Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
A Boston lawyer suing the city and police officers who arrested him for using his cell phone to record a drug arrest on the Common won a victory today when a federal appeals court said the officers could not claim "qualified immunity" because they were performing their job when they arrested him under a state law that bars audio recordings without the consent of both parties. In its ruling, which lets Simon Glik continue his lawsuit, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston said the way Glik was arrested and his phone seized under a state wiretapping law violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights: The First Amendment issue here is, as the parties frame it, fairly narrow: is there a constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public? Basic First Amendment principles, along with case law from this and other circuits, answer that question unambiguously in the affirmative.
Posted on 26 May 2011. If you are one of those individuals that made their own Google Profile, chances are that you knew and agreed to the fact that the information you included in it will be available for anyone who searches for it online. But, maybe you haven't thought about the possibility of this information being harvested and indexed in order to make mining of it easier. Whether you have or not, it is ultimately irrelevant - you have shared the information with Google, and it does not forbid the indexing of the list. Nor does it limit the amount of data that can be extracted. According to Matthijs Koot , a Ph.D. student of the University of Amsterdam who attempted this feat, Google didn't attempt to throttle, block, CAPTCHA or in any other way make his mass-downloading more difficult.
For app development tools, videos, and documents, point your browser to the HTML5m Developer Site . jqMobi API Reference This feature is now available from the appMobi documentation. Click here to redirect to that documentation. Articles
Personal Rights and Freedoms