This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is aerinai proposing a way to find out just how much cops and prosecutors believe in asset seizure as an effective means of law enforcement:
Just as an experiment, it would be interesting to see if these cops would feel the same way if 100% of the proceeds of this program were instead sent to the office that employs public defenders. I would bet that the program would stop immediately because not only are they not getting to ‘keep’ the cash. It would be a good way of funding the already underfunded staff at any public defender’s office.
In second place, we’ve got Stephen T. Stone on our post about the CBP officer who demanded a journalist say he writes “propaganda” before giving him his passport back, responding to the idea that the officer wasn’t wrong:
This situation reeks of a government agency attempting to stifle a free press through intimidation tactics. Whether you agree with what the member of the press in this situation says shouldn’t matter if you want a free press with which you will, at times, disagree. To wit: If a CBP agent did this to a Fox News anchor under the watchful eye of a Democrat president, how would you feel about that?
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out one more of Stephen’s comments from that post, this time in response to the defense that it was just a joke:
When a person with both authority and the power to back it up tells a “joke” outside of a comedic setting that reads like an attempt to intimidate the press, take it seriously. Claiming backsies because it’s politically convenient — and doing so on behalf of another person so their position can remain ambiguous — doesn’t make what was done any less bullshit.
Next, we’ve got Rocky responding to the Ellen Show’s copyright takedown of a critical video that modified her speech addressing her friendship with George W. Bush and reiterating the important point that transformative works are about transformation in purpose, not extensive material changes:
The video is a form of social commentary which counts as transformative.
Someone could have taken the DeGeneres video and replaced her face with a derp face throughout and it would have been transformative even though it would take minimal effort.
Unless, of course, one is simply pro-copyright and misses no opportunity to use copyright as a corporate censorship-tool.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is Thad with another comment on that same post, this time simply underlining who the journalist in question worked for:
Ah yes, that famously biased and partisan media outlet, Defense One.
In second place, it’s an anonymous response to someone who busted out the trusty ol’ Rot13 on our post about Deputy AG Rosen’s comments about encryption:
For better security you should really use DOUBLE ROT13.
So very tempting…
CBP agent: So you write propaganda, right?
Reporter: To the same extent that you make the country more secure, yes, absolutely.
Finally, we’ve got an anonymous comment about Banksy’s not-surprising-to-everyone heel turn:
“You either die a hero, or get rich enough to afford expensive law firms.”
That’s all for this week, folks!