Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WorldNetDaily)   Obama committed a federal felony by looking at someone else's Facebook page, making Sarah Palin automatic president   (wnd.com ) divider line
    More: Unlikely, President Obama, federal felony, Facebook, Eugene Volokh, Volokh Conspiracy, practice of laws, UCLA School of Law, Abuse Act  
•       •       •

2463 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Aug 2013 at 8:58 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



85 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-08-02 08:47:15 AM  
For anyone who doesn't want to click the link, here's a summary of the article:

s12.postimg.org
 
2013-08-02 08:51:22 AM  
www.rock979.ca
 
2013-08-02 08:51:44 AM  
The submitter's headline is dishonestly misleading. The article, despite the implication of the headline, does not state that President Obama violated federal law by looking at other Facebook pages. Rather, the article -- and the author through it -- asks if President Obama and his campaign staff violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by looking at Facebook pages. The article contains no direct accusations, but rather speculates that actions taken by President Obama's campaign staff might possibly have been a felony offense.

A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-02 08:54:36 AM  

Dimensio: A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.


Really?  I thought the whole modus operandi of the right was to put dishonest accusations in the form of a question then claim they were "just asking".
 
2013-08-02 08:56:06 AM  
Um. Facebook pages are public information.
 
2013-08-02 08:56:40 AM  

vpb: Dimensio: A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.

Really?  I thought the whole modus operandi of the right was to put dishonest accusations in the form of a question then claim they were "just asking".


And where were you on that fateful night in 1990? I'm just asking questions here.
 
2013-08-02 08:59:22 AM  

UberDave: For anyone who doesn't want to click the link, here's a summary of the article:


Isn't this the default response to anything from WND?
 
2013-08-02 09:01:56 AM  
PALIN/CHENEY 2016!!!

if you don't support this all woman ticket, you're a misogynist ;)
 
2013-08-02 09:02:06 AM  

Aarontology: Um. Facebook pages are public information.


Uh, oh. That means Ted Cruz better delete that pic of himself dressed as Lulu from Hee-Haw playing Pig In A Poke at Santorum's Fourth of July Bash.
 
2013-08-02 09:03:56 AM  

UberDave: For anyone who doesn't want to click the link, here's a summary of the article:

[s12.postimg.org image 400x259]


Don't most submitted headlines for WND/American Thinker/Townhall do a decent job of summing up the article?
There text all seems to follow the same pattern: some new outrage which subby puts in the headline, followed by a few paragraphs of rehashed variations of 'Obama is a tyrant'.  Well, plus the occasional shameless plug for books, overpriced gold, perpetual motion machines, or emergency food.
 
2013-08-02 09:08:47 AM  
The article is based on a posting from the Volokh Conspiracy.  The author of the original article has already updated his post to point out that he was wrong.  The app created by the Obama campaign was approved by Facebook, and was in compliance with all of their terms of use.
 
2013-08-02 09:10:30 AM  

stoli n coke: Aarontology: Um. Facebook pages are public information.

Uh, oh. That means Ted Cruz better delete that pic of himself dressed as Lulu from Hee-Haw playing Pig In A Poke at Santorum's Fourth of July Bash.


Look. Don't give him any ideas. It's hard enough for me to find good porn as it is.
 
2013-08-02 09:10:45 AM  

Dimensio: The submitter's headline is dishonestly misleading. The article, despite the implication of the headline, does not state that President Obama violated federal law by looking at other Facebook pages. Rather, the article -- and the author through it -- asks if President Obama and his campaign staff violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by looking at Facebook pages. The article contains no direct accusations, but rather speculates that actions taken by President Obama's campaign staff might possibly have been a felony offense.

A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.


It's a stupid question to ask, anyway. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act basically creates a crime out of doing something that exceeds a computer system's permissions or terms of service. There is nothing in the Facebook terms of service that makes it a violation to view other people's profiles - in fact, that's kind of the whole point of social media. Therefore, it's not a violation and it's a stupid question to ask.
 
2013-08-02 09:10:45 AM  
Done in one...
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-02 09:10:56 AM  

dr_blasto: vpb: Dimensio: A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.

Really?  I thought the whole modus operandi of the right was to put dishonest accusations in the form of a question then claim they were "just asking".

And where were you on that fateful night in 1990? I'm just asking questions here.


I was helping Glenn Beck bury that girls body.
 
2013-08-02 09:12:11 AM  

trmpt99: The article is based on a posting from the Volokh Conspiracy.  The author of the original article has already updated his post to point out that he was wrong.  The app created by the Obama campaign was approved by Facebook, and was in compliance with all of their terms of use.


Does not that only prove that the author of that original post is part of the conspiracy?

/Only asking questions.
 
2013-08-02 09:14:02 AM  
A comment from the discussion of the article at the website is rather insightful:

This is like peeing against a window it only comes back on you there is no sense in speaking about this anymore it just simply not worth it sad but so true.

I must concur; WorldNetDaily's continued investigation and exposure of President Obama is directly analogous to urination onto an inappropriate surface.
 
2013-08-02 09:19:14 AM  
CORRECTION/UPDATE: Having talked in some detail with folks at Facebook, I've concluded that this post was just wrong, and I owe an apology to both Facebook and the Obama campaign, not to mention the co-bloggers and readers who joined the fray. Facebook's terms of service do say all the things that I and Michael Vatis's post quoted - they prohibit password sharing and the soliciting of password sharing and so on. But it turns out that Facebook also maintains Facebook Platform, whose rules permit users to grant app developers access to their user data, including a user's list of friends. The Obama campaign created an app that adapted this platform to its turnout goals, and it did so within the rules set by Facebook.  Because the program was authorized by Facebook, it was also authorized under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.  I've deleted the bulk of the post but left it up so that any links to the original post will come to this correction.

http://www.volokh.com/2013/08/01/did-the-president-win-re-election-b y- violating-the-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act/
 
2013-08-02 09:23:33 AM  

Dimensio: I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.


he has an alibi.  he was with Glenn Beck.
 
2013-08-02 09:24:36 AM  

BillClintonsCigar: CORRECTION/UPDATE: Having talked in some detail with folks at Facebook, I've concluded that this post was just wrong, and I owe an apology to both Facebook and the Obama campaign, not to mention the co-bloggers and readers who joined the fray. Facebook's terms of service do say all the things that I and Michael Vatis's post quoted - they prohibit password sharing and the soliciting of password sharing and so on. But it turns out that Facebook also maintains Facebook Platform, whose rules permit users to grant app developers access to their user data, including a user's list of friends. The Obama campaign created an app that adapted this platform to its turnout goals, and it did so within the rules set by Facebook.  Because the program was authorized by Facebook, it was also authorized under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.  I've deleted the bulk of the post but left it up so that any links to the original post will come to this correction.

http://www.volokh.com/2013/08/01/did-the-president-win-re-election-b y- violating-the-computer-fraud-and-abuse-act/


Our corrupt justice system may behave differently, but WorldNetDaily is not about to allow a technicality such "what happened was not actually illegal" to interfere with their exposure of President Obama's criminal activities.
 
2013-08-02 09:24:50 AM  

BillClintonsCigar: CORRECTION/UPDATE


Admitting to being wrong? He's going to get kicked out of the Republican Party.
 
2013-08-02 09:27:20 AM  

trmpt99: The article is based on a posting from the Volokh Conspiracy.  The author of the original article has already updated his post to point out that he was wrong.  The app created by the Obama campaign was approved by Facebook, and was in compliance with all of their terms of use.


So what your saying is that WND ran a story about the abortionplex?
Why am I not surprised.
 
2013-08-02 09:28:30 AM  

RexTalionis: It's a stupid question to ask, anyway. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act basically creates a crime out of doing something that exceeds a computer system's permissions or terms of service. There is nothing in the Facebook terms of service that makes it a violation to view other people's profiles - in fact, that's kind of the whole point of social media. Therefore, it's not a violation and it's a stupid question to ask.


What might be a crime, though, is Facebook encouraging its users to provide their username and password for email accounts so that they can search through their mail looking for potential "Friends" to suggest.

I'm pretty sure that every email account I've ever had prohibited me sharing my login credentials.
 
2013-08-02 09:31:41 AM  
Is automatic president like automatic quarterback?
 
2013-08-02 09:33:30 AM  
That there Black Feller used "Social Media" to appeal to voters.

So he must be SOCIALIST!

Get a rope....
 
2013-08-02 09:34:04 AM  

AndreMA: RexTalionis: It's a stupid question to ask, anyway. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act basically creates a crime out of doing something that exceeds a computer system's permissions or terms of service. There is nothing in the Facebook terms of service that makes it a violation to view other people's profiles - in fact, that's kind of the whole point of social media. Therefore, it's not a violation and it's a stupid question to ask.

What might be a crime, though, is Facebook encouraging its users to provide their username and password for email accounts so that they can search through their mail looking for potential "Friends" to suggest.

I'm pretty sure that every email account I've ever had prohibited me sharing my login credentials.


Not if the app was approved by Facebook for the Facebook platform.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-02 09:34:59 AM  

AndreMA: What might be a crime, though, is Facebook encouraging its users to provide their username and password for email accounts so that they can search through their mail looking for potential "Friends" to suggest.

I'm pretty sure that every email account I've ever had prohibited me sharing my login credentials.


Violating terms of service isn't a crime, and if you provide it it's YOU breaching the terms of service, not Facebook.
 
2013-08-02 09:35:40 AM  

JerseyTim: Is automatic president like automatic quarterback?


In this context, for conservatives, I think it's more like autoerotic asphyxiation.

"Sarah....SARAH....ack..."
 
2013-08-02 09:36:30 AM  
AndreMA:
What might be a crime, though, is Facebook encouraging its users to provide their username and password for email accounts so that they can search through their mail looking for potential "Friends" to suggest.

I'm pretty sure that every email account I've ever had prohibited me sharing my login credentials.


That means that also anyone that uses that feature is committing a felony. In short, The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is a terrible law.
 
2013-08-02 09:39:14 AM  

BillClintonsCigar: CORRECTION/UPDATE: Having talked in some detail with folks at Facebook, I've concluded that this post was just wrong, and I owe an apology to both Facebook and the Obama campaign, not to mention the co-bloggers and readers who joined the fray. Facebook's terms of service do say all the things that I and Michael Vatis's post quoted - they prohibit password sharing and the soliciting of password sharing and so on. But it turns out that Facebook also maintains Facebook Platform, whose rules permit users to grant app developers access to their user data, including a user's list of friends. The Obama campaign created an app that adapted this platform to its turnout goals, and it did so within the rules set by Facebook.  Because the program was authorized by Facebook, it was also authorized under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.  I've deleted the bulk of the post but left it up so that any links to the original post will come to this correction.


i236.photobucket.com

Nevermind.
 
2013-08-02 09:45:18 AM  
"Guys, I have it on direct authority that President HUSSEIN Obama took a dump today. That's illegal right? RIGHT? Okay, I'll go back to the drawing board."

"GUYS, HUSSEIN Obama is drinking PEPSI. ... really? Okay."
 
2013-08-02 09:46:53 AM  

lh3.googleusercontent.com

 
2013-08-02 09:47:32 AM  

vpb: Dimensio: A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.

Really?  I thought the whole modus operandi of the right was to put dishonest accusations in the form of a question then claim they were "just asking".


The article was about how awful the computer fraud act is. Basically a call to change it. See Aaron Schwartz. (sp?)
 
2013-08-02 09:48:23 AM  
This headline meme as become as insipid as any Sarah Palin utterance.
 
2013-08-02 09:50:34 AM  

trmpt99: The article is based on a posting from the Volokh Conspiracy.  The author of the original article has already updated his post to point out that he was wrong.  The app created by the Obama campaign was approved by Facebook, and was in compliance with all of their terms of use.


Volokh co tributors have been more and more against the tactics of federal prosecutors and the vague laws they use to indict. Three Felonies a Day is a sad collection of Federal Laws used to prosecute basically anybody in the US. sad but good read.
 
2013-08-02 10:03:45 AM  

Nabb1: This headline meme as become as insipid as any Sarah Palin utterance.


Nabb1 is now President of Fark and Drew has to clean up vomit in the server room.
 
2013-08-02 10:12:11 AM  

Dimensio: A fundamental difference exists between an accusation and just asking questions, and submitter should be deeply ashamed for presenting one as the other. I would also like to ask regarding submitter's whereabouts in 1990, on the same date that a young girl was raped and murdered.


Not bad. Subtle yet entertaining. 8/10.
 
2013-08-02 10:12:47 AM  

NeverDrunk23: Isn't this the default response to anything from WND?


Pretty much. Good old World Nut Daily.
 
2013-08-02 10:14:01 AM  

Diogenes: Nabb1: This headline meme as become as insipid as any Sarah Palin utterance.

Nabb1 is now President of Fark and Drew has to clean up vomit in the server room.


I promise to be a firm but benevolent dictator.
 
2013-08-02 10:16:55 AM  

Aristocles: PALIN/CHENEY 2016!!!

if you don't support this all woman ticket, you're a misogynist ;)


OR you might just be completely sane.
 
2013-08-02 10:21:41 AM  

Nabb1: Diogenes: Nabb1: This headline meme as become as insipid as any Sarah Palin utterance.

Nabb1 is now President of Fark and Drew has to clean up vomit in the server room.

I promise to be a firm but benevolent dictator.


Let's kick it off by giving you the Nobel Peace Prize.
 
2013-08-02 10:22:02 AM  

Nabb1: This headline meme as become as insipid as any Sarah Palin utterance.


Why is it always Sarah Palin who automatically becomes President?

Why is it never, say, Alan West?  Or Michele Bachmann?  Or Rick Santorum?

It's not like the prospect of any of the others becoming POTUS would be any less ridiculous or frightening than President Palin.

Is it an acknowledgement that she knows better, and is cynically beguiling the gullible horde of Real Americans, whereas the others are True Believers?

Is it because of her Peg Bundy-esque pulchritude?  (Apologies to Peg)

I'm just asking questions.
 
2013-08-02 10:22:38 AM  
"I think this issue will go mainstream," Baker insisted.

So he thinks the story has legs?

data.whicdn.com

Disapproves.
 
2013-08-02 10:35:20 AM  
images.t-nation.com
 
2013-08-02 10:43:29 AM  
It's like you're not even trying anymore, submitter...
 
2013-08-02 10:50:27 AM  

Dimensio: asks if President Obama and his campaign staff violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by looking at Facebook pages.


Wait.  Is WND implying that President Obama & his staff are a crew of l33t h4x0rz??  What if THEY are Anonymous!??  WE'RE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS, PEOPLE!!!

/what the hell does the CFAA have to do with viewing Facebook pages!?
//or have I been studying this shiat for 8 months for nothing?
///or are they trying to argue that it was an unauthorized access of government computers?
 
2013-08-02 10:54:05 AM  
"Half the country will want to know exactly how that happened."

Probably the really smart half.
 
2013-08-02 10:54:54 AM  

xanadian: It's like you're not even trying anymore, submitter...


Why would the submitter actually have to try?  It has become obvious that the articles that get onto the politics tab are basically troll links...
 
2013-08-02 11:05:45 AM  

Aarontology: Um. Facebook pages are public information.


The article wasn't about looking at facebook pages. It was about sharing accounts and account passwords. It doesn't matter anyway. The individual who made the claims took them back on the Volokh Conspiracy blog. He found out that what the Obama campaign did, didn't violate Facebook's terms of service.
 
2013-08-02 11:06:24 AM  
How could any one read the article with this ad on the same page.

superstore.wnd.com
 
Displayed 50 of 85 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report