Jujitsui Generis

Another Court Decision

Another disappointing decision.  It's too early to tell what effect the Supreme Court's decision on file-swapping software will have on innovation, but it will not likely be a good one.  By broadly interpreting a particular function or use of a software as intent, the court's decision effectively renders even the legal use of file-swapping software suspect.  In effect, the decision holds the software manufacturers responsible for the intent and use of the consumer.  More disturbing, however, is that by returning the case to the lower court to review, the Supremes are sending a message that threatens to return all exchanges of information to a time of tighter control.

Return of the Dead

Scientists are reporting that they have successfully resurrected dogs from the dead.  By draining their blood and filling their veins with a ice-cold saline solution, scientists have been able to leave the dogs clinically dead for as long as three hours before resuscitating the animals by replacing the blood and applying a small electric shock.

Though a far cry from suspended animation, scientists are hoping that the process will one day be used on the battlefield to save wounded soldiers or as a method to treat stabbing and shooting victims.

A Few Site Changes

You may notice just a few site changes here at J-G.  We've cleaned up the links, added a couple new ones, and we've also altered the layout just slightly.  We hope these changes give the site a cleaner feel.  We have also made the decision to allow ads in the right hand column as a potential way to recoup the cost of running the site.  The cost is not much, but it adds up over the months and we hope to offset that just a little.  Please bear in mind that we have no control over what is advertised and we do not personally endorse any product advertised on this site.

Finally, we have added just a couple new products over at the J-G merchandise store to your left.  Feel free to browse and purchase your favorite piece of J-G gear.

The Flag Amendment

On the heels of Kelo vs City of New London, comes the troubling news that Congress is offering up an ill-advised constitutional amendment to protect the flag (banning desecration of the flag has already been struck down as unconstitutional). Proponents are asking for just a little leeway in their attempts to protect the symbol of our freedoms, arguing that minimal protection to the symbol does little to endanger free speech. That’s an easy sell and a fairly transparent way to curry populist favor.  But the end result is, in fact, an assault on free speech and a limitation on dissent.

The amendment would pave the way for legislators to pass a bill prohibiting the desecration of the flag, though the act of desecration, of course, hinges on context   Lawmakers would not want to disallow boy scouts from burning the flag in a ritual of disposal, nor would actors in a movie be prohibited from burning the flag as part of a scene. Meaning, that enforcement of the law would depend not so much on the physical act itself, but on intent.

And what sort of intent would be subject to criminal prosecution?  Presumably the kind that is aimed at desecrating the flag as an act of protest or petition, one that expresses displeasure with the United States.  In other words, the primary purpose of the law would be to prevent certain acts of protest. It’s a truism that the right to free speech is not unlimited, that there may be an over-riding public or national security interest that compels the state to prohibit or curtail certain speech acts. But flag-burning does not even come close to representing a threat to the public good or to national security. A far more sinister threat is a Congress that hides behind a populist patriotism in order to limit speech and restrict the open expression of dissent.

Your Boss Is Watching

I hope you're not reading this at work.  If so, you should know that there's a 76% chance that your company is monitoring web site connections according to the latest American Management Association and EPolicy Institute survey.  Among other findings:

• 65% block inappropriate web sites
• 55% store and review e-mails
• 51% track time on the phone and review numbers called
• 27% have policies on personal cell phone use
• 26% have terminated employees for misusing the Internet
• 25% have terminated employees for misusing e-mail
• 6% have fired employees for phone misuse

So get back to work!

Theirs For The Taking

I share John's disbelief at the Court's decision in Kelo vs New London.  We all heard accounts that IJ had not done as well as they could have during arguments, but I suspect that most of us held out hope that the Justices would recognize the fundamental nature of property rights, would recognize the justification for such takings must go beyond 'efforts to improve the tax base' or economic development plans.  Those kinds of justification now put all property at risk.  I would not have thought it possible, and am still reeling.

Un-effing-believable

This decision ought to do wonders for the Supreme Court's standing with the American people.  Someone needs to check our out-of-control judiciary, and quick.  Janice Rogers Brown for Chief Justice!

Real Life CSI

On the lighter side, the Associated Press (no link available) is reporting that three Virginia robbers were nabbed based on DNA evidence they left on food.  While waiting for the crowd at McDonalds to clear out (so they could rob it), the crooks ordered meals.  But they only finished half of their sandwhiches before robbing the store, leaving the half-eaten food behind.  That was all the police needed for a sample of DNA.  All three men have been arrested.

Cutting The Cord

Those that question the value of publicly funding PBS are usually derided for a)lacking the cultural sensibility to appreciate PBS's place as the cultural high ground or b) wishing to deny children (especially poor children) the entertainment and/or education of a Sesame Street or Red Rover.  As I've written before, the arguments for fuding PBS with tax dollars don't really hold up to scrutiny - which is why it's good to see lawmakers now publicly questioning the level of federal funds PBS receives.

Besides, as Rick Martinez writes:

One public TV big shot has already warned that this cut will begin "a spiral of death for public broadcasting."

We should be so lucky.

Taxpayer-funded radio and TV has become a huge industry. In 2003, the nation's 784 public radio and 356 public television stations raked in $2.3 billion in revenue from all sources. The House's proposed $100 million cut in federal funding is chicken feed. Even with the cut, the House will fork over $300 million from the public trough. Keep that in mind when the Big Bird lobby aims its hysteria at the Senate.

Sadly, the push to grab every federal dollar reveals a fundamental reality: public broadcasting is more about greed than need. If the CPB went out of business today, there would still be an ocean of tax money in the stations' budgets. In 2003, state legislatures, public colleges and universities and local governments directed nearly $600 million to public broadcasting. The private sector kicked in another $1.3 billion. 

With those resources at their disposal, broadcasters should muster the moral courage to voluntarily get off the federal dole. The $300 million or so they bleed from the budget would be better spent on health care or other pressing social needs. But instead of weaning themselves off tax funds, they've become addicted to crying for more.

He's right.  And don't let the proponents fool you.  This is less a cultural issue than it is a simple case of an entrenched special-interest group lobbying for more funding and special protection.

Syria Learns The Wrong Lesson. Again.

After a few tense moments, Lebanon - through their recent election - has affirmed their right to self-rule and rejected Syrian influence.  Syria, in turn, has responded in typical fashion: by killing someone.  A car bomb killed anti-Syrian politician, George Hawi on Tuesday.  Hawi had a reputation as an outspoken critic of Syria.  Authorities are reporting that the bomb was very similar to the device that killed Lebanese journalist, Samir Kassir, earlier this month.

Syria continues to pin its hopes for power and control on the targeted killing of critics.  Which is, of course, exactly what got Syria in the mess it now finds itself.