http://www.cbsnews.com/…

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has sent a memo to some health care providers noting procedures to be followed if the swine flu outbreak eventually makes quarantines necessary.

DHS Assistant Secretary Bridger McGaw circulated the swine flu memo, which was obtained by CBSNews.com, on Monday night. It says: “The Department of Justice has established legal federal authorities pertaining to the implementation of a quarantine and enforcement. Under approval from HHS, the Surgeon General has the authority to issue quarantines.”

McGaw appears to have been referring to the section of federal law that allows the Surgeon General to detain and quarantine Americans “reasonably believed to be infected” with a communicable disease. A Centers for Disease Control official said on Tuesday that swine flu deaths in the U.S. are likely.

Federal quarantine authority is limited to diseases listed in presidential executive orders; President Bush added “novel” forms of influenza with the potential to create pandemics in Executive Order 13375. Anyone violating a quarantine order can be punished by a $250,000 fine and a one-year prison term.

http://www.eff.org/…

Friday evening, in a motion to dismiss Jewel v. NSA, EFF’s litigation against the National Security Agency for the warrantless wiretapping of countless Americans, the Obama Administration’s made two deeply troubling arguments.

First, they argued, exactly as the Bush Administration did on countless occasions, that the state secrets privilege requires the court to dismiss the issue out of hand. They argue that simply allowing the case to continue “would cause exceptionally grave harm to national security.” As in the past, this is a blatant ploy to dismiss the litigation without allowing the courts to consider the evidence.

It’s an especially disappointing argument to hear from the Obama Administration. As a candidate, Senator Obama lamented that the Bush Administration “invoked a legal tool known as the ’state secrets’ privilege more than any other previous administration to get cases thrown out of civil court.” He was right then, and we’re dismayed that he and his team seem to have forgotten.

Sad as that is, it’s the Department Of Justice’s second argument that is the most pernicious. The DOJ claims that the U.S. Government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying — that the Government can never be sued for surveillance that violates federal privacy statutes.

This is a radical assertion that is utterly unprecedented. No one — not the White House, not the Justice Department, not any member of Congress, and not the Bush Administration — has ever interpreted the law this way.

Previously, the Bush Administration has argued that the U.S. possesses “sovereign immunity” from suit for conducting electronic surveillance that violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, FISA is only one of several laws that restrict the government’s ability to wiretap. The Obama Administration goes two steps further than Bush did, and claims that the US PATRIOT Act also renders the U.S. immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. Essentially, the Obama Adminstration has claimed that the government cannot be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statutes.

Again, the gulf between Candidate Obama and President Obama is striking. As a candidate, Obama ran promising a new era of government transparency and accountability, an end to the Bush DOJ’s radical theories of executive power, and reform of the PATRIOT Act. But, this week, Obama’s own Department Of Justice has argued that, under the PATRIOT Act, the government shall be entirely unaccountable for surveilling Americans in violation of its own laws.

This isn’t change we can believe in. This is change for the worse.

Do I need to repeat myself about how I don’t think this is the change people were expecting?

I caught this comment on Slashdot about this story that I really liked.

It is my position that Bush was a horrible president because he weakened our constitution, was an ugly warmonger, and spent money like it was water.

It is my position that Obama is about the same with the only difference being who gets some of the wastefully spent money.

Both “sides” treat the populace like we’re their own public goatse waiting patiently to get stretched just a bit wider by some Republican prick or a Democratic cock.

If only that could be the image people imagined when someone said “Republican” or “Democrat.” Third parties would have no problem getting into office. Perhaps that could be the attack plan for 2012. Splice in a single frame of goatse.cx once in a while during R and D presidential debate feeds.

http://www.latimes.com/…

Reporting from Washington — Another inauguration took place in Washington this week — Google Inc. officially became a political power player.

In October, Google was only hours from being sued by the Justice Department as a Web-search monopolist. Today, less than three years after it made its first Washington hire, the Internet giant is poised to capitalize on its backing of President Obama and pursue its agenda in the nation’s capital.

Google’s executives and employees overwhelmingly supported Obama’s candidacy, contributing more money than all but three companies or universities. And only DreamWorks employees gave more toward inauguration festivities.

Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt campaigned for Obama and was one of four Googlers on his transition team. He is now as likely as any corporate chieftain to get his calls to the White House returned.

At the top of the company’s policy priorities are two that consumer advocates largely champion. First, it wants to expand high-speed Internet access so people can use its Web services more often. It also is pushing for so-called network neutrality: prohibitions on telecommunications companies charging websites for faster delivery of their content.

“Google is not just a benign corporate entity. It has a variety of special interests,” said Jeff Chester, the executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, who has sparred with Google over data-privacy issues. “They’re in a great position to push their agenda through with the support of the president and the Democrats in Congress.”

How predictable. A company thrives due to freedom. Serving their neighbor. Once in a position of success they turn to the guns of government to push out and keep out competition and ease the aspects of the free market that get in their way.

Combine these actions with their pulling of Checkpoint USA’s videos from YouTube because some buearacrats were displeased with being outed. Google is going down an unfortunate path.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/…

LG (South Korean), Sharp (Japanese), and Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd. (Tiawanese) have admitted to fixing the prices of liquid crystal display TV screens, computer monitors and other thin-film transistor (TFT) LCD screens and will have to pay over a half billion dollars in fines.

That is according to the Justice Department, which Wednesday announced the three leading manufacturers of LCD displays would have to pony up $585 million, $400 million coming from LG, which Justice says is the second highest criminal fine the department has ever imposed. Chunghwa will have to pay $65 million and Sharp $120 million.

Calling it an international cartel, Justice said that LG agreed to plead guilty to participating in the cartel from September 2001 through June 2006. The plea agreements are subject to court approval, Justice said.

Justice said the price fixing affected “millions of American consumers who use computers, cell phones and numerous other household electronics every day.”

Assume we agree that price fixing is a criminal offence, which I don’t, if the government role is to protect us and they brought this case on our behalf… why are they getting the $585 million?

http://www.collegenews.com/…

Former New York Governor Elliot Spitzer will not face charges after rumors that he spent thousands of dollars on high priced prostitutes forced him out of office 8 months ago.

Michael J. Garcia, the United States Attorney in Manhattan, issued a statement about Spitzer on Thursday, saying that “We have determined that there is insufficient evidence to bring charges against Mr. Spitzer”.  “In light of the policy of the Department of Justice with respect to prostitution offenses and the longstanding practice of this office, as well as Mr. Spitzer’s acceptance of responsibility for his conduct, we have concluded that the public interest would not be further advanced by filing criminal charges in this matter.”

So… if I get arrested for a victimless crime, like being a John, I get fined or jail time. But if I’m a politician with some connections I get off without even a trial.

http://www.downsizedc.org/…

“If the court grants our request … then if any law enforcement officer sees a Mongol wearing his patch, he will be authorized to stop that gang member and literally take the jacket right off his back.” – U.S. Attorney Thomas O’Brien

“The government can’t ban confederate flags, swastikas, or klan robes, and it sure as hell can’t ban the display of the Mongols’ logo.” – Marc J. Randazza

“What if the government had decided that, because of the Watergate scandal, nobody could use the word Republican again? – Zeichner Ellman

The Justice Department indicted 79 members of the Mongol Nation Motorcycle club for racketeering on October 21. The indictment included federal seizure of the “Mongols” trademarked name.

The case hasn’t even gone to trial yet , but U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper has authorized the seizure of the defendants’ . . .

* Clothing, motorcycles, and other property bearing the Mongols trademark.
* Any similar property bearing the trademark that belongs to the defendants’ “agents, servants, employees, family members, and those persons in active concert or participation with them.”

In other words, many people who weren’t even indicted will have their property seized.

This ruling has serious problems . . .

* In April, Mongol Nation transferred its trademark to Shotgun Productions, LLC, in April, a company that isn’t even named in the indictment.
* Prohibiting possession of trademarked items sets a dangerous precedent. If the government for some reason seizes the Nike swoosh, could FBI agents strip Tiger Woods of his cap, shirt, and shoes?

Civil asset forfeiture was already wrong. The government has no right to seize property without a trial and conviction. But now Judge Cooper and the Justice Department have taken it to a whole new level . . .

* An organization could lose its trademark because of the alleged crimes of some of its members.
* Normal asset forfeiture only seizes property alleged to have been used for illegal purposes, but now the government can take property simply because it sports the wrong logo!
* People completely unrelated to any indictment are now having their property seized too!

Civil asset forfeiture already violates the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution. Now it endangers the First Amendment too. Government officials could trump-up charges against any organization they don’t like, seize its name, and put it out of business! It could happen to DownsizeDC.org!

This will chill freedom of expression.

Civil asset forfeiture must die. Use our Educate the Powerful System to tell Congress to repeal civil asset forfeiture.

Use your personal comments to tell Congress . . .

* About the Mongol case
* That’s its wrong for the government to seize property without due process and a conviction
* And even more wrong to seize property simply because it sports a legally-obtained, trademarked logo.

Demand that Congress abolish civil asset .forfeiture.

Thank you for being a part of the growing Downsize DC army.

And a hat tip to The Legal Satyricon blog for providing links to government documents.

James Wilson
Assistant to the President
DownsizeDC.org

This is really slick. I hadn’t considered such an action. Asset forfeiture has generally been able to continue do to its reach. It effects few and often those who are accused or convicted of a crime taking advantage of the fact that many do not wish to be associated with criminals and therefore will not stand up for their rights. However, should that reach grow as it has in this particular case perhaps there will be more public outrage. Then again perhaps not. Eminent domain has been more and more abused recently with relatively little increase in response.

http://news.cnet.com/…

President Bush on Monday signed into law an intellectual-property enforcement bill that would consolidate federal efforts to combat copyright infringement under a new White House cabinet position.

The Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act establishes within the executive branch the position of intellectual property enforcement coordinator, who will be appointed by the president.

The law also steepens penalties for intellectual-property infringement, and increases resources for the Department of Justice to coordinate for federal and state efforts against counterfeiting and piracy. The so-called Pro-IP Act passed unanimously in the Senate last month and received strong bipartisan support in the House.

The Bush administration initially expressed its opposition to the legislation, but one of its more contentious provisions, which would have allowed the Justice Department to pursue civil litigation against copyright infringers, was removed.

The law has received wide-ranging support from within the business community, including from the Recording Industry Association of America, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and copyright holders such as NBC Universal. Labor groups such as the AFL-CIO have also expressed their support for the new law. Business and labor groups have said strong intellectual-property enforcement is critical for the development of the U.S. economy.

And who said that government was anti-monopoly? The Constitution be damned… intellectual property is not property. There is no scarcity. One can not own an idea like they can own a hammer. Many companies have trade secrets which are enforced through private contract and have kept from the public for decades. Even if you don’t agree one would have to admit that all current laws are corporatist in nature. The patent system is completely fucked. No one should be able to patent one click shopping or any other software algorithm or the genetic makeup of a house fly.

UPDATE:

The USA isn’t the only one: Court ruling strengthens patent protection for UK software