Search for: "People v. Davis (1998)" Results 21 - 40 of 159
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Apr 2020, 4:47 pm by INFORRM
Forbes had a piece “Zoom Alternatives: 5 Options For People Who Care About Security And Privacy”. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 2:05 am by INFORRM
Issue 1: the interpretation of damage under section 13 DPA 1998 Section 13 of the DPA 1998 lies at the heart of this appeal. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 4:56 pm by INFORRM
The claim for slander, libel, malicious falsehood, negligence and under the Human Rights Act 1998 was struck out. [read post]
15 May 2019, 7:21 pm
I am delighted to announce the publication of  "Next Generation Law: Data-Driven Governance and Accountability Based Regulatory Systems in the West, and Social Credit Regimes in China," Law &: Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 28(1): 123-172 (2018).In the contemporary world, compliance systems and policing are quickly replacing law and the traditional methods of enforcement (either organic or positive law) as the framework through which collectives (the state, the… [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
In a similar vein, Equifax has been fined £500,000 by the ICO (the press release can be found here and Equifax’s response here) for its failure to protect the personal data of over 15 million people in the UK following a breach in 2017. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 10:40 am by Kevin Kaufman
The state’s high and economically inefficient taxes are only one of several reasons for the outmigration of people and jobs, but taxes are an important consideration and one within policymakers’ power to address. [read post]
5 Jul 2018, 3:03 pm by admin
In the documentary, Davis says people have been “coming after” him for twenty-years. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 5:27 pm by Wolfgang Demino
Merrill and Title 15 Section 1692 that when people enter into any dealings with agents, the people better investigate the authority and limits of authority that the agents possess. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 6:09 pm by Wolfgang Demino
 In Henry v Cash Biz the Supremes had another chance to demonstrate their commitment to denying people harmed by shady business practices from getting any relief from the State’s judicial system; they embraced that opportunity wholeheartedly as much as coldheartedly, with not a single member of the court writing in dissent. [read post]