Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Supremes Get It Right

Supremes Get It Right
Thread Tools
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 03:02 AM
 
Unanimously.

Ruling Spurs Debate on Digital Tracking - WSJ.com

The right call in my book, and makes things look hopeful for using cell phone GPS data.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 09:54 AM
 
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 10:15 AM
 
I prefer to think of it as being right twice.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 10:44 AM
 
It's a good ruling, though there is still a huge difference of opinion within the unanimous ruling. Five of the justices ruled based on a narrow invasion-of-personal-propery view. They ignored (or dismissed) any personal privacy aspect. The remaining four justices ruled with a view toward wider personal-privacy implications. This split would seem to indicate how the court may swing when more pure privacy issues come before them.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 10:48 AM
 
Hey, wrong thread, jerk!
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 10:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
It's a good ruling, though there is still a huge difference of opinion within the unanimous ruling. Five of the justices ruled based on a narrow invasion-of-personal-propery view. They ignored (or dismissed) any personal privacy aspect. The remaining four justices ruled with a view toward wider personal-privacy implications. This split would seem to indicate how the court may swing when more pure privacy issues come before them.
That could go either way. It's pretty standard to make your ruling as narrow as possible lest you be accused of overstepping your bounds.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 10:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Hey, wrong thread, jerk!
The other thread is for people who don't have anything to add. This thread is for insightful commentary.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 10:55 AM
 
I'll add some insightful commentary to your face.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2012, 11:00 AM
 
I'm hurt you think I rate such a weak comeback.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:26 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,