The CyberSleuth: Cyber Crime Worldwide

HIspanic migration to the U.S. South

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:11:00 +0000

Hispanic Immigration to the Metro Atlanta area

While there has been a dispersion of Hispanics to all parts of the country during the past thirty years, the South has seen a particularly large population increase. More specifically, the Southeast states of Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina have all had 100% or more Hispanic population increases over the past ten years. [2] Within those three states, most of the Hispanic migration has been towards economically prosperous parts of the South, such as the cities of Atlanta, Charlotte and the respective surrounding areas. [2]

The number of Hispanics living in the Metro Atlanta area has grown considerably since the 1990s, when the Hispanic population first started to boom. Unlike the 1970s, when most Hispanic migration to Georgia consisted of single men coming to work in urban construction or migrant farming, the Hispanic migration today is family-driven with an emphasis on permanent settlement. [1]

As of the 2010 census, there were 819,887 Hispanics living in Georgia (up from 462,000 in 1996), making it the 10^th largest state for Hispanics in the United States. [4, 5] Of those 819,000, approximately 50% lived in four counties: Cobb, Dekalb, Fulton, and Gwinnett. Of those four counties, Gwinnett experienced the fastest growth rate of 126% from 2000 through 2009. [4] If the 819,000 Hispanics in Georgia, approximately 43% own his or her own home, but 49% do not have health insurance. [4]

Why the South?

There are several reasons behind the Hispanic migration to southern states, most of which are economic. First, the Southern states are inexpensive when compared to the Northeast, Midwest, or Western counterparts. Land is relatively cheap so it’s possible for Hispanic workers to buy a house and start accumulating wealth. And second, the South, particularly Atlanta, has plenty of job opportunities, both agriculturally and construction-based.

Legislative attempts to remove illegal aliens

In 2011, Georgia passed bill HB-87 into law, which, like it’s counterparts in Arizona and Alabama, required local law enforcement to check the immigration status of people who cannot provide identification, and punishes anyone who harbors or transports undocumented individuals. [6] Persons who cannot produce identification are likely to be deported.

In response to this law, many Atlanta immigration attorneys filed a petition in federal court to strike down the law or, at the least, push back the full enactment of the law until a ruling can be issued by the United States Supreme Court. These Atlanta immigration lawyers were successful in that a federal judge struck down the most controversial sections of HB-87 because it pre-empted federal law on the same subject. [6]

[1] “Hay Trabajo in Georgia” (There’s work in Georgia), 1975-1995 http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/hge/article.jsp?id=h-2728

[2] Census Shows More Hispanics Moving to N.C. http://www.mpr.org/2011/03/04/134253846/The-Census-And-The-South
[4] Pew Hispanic Center http://www.pewhispanic.org/states/state/ga/, http://www.usresidentvisa.com/es/

[5] Hispanic and Latino Communities in Metro Atlanta http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_and_Latino_Communities_in_Metro_Atlanta

[6] Who Gains after Federal Judge Blocks Immigration Law? http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2011/06/27/who-would-gain-if-a-judge-blocks-georgias-immigration-law/

History of Immigration to United States

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:22:00 +0000

Immigration to the United States

Immigration to the United States is a complex demographic phenomenon that has been a major source of population growth and cultural change throughout much of the history of the United States. The economic, social, and political aspects of immigration have caused controversy regarding ethnicity, economic benefits, jobs for non-immigrants, settlement patterns, impact on upward social mobility, crime, and voting behavior. As of 2006, the United States accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents than all other countries in the world combined.Since the removal of ethnic quotas in immigration in 1965, the number of first-generation immigrants living in the United States has quadrupled, from 9.6 million in 1970 to about 38 million in 2007. 1,046,539 persons were naturalized as U.S. citizens in 2008. The leading emigrating countries to the United States were Mexico, India, the Philippines, and China. Nearly 14 million immigrants came to the United States from 2000 to 2010.

Brief History of Immigration to the United States

Between 1850 and 1930, about 5 million Germans immigrated to the United States with a peak in the years between 1881 and 1885, when a million Germans left Germany and settled mostly in the Midwest. Between 1820 and 1930, 3.5 million British and 4.5 million Irish entered America. Before 1845 most Irish immigrants were Protestants. After 1845, Irish Catholics began arriving in large numbers, largely driven by the Great Famine

Each group evinced a distinctive migration pattern in terms of the gender balance within the migratory pool, the permanence of their migration, their literacy rates, the balance between adults and children, and the like. But they shared one overarching characteristic: They flocked to urban destinations and made up the bulk of the U.S. industrial labor pool, making possible the emergence of such industries as steel, coal, automobile, textile, and garment production, and enabling the United States to leap into the front ranks of the world’s economic giants.

The 1910s marked the high point of Italian immigration to the United States. Over two million Italians immigrated in those years, with a total of 5.3 million between 1880 and 1920. About a third returned to Italy, after working an average of five years in the U.S.

In 1934, the Tydings-McDuffie Act, which provided for independence of the Philippines on July 4, 1946, stripped Filipinos of their status as U.S. nationals. Until 1965, national origin quotas in the immigration law strictly limited immigration from the Philippines. In 1965, after revision of the immigration law, significant Filipino immigration began, totaling 1,728,000 by 2004

In 1950, after the start of the Korean War, the Internal Security Act barred admission to any foreigner who was Communist, who might engage in activities "which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or would endanger the welfare or safety of the United States."

This all changed with passage of the Hart-Celler Act in 1965, a by-product of the civil rights revolution and a jewel in the crown of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs. The measure had not been intended to stimulate immigration from Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere in the developing world. Rather, by doing away with the racially based quota system, its authors had expected that immigrants would come from the "traditional" sending societies such as Italy, Greece, and Poland, places that labored under very small quotas in the 1924 law. The law replaced the quotas with preference categories based on family relationships and job skills, giving particular preference to potential immigrants with relatives in the United States and with occupations deemed critical by the U.S. Department of Labor. But after 1970, following an initial influx from those European countries, there were immigrants from places like Korea, China, India, the Philippines, and Pakistan, as well as countries in Africa. Naturalization into the United States.

U.S. Permanent Resident

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:39:00 +0000

U.S. PERMANENT RESIDENTS

Intent to Keep U.S. Permanent Residence— If there is an absence of intent coupled with objective circumstances, lawful permanent residents (LPRs) can lose their status even if they visit the U.S. often. An LPR may have multiple residences, but U.S. residence must be the permanent one.

What Lawful Permanent Residence Does Not Provide
Citizenship; Permanence in the sense that the status cannot be lost. LPRs are subject to the grounds of deportation and can, for example, be deported for the commission of a drug offense. LPR status may be lost if abandoned. «LPRs are accorded full constitutional due process rights as to their admission.

Automatic entry to U.S.—LPRs are not regarded as seeking admission upon return from a trip abroad except under certain circumstances.

Green Card— Person becomes LPR upon first admission to U.S. with immigrant visa or upon adjustment of status in U.S. Card is merely evidence of such status.

Process for Obtaining Lawful Permanent Residence
Immigration Selection System consists of:
§ Family-sponsored immigrants.
§ Employment-based immigrants.
§ Diversity immigrants.
§ Refugees and asylees.
§ Persons not subject to limitations.

Part of Overall Cap—Under the Immigration Act of 1990, immediate relatives (IRs) are part of the overall annual cap of 480,000 immigrant visas.
1. IRs, however, are not subject to a numerical limit within the overall cap.
2. IRs are not exempt from grounds of inadmissibility.
Restricted to: Children, spouses and parents of a USC; If applying for a parent, the USC son or daughter must be at least 21 years old; If applying for a child, the child must be under 21 and unmarried.

VAWA Petitioners (Battered Spouses, Children, or Parents)
VAWA Self-Petitioner Defined — Includes conditional residents, battered spouses and children of Cuban Adjustment, HRIFA and NACARA beneficiaries, as well as abused spouses, children, and parents described herein.
Eligibility—The spouse, child or parent who is battered or subject to extreme cruelty may file a self-petition independently of the abusive USC/LPR spouse or parent. The spouse or child must demonstrate that he or she resided with USC/LPR spouse/parent; was battered or subject to extreme cruelty during the marriage (or, in the case of a spouse self-petitioner, the child was battered or subjected to extreme cruelty); the marriage was entered into in good faith; she is otherwise eligible for IR or preference status; and has good moral character.

Good Moral Character (GMC)—If the person lacks GMC, the petition will be denied. «

NUMERICAL LIMITATION (PREFERENCE) IMMIGRANTS
Maximum Divided into Categories—The maximum number of visas issued per fiscal year (Oct. 1 to Sept. 30) is divided into three categories: family-sponsored, employment-based, and diversity immigrants.
Family-Sponsored: 480,000 visas less immediate relatives plus unused employment-based visas; Employment-Based—140,000 visas, plus unused family visas; Diversity Immigrants—50,000 per year

DIVERSITY IMMIGRANTS
Number Available—DHS/DOS determine by a complex formula based on number of persons from each foreign state who were provided LPR status during the most recent 5-year period for which data is available. The number of diversity visas available is 55,000 each year.

Contact Atlanta immigration attorney.

Overview Immigration Law

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 22:51:00 +0000

This article gives a broad outline of Naturalization and Citizenship law in the United States. It is not intended to be a complete article on the matter, but rather an outline that gives several salient points on each topic and subtopic.

ELIGIBILITY FOR CITIZENSHIP
The INA grants U.S. citizenship at birth based on: (1) birth in the U.S. or certain other places; (2) the citizenship of one or both parents; and (3) a combination of location and parental citizenship. U.S. citizenship is also granted to persons after their birth based on a combination of parental citizenship and later residence and by naturalization. U.S. noncitizen national status is granted based on the birth location in certain other places, and the U.S. national status of one or both parents
Birth in the U.S. or Certain Incorporated Territories.
Under the Fourteenth Amendment "all persons born or naturalized in the United States...are citizens of the United States." Citizenship by birth also includes persons born in certain territories under U.S. control. Persons born in unincorporated territories are not USCs at birth. «The absence of an official birth certificate is not decisive as to whether a person was born in the U.S. «A person of unknown parentage found in the U.S. while under the age of five is considered a USC by birth unless proven not to have been born in the U.S. prior to the age of 21.
By Acquisition at Birth
A child born outside the U.S. where one or both parents are USCs may acquire U.S. citizenship at birth. A child who acquires citizenship is a citizen at the moment of birth and does not need a certificate of citizenship.
The congressional acts providing for acquisition of citizenship require the USC parent to reside or be physically present in the U.S. for certain time periods prior to the birth of the child so that he or she may "transmit" citizenship. The transmission requirements are established by the law in effect at the time of the child’s birth.
The requirement that the child had to reside in the U.S. for certain time periods to retain citizenship under former statutes was eliminated by §103 of the Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act of 1994.
By Derivation Through the Naturalization or U.S. Birth of One Parent
A child born outside the U.S. may become a USC as a matter of law by virtue of his or her parent or parents’ birth or naturalization.
As a result of the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, a child no longer needs to prove that his or her parents were legally separated or divorced if s/he is in the custody of one parent as s/he did under prior law. Under the present version of INA §320(a) a child derives citizenship as long as: (1) one parent is a citizen by birth or naturalization; (2) the child is under 18; (3) the child is residing in U.S. pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence (an LPR); and (4) the child is residing in the U.S. in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent.
An application for a certificate of citizenship is made on Form N600. Evidence includes: (a) child’s birth certificate; (b) marriage certificate of child’s parents if applicable; (c) proof of termination of previous marriages; (4) U.S. citizenship of parent; (5) verifying legitimation according to the laws of the child’s or father’s residence or domicile if child born out-of-wedlock; (6) documentation of legal custody in case of divorce, legal separation or adoption; (7) LPR card or stamp for child; (8) full adoption decree if adopted; (9) legal name changes; and (10) any additional documentation INS requires to make a decision.
A USC by derivation may also apply directly for a U.S. passport, without obtaining or requiring a certificate of citizenship.
Certificate of Citizenship under INA §322
Children of USCs who did not acquire citizenship at birth abroad or derive it through naturalization of their parent(s) may still obtain a certificate of citizenship upon application of the USC parent if: (1) one parent is a USC; (2) the child is temporarily physically present in the U.S. pursuant to lawful admission and is in status; (3) the child is under 18; and (4) the child is residing outside the U.S. in the legal and physical custody of the USC parent who has been in the U.S. five years, two of which were after her/his 14th birthday.
By Naturalization
A person who is 18 years or older, who meets certain requirements, including residence, presence, good moral character, and legal status, may file an application for naturalization.
ELIGIBILITY FOR NATURALIZATION BY APPLICATION
Criteria for Naturalization—Congress has the constitutional duty to "establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization." To qualify for naturalization, an applicant:
Must Be a Lawful Permanent Resident; Must be 18 Years or Older unless age requirement is waived due to military involvement; Must Meet Continuous Residence and Physical Presence Requirement; Must generally be a continuous resident for 5 years subsequent to LPR status.
Marriage to a USC—If married to a USC the residency requirement is 3 years if: (i) the USC spouse is a USC for three years; and (ii) the parties have been "living in marital union" for 3 years.
Battered Spouse/Child—A spouse or child who obtained LPR status because of battering or extreme cruelty may also apply for citizenship within a 3-year period
Must Meet the Good Moral Character Requirements—Must be a person of good moral character for 5 years (or for a spouse of a USC, 3 years, or for person in the military, one year) prior to filing and up to the time of admission.
Must Demonstrate Knowledge of English Language, U.S. History, and Government Requires (1) elementary-level reading, writing and understanding of the English language, (2) a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of U.S. history and government.
For more information on any of these topic areas, please contact an Atlanta immigration lawyer.

iPad released

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:31:00 +0000

What better way to re-start this blog than by doing it along side Apple's new product, the iPad.

This could be a game changer. A couple of companies have tinkered with the netbook idea (or notebook) of a small computer that is more than a PDA but less than a laptop. The problem with those items is that you have to wait for the software to load when you turn it on, and the battery life won't make it through an entire day of work.

The iPad, however, seems to work all day long, giving users quick access to anything you'd find on a laptop: email, chat, internet, documents, spreadsheets, etc.

In my humble opinion, this is just another example of How William Shatner Changed the World.

The iPad is heading towards the PADS on ST: TNG!

The Difference Engine

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:00:00 +0000

I always appreciate stories about men and women who were ahead of their time.

So NPR aroused my interest this morning with a story about Charles Babbage.

Who?

Well, the inventor of the Difference Engine, of course. He thought it of before the Civil War and today, the Difference Engine is considered the pre-cursor to all modern computing.

Here is the intro to the story (and video of it working):

Charles Babbage, the man whom many consider to be the father of modern computing, never got to complete any of his life's work. The Victorian gentleman was a brilliant mathematician, but he wasn't very good at politics and fundraising, so he never got the financial backing to finish any of his elaborate machine designs. For decades, even his fans weren't certain whether his computing machines would have worked.

But Doron Swade, a former curator at the Science Museum in London, has proven that Babbage wasn't just an eccentric dreamer. Using nothing but materials that would have been available to Babbage in the 1840s, Swade and a group of engineers successfully built Babbage's Difference Engine — and a version is now on display at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, Calif.

The Difference Engine fills half a gallery and stands taller than most men. It's 5 tons of cast iron, steel and bronze woven together from 8,000 distinct parts. Though it looks like it could be a sculpture, the machine is essentially a giant calculator. Tim Robinson, a docent at the museum, says it's "the first automatic calculating machine.

Plastic Surgery changes identity by changing fingeprints

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:59:00 +0000

According to the BBC...

A Chinese woman managed to enter Japan illegally by having plastic surgery to alter her fingerprints.

Lin Rong, 27, had previously been deported from Japan for overstaying her visa. She was only discovered when she was arrested on separate charges.

Tokyo police said she had paid $15,000 (£9,000) to have the surgery in China.

It is Japan's first case of alleged biometric fraud, but police believe the practice may be widespread.

Japanese police suspect Chinese brokers of taking huge sums to modify fingerprints surgically.

Local media reports said Ms Lin had undergone surgery to swap the fingerprints from her right and left hands.

Skin patches on her thumbs and index fingers were removed and then re-grafted on to the matching digits of the opposite hand.

Japanese newspapers said police had noticed that Ms Lin's fingers had unnatural scars when she was arrested last month for allegedly faking a marriage to a Japanese man.

The apparent ability of illegal migration networks to break through hi-tech controls suggests that other countries who fingerprint visitors could be equally vulnerable - not least the United States, according to BBC Asia analyst Andre Vornic.

PACER

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:34:00 +0000

Federal law practitioners know that to view a document on PACER (federal electronic filing) costs $0.08 per page ... so how much does the Dept. of Justice spend in PACER fees a year?

Answer: $4,000,000.00. Wow.

And the IRS? $950,000.00 in 2008. Double-wow.

And how much does PACER bring in per year? $50,000,000.00 in 2006 ... triple-wow.

When Your Boss Wants Your DNA

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:21:00 +0000

Outstanding privacy story by NPR this morning on the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) that went into effect over the weekend.

GINA (background here) prohibits health insurers and employers from using your genetic information against you. It went into effect on November 21, and prevents health insurers from collecting genetic information to make decisions about the insurance people get or how much it costs.

More from the NPR story (listen to it here):

It took over a decade to get GINA through Congress. Since then, genetic medicine has gone from an imagined frontier to scientific reality.

"Genetic medicine is expanding dramatically. So, for example, there are genetic tests available that can give you an idea of your increased likelihood of developing cancer. And once you have that information, you can do things to minimize your risk. You can pursue more preventive or early detection kind of care and really increase the chances that the cancer won't affect you."

For some medicines, there is testing to see whether they'll even work for an individual, whether the medication will cause side effects and what dose is the most effective.

But until now, Baruch says, people passed up genetic testing that could have helped them. They kept information hidden, even from their own doctors, because they had reason to fear that genetic information would be used against them. "Alleviating the fear was one of the primary purposes of GINA, so that we would all benefit from these advances in genetic medicine, rather than having to hide from them," Baruch says.

Now, she says, patients need to be educated about these benefits, and employers have to learn that they can't gather genetic information or family history of their workers.

JHW: The idea that employers could use your genetic code against you is ghastly. What if you are 50% more likely to develop cancer after 40 - should companies be allowed to refuse hiring you based solely on your genetic code?

Post Office to block "Dear Santa" letters

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:27:00 +0000

The Federal Sentencing and Policy Blog had an interesting article (from USA Today, actually) on the U.S. Post Office's recent decision to stop forwarding "Dear Santa," letters by children to North Pole, Alaska. The concern is that children frequently include their personal information (names, addresses, pictures) in such letters that, theoretically, could fall into the wrong hands.

Here is the article:

The U.S. Postal Service, citing security and privacy concerns of children, will no longer forward "Dear Santa" letters to the Alaska town of North Pole, putting in jeopardy the town's 55-year-old volunteer letter-answering effort by the town. The concern is that names, addresses and other private information about small children could get into the wrong hands.

Postal Service officials note that a postal worker last year in Maryland recognized a volunteer in the agency's Operation Santa program as a registered sex offender, the Associated Press reports. The Postal Service now prohibits volunteers in such programs to have access to children's last names and addresses.

Mayor Doug Isaacson says the Postal Service is "running roughshod" over the city of North Pole, whose identity is tied to Christmas, the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reports. "What grinch would conceive of something so sinister?" Isaacson tells the paper. He says businesses and civic organizations in the town of 2,200 gear up for the program every year "when we're able to really demonstrate the spirit of Christmas."

JHW: Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Patriot Act Changes

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:01:00 +0000

Proposed Patriot Act changes from the House and Senate (pdf).

Men indicted for 2008 WorldPay Hack

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:05:00 +0000

Back in February 2009, I blogged about a group of hackers that orchestrated one of the most sophisticated bank card hacks of all time. It was a $9 million hack where, for only several minutes, the withdrawal limit for hundreds of ATM cards was temporarily removed. During those couple minutes, a small army of "foot soldiers" took to the streets and withdrew cash, cash, and more cash. Then, just as suddenly as the hack began, it stopped. A flash-mob hack, if you will, and the blogosphere was stunned.

Here is the old post.

It seems, however, that the international law enforcement community worked together to find out the mastermind(s) of the hack. Earlier this week, four men of eastern European decent were indicted in Northern District of Georiga.

Here is a description of the brain-trust as posted by Cybercrime and Doing Time:

SERGEI TŠURIKOV, 25, of Tallinn, Estonia performed reconnaissance and found a path of entry into the RBS WOrldPay computer network. Using unnamed hackers, they found a successful path of vulnerability into the network. TŠURIKOV then introduced these hackers to VIKTOR PLESHCHUK, 28, of St. Petersburg, Russia who was the one to actually mastermind the hack, supported by OLEG COVELIN, 28, of Chişinău, Moldova, and an unknown hacker referred to in the indictment as "HACKER 3". TŠURIKOV also managed an existing ring of "cashiers" - criminals who brazenly take the risk of withdrawing money using counterfeit ATM cards, and then dutifully wire part of their proceeds back to the smarter criminals who don't take such risks themselves.

Pic: Wired's Threat Level

Outrage! In Maricopa County

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:30:00 +0000

Talk about privacy, secrecy, and surveillance! This video shows government intrusion into the private life of a citizen in its most raw form.

The set-up: Criminal defense lawyer is arguing before a judge. The courtroom deputies sneak up behind her back and swipe - steal! - a document from her personal file concerning this defendant.

At 1:00 -- you can see the blond deputy reading the private file.
At 1:34 -- you can clearly see the blond deputy reach into the file and take out a document.
At 1:49 -- larger deputy walks away w/ the file
At 2:02 to 2:10 -- the theft is revealed in open court and you can see the blond deputy clearly shift his hands in anxiety over being caught -- what's called "pacifying behavior" in the field of body language interpretation.

Hat tip: SDFLA Blog.

Metadata = public record, says Arizona Supreme Court

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:54:00 +0000

The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that metadata is considered part of the public record. The case stems from a police officer who alleges that his supervisors backdated a document concerning his performance. The officer had sued the city for employment discrimination, and sought the metadata to prove his allegation that his employment record had indeed been doctored.

The city argued that metadatea was not part of the public record.

Metadata is data about a record. For example, a document containing various employee complaints is data. Information about when the document was created, however, is metadata. In the Arizona case, the metadata would have revealed whether, in fact, the employee review document had been accessed after the performance review, and when.

The Arizona Supreme Court held that if a record is help to be public, including in an electronic format, the embedded metadata is likewise a public record.

The Washington State Supreme Court is set to hear a similar case.

pic: Yourwallpaper.com

Tweet this!

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:26:00 +0000

Enough is enough: Twitter must die.

I've tried it. I've learned about it. I've tried to get used to it ... and all I can say is that it's the most worthless piece of software ever written. Period. And now this?!

The TwitterPeek? An Amazon Kindle-looking device that is exclusively for Twitter? Users can update, follow other "tweets," and "tweet" themselves.

Happy Halloween

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:52:00 +0000

Imagine a world without lawyers ...

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:40:00 +0000

Redbox - a DVD rental machine company - advertises "no late fees, ever." Redbox does charge $1, however, if you keep the movie longer than one night: $1 for 1 night, $2 for 2 nights, etc. If you fail to return a movie, you have deemed to have purchased it and pay $25.

Now, for all you lawyers out there: are those additional charges per night de-facto late fees? If so, are those late fees illegal in light of Redbox's slogan "no late fees, ever" ?

Can you say Fed. R. Civ. P. 23? Illinois resident Laurie Piechur can. She filed a class action lawsuit after Redbox charged her $50 for 2 movies she never returned. She is seeking damages on the theory that the additional charge per night is actually a late fee in disguise.

According to Yahoo!, "The class-action suit claims that Redbox's $1-a-night rental fee is more than "the reasonable estimate of the actual damages Redbox incurs for a late return," and that the $25 fee for keeping a movie is more than triple the $7 that Redbox charges for used DVDs.Well, maybe so ... but to my mind, Redbox's rental terms couldn't be clearer: it's "$1 per night."

Query: Can you imagine a world without lawyers?

Cell tracking bills address key issue

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:23:00 +0000

Several bills in Congress will require cell phone providers to immediately release cell phone pinging data to law enforcement upon its request involving "death or serious bodily injury."

Consider this very realistic hypo:

1) Child is abducted. Child has a cell phone. As child moves in captivity, her or her cell phone periodically "pings" local towers and data regarding the cell phone's general location is stored w/ the cell phone service provider.

2) Law enforcement, aware of such critical info, says to cell phone service provider: "Give us the ping locations now, this is a matter of life and death."

3) Under current law, cell phone provider can legally say "no."

The cell phone service provider is under no legal obligation to provide the cell information unless law enforcement has a warrant. This means Verizon, Sprint, Tmobile, or whoever can comfortably yawn at the police request - think of it as a modern view of the "no duty to rescue" rule in tort law.

Law enforcement, however, points out that the first couple hours after an abduction are the most critical. And if the cell phone towers are pinging the cell phone, revealing the victim's exact location, then why shouldn't the records be made available immediately upon request? Especially if a child's life is at stake.

Several national bills are being considered where the cell phone service provider must supply cell phone data records immediately upon request. All police would have to say is "This is an emergency. This request involves death or serious physical harm," and the info must be provided without a warrant.

The concern is that this new standard has, like most privacy issues, potential for abuse.

The bill with the most muster is the Kelsey Smith Act. In 2007, Kelsey Smith (18) was kidnapped and found dead 4 days later in a nearby wooded area. Kelsey was discovered 45 minutes after Verizon released ping data from her cell phone, after days of haggling between Verizon and law enforcement.

hat tip: Threat Level.

The marvel of Google Voice

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:39:00 +0000

Forget Cybercrime for a moment, and let's talk about Google Voice - the best cloud software program I've seen, ever.

This is how it works: Google Voice gives you a new cell phone number that automatically forwards to your existing cell number, a great way to keep your privacy. Key features include:

1) Incoming callers have to state their name before you pick up;

2) You can send callers straight to voicemail, listen to the voicemail as it's being left, and interrupt the voicemail and have a regular conversation;

3) Voicemails are TRANSCRIBED and sent to your via email;

4) Skype-like international calling features and rates;

5) You can create different groups, so "friends" receive a different voicemail message than "co-workers," or "clients."

I just installed this and it works like a charm. Amazing. I have a control panel where I can pick and choose what features I want, and which I want to avoid. The voice-recognition software works well too.

When the Cloud screws up, who pays?

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:53:00 +0000

This is an emerging issue on the legal horizon: When data lost on the Computer Cloud is lost, who can sue? For what? And what basis?

Why do I ask? Remmeber the SideKick? It was on the first phones to keep all your email, contacts, events, and photos on the Computer Cloud.

Recently, however, the SideKick's servers suffered a major meltdown; a complete shutdown for days - DAYS - that left SideKick users completely helpless. What is worse, even when Tmobile brought the servers back online, almost ALL of the information (emails, etc.) was lost.

TMobile openly admits that there is a very low chance of getting back the lost data. It further admits that millions of emails and phone numbers were lost forever.

Which brings me to my original question: If a SideKick user suffered a financial loss due to the server meltdown, who pays?

TMobile? Possible. Depends on whether they maintained the servers?
Manufacturer of the SideKick? Possible. Why not back up data on the SIM card as well?
Manufacturer of servers? Likely. Was the server designed defectively?
Location owner of servers? Possible, if external factors (excessive heat due to A/C defect) caused the servers to fry.
Any others I missed?

Cost per Swipe

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:04:00 +0000

I've had my credit card skimmed in Miami, twice. Once at a drive-thru at Pollo Tropical, a.k.a. Gato Tropical. Another time at a gas station. I knew what happened as soon as I checked my spending history online: $1000 spent at a Walmart in Maryland?

So how much is my credit card info worth?

Thanks to Threat Level, we now know. You see, Miami is a hot-spot for crime. Most of nationwide scams started in Miami. Ever hear of Medicare Fraud? Miami.

Credit card skimmers are usually men or women who work in restaurants, fastfood or otherwise, who frequently handle credit cards out of the owner's sight. It takes 1 second to swipe a card's magnetic strip. But as to value, here is what a federal investigation revealed:

Lan Pan Asian Cafe (Miami): $7.50

Popeyes (Miami): $10

Burger King (W. Palm Beach): $10

Latin Cafe 2000 (Miami): $20

McDonalds (Miami): $30

O' Microsoft, my Microsoft

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:32:00 +0000

Frequent readers (if there are any) know that I never miss an opportunity to knock Microsoft. Once upon a time, Microsoft produced a good product; but today, programs like Vista cause way more headaches than an operating system should. Microsoft has had only 14 years since Windows 95 to get it right, but it hasn't.

Anyway ... I digress ... Right, Joe. Focus. The point of this post is:

On Monday, Microsoft announced that it was suspending several thousand Hotmail accounts because hackers gained access. Supposedly it was a phising attack or something. That part isn't important.

What IS important is that Microsoft made the following statement: "We have taken measures to block access to all of the accounts that were exposed and have resources in place to help those users reclaim their accounts."

Excellent. Microsoft is "on it." Steve Ballmer a.k.a. Monkeyboy is "demanding action," and jumping around in anger (see vid below).

Except ... get this ... a Microsoft spokesperson said the "solution" was to "advise Hotmail users to change their account passwords every 90 days."

Say what? The solution is to ask the USERS to change THEIR passwords every 90 days? Nevermind "we're going to eliminate spam better than Gmail does," or "we're going to solve this reoccuring problem once and for all by XYZ." Nyet. The response is "our clients need to do more and change passwords every 3 months."

Yes, Microsoft, way to knock it out of the park.

Dog sniff technology ... or not.

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:16:00 +0000

The technology of "dog sniff matching" may be on the "low-tech" side of forensic science, but it is technology nevertheless because a dog's nose enhances human ability to smell. Does this technology, however, create more problems than it solves? Should a dog's brain be the difference between putting a man in jail or setting him free?

The story goes like this ...

A sheriff from Texas - yes, the defendant was a police officer - was accused of murder in 2006 for a crime he did not commit. The "evidence" linking him to the crime was a positive identification in what is called a "dog-sniff line-up. " The sheriff was arrested, and his scent was given to two bloodhounds. The bloodhounds sniffed evidence found at the crime scene and identified a match between the smell of the sheriff-defendant and the smell at the crime scene. Based on that evidence, the defendant was charged with a crime.

Subsequent DNA evidence linked the murder to another man, who confessed.

Dog-sniffs have been a useful tool for law enforcement, but does a "dog-sniff line-up" create faulty evidence? It's one thing for a dog to follow the trail of a defendant who has run into the woods, but a line-up asks a dog to use its brain to match one scent to another scent. If the dog makes a mistake or isn't sure, obviously, there is no way to find out.

The dog handlers are not certified or regulated and there is no way to track a bloodhound's track record.

Should dog-sniff line-ups be banned?

Whenever particular hackers congregate

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:57:00 +0000

The "Hacker Halted" conference just wrapped up here in sunny Miami, Florida.

This conference focused on the ethical hackers of the world, and how they can better help businesses fight off cybercrime. The bottom line, it seems, is cybercrime continues to grow out of control. Evil hackers in eastern Europe, China, and Russia run virtually unabated in their never-ending quest to steal, steal, and steal. The "white hat hackers" - the good guys - work for multi-national businesses to try and find weak spots in that company's online presence.

The conference featured - seriously - some of the most prolific hackers in the world. A lot of the key speakers brought up ethical issues. For example, if a hacker visits Amazon.com and realizes that with a few swift keystrokes, he or she can change the price of an item, should the hacker make the change and tell the company? Should the hacker do nothing? Interestingly, most white hat hackers fear the long-arm of the law and opt NOT to tell a company that it's website has a defect.

Newer topics on hacking and cybercrime include: hacking info on the Cloud, hacking VoIP, smartphone hacking, social networking, and malware.

The poor hotel where the conference was held couldn't stop the masses: Conference attendees hacked the hotel's wireless in seconds, giving free internet access to everyone.

Bank sues Google for its own mistake

noreply@blogger.com (Atlanta immigration lawyer) — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:54:00 +0000

A private bank accidentally sent an email containing private and sensitive information to the wrong email address. Realizing the mistake, the bank now wants Google to reveal the identity of the party that actually received the email. Google declined, and litigation ensued.

The story goes like this: A employee of Rocky Mountain Bank sent a sensitive email to the wrong person. Realizing his or her mistake, the employee tried to recall the email but was not successful. A second email was sent asking for the receiver to delete the email entirely without reading it. No one responded.

The Bank asked Google to reveal the name of the receiver, but it refused, citing privacy. The Bank sued on the grounds that it wants to know whether the email address was valid or dormant, and whether the sensitive data was actually in danger of being seen and used.

A motion by the Bank to seal the entire case was rejected. The federal judge, however, did give the parties the opportunity to redact the email address in question.

Hat tip: Threat Level.