New answers tagged

2

What can Mr. Johnson be charged with? In england-and-wales this would be an offence colloquially referred to as revenge porn contrary to s.33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (1) It is an offence for a person to disclose a private sexual photograph or film if the disclosure is made — (a) without the consent of an individual who appears in the ...


2

Short Answer No. Not everything that is efiled is publicly accessible. Long Answer Most documents are public, but there are default levels of security for different kinds of documents. The e-filing system can support several levels of security. Some kinds of documents can be (and routinely are as a matter of course) sealed by court order following a motion ...


6

In the united-states, there is no general right for a person to control or approve a biography or other account of that person's life. Many biographies are "unauthorized", which simply means that the subject, or in some cases the subject's heirs or family, did not cooperate with the biographer. Sometimes this is even considered to be a point in ...


0

There is a concern over four torts related to privacy: intrusion upon seclusion, appropriation, public disclosure of private facts, and false light publicity. This article gives a summary of those torts, including relevant case law. As a quick summary, the "appropriation" tort would limit a film's ability to use Tyson's photograph, but doesn't ...


-1

You can say anything about anybody So long as it’s factual. Or, if it isn’t factual, the untruths are not damaging to their reputation. Or, those untruths are so outrageous that nobody would believe them. Or, in most places, if they are dead. The medium you say it in can be anything including a documentary.


0

The US Federal Trade Commission is responsible for the enforcement of certain US laws, particularly in the areas of anti-trust (monopolistic practices) and consumer protection. The FTC itself, on its page "What the FTC Does" says: The Federal Trade Commission enforces a variety of antitrust and consumer protection laws affecting virtually every ...


3

It's probably not unlawful to ask, but an answer cannot be required immediately. Per the Department of Labor, Susan has 60 days to elect COBRA coverage (the qualifying event here being the termination of Susan's employment): Your plan must give you at least 60 days to choose whether or not to elect COBRA coverage, beginning from the date the election notice ...


0

First of all, Susan has 60 days after her employment ends to accept or reject COBRA coverage. Emily should not press for a response, and must tell Susan that she has this time. Emily may give general information in public if she so chooses, but should not discuss anything specific to Susan's situation in public unless Susan gives unforced consent to this. It ...


9

What are the reasons/ legal requirements that the police might need my personal information, given that I had not been able to provide any further information/ witness testimony to the incident that they were investigating? The police in england-and-wales have a duty to undertake reasonable lines of enquiry and to carry out a proportionate investigation in ...


0

From this very good article a Google translation which describes the according German law which your ex-boyfriend violates: In most cases, however, corresponding photos are taken with the consent of the person depicted or even made by the person himself and then sent or handed over. In these cases, §§ 33, 22 KunstUrhG protect against unauthorized ...


1

You can use the Internetwache Polizei Berlin and klick on the (small) Flag below the Logo on the right side. That will give You access to an English version. Please be aware that some offenses, especially those touching personal matters like Yours, require that additional to complaining to police (a "Strafanzeige") via Internet You'll need to sign ...


3

What you describe is essentially a Warrant Canary, which is legally murky. From a functional point of view, it is breaking the non-disclosure requirements of the NSL by omission. Proponents of warrant canaries would point to case law such as West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette and Wooley v. Maynard to suggest that the Free Speech clause of the ...


3

No that's definitely not a good idea. A privacy policy/terms document is supposed to reflect your situation: local laws for both PP/Terms describe exactly what your company does for both PP/Terms and identify you as a company What you will do however, is to describe the service providers you're using, in that case you would link to them, from your own ...


14

It would be terribly risky for you to simply link another company's terms of service. What if they take their server down? What if they change their terms? You would not even know when exactly the changes were made. Copying their terms means you might run into copyright issues on the text. Either pay a lawyer to write your ToS for you, or see if you can ...


31

Is it a correct inference that the right "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" extends to even a private corporation? No. It's not even a correct inference that it extends by its own terms to state and local governments. In Barron v. Baltimore (1833), the Supreme Court held that the Bill of Rights was enacted as part of the ...


11

No, it does not The terms "searches" and "seizures", as used here, are terms of art, and refer to governmental actions, primarily to the actions of law enforcement (police, customs officials, etc). When the US Constitution was written, the memory of "general searches" by British customs officials was still strong, and one of ...


3

It's just been answered by the Court of Appeal. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55953247 The rationale for the decision is: Interception of messages renders them unable to be used as evidence. But the Encrochat system used end to end encryption, and the captured messages were in plain text and not decrypted by authorities. Therefore the captured evidence data ...


2

The United Kingdom Investigatory Powers Act 2016 would permit this. Under the IPA the Home Secretary can issue a Bulk Interception Warrant for communications relating to serious crime. These warrants have to be countersigned by a "Judicial Commissioner". These warrants can remain secret indefinitely. They are described as being targetted at ...


Top 50 recent answers are included