Jump to content

B4 - General Topic 2024 #35 (March)


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, StnCld316 said:

 

Knock off the haggling.  

I thought haggling was when you were trying to get a better deal from another person--sounds like these 2 aren't buying anything from each other 😏

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, moules said:

He did not give his consent to transcripts of conversations he had with other parties over a telephone in his bedroom being made public.

He gives up that right when he broadcasts it thousands of people, no I guess, his employer did not give him consent, it’s all on Mass

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, moules said:
SCRIPPSNEWS.COM

A man illegally made $1.7 million by trading stocks using insider information after eavesdropping on his wife's work call. He now faces...

FWIW.

He was charged with securities fraud dummy.  Eavesdroping was never in the charges...and get yourself a better source for news.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maxfactor said:

He was charged with securities fraud dummy.  Eavesdroping was never in the charges...and get yourself a better source for news.

The securities fraud resulted from his eavesdropping.

In the United States, individual state laws define what is eavesdropping, and when it is illegal.  The Federal government's laws against eavesdropping are limited in their application, with the national government primarily deferring to the states in this area.. These state laws vary, and, for example, many states allow eavesdropping if one of the communicating parties consents.  Massachusetts is a two party consent state, and with an extreme prohibition.  see below:

Quote

The recording, interception, use or disclosure of any conversation, whether in person or via wire or telephone, without the consent of all the parties is prohibited.

Assuming Spain requires two party consent.  As several posters argue, Massi consented by speaking over his phone at a spot where he could be overheard by RLC subscribers.  However, the party he was speaking with did not consent.

Eavesdropping prohibitions generally apply to conversations where a telephone is used.  If Massi stood in the LR of B-7 and shouted in Italian that Participant X is a whore, and she lets dogs fuck her, and that the only way that RLC can operate in Spain is by paying big bribes to everyone, and that Participant Y gave him syphilis and laughed about it, AND a CC poster overhears Massi saying this, and then posts a transcript on CC of what he said, that is not eavesdropping.  If Massi said the very same thing over his smartphone, that's when the eavesdropping prohibitions could come into play.

CC has a rule that villa/apartment locations are not to be published, nor are the real names of participants to be published.  It seems to me when there are government rules against public disclosure of private conversations over a telephone, it would be a good practice not to publish transcripts of such. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maxfactor said:

He was charged with securities fraud dummy.  Eavesdroping was never in the charges...and get yourself a better source for news.

Okay now I'm enjoying this...I write a one line explanation and this guy writes a book.  Again, the example you sited is for securities fraud and had nothing to do with how he got the information...Okay????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no point in bringing in Naya and Katerina to B4. Who are they gloing to get adult with? It's clear they are not attracted sexually to each other, most girlfriends who share a bed are not. Massimo & Bognan are lumbered and Wolf couldn't get it up, in a free brothel. The whole place has no direction or plan, is completely dysfunctional and if they don't find a solution soon, it will wither and die.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...