#statutory demand

[lexlawuk]

Abusive Winding-up Petition Based on DIY Statutory Demands Restrained (Invenia v Hudson)

In the recent case of Invenia Technical Computing Corporation & Anor v Matthew Hudson [2024] EWHC 1302 (Ch), the High Court issued a landmark judgment that serves as a stark costs warning against the misuse of statutory demands and winding-up petitions. This case highlighted the severe consequences that can follow when a creditor takes a DIY approach and fails to seek appropriate legal advice…

[defective-titan]

Shitty that I kinda miss 2019-2021 era bc my ex made me so horrifically depressed I was actually Skinny for a hot minute.

[dduane]

May the Middies be chewed to death by the Mouse.

ETA: a little more detail--

Plaintiffs to the lawsuit include Disney Enterprises, Inc., Marvel Characters, Inc., MVL Film Finance LLC, Lucasfilm Ltd. LLC, and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation (collectively “Disney”), as well as Universal City Studios Productions LLP and DreamWorks Animation L.L.C. (collectively “Universal”). The lawsuit was filed at the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California on June 11. Specifically, Plaintiffs seek relief over Midjourney’s alleged direct copyright infringement, and demand that Midjourney be barred from further alleged infringement and pay either actual damages (an amount of damage that can be proven Midjourney is responsible for) or statutory damages limited to $150,000 per infringed work. Furthermore, for secondary copyright infringement, they also demand actual damages or statutory damages, again, up to $150,000 per infringed work.

[wizardysseus]

On Friday, the president signed yet another Executive Order, this time directly targeting funds allocated to libraries and museums nationwide. The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is a federal agency that distributes fund approved by Congress to state libraries, as well as library, museum, and archival grant programs. IMLS is the only federal agency that provides funds to libraries. The Executive Order states that the functions of the IMLS have to be reduced to “statutory functions” and that in places that are not statutory, expenses must be cut as much as possible. [...] The department has seven days to report back, meaning that as soon as this Friday, March 21, 2025, public libraries–including school and academic libraries–as well as public museums could see their budgets demolished.

Actionable items from the article:

Sign the petition at EveryLibrary to stop Trump’s Executive Order seeking to gut the IMLS then share it with your networks.

Write a letter to each of your Senators and to your Representative at the federal level. You can find your Senators here and your Representative here. All you need to say in this letter is that you, a resident of their district, demand they speak up and defend the budget of IMLS. Include a short statement of where and how you value the library, as well as its importance in your community. This can be as short as “I use the library to find trusted sources of information, and every time I am in there, the public computers are being used by a variety of community members doing everything from applying for jobs to writing school papers. Cutting the funds for libraries will further harm those who lack stable internet, who cannot afford a home library, and who seek the opportunities to engage in programming, learning, enrichment, and entertainment in their own community. Public libraries help strengthen reading and critical thinking skills for all ages.” In those letters, consider noting that the return on investment on libraries is astronomical. You can use data from EveryLibrary.

Call the offices of each of your Senators and Representatives in Congress. Yes, they’ll be busy. Yes, the voice mails will be full. KEEP CALLING. Get your name on the record against IMLS cuts. Do this in addition to writing a letter. If making a call creates anxiety, use a tool like 5 Calls to create a script you can read when you reach a person or voice mail.

Though your state-level representatives will not have the power to impact what happens with IMLS, this is your time to reach out to each of your state representatives to emphasize the importance of your state’s public libraries. Note that in light of potential cuts from the federal government, you advocate for stronger laws protecting libraries and library workers, as well as stronger funding models for these institutions.

Show up at your next public library meeting, either in person at a board meeting or via an email or letter, and tell the library how much it means to you. In an era where information that is not written down and documented simply doesn’t exist, nothing is more crucial than having your name attached to some words about the importance of your public library. This does not need to be genius work–tell the library how you use their services and how much they mean to you as a taxpayer.

Tell everyone you know what is at stake. If you’ve not been speaking up for public institutions over the last several years, despite the red flags and warnings that have been building and building, it is not too late to begin now. EveryLibrary’s primer and petition is an excellent resource to give folks who may be unaware of what’s going on–or who want just the most important information.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Billionaire-proofing the internet

Picks and Shovels is a new, standalone technothriller starring Marty Hench, my two-fisted, hard-fighting, tech-scam-busting forensic accountant. You can pre-order it on my latest Kickstarter, which features a brilliant audiobook read by Wil Wheaton.

During the Napster wars, the record labels seriously pissed off millions of internet users when they sued over 19,000 music fans, mostly kids, but also grannies, old people, and dead people.

It's hard to overstate how badly the labels behaved. Like, there was the Swarthmore student who was the maintainer of a free/open source search engine that indexed files available in public sharepoints on the LAN. The labels sued him for millions and millions (the statutory damages for digital copyright infringement runs to $150,000 per file) and, when he begged for a settlement, said that they would accept his life's savings, but only if he changed majors and stopped studying Computer Science.

No, really.

What's more, none of the money the labels extracted from teenagers, grandparents (and the dead) went to artists. The labels just kept it all, while continuing to insist that they were doing all this because they wanted to "protect artists."

One thing everyone agreed on was how disgusted we all were with the labels. What we didn't agree on was what to do about it. A lot of us wanted to reform copyright – say, by creating a blanket license for internet music so that artists could get paid directly. This was the systemic approach.

Another group – call them the "individualists" – wanted a boycott. Just stop buying and listening to music from the major labels. Every dollar you spend with a label is being used to fund a campaign of legal terror. Merely enjoying popular music makes you part of the problem.

You can probably guess which group I was in. Leaving aside the futility of "voting with your wallet" (a rigged ballot that's always won by the people with the thickest wallet), I just thought this was bad tactics.

Here's what I would say when people told me we should all stop listening to popular music: "If members of your popular movement are not allowed to listen to popular music, your movement won't be very popular."

We weren't going to make political change by creating an impossible purity test ("Ew, you listen to music from a major label? God, what's wrong with you?"). I mean, for one thing, a lot of popular music is legitimately fantastic and makes peoples' lives better. Popular movements should strive to increase their members' joy, not demand their deprivation. Again, not merely because this is a nice thing to do for people, but also because it's good tactics to make participation in the thing you're trying to do as joyous as possible.

Which brings me to social media. The problem with social media is that the people we love and want to interact with are being held prisoner in walled gardens. The mechanism of their imprisonment is the "switching costs" of leaving. Our friends and communities are on bad social media networks because they love each other more than they hate Musk or Zuck. Leaving a social platform can cost you contact with family members in the country you emigrated from, a support group of people who share your rare disease, the customers or audience you rely on for your livelihood, or just the other parents organizing your kid's little league game.

Hypothetically, you could organize all these people to leave at once, go somewhere else, and re-establish all your social connections. Practically, the "collective action problem" of doing so is nearly insurmountable. This is what platform owners depend on – it's why they know they can enshittify their services without losing users. So long as the pain of using the service is lower than the pain of leaving it, the companies can turn the screws on users to make their lives worse in order to extract more profit from them. This is why Musk killed the block button and why Zuck fired all his moderators. Why bear the expense of doing something nice for users if they'll still stick around even if you cut a ton of headcount and/or expensive compute?

There's a way out of this, thankfully. When social media is federated, then you can leave a server without leaving your friends. Think of it as being similar to changing cell-phone companies. When you switch from Verizon to T-Mobile, you keep your number, you keep your address book and you keep your friends, who won't even know you switched networks unless you tell them:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/29/how-to-leave-dying-social-media-platforms/

There's no reason social media couldn't work this way. You should be able to leave Facebook or Twitter for Mastodon, Bluesky, or any other service and still talk with the people you left behind, provided they still want to talk with you:

https://www.eff.org/interoperablefacebook

That's how the Fediverse – which Mastodon is part of – works already. You can switch from one Mastodon server to another, and all the people you follow and who follow you will just move over to that new server. That means that if the person or company or group running your server goes sour, you aren't stuck making a choice between the people you love who connect to you on that server, and the pain of dealing with whatever bullshit the management is throwing off:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/12/23/semipermeable-membranes/#free-as-in-puppies

We could make that stronger! Data protection laws like the EU's GDPR and California's CCPA create a legal duty for online services to hand over your data on demand. Arguably, these laws already require your Mastodon server's management to give you the files you need to switch from one server to another, but that could be clarified. Handing these files over to users on demand is really straightforward – even a volunteer running a small server for a few friends will have no trouble living up to this obligation. It's literally just a minute's work for each user.

Another way to make this stronger is through governance. Many of the great services that defined the old, good internet were run by "benevolent dictators for life." This worked well, but failed so badly. Even if the dictator for life stayed benevolent, that didn't make them infallible. The problem of a dictatorship isn't just malice – it's also human frailty. For a service to remain good over long timescales, it needs accountable, responsive governance. That's why all the most successful BDFL services (like Wikipedia) transitioned to community-managed systems:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/12/10/bdfl/#high-on-your-own-supply

There, too, Mastodon shines. Mastodon's founder Eugen Rochko has just explicitly abjured his role as "ultimate decision-maker" and handed management over to a nonprofit:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/01/mastodon-becomes-nonprofit-to-make-sure-its-never-ruined-by-billionaire-ceo/

I love using Mastodon and I have a lot of hope for its future. I wish I was as happy with Bluesky, which was founded with the promise of federation, and which uses a clever naming scheme that makes it even harder for server owners to usurp your identity. But while Bluesky has added many, many technically impressive features, they haven't delivered on the long-promised federation:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/11/02/ulysses-pact/#tie-yourself-to-a-federated-mast

Bluesky sure seems like a lot of fun! They've pulled tens of millions of users over from other systems, and by all accounts, they've all having a great time. The problem is that without federation, all those users are vulnerable to bad decisions by management (perhaps under pressure from the company's investors) or by a change in management (perhaps instigated by investors if the current management refuses to institute extractive measures that are good for the investors but bad for the users). Federation is to social media what fire-exits are to nightclubs: a way for people to escape if the party turns deadly:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/12/14/fire-exits/#graceful-failure-modes

So what's the answer? Well, around Mastodon, you'll hear a refrain that reminds me a lot of the Napster wars: "People who are enjoying themselves on Bluesky are wrong to do so, because it's not federated and the only server you can use is run by a VC-backed for-profit. They should all leave that great party – there's no fire exits!"

This is the social media version of "To be in our movement, you have to stop listening to popular music." Sure, those people shouldn't be crammed into a nightclub that has no fire exits. But thankfully, there is an alternative to being the kind of scold who demands that people leave a great party, and being the kind of callous person who lets tens of millions of people continue to risk their lives by being stuck in a fire-trap.

We can install our own fire-exits in Bluesky.

Yesterday, an initiative called "Free Our Feeds" launched, with a set of goals for "billionaire-proofing" social media. One of those goals is to add the long-delayed federation to Bluesky. I'm one of the inaugural endorsers for this, because installing fire exits for Bluesky isn't just the right thing to do, it's also good tactics:

https://freeourfeeds.com/

Here's why: if a body independent of the Bluesky corporation implements its federation services, then we ensure that its fire exits are beyond the control of its VCs. That means that if they are ever tempted in future to brick up the fire-exits, they won't be able to. This isn't a hypothetical risk. When businesses start to enshittify their services, they fully commit themselves to blocking anything that makes it easy to leave those services.

That's why Apple went so hard after Beeper Plus, a service that enhanced iMessage's security by making conversations between Apple and Android users as private as chats that were confined to Apple users:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/12/07/blue-bubbles-for-all/#never-underestimate-the-determination-of-a-kid-who-is-time-rich-and-cash-poor

It's why Elon Musk periodically freaks out and suspends users who list their Mastodon userids in their Twitter bios:

https://techcrunch.com/2022/12/15/elon-musk-suspends-mastodon-twitter-account-over-elonjet-tracking/

And it's why Meta will suspend your account if you link to Pixelfed, a Fediverse-based alternative to Instagram:

https://www.404media.co/meta-is-blocking-links-to-decentralized-instagram-competitor-pixelfed/

Once upon a time, we had a solid way of overcoming the problem of lock-in. We'd reverse-engineer a proprietary system and make a free, open alternative. We've been hacking fire exits into walled gardens since the Usenet days, with the creation of the alt.* hierarchy:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/11/altinteroperabilityadversarial

When the corporate owners of Unix started getting all weird about source-code access and user-modifiability, we didn't insist that Unix users were bad people for sticking with a corporate OS. We reverse-engineered Unix and set all those users free:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Project

The answer to Microsoft's proprietary SMB network protocol wasn't a campaign to shame people for having SMB running on their LANs. It was reverse-engineering SMB and making SAMBA, which is now in every single device in your home and office, and it's gloriously free as in speech and free as in beer:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/07/samba-versus-smb-adversarial-interoperability-judo-network-effects

In the years since, a thicket of laws we colloquially call "IP" has grown up around services and products, and people have literally forgotten that there is an alternative to wheedling people to endure the pain of leaving a proprietary system for a free one. IP has put the imaginations of people who dream of a free internet in chains.

We can do better than begging people to leave a party they're enjoying; we can install our own fucking fire exits. Sure, maybe that means that a lot of those users will stay on the proprietary platform, but at least we'll have given them a way to leave if things go horribly wrong.

After all, there's no virtue in software freedom. The only thing worth caring about is human freedom. The only reason to value software freedom is if it sets humans free.

If I had my way, all those people enjoying themselves on Bluesky would come and enjoy themselves in the Fediverse. But I'm not a purist. If there's a way to use Bluesky without locking myself to the platform, I will join the party there in a hot second. And if there's a way to join the Bluesky party from the Fediverse, then goddamn I will party my ass off.

Check out my Kickstarter to pre-order copies of my next novel, Picks and Shovels!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/14/contesting-popularity/#everybody-samba

[tinfoil-jones]

The pursuit of knowledge is long and demanding but do you also wanna know what else is long and demanding? That right! My need for this man *point to jerk Ford* so here are more questions (I realized the lack of child jerk Ford and sea grunks and now my brain won't leave me alone)

1. Since jerk Ford is a jerk from birth and holds a grudge till the day he dies, how much of Crampelter life did he ruin? I wanna see little jerk Ford saying fuck you and little Stan's reaction

2. If Stan were to get grounded or get detention, how much longer till jerk Ford also gets grounded or gets detention? Or does he just break Stan out of them?

3. Has there been time where Stanley does something bad but people just assumed it's jerk Ford pretending to be Stan or that Stan was pressured into helping jerk Ford? I need to know who Filbrick blames for the missing golden chain in the lost legend comic

4. We're there like full-blown panic for the coast guard, the navy, the fishermen, the pirate, and the marine life? Because "oh God he's in the seas, HE'S IN THE SEAS"

(I will be back >:) muehehehehe)

(1)

In High School, people told Crampelter to leave Stanford Pines alone; that even though he wasn't as big as his brother, he still could and would hurt you in ways you never thought possible.

Crampelter did not listen.

After a week of no retribution from Jerk Ford, and Crampelter assumed that everyone must have been exaggerating, sure the guy was mouthy as hell but-

Wait.

Why is he telling everyone he f***ed Crampelters mom?

He's just bluffing, there's no way-

And then Crampelters mom goes to jail for statutory. And he never lives it down.

He had to move out of Glass Shard Beach after High School.

(2)

Believe it or not, in the AU Stan was a good student. Teachers realized early on that the only way to keep Jerk Ford somewhat behaved was to keep his twin with him, because he was the only person he wasn't a jerk to and could actually talk him down.

So Stanley got a lot of extra help and support from the school and even his parents for his learning needs to be met, so he and Jerk Ford could share as many classes as possible throughout their school years.

Obviously they didn't share every single class because they still had differing interests (Jerk Ford taking robotics while Stan was a theatre kid) and Jerk Ford was a Math and Science prodigy, but they were usually in the same core classes.

Jerk Ford was indefinitely banned from detention in his Freshman year because if he was in detention, you bet whoever the teacher or supervisor was wasn't going to be there.

(3)

Because of how catastrophically bad Jerk Ford was, nothing Stanley did in comparison could ever look that bad.

Stanley took the gold chain? That same week, he and Jerk Ford tried opening a lemonade stand only for the Sibling brothers to do the same thing and take all of their business (not that they got a lot because everyone in Glass Shard Beach stayed clear of Jerk Ford even at the tender age of twelve).

And what happens? Well, Jerk Ford said or did something because the Sibling brothers stand was shut down by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and also the f***ing FBI showed up; Ascot and Dickie had to wear ankle monitors all summer.

Stanley wouldn't let Jerk Ford take the fall for something he did, however, so he'd own up to it. He'd be punished like a normal kid, none of that 'hold an extra Stan sign' stuff.

(4)

When the expedition for the Stan O'War II began, Jerk Ford was mostly unknown at first. He'd been out of his dimension and believed to be dead for three decades.

At first.

At first.

[jtmportland]

I know this post is long, but it’s important to read to understand what’s going on. A lot of people are asking, “Why is Trump just out golfing while things are falling apart?” It’s simple: the emergency isn’t something he’s reacting to — it’s something he’s building.

Trump recently declared a national economic emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) — granting himself sweeping authority over international trade by labeling foreign economic practices an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”

But here’s the real play: by declaring a national emergency, Trump didn’t just respond to a crisis — he created one. And in doing so, he unlocked access to over 120 statutory powers scattered throughout federal law. Many of these powers have nothing to do with trade — and everything to do with expanding presidential authority inside the U.S.

What This Move Enables: Expanded Domestic Powers

1. Control of Domestic Communications

- 47 U.S.C. §606(c): Allows the president to take control of, shut down, or regulate wire and radio communications — including the internet, social media platforms, broadcast networks, and telecom infrastructure — in the name of national defense. Originally intended for wartime, this Cold War-era law remains on the books.

2. Asset Freezing and Financial Surveillance

- Under IEEPA and related laws, the president can freeze the assets and bank accounts of individuals or organizations accused of aiding foreign threats. These powers are vague and can be stretched to include domestic political groups, journalists, or activists — especially if they’re perceived as having foreign ties or influence.

3. Domestic Military Deployment

- Under the Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C. §§ 251–255), the president can deploy active-duty U.S. military to enforce laws or suppress civil unrest within the country. In certain scenarios, this can be done without state governor consent — especially if the president claims state authorities are failing to uphold federal law.

4. Emergency Detention Powers (Non-Citizens)

- The Alien Enemies Act (50 U.S.C. §21) — a law dating back to 1798 — allows the president to detain or restrict the movement of non-citizens from nations deemed hostile. The criteria for “hostile” can be broad and undefined during a declared emergency.

5. Control of Energy and Transportation

- Under laws like 42 U.S.C. §6272 and others, the president can redirect or restrict domestic fuel production, electricity usage, or energy transportation. Additionally, 49 U.S.C. §40106(b) allows the president to limit, reroute, or suspend civil aviation, giving the executive branch near-total control over U.S. airspace in a crisis.

6. Suspension of Labor Regulations

- During a declared emergency, the president can waive federal labor regulations and override contract protections. This includes removing limits on hours, wages, and workplace safety for federal contractors and any industries deemed vital to national security.

7. National Security Letters & Warrantless Surveillance

- Emergency declarations expand the reach and use of National Security Letters (NSLs) — tools that let federal agencies demand financial, telecom, and internet records without a warrant. These also come with gag orders, preventing the recipient (e.g., Google or a bank) from disclosing that they’re under surveillance.

Why it Matters?

Even when legal domestic powers are limited, a national emergency lets the president:

- Frame the issue as a national security crisis, justifying aggressive action

- Bypass Congress and the courts by acting unilaterally

- Sway public opinion using fear, urgency, and patriotic rhetoric

Bottom Line

IEEPA is focused on foreign threats — but once the emergency is declared, the president taps into a hidden arsenal of domestic control powers. What began as a trade issue could quickly shift into civil liberties restrictions, mass surveillance, or even crackdowns under the legal shield of an “emergency.”

This isn’t just about tariffs. It’s about redefining the boundaries of executive power. Imagine if this economic crisis keeps getting worse — the amount of power he will gain.

[mariacallous]

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has canceled plans to introduce new rules designed to limit the ability of US data brokers to sell sensitive information about Americans, including financial data, credit history, and Social Security numbers.

The CFPB proposed the new rule in early December under former director Rohit Chopra, who said the changes were necessary to combat commercial surveillance practices that “threaten our personal safety and undermine America’s national security.”

The agency quietly withdrew the proposal on Tuesday morning, publishing a notice in the Federal Register declaring the rule no longer “necessary or appropriate.”

The CFPB received more than 600 comments from the public this year concerning the proposal, titled Protecting Americans from Harmful Data Broker Practices. The rule was crafted to ensure that data brokers obtain Americans’ consent before selling or sharing sensitive personal information, including financial data such as income. US credit agencies are already required to abide by such regulations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, one of the nation’s oldest privacy laws.

In its notice, the CFPB’s acting director, Russell Vought, wrote that he was withdrawing the proposal “in light of updates to Bureau policies,” and that it did not align with the agency’s “current interpretation of the FCRA,” which he added the CFPB is “in the process of revising.”

The CFPB did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Data brokers operate within a multibillion-dollar industry built on the collection and sale of detailed personal information—often without individuals’ knowledge or consent. These companies create extensive profiles on nearly every American, including highly sensitive data such as precise location history, political affiliations, and religious beliefs. This information is frequently resold for purposes ranging from marketing to law enforcement surveillance.

Many people are unaware that data brokers even exist, let alone that their personal information is being traded. In January, the Texas Attorney General’s Office, led by attorney general Ken Paxton, accused Arity—a data broker owned by Allstate—of unlawfully collecting, using, and selling driving data from over 45 million Americans to insurance companies without their consent.

The harms from data brokers can be severe–even violent. The Safety Net Project, part of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, warns that people-search websites, which compile information from data brokers, can serve as tools for abusers to track down information about their victims.

Last year, Gravy Analytics—which processes billions of location signals daily—suffered a data breach that may have exposed the movements of millions of individuals, including politicians and military personnel.

“Russell Vought is undoing years of painstaking, bipartisan work in order to prop up data brokers’ predatory, and profitable, surveillance of Americans,” says Sean Vitka, executive director of Demand Progress, a nonprofit that supported the rule. Added Vitka: “By withdrawing the CFPB’s data broker rulemaking, the Trump administration is ensuring that Americans will continue to be bombarded by scam texts, calls and emails, and that military members and their families can be targeted by spies and blackmailers.”

Vought, who also serves as director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, received a letter on Monday from the Financial Technology Association (FTA) calling for the rule to be withdrawn, claiming the rules exceed the agency’s statutory mandate and would be “harmful to financial institutions’ efforts to detect and prevent fraud.” The FTA is a US-based trade organization that represents the interests of banks, lenders, payment platforms, and their executives.

Privacy advocates have long pressed regulators to use the Fair Credit Reporting Act to crack down on the data broker industry. Common Defense, a veteran-led nonprofit, urged the CFPB to take action in November, blaming data brokers for recklessly exposing sensitive information about US service members that placed them at “substantial risk” of being blackmailed, scammed, or targeted by hostile foreign actors.

A 2023 study cited by the group—funded by the US Military Academy at West Point—concluded that the current data broker ecosystem is a threat to US national security, permitting the sale of sensitive personal data that can be used not only to identify service members and “other politically sensitive targets,” but also to offer details about medical conditions, financial problems, and political and religious beliefs. “Foreign and malign actors with access to these datasets could uncover information about high-level targets, such as military service members, that could be used for coercion, reputational damage, and blackmail,” the authors report.

Common Defense political director Naveed Shah, an Iraq War veteran, condemned the move to spike the proposed changes, accusing Vought of putting the profits of data brokers before the safety of millions of service members. "For the sake of military families and our national security, the administration must reverse course and ensure that these critical privacy protections are enacted," Shah says.

Investigations by WIRED have shown that data brokers have collected and made cheaply available information that can be used to reliably track the locations of American military and intelligence personnel overseas, including in and around sensitive installations where US nuclear weapons are reportedly stored.

WIRED reported in February that US data brokers were using Google's ad-tech tools to sell access to information about devices linked to military service members and national security decisionmakers, as well as federal contractors that manufacture and export classified defense-related technologies. Experts say it proves trivial for foreign adversaries to de-anonymize the data.

"Data brokers inflict severe harm on individuals by degrading privacy, threatening national security, enabling scams and fraud, endangering public officials and survivors of domestic violence, and putting immigrant populations at risk,” says Caroline Kraczon, law fellow at the Electronic Privacy Information Center focused on consumer protection.

“The CFPB had a critical opportunity to address these harms by clarifying that data brokers must follow the Fair Credit Reporting Act,” adds Kraczon. “This withdrawal is deeply disappointing and another attack in the administration’s war against consumers on behalf of corporate interests."

Last month, more than 1,400 CFPB employees had their positions at the agency terminated, leaving the agency with a staff of around 300 people. Elon Musk, whose so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has spearheaded the White House's efforts to radically restructure the federal government by slashing the size of its workforce, last November called on President Donald Trump to “delete” the CFPB, whose job includes shielding Americans from predatory lending practices.

[itsbansheebitch]

The Cody Ko Allegations: It was a CRIME

TW: Sexual violence

Cody Ko has been accused of committing statutory rape against Tana Mongeau. These allegations have been around for years, but he he, his friends, and his subreddit have repeatedly covered them up. I would recommend D'Angelo Wallace's video on the topic.

Not only has Tana's story stayed consistent, but also, she has a WITNESS. Gabbie Hanna saw what was happening and tried to stop Cody, but he continued anyway.

Gabbie has been seen on video telling the EXACT SAME STORY.

The idea that if you lose good will in the eyes of the public that it doesn't matter what happens to you... it's terrifying. People will do ANYTHING to demand a perfect victim.

It doesn't matter if you don't like Tana or Gabbie. IT WAS A CRIME

Cody's fans have taken two different approaches:

1, insulting Tana in pretty much anyway you can imagine/saying that if Tana is fine, then why should we care

2, demanding a response from Cody. Since Cody has been vigilant with his comment moderation, his fans have moved to his wife's channel to demand an answer.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Sarah Jones at Jason Easley at PoliticusUSA:

The Trump administration has been on an extortion bender. Trump’s White House has extorted free legal services from powerful law firms with threatening executive orders, and they have either stripped or threatened to strip research funding from universities under the pretense of fighting antisemitism on college campuses. One of the primary targets of the Trump administration has been Harvard. The Trump White House wants to control what is taught, who can be hired, and who can be admitted to the schools that they are targeting. On Monday, Harvard said no.

Alan M. Garber, the president of Harvard University, wrote in a published letter: Late Friday night, the administration issued an updated and expanded list of demands, warning that Harvard must comply if we intend to “maintain [our] financial relationship with the federal government.” It makes clear that the intention is not to work with us to address antisemitism in a cooperative and constructive manner. Although some of the demands outlined by the government are aimed at combating antisemitism, the majority represent direct governmental regulation of the “intellectual conditions” at Harvard. I encourage you to read the letter to gain a fuller understanding of the unprecedented demands being made by the federal government to control the Harvard community. They include requirements to “audit” the viewpoints of our student body, faculty, staff, and to “reduc[e] the power” of certain students, faculty, and administrators targeted because of their ideological views. We have informed the administration through our legal counsel that we will not accept their proposed agreement. The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. The administration’s prescription goes beyond the power of the federal government. It violates Harvard’s First Amendment rights and exceeds the statutory limits of the government’s authority under Title VI. And it threatens our values as a private institution devoted to the pursuit, production, and dissemination of knowledge. No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue. Harvard didn’t cave to fear. They didn’t bend the knee and kiss Trump’s ring as so many others have. The university said no. We won’t surrender. We won’t allow Donald Trump to take us over.

This is how you respond to Donald Trump’s extortion games with colleges. Harvard University rightfully refused to bend to Trump’s BS demands.

See Also:

The Guardian: Harvard says it will not ‘yield’ to Trump demands over $9bn in funding cuts

HuffPost: Harvard Refuses To Give In To Trump Administration Demands

Daily Kos: Harvard risks billions as university stands up to Trump

[lexlawuk]

Amanda Staveley fails to Set Aside Victor Restis' £3.5 Million Statutory Demand

British financier labels demand an ‘abuse of process’ that should be settled through arbitration. A recent ruling of the High Court has left Amanda Staveley, the co-owner of Newcastle United football club, facing payment of her substantial debt of nearly £3.5 million following a legal dispute with the Greek shipping tycoon Victor Restis. Victor had issued a statutory demand against Staveley,…

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Emily Yoffe

Published: Jan 20, 2025

Toward the end of the 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s campaign released an unexpected ad, and one that was extremely politically effective. The tagline—“Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”—could go down in history as one of the most effective campaign slogans ever devised.

The ad reinforced a promise Trump repeated at rally after rally as he toured the swing states: If returned to office, he would immediately take on the gender ideology the Biden administration had embraced. Namely, he would end policies such as allowing males on women’s sports teams and in women’s locker rooms, and the housing of male prisoners who identify as transwomen in federal prisons for female offenders.

President Trump has addressed all this and more in an expansive executive order he will sign tomorrow afternoon called “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

Here is what the order sets out:

The Executive Order establishes Government-wide the biological reality of two sexes and clearly defines male and female.

All radical gender ideology guidance, communication, policies, and forms are removed.

Agencies will cease pretending that men can be women and women can be men when enforcing laws that protect against sex discrimination.

“Woman” means an “adult human female.”

The Executive Order directs that Government identification like passports and personnel records will reflect biological reality and not self-assessed gender identity.

The Executive Order ends the practice of housing men in women’s prisons and taxpayer funded “transition” for male prisoners.

The Executive Order ends the forced recitation of “preferred pronouns” and protects Americans’ First Amendment and statutory rights to recognize the biological and binary nature of sex.

This includes protection in the workplace and in federal funded entities like schools.

Asked why Trump is making sex-based policy a day one priority of his administration, an incoming senior administration official said, “This really was a defining issue of the campaign. The president is going to be fulfilling the promises he made on the trail.” The executive order puts it more bluntly: “Radical gender ideology has devastated biological truth and women’s safety and opportunity.”

It is becoming something of a presidential tradition to begin a term with sweeping directives regarding “gender identity.” President Biden, on his first day in office, demanded the federal government “review all existing orders, regulations, guidance documents, policies, programs, or other agency actions” that could impinge on transgender rights. Language and rules about transgender identities became embedded in the vast federal bureaucracy.

Now, Trump has ordered a reversal of all this. In an exclusive briefing with The Free Press, two senior officials provided a summary of the executive order. “Women deserve protections, they deserve dignity, they deserve fairness, they deserve safety,” said a senior policy adviser explaining why the order explicitly embraces the necessity of special treatment for women. “And so this is going to help establish that in federal policy and in federal laws.”

In reading the order, it’s clear that lawsuits challenging the new directives will start stacking up quickly. The order, for example, asserts that “All radical gender ideology guidance, communication, policies, and forms are removed.” This is far from mere symbolism. United States passports—which since 2022 have allowed citizens to choose “X” as their gender—will revert to offering exclusively male and female options, with the proviso that what people select must “reflect biological reality and not self-assessed gender identity.”

The executive order also “ends the forced recitation of ‘preferred pronouns’ and protects Americans’ First Amendment and statutory rights to recognize the biological and binary nature of sex.” When asked about how this would affect public universities, which are bound by the First Amendment’s free speech protections, the senior policy adviser said the U.S. attorney general will enforce these rights. The adviser cited a 2022 federal court ruling to the effect that a Shawnee State University philosophy professor was deprived of his First Amendment rights by being forced to address a transgender student using that student’s chosen pronouns.

The task of the Trump administration now will be to promulgate rules implementing the order, which will affect people’s daily lives. It is inevitable that activist organizations will take these matters to court. The policy adviser said the administration is ready for litigation, predicting Trump will be “100 percent successful.”

It’s a fight the new administration seems to relish. Both officials said the executive order has the potential to broaden the president’s support. “Just take a look at the polling,” the senior official said. “The public is broadly in favor of the president’s and of the Republican Party’s stance on gender. That there are two biological sexes is something that the public is supportive of.”

The executive order does not address one of the most contentious areas of transgender activism: “gender-affirming care” for minors, meaning putting gender-distressed young people on a swift course to transition and lifetime medication. The Biden administration ardently supported such treatments, even as other Western nations began to restrict them, and dozens of U.S. states began to ban them.

The Biden administration sued Tennessee over its ban. That case resulted in a contentious oral argument at the Supreme Court in December, after which most observers felt the court would probably uphold Tennessee’s law.

Asked about why the new executive order does not deal with this, the senior official said, “This executive order is the first of many. I would expect that anything the president said he would do on the trail regarding these issues, he’s going to be fulfilling those promises.”

The order ends with a sweeping statement about the fundamental issue the White House believes is at stake in this order: ”Men and women are equal but have obvious sexual differences,” it reads. “If federal policies promote such an obvious falsehood that men can become women, the government will forfeit all credibility. The government must maintain a commitment to recognizing biological reality to maintain the trust of the American people.”

This order is one of nearly 200 executive actions the White House is rolling out today. Among them: orders to declare a national emergency at the border; end all DEI programs across the federal government; withdrawal from the Paris climate accord; and a return-to-office directive for federal workers.

==

Go ahead and try to explain how this is unreasonable.

[codename-adler]

Would love to hear more of your thoughts about Renee, I saw you post some headcanons and there were some interesting ones regarding her that I’d LOVE to hear about. She’s my girl and I love her so much

here are my transcribed notes about my post-TKM Renison fic Baby Girl, Good Luck <3

***CW: all AFTG triggers apply

reminder that she was 10 at the time of her initiation/1st rape according to EC

while in the gang she joined, Natalie Shield was often forced into sexual work, either with fellow gang members, strangers, or enemies

Natalie completed the tasks as best as she could, and sometimes even foolishly enjoyed it, like in a sort of power trip, which she feels guilty about and ashamed of, given all the trauma it left her with and all the times it was painful, terrifying, scarring, dangerous, inhumane...

[Natalie didn't solicit in the streets, and wasn't part of a 'brothel,' nor did she have a designated pimp]

the sex work pushed Natalie further into a premature adulthood, along with the bloody jobs, the beatings, the fear, the threats, the punishments, the deaths, the drugs, the murders...

when Renee came into Stephanie Walker's care, and pursued high school, the first year was rough, in terms of Renee's coping mechanisms; while she did not self-harm or get into fights like Andrew did, she still used sex as a way to cope, assert her independence and agency over her own body, sort of, but in truth it harmed her further, even more so that in the early stages of her newfound faith, she shamed and blamed herself thinking God would hate her and so would Stephanie—but she couldn't stop herself, get rid of the itch

in HS, Renee dressed mostly like she does now with the Foxes, was very studious and mostly stayed out of trouble (due to fear of rejection + abandonment from both Stephanie and God)

however, Renee had not yet given up her knives nor her observational skills, leftovers of a past life, so she would always know when a fight was coming her way, and when someone had been captivated by her

she'd approach the person when she felt the itch, offer them point-blank a deal, calmly and with her known lack of ulterior motive and evil; she always demanded money in exchange for her 'services,' so people wouldn't go thinking feelings had anything to do with it (assert control, take before it's taken)

the money she got out of the sex, she at first kept in a 'sock of shame,' then tried giving it at church but felt dirty doing so, thus she gave it to charities

never the same person twice; mostly her school classmates, from the same year or older; sometimes strangers outside of school; thrice a teacher (2M, 1F)

she never let herself think about her potential sexual orientation or let it affect her methods; this will cause her yet another layer of trauma, and trouble with acceptance, feelings, etc.

Stephanie eventually found out about everything, because the janitor caught the last teacher with Renee and reports him to the principal; the janitor only saw the man kiss her (quite roughly), but Renee revealed all of it to the principal and Stephanie, emotionless and dissociated af; Renee personally would not have said anything, but when Stephanie told her that she was safe, that the man was in the wrong, a predator bound to do it again, if he hasn't done so in the past already, Renee confesses for other past and potential future girls (but not for herself)

Renee's written testimony, as Jane Doe because she is a minor, is enough to convict the teacher, send him for a (short) trip in jail, and pay the Walkers in the thousands (Renee demands all of it goes to charity; Stephanie only uses the bare minimum to move states and transfer Renee to a new HS)

so the Walkers move to a new town and Stephanie doubles down on trying to make Renee see a therapist, previously because of Renee's past and now more than ever after her statutory rape(s)

Stephanie considers holding back on the religious thing, not wanting to further harm Renee by pushing her into something she might not want, but Renee is actually hungry for it

Renee agrees to seeing a specialized psychiatrist and therapist, who mainly treat cases like hers, instead of just the school's therapist

said specialist is a man, which makes Renee distrustful from the get-go, she applies herself into superficially getting help from him, reciting what people told her during her teacher's court case, how it's not her fault, that it probably comes from her family issues and abuse, etc.

she never speaks to him about what actually happened in her home or her gang, nor does she ever mention the other adults who took advantage of her—though she doesn't see it that way yet—and her coping with sex; only Betsy and the new town's pastor will be able to get through to her and actually unpack her trauma, and make her feel comfortable and safe to talk

however, the psych specialist, Stephanie, the new school's principal and the PE teacher guide her towards Exy, her new outlet

Renee stops anything remotely related to sex, which does cause and abrupt/dry withdrawal; she plays Exy like her life depends on it, she reads the Bible, involves herself at her church, and continues training alone with knives

the rest is history, and now fast forward to mid-/post-TKM (*this fic was started pre-TSC announcement and everything that followed*)

Renee's old itch is triggered at PSU and she begins to rely on sex to cope again

she starts absenting herself from the girls' room often, spars more and more with Andrew, has trouble with her studies, and pulls away from Betsy

Stephanie knows most of Renee's life story and coping mechanisms (almost as much as Betsy), but she notices no change in Renee's behavior when she relapses, as she believes the worse is over and Renee is wholly healed

when she relapses, Renee is careful not to ask for her knives back from Andrew, as he would instantly know something is wrong, although not exactly what

she follows the same patterns at PSU as in HS, and the same tactics as in her gang; she demands money still to keep her partners' secrets, and because subconsciously the money aspect brings her back to her life in the gang

money means she did well; means others are happy with her; means safe from repercussions; means success; means closure; means a task completed; money means she has fulfilled a purpose and deserves to live

Renee suffers from a deep lack of and need for approval, usefulness, touch, praise, and acceptance; if I can help others, it's the closest I'll get to being helped myself

unlike Andrew, who strictly defines his sexuality and boundaries to cope with and pursue sex, Renee disregards everything and anything about herself to please her partner; almost nothing is off-limit

like before, Renee doesn't use any of the money; she keeps it in a sock in her court locker and plans to donate it

Renee inevitably gets caught in the act, by none other than Allison Reynolds

everything about the situation baffles Allison: Renee and sex, Renee being vulnerable, Renee with someone, like that, the place, the roughness of the act, etc.

Allison starts yelling at the guy Renee's with, causing a scene and making him flee while Renee kind of dissociates for a bit, empty stare and soiled mouth

nobody else is present, and nobody else knows or finds out, because Renee's privacy and safety are very important to Allison, and she respects Renee too much to betray her trust, even if that act of trust could possibly hurt Renee

Allison does push for them to have a private discussion, in Renee's room, about what she just witnessed, why, and how Renee is struggling and hurting

Renee is rather surprised that Allison saw through what was happening and immediately knew something was wrong, knew that Renee was being a danger to herself, and not simply having a relationship, intercourse, or wasn't being entirely coerced

Allison does indeed have an innate understanding of Renee's character despite all (Ally's personality, Renee's, how different they are, how close but not-that-close they are, etc.)

Allison does believe in Renee's goodness, what she preaches and projects, but a Fox is a Fox, and she doesn't believe in Renee's trouble being done and over, a thing of the past, that is completely healed

Allison doesn't know why or when she understood all that about Renee

after the discussion, the girls part ways, with Allison offering a verbal promise not to tell anyone

on her own, Allison tries to think of ways to help Renee; she is the only one, and has to remain the only one, who can do anything...

after multiple failed strategies, Allison decides to directly and physically involve herself

thus, "the Deal" is born

Allison now has to present her Deal to Renee, which involves a fuckton emotions Allison wasn't prepared for

"You claimed me from Andrew. Said I was yours to handle and protect. Now I protect you."

and so it becomes that Allison takes on a role much like Andrew, and Renee receives protection like Kevin and Neil, which is special and interesting because you would expect the opposite, or at least for Renee to be similar to Andrew in that type of dynamic

truth is, Renee is very much like Andrew in terms of her past and her being a protector at her core, but she shares a similar past with Neil as well, and masks superbly like he does, which could explain his discomfort/uneasiness towards her (and explains tolerance of her)

as for Allison, she shares Andrew's need for the truth, she despises lies, especially if they hurt those she cares for; she's very possessive—as in feels responsible and hurts when they hurt—of those she considers hers; she is all too familiar with self-harm and sexual assault

and that's all i have at the moment! i still have a Raven!Renee ask somewhere, and i might do more general Renee hcs in the future, but i hope this was 'fun' for you even if i went on a completely different tangent...

[no-passaran]

[...] The International Olympic Committee, FIFA, UEFA, FIBA, and other sports organisations are complicit as they allow a continuous participation of the occupying apartheid regime in their events. Following a swift response and an instant suspension of Russia, it is now difficult for them to justify turning a blind eye to the Israeli government’s actions.

We must however take heart from history and support the liberation of Palestine as generations before us brought apartheid to an end in South Africa. That struggle took on all possible dimensions, with one of the earliest being suspension of sporting ties – which aided in peacefully isolating the South African regime, demonstrated a global rejection of apartheid and changed domestic perspectives in the country.

This act must now be extended to Israel – not only due to its practice of settler-colonialism, military occupation, ethnic cleansing, genocide, apartheid and illegal exploitation of natural resources on occupied territories – but also due to its brutal assault on cultural, academic and sporting life of the Palestinian society.

We thus urgently demand:

An immediate suspension of Israel from participation in all international sports until it fully complies with international law and sports regulations

For global and European sports governing bodies to immediately uphold their statutory obligations – especially their own rules on human rights and non-discrimination given Russian, South African and other precedents. This would include, inter alia, a ban on Israel competing at the 2024 Paris Olympics, UEFA’s European Championship and FIFA’s World Cup.

For a deeper analysis on the rationale to suspend Israel from international sports, please review this paper (also available in Spanish) that will be sent to sports organisations.

[delreymangione]

🚨NY STATE CASE UPDATE🚨

Ms. Karen Friedman Agnifilo filled a motion.

In this motion, she address 4 points.

1) The prosecution has intentionally violated Mr. Mangione's right to a fair trial by unnecessarily publicly releasing his alleged journal

2) The prosecution has failed to provide evidence for its terrorism-related charges that are both legally and factually unfounded

3) The prosecution is violating Mr. Mangione's constitutional and statutory rights by attempting to start the state trial before the federal death penalty trial.

4) the defense requests the court set a motion schedule for the defense to fully brief the prosecution's demand pursuant to CPL 250.10*

*Notice of intent to proffer psychiatric evidence; examination of defendant upon application of prosecutor

[palestinegenocide]

More than 300 Palestinian sports teams are calling to ban Israel from the Olympics over its genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

The Israeli offensive on Gaza has claimed the lives of 26,706 civilians, including 11,422 infants and children. Ninety percent of Palestinians are internally displaced and living in inhumane conditions with “no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel.” No functional hospitals. No mosques. No churches. No libraries. No schools. No universities. No bakeries. At this rate, the brutal Israeli regime will soon destroy every aspect of life in Gaza, including its sports.

Join the global campaign to peacefully disrupt the road to Paris 2024 calling on the IOC to #BanIsrael until it ends its crimes against Palestinians and recognizes our UN-stipulated rights.

Register your group to join the campaign

We thus urgently demand:

An immediate suspension of Israel from participation in all international sports until it fully complies with international law and sports regulations

For global and European sports governing bodies to immediately uphold their statutory obligations – especially their own rules on human rights and non-discrimination given Russian, South African and other precedents. This would include, inter alia, a ban on Israel competing at the 2024 Paris Olympics, FIFA World Cup, and UEFA’s EURO. 

For a deeper analysis on the rationale to suspend Israel from international sports, please review this paper (also available in Spanish) that will be sent to sports organisations.

Here’s what you can do.

1. Join the Global Day(s) of Action, March 15-17 

Ahead of the IOC executive board meeting in Lausanne Switzerland (March 19-21), take the call from Palestinian teams to your National Olympic Committee, International Sports Federations and Recognized Sports Federations. Organize protests, sit-ins, peaceful disruptions, or awareness raising events on Israeli attacks on Palestinian sports. Register your group for more information.

2. Olympics qualifiers and events

From now until the Olympic Games start in July, the road to Paris will be filled with opportunities to remind the IOC that there is no place in the Olympics for genocide perpetrators. Earlier this month, four runners took the #CeasefireNow message to the Olympic Trials Marathon in Florida, crossing the finish line with Palestinian flags. Find information on Olympic time trials and qualifiers (also here) or other Olympics-related events in your area. Register your group for more information.

3. Kick Israeli apartheid out of sports

Is your country a signatory to the International Convention Against Apartheid in Sports? If so, it has an obligation to “take all appropriate action to secure the expulsion of a country practising apartheid from international and regional sports bodies.” Register your group to learn what you can do.

4. Sign the petition to ban Israel from world sports

Join more than 70,000 people from all over the world who have signed the petition calling for banning Israel from international sport.

Add your signature here

Israel has killed Palestinian Olympic Football coach Hani Al Masdar, destroyed the Palestinian Olympic Committee offices, and turned sports facilities into shameful mass detention and torture centers.

We can’t sit back as the IOC allows Israel to use the Olympics to sportswash its genocide in Gaza and its apartheid regime against Palestinians everywhere. Support the call from Palestinian teams. 

Join the campaign to #BanIsrael from the Olympics and peacefully disrupt the road to the Paris 2024 games.