Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

France Says Immunity is Forever

Contradicting a series of international law decisions by multiple national and international tribunals, and citing a missive from the French Foreign Ministry, a French court has ruled that ministerial immunity against torture charges persists past the minister's retirement.

Based on this dramatically deviant assertion by the French Foreign Ministry, the French court of first instance dismissed the torture charges filed against Donald Rumsfeld in France.

Details on what happened and how it deviates from international law as it is commonly understood at the Center for Constitutional Rights, France in Violation of Law Grants Donald Rumsfeld Immunity, Dismisses Torture Complaint.

Is this (pro-US) French President Nicolas Sarkozy's doing? It certainly seems an odd decision for Bernard Kouchner, the former socialist and co-founder of Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières) turned Foreign Minister.

It also seems like the sort of decision a decent court system would overturn on appeal.

Posted in Torture | 3 Comments

Kudos (Again) to Sen. Dodd

via techPresident: Dodd Breaks the Frame, Asks YouTube Question of GOPers

Finally, a presidential candidate has seized the opportunity presented by the CNN/YouTube debates … it looks like the creative minds at Chris Dodd's campaign—which has already distinguished itself with a string of web innovations—were paying attention. A few days ago, they posted this question from Senator Dodd for this Wednesday's Republican CNN/YouTube event:

Direct link to video.

Posted in Politics: US: 2008 Elections | 1 Comment

Time to Ban Police Use of Tasers?

Amnesty International says,

Since June 2001, there have been more than 270 TASER-related deaths in the United States. AI is concerned that TASERs are being used as tools of routine force—rather than as weapons of last resort. Rigorous, independent, impartial study of their use and effects is urgently needed.

By all means let's get the data. It's possible that the people killed by tasers might have been shot to death by police limited to their traditional guns and truncheons. But I doubt it.

Not to mention the non-lethal abuses — like the 82-year-old Chicago woman tased when she refused to admit cops sent to check on her well-being.

Update: And how did I miss this? “The use of these weapons causes acute pain, constituting a form of torture,'' the UN's Committee against Torture said.

Update2: Digby has a video of a Utah Highway Patrolman tasing a motorist — and then apparently lying to his partner about having given the motorist a warning. Lawsuit to follow. (But, say Digby's commentators, the real issues are pushy Taser salespeople and poor law enforcement training.)

Posted in Law: Criminal Law | 3 Comments

Be Thankful

Even when it's difficult.

Posted in Politics: US: GW Bush Scandals | 2 Comments

Tech Snark

This is mean: What If Gmail Had Been Designed by Microsoft?.

Unfortunately, there's some truth in it too.

Posted in Internet | Comments Off on Tech Snark

Don’t Use PayPal if You Can Use a Credit Card

I'd like to dissent from the view expressed at Concurring Opinions's A PayPal Christmas. Prof. Waldeck suggests that we'd all be better off if we used PayPal because “PayPal and other payment providers are intermediaries that can make both consumers and merchants better off” — primarily because “PayPal and similar services charge merchants lower processing fees and offer other advantages, such as not requiring retailers to reimburse them for fraudulent purchases.”

But in fact most consumers won't see the advantages — quite the contrary.

First, consider how Paypal gets its money from you. Unless you are a seller who puts money into Paypal from other consumers, odds are that you fund your Paypal account the way I do: with a linked credit card. It may be that Paypal gets charged a lower fee than a merchant account, but it can't be that much lower because it is still a “card not present” transaction, and those tend to be on the high end.

No, the real 'savings' to merchants is that by inserting Paypal into the payment chain, consumers waive their rights to cancel transactions if the good is not delivered or the service is performed improperly. That's because the credit card payment agreement is with Paypal, and it's not Paypal that has failed to perform. It's done exactly like you asked it, by sending money on to the merchant. And now the merchant is just a third party from the point of view of the credit card.

So, my advice is that if you are buying anything at all expensive, use your credit card. (Unless you are carrying a balance – in which case you want to pay that off first before you buy anything, even with Paypal!) Don't use your debit card, and certainly not a payment intermediary unless you trust that intermediary to have as generous chargeback terms as the credit cards.

It's certainly true that credit cards take a big bite out of merchants and that ultimately these charges are passed on to consumers. But unlike debit cards, credit cards give you a small float, even if you pay your bill in full every month (which you absolutely should). More importantly, they are in effect insuring the transaction. That's valuable now and especially valuable if you are buying something online, sight unseen, and trusting in delivery.

It may be that pressure from the paypals of the world will in time — lots of time — get credit card companies to cut their fees. But at best this is an N-person prisoner dilemma game; at worst it's a category mis-match because the service you are switching to is one that is significantly inferior to the one you are switching from. Paypal does have a “buyer protection policy” but this isn't mandated by law, and it is very significantly more limited than what your credit card will give you.

But don't take my word for it. Visit some of the Paypal fan sites, like PayPalsucks.com.

(Note: There are also “warning” sites aimed at merchants, e.g. About Paypal.org and Paypalwarning.com, but it's hard to tell if these are for real or just astroturf for a would-be competitor.)

Posted in Econ & Money | 15 Comments