required to manage consent for third-party cookies directly on your site/app as this responsibility falls to the individual third-parties. You are, however, required to at least facilitate the process by linking to the relevant policies of these third-parties.

conspicuously provide the option for obtaining informed consent, provide a means for the withdrawal of consent and guarantee, via prior blocking, that no tracking is performed before the user has provided consent.

the Cookie Law does not require that you provide users with the means to toggle cookie preferences directly on your site/app

the publisher would be required to check, from time to time, that what is declared by the third parties corresponds to the purposes they are actually aiming at via their cookies. This is a daunting task because a publisher often has no direct contacts with all the third parties installing cookies via his website, nor does he/she know the logic underlying the respective processing.

When you think about data law and privacy legislations, cookies easily come to mind as they’re directly related to both. This often leads to the common misconception that the Cookie Law (ePrivacy directive) has been repealed by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which in fact, it has not. Instead, you can instead think of the ePrivacy Directive and GDPR as working together and complementing each other, where, in the case of cookies, the ePrivacy generally takes precedence.

Another EU law worth mentioning here is the ePrivacy Directive (also known as the Cookie Law). This law still applies as it has not been repealed by the GDPR. In future, the ePrivacy Directive will be replaced by the ePrivacy Regulation and as such, will work alongside the GDPR; the upcoming regulation is expected to still uphold the same values as the directive.

If a website/app collects personal data, the Data Owner must inform users of this fact by way of a privacy policy. All that is required to trigger this obligation is the presence of a simple contact form, Google Analytics, a cookie or even a social widget; if you’re processing any kind of personal data, you definitely need one.

In short, a website needs a consent-management platform if any of the following activities are taking place:

Regardless of where an organization is based (in the EU or otherwise), its website must meet regulatory obligations when processing EU/EEA citizens’ data or the business will face financial penalties.

the introduction of the EU’s General Data-Protection Regulation (GDPR) has significantly impacted the way websites and business collect, store and use both types of cookies. For one, the GDPR includes cookies in its definition of personal data, which refers to any piece of data or information that can identify a visitor.

Are cookies governed by the GDPR? Cookie usage and it’s related consent acquisition are not governed by the GDPR, they are instead governed by the ePrivacy Directive (Cookie Law) which in future will be repealed by the up-coming ePrivacy Regulation.

If your website installs any non-technical cookies, e.g. via script like Google Analytics or via a Facebook share button

If your website can be visited by European users

valid cookie policies are required under Cookie Law

In accordance with the general principles of privacy law, which do not permit the processing of data prior to consent, the cookie law does not allow the installation of cookies before obtaining the user’s consent, except for exempt categories.