Category: reason

After 3 years of battling in court, Warner Music and its affiliates that held the rights to “Happy Birthday to You” agreed to return the song to the public domain. Under the tentative settlement, they will drop their claims to future royalties from the copyright and pay $14 million to those who have had to fork over licensing fees to use the song in the past.

Originally recorded in 1893 by Mildred and Patty Hill as “Good Morning to All,” the birthday-themed lyrics of the modern tune were published in 1911. The central dispute in this case was whether and to whom the Hills had transferred the rights to the original tune.

The judge ruled that, since the original copyright on the song expired in 1949 and the Hills’ publisher had never acquired the rights to the lyrics, Warner’s current copyright is not valid. As such, the agreement adds, “All parties believe the song will be in the public domain on the final settlement date.”

In December, Reason TV took a look at another side of copyright law that is particularly important for journalists, filmmakers, and musicians: fair use. Watch below to see how South Park saved this important protector of free speech.

Antonin Scalia, associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, was found dead today of apparent natural causes. He was 79 years old.

Appointed to the Supreme Court in 1986 by President Ronald Reagan, Scalia was an outspoken and highly respected judicial conservative. To say the very least, Scalia had a massive influence on American law. Among his many contributions, Scalia was an early champion of the legal philosophy known as “originalism,” which says that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning at the time it was enacted. Today originalism is one of the primary legal philosophies jostling for dominance at the high court, a situation that was practically unimaginable several decades ago. Scalia played an indispensable role in making that possible.

I certainly had my share of disagreements with Justice Scalia over the years. In my recent book Overruled, for example, I extensively criticized Scalia for his refusal to seriously engage with the original meaning of the 14th Amendment in the landmark gun rights case McDonald v. Chicago. But at the same time, I have always had great respect for Scalia’s keen legal mind and acerbic wit. And I’m hardly unusual in that regard. Scalia was overwhelmingly respected by his intellectual opponents. In 2008, for instance, presidential hopeful Barack Obama praised Scalia for his “intellectual brilliance.” Likewise, Scalia’s close friendship with liberal legal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg is well known.

Whether you agreed with him or not, Antonin Scalia was a brilliant legal thinker who always earned your respect.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead of apparent natural causes Saturday on a luxury resort in West Texas, federal officials said.

Scalia, 79, was a guest at the Cibolo Creek Ranch, a resort in the Big Bend region south of Marfa.

According to a report, Scalia arrived at the ranch on Friday and attended a private party with about 40 people. When he did not appear for breakfast, a person associated with the ranch went to his room and found a body.

More here.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has released a statement confirming the death:

Abbott said Scalia’s “loyalty to the Constitution” set an example for Americans.

“His fierce loyalty to the Constitution set an unmatched example, not just for judges and lawyers, but for all Americans,” Abbott’s statement continued. “We mourn his passing, and we pray that his successor on the Supreme Court will take his place as a champion for the written Constitution and the Rule of Law. Cecilia and I extend our deepest condolences to his family, and we will keep them in our thoughts and prayers.”

Reason has written tons about Scalia over the years. Read all that here.

Damon Root, among others, noted that during the course of his tenure on the Supreme Court, Scalia became increasingly results-oriented and on the conservative side of a split between libertarians and conservatives. Indeed, Scalia increasingly accused judges of engaging in “activism” if and when they ruled in ways that narrowed a legislative body’s ability to curtail individual rights. As Root wrote in 2013 while commenting on Scalia’s dissent in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case:

If the overriding theme of Kennedy’s DOMA opinion is the protection of liberty, the theme of Scalia’s dissent is respect for majority rule. “The Constitution does not forbid the government to enforce traditional moral and sexual norms,” he wrote, citing his dissent in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the case where he voted to allow states to criminalize homosexual conduct. As for placing restrictions on the recognition of gay marriage, “We might have let the People decide.”

It’s a familiar conservative legal argument, drawn from the same philosophy of judicial deference to the will of the majority that has motivated many other thinkers on the right, including Robert Bork, who famously ranked majority rule higher than individual rights in his conception of the American system. “In wide areas of life,” Bork wrote in his bestselling book The Tempting of America, “majorities are entitled to rule, if they wish, simply because they are majorities.”

Bork’s majoritarian approach prompted a response back in 1986 by the libertarian political scientist Stephen Macedo that I have long considered to be a definitive nutshell summary of the difference between conservative and libertarian legal thinking. As Macedo put it, “When conservatives like Bork treat rights as islands surrounded by a sea of government powers, they precisely reverse the view of the Founders as enshrined in the Constitution, wherein government powers are limited and specified and rendered as islands surrounded by a sea of individual rights.”

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who is trying to leverage his second-place finish in the New Hampshire Republican primary to a nationally viable presidential candidacy, has one thing his competitors lack: a fistful of newspaper endorsements.

The New York Times called Kasich “the only plausible choice for Republicans tired of the extremism and inexperience on display in this race.” The Boston Globe contrasted Kasich with “the divisive, demagogic candidates running on nativism and other political simplicities,” and suggested that he might well become the “leader of the party’s reality-based wing.” More in that vein from The Keene Sentinel, Quad-City Times, and Concord Monitor, the latter of which adds—with more hope than evidence—that, “On national security, Kasich is more alliance-builder than hawk.”

So about that. At the Feb. 6 debate in Manchester, NH, moderator Martha Raddatz pointed out that North Korea had reportedly just tested an intercontinental ballistic missile, and then she asked a series of candidates whether they would “destroy that missile pre-emptively on the launch pad.” Eventually Raddatz came to the Ohioan: “Governor Kasich, how would you respond to tonight’s launch?”

“Well, we’ve got to step up the pressure,” the governor said. “We have to make sure that we intercept both the ships and their aircraft.” While falling short of pre-emptively bombing a country within its borders, the former House Armed Services Committee member did say he would encourage Japan to do that particular dirty work for us if they so choose. Also, militarily intercepting ships and aircraft against their will is often considered by owners of said vessels as an act of war. But such is the price of the Kasich Doctrine. “We cannot,” he concluded, “continue to be weak in the face of the North Koreans, or, frankly, in the entire rest of the world.”

For instance, Iran. At the Jan. 28 debate in Des Moines, Kasich volunteered the possibility of pre-emptive war against the Mullahs. “If we find out they’re developing a nuclear weapon and we know how to get to it, we’re going to go take it out,” he declared. “That is what we have to do. We cannot let things get farther down the road, like we did with North Korea.”

Kasich has been saying for a year now that the United States needs another major land war in the Middle East, to wipe out ISIS. “We have to go massively, like we did in the first Gulf War where we destroyed Saddam’s ability to take Kuwait,” he said at the Dec. 15 debate in Las Vegas. “We need to have a coalition that will stand for nothing less than the total destruction of ISIS and we have to be the leader. We can’t wait for anybody else.”

As for Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, well, he “has to go,” Kasich says. “We need to support the opposition in Syria, remove al-Assad,” he told NPR in November. Obviously, that requires enforcing a no-fly zone in Syrian airspace, which even National Review writers acknowledge may well lead to a mild shooting war with Russia. Though that may be the point: “Frankly, it’s time that we punched the Russians in the nose,” Kasich said in Vegas.

So why are all these newspapers portraying a candidate with such a bellicose foreign policy as a reality-based “moderate”? Most every endorsement cites Kasich’s expansion of Medicaid in Ohio, over the objections of national conservative activists. This has roughly squat to do with what the next president of the United States will face. Meanwhile foreign policy, and particularly the waging of war, will continue to be the area where commanders in chief arguably have the most latitude. As with John McCain in 2008, editorial boards are confusing inconsistently applied moderation (read: sporadic departures from standard-fare Republican positions and anti-Democratic rhetoric) with an actually even-keel approach to the most important part of his prospective job.

John Kasich wants the feds in your cell phone, and without you knowing about it. He thinks one key in winning the long war against Islamic terrorists is propagandizing in favor of “Judeo-Christian Western values.” He wants to ban Syrian refugees from entering the United States, punish countries who “dump product in this country,” and thinks failed banks should be bailed out. He is terrible and incoherent about the failed drug war, has active anger-management issues, and once tried to convert his hatred of the movie Fargo into action against Blockbuster. All of which will be held against him if and when political journalists start looking any deeper than he’s-not-as-crazy-sounding-as-those-other-guys.

But the crazy has been right there all along in this campaign, particularly on foreign policy. After the jump, read one of the single most spectacularly incoherent word-salads in this entire presidential campaign, from the Nov. 10 debate in Milwaukee:

GERARD BAKER: I want to ask you about China. In particular, hundreds of American companies have been subjected to cyberattacks from the Chinese military, yet state-backed Chinese companies, growing their presence in the United States, Chinese investments in U.S., which were nearly nonexistent a few years ago, are now over $50 billion. And as my newspaper recently reported, Chinese companies are planning to bid for one of the largest hotel chains in the United States, what would be the largest ever Chinese takeover of a U.S. company. Would you stop them?

KASICH: Let me tell you this, Mr. Baker, in terms of the cyberattacks, we have the capability to not only have a defensive posture, but it also to make it clear to people that if you attack us with cyberattacks, we will destroy the mechanisms that you are using to attack us.

I want to give you a little trip around the world. I served on the Defense Committee for 18 years. In the Ukraine, arm the people there so they can fight for themselves. In the eastern part of Europe, make sure that Finland and the Baltics know that if the Russians move, we move. In Syria, yes, a no-fly zone in the north on the Turkish border, a no-fly zone on the south on the Jordanian border. Anybody flies in the first time, maybe they can fly out. They fly in there a second time, they will not fly out. And it also becomes a sanctuary for the people to be. And it also sends many messages in the Middle East that we’re still involved.

Saudi Arabia, cut off the funding for the radical clerics, the ones that preach against us. But they’re fundamentally our friends. Jordan, we want the king to reign for 1,000 years. Egypt, they have been our ally and a moderating force in the Middle East throughout their history. In the groups—in the countries of the Gulf states of Bahrain, the Cleveland Clinic is opening an operation. Clearly we see the same with them. And in Israel, we have no better ally in the world, and no more criticizing them in public, we should support them.

And finally China. China doesn’t own the South China Sea, and I give the president some credit for being able to move a naval force in there to let the Chinese know that we’re not going to put up with it any more. And in the trade agreement, the TPP, it’s critical to us, not only for economic reasons and for jobs, because there are so many people who are connected to getting jobs because of trade, but it allows us to create not only economy alliances, but also potentially strategic alliances against the Chinese. They are not our enemy, but they are certainly not our friend.

And finally, I will say to everyone in this room, we have been talking about taxes and economics. When the fall comes, and we run against Hillary, which will be a disaster if she got elected. I have two 16-year-old girls, and I want this country to be strong. We make promises we can’t keep under the bright light of the fall, we will have trouble. We must make sure that economic programs and our military programs are solid.

I served in Washington as the chairman of the Budget Committee, and we got the budget balanced. And in Ohio, as the CEO, and guess what, we have got to have a CEO mentality and a way to beat Hillary Clinton and the Democracies in the fall. And our ideas have to add up. They have to be solid. And people have to know we have the confidence to lead America.

And as president, I will lead this country, as I have before in Washington and in Ohio, and will return both on domestic and international affairs.

Enjoy your rational moderate, editorial boards!

Indonesia is home to the planet’s largest Muslim population—and to a government that is willing to squelch controversial expression that runs afoul of prevailing attitudes toward gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and trans residents.

The latest targets, according to The Stack via Slashdot, include 

emojis, stickers and emoticons which depict same-sex couples, the rainbow flag, and any symbol that symbolises the lesbian, bay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community.

Apps that have been targeted by the demands include the popular Asian messaging app LINE, Whatsapp, Facebook and Twitter.

“Such contents are not allowed in Indonesia based on our cultural law and the religious norms and the operators must respect that,” said Ismail Cawidu, a spokesperson for the Indonesian Communication and Information Ministry.

Homosexuality isn’t illegal in most parts of Indonesia, mind you, but Cawidu says that kids might dig brightly colored stickers and emojis and the next thing you know, you’ve got a full-blown Tinky Winky situation on your hands.

More here.

This is all sad and stupid, especially for Indonesians in the Aceh province, which adheres to sharia law. There, you can be caned for having gay sex. But given the spread of communications tools, it’s also clear that such prohibitions are not only doomed to fail but self-evidently useless upon first being imposed. Which of course, just makes them sadder and stupider.

Former Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca will serve up to six months in prison for lying to federal investigators who were investigating civil rights violations at the Los Angeles County Men’s Jail. An FBI probe found that deputies abused inmates and even hid an informant who had been reporting abuses in the jail to the authorities (read the pleading document here). From the Los Angeles Times:

Last year, Baca’s former top aide, Undersheriff Paul Tanaka, was indicted on charges of orchestrating an elaborate scheme to thwart the FBI, raising questions about whether Baca would be the next to face prosecution.

The grand jury indictment of Tanaka offered a portrait of a department adrift, with senior officials who were responsible for investigating abuses working instead to undermine internal safeguards and ignoring repeated warnings of widespread problems in the nation’s largest jail system.

The investigation into the sheriff’s department has been going on for five years and has resulted in more than a dozen former officials being convicted. Reason TV spoke with the American Civil Liberties Union back in 2013 after the feds announced they would be charging 18 officers involved in corruption in the largest jail system in the United States.

George Washington’s exploits as both a politician and general are well known, but should he be equally recognized as a businessman? According to author Edward Lengel, the answer is an unqualified yes. In his new book, First Entrepreneur: How George Washington Built His–and the Nation’s–Prosperity, Lengel makes the case that Washington’s business acumen and economic principles are just as important to understanding the man and the country he helped form.  

“He was a big believer in individuals creating their own wealth by virtue of their own hard work,” says Lengel. “He believed that what he did at Mount Vernon was a microcosm of what other entrepreneurs could do for America.”

Watch above or click the link below for full text, links, downloadable versions and more.

View this article.

Landlords in Golden Valley, Minnesota, are challenging mandatory inspections of rental properties that go down to the toilet. Even though a judge agreed, the town is still fighting. Eric Boehm reports:

Even after one Minnesota judge ruled that Golden Valley can’t conduct inspections without a good reason, the city is spending more taxpayer money on an appeal.

“We’ve done nothing wrong and we have nothing to hide,” said Jason Wiebesick, one of the plaintiffs in the case. “The city of Golden Valley shouldn’t be allowed to force its way into innocent people’s homes.”

The city sees things differently. It requires a complete inspection of rental properties—all the way down to checking on the cleanliness of the kitchen and the bathroom—as part of a license renewal process that all landlords must go through periodically.

View this article.

College football is tantamount to religion in the South.  

So when John Bel Edwards (D) went on television Thursday night and threatened to cut college football due to the state’s massive budget deficit, SEC fans and sports enthusiasts reacted as if the Louisiana governor had spoken blasphemy over the state’s airwaves.  

Louisiana has a budget crisis to contend with this fiscal year. As the Times-Picayune reports: 

The governor’s staff announced Thursday that the state’s current year budget deficit has reached $940 million — a price tag larger than the annual spending on LSU’s Baton Rouge campus and all of New Orleans public higher education institutions combined. The state must find a way to close the gaping budget gap by June 30, when it shuts the books on the fiscal year.  

Once it resolves that budget crisis, Louisiana will be facing an immediate $2 billion shortfall in the next fiscal cycle, which starts July 1. Edwards is proposing cuts — but also large tax hikes — to deal with the financial crises both this year and next year. 

Those tax hikes include nine proposed increases on items such as alcohol, cigarettes, and rental cars to raise revenue and might even include raising rates on personal incomes.  The suggested increases have been described as the ”largest in state history” by state treasurer John Kennedy. 

Which is probably why state legislators aren’t buying Edwards’ plan. So the governor held a rare televised address to tell constituents that budget cuts would mean canceled classes for college students— and yes—even college football would be in peril come fall.   

But Edwards’ threat to cut college football is somewhat disingenuous, especially since the Louisiana State University (LSU) program actually generates revenue. While many schools receive state funds, LSU is one of seven NCAA Division I programs that does not accept state subsidies. In fact, LSU’s athletic program generated so much revenue last season that it transferred over $10 million to the university’s general academic fund. 

So clearly, college football—or at least LSU’s program—isn’t quite the albatross around the state budget’s neck that the governor wants the public to believe. 

And cutting subsidies to the rest of the state’s college football programs won’t do a thing to solve the budget crisis Louisiana currently faces. Les Miles makes a lot of money, but not enough to put a dent in a projected $2 billion budget hole.

Instead of seeking long-term reforms that would stabilize state spending, the governor wants to scare the public by threatening to cancel football season to generate support for higher taxes. Someone throw a flag on this guy. 

As has become customary this decade, the FBI and vice cops nationwide conducted a coordinated series of prostitution stings in conjunction with the latest Super Bowl, yielding hundreds of arrests for “would-be sex buyers.” Known as the National John Suppression Initiative, the stings—which took place in 14 states and involved 23 different law-enforcement units this year—start with police decoys offering commercial sex, usually on sites like Backpage.com. When prospective clients bite, they’re booked on solicitation or similar charges. At the end of the January 17 through February 7 operation, 552 people were arrested for trying to purchase sex, and officials expect to collect a minimum of $187,000 in fines from them. 

But don’t call it a “vice sting”—if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s actually human trafficking these days. In police press releases and FBI statements about the operation, officials trumpeted the dent they were making in “ending demand” for prostitution and thus eradicating sex trafficking. 

Across all operations, 10 teens were discovered, including seven in the San Francisco Bay area, a region that includes Santa Clara, where Super Bowl 50 took place. Though almost exclusively referred to as “children” by police and press, one recovered juvenile was 14 years old and the other nine ranged from ages 15 to 17. Public details about these cases are scarce, but a few are described in local news reports as runaways; it’s unclear whether most were being forced or coerced into prostitution or not (legally, anyone under 18 selling sex is defined as a sex trafficking victim). 

Because of its proximity to the Super Bowl, the Bay Area operation was by far the largest, with more than a half-dozen law-enforcement units, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, more than 50 organizations, and 5,000 volunteers lending a hand. The six-county operation yielded 85 arrests for soliciting prostitution, 12 “pimps” apprehended, and 129 adult sex workers “contacted.” (More on this from sex worker and author Maggie McNeill here.) 

By “contacted,” an FBI spokesperson specified that some were cited on prostitution charges and others were referred to social workers but will not provide precise numbers. In Santa Clara County, where 42 sex workers were “contacted,” 20 were ultimately referred to social service and 22 were arrested—including at least one minor, booked for prostitution and resisting arrest, according to the Contra Costa Times. It reports that “sex workers who were arrested were offered a wide array of services, such as food, clothing and shelter.”

The Bay Area operation also yielded 12 “pimps,” according to the FBI, though what they mean by this isn’t exactly clear. One of these so-called pimps, arrested on human trafficking of a minor and pandering charges, is a 20-year-old Sacramento sex-worker who was working alongside one 17-year-old and one older teen. 

It is also unclear how many sex workers were arrested nationwide during the “John Suppression” stings, but most places where any detail is available report both solicitation and prostitution arrests. In Lincoln, Nebraska, for instance, six men were arrested for solicitation, two people were arrested for driving women to prostitution jobs, and five women were arrested for prostitution. A Harris County, Texas, sting in late January led to the arrest of 18 “johns” and one woman charged with prostitution; their bonds range from $500 to $5,000. 

Overall, Harris County authorities and Houston police arrested 183 people on solicitation charges, the most of any one area. Cook County, Illinois—which includes Chicago—saw 79 potential prostitution clients arrested.

Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart spearheaded the launch of the National John Suppression Initiative (then called the National Day of John Arrests) in 2011; he’s also been on a crusade to shut down the classified-advertising site Backpage. Twenty-six sex workers were picked up and offered “counseling” during the Cook County operation; it’s unclear what happened if they refused. 

Stings in Phoenix, Mesa, and Glendale, Arizona, netted 32 “johns”; Little Rock police apprehended 42; and Seattle arrested 54.

Other participating areas and their solicitation-arrest numbers: Dekalb, Georgia, with three; Lake County, Indiana, with one; Howard County, Maryland, with eight; Boston with 18; Las Vegas and Reno, Nevada, with 34; Portland, Oregon, with six; and Pittsburgh with 23. Among those arrested were at least one police officer, a Northeastern University professor, and the brother of Denver Broncos safety Ryan Murphy; Murphy himself was detained and questioned by police but not charged.  

The last round of the National Johns Suppression Initiative, in which 18 states and 39 units participated last September, yielded 961 solicitation arrests and $189,170 in fines from those arrested.