Podcasts about Clause

In this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.Innovation is at the heart of the American economy, fueled by a patent system that represented a deliberate radical break from the British model. Under English practice, the Crown granted patents as royal favors, monopolies awarded at the sovereign's pleasure, with no requirement of genuine novelty or utility. The Framers rejected this. They believed that intellectual property rights should both reward ingenuity and advance society. By drawing Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 almost verbatim from the South Carolina Constitution, they tied the grant of patents to the mandate to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts."This system democratized invention, where anyone could apply for a patent, and set the stage for centuries of American innovative dominance. The U.S. model has largely been adopted globally.As we approach the Semiquincentennial, join our panel to explore the inventive spirit unleashed after the Founding. How did the Constitution break with British common law? Why did the Framers embed IP rights in the Constitution itself rather than the Bill of Rights? What does it mean that the provision passed without recorded controversy? And how healthy are those rights today?Featuring:Prof. Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. David S. Olson, Associate Professor, Boston College Law SchoolProf. Zvi Rosen, Associate Professor, UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law(Moderator) Hon. John D. Love, Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas

In this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.Innovation is at the heart of the American economy, fueled by a patent system that represented a deliberate radical break from the British model. Under English practice, the Crown granted patents as royal favors, monopolies awarded at the sovereign's pleasure, with no requirement of genuine novelty or utility. The Framers rejected this. They believed that intellectual property rights should both reward ingenuity and advance society. By drawing Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 almost verbatim from the South Carolina Constitution, they tied the grant of patents to the mandate to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts."This system democratized invention, where anyone could apply for a patent, and set the stage for centuries of American innovative dominance. The U.S. model has largely been adopted globally.As we approach the Semiquincentennial, join our panel to explore the inventive spirit unleashed after the Founding. How did the Constitution break with British common law? Why did the Framers embed IP rights in the Constitution itself rather than the Bill of Rights? What does it mean that the provision passed without recorded controversy? And how healthy are those rights today?Featuring:Prof. Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. David S. Olson, Associate Professor, Boston College Law SchoolProf. Zvi Rosen, Associate Professor, UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law(Moderator) Hon. John D. Love, Magistrate Judge, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas

Épisode des abonnés #23 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

Nick Reiner trust payout — his trust reportedly had no clause to stop a distribution after a murder charge. Does your family's trust have one? Most don't.The probate petition filed in the Nick Reiner case exposes something that goes well beyond one family. The trust Rob and Michele Reiner established for their son in 1993 allegedly used the most common settings in estate planning — mandatory distributions at fixed ages, no behavioral conditions, no trustee discretion to withhold. Those default settings are the reason Nick Reiner's legal team can now argue that more than $1.5 million was his before anyone died, and that neither the trustee nor the slayer statute can take it back.According to reporting, the trustee is now preparing to ask a judge to release the funds. A hearing is reportedly on the calendar for August. High-profile defense attorney Alan Jackson has filed a declaration saying he stands ready to return to the case if the money comes through.This is not an episode about the Reiner case alone. It's about the document sitting in your filing cabinet right now. The trust your attorney drafted when your kids were small. The one you haven't opened since you signed it.Three provisions — an indictment freeze, a discretionary trust structure, and a behavioral trigger — are available to any family working with an estate attorney. They don't require predicting violence. They exist for the situations families actually deal with: addiction, instability, irresponsibility. The fact that they also protect against the unimaginable is the entire point.The Reiners reportedly had none of them. Most families don't. This episode walks through all three and explains exactly how each one would have changed the outcome in the Reiner case. Nick Reiner is presumed innocent until proven guilty.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMER:This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS:#NickReiner #RobReiner #TrueCrimeToday #MicheleReiner #TrustFund #EstatePlanning #SlayerStatute #FamilyTrust #NickReinerUpdate #TrueCrime

Big players in the artificial intelligence space like OpenAI or Anthropic continue to take up tons of conversational space, whether it's about how much they're worth, how much they spend, and how much it takes to maintain their systems. Often left out of the conversations, though, are whether or not their investments could be a net benefit to the economy. Host Mike Eppel speaks to Raj Juneja, President of Cisco Systems Canada, about the company's leadership role in AI infrastructure, what he's hearing from CEOs about the growth payback from investing in AI, and how building trust and data security is key to Canadian user adoption. Do you have a topic that's confounding you in this economy? We'll be happy to dig into it for you and get you the answers you need. Email us at: rogerspodcastnetwork@rci.rogers.com. Thank you for listening!

Épisode des abonnés #22 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

Vous avez réussi professionnellement. Vous gagnez bien votre vie. Vous êtes indépendante. Mais amoureusement ? C'est un désastre.Et vous culpabilisez. Pour tout.Vous avez des standards et vous culpabilisez d'être "trop exigeante." Vous avez besoin de clarté et vous culpabilisez d'être "too needy." Vous réussissez et vous culpabilisez de prendre "trop de place." Vous dites non et vous culpabilisez d'être "difficile."Et cette culpabilité ? Elle sabote votre vie amoureuse. Elle vous pousse à accepter moins que ce que vous méritez. À diminuer qui vous êtes. À vous rendre petite pour que les hommes se sentent grands.Dans cet épisode, je décortique les 4 types de culpabilité que vous traînez. La culpabilité d'avoir des standards. La culpabilité d'avoir des besoins émotionnels. La culpabilité de prendre de la place. La culpabilité d'être "difficile."Et comment vous en libérer. Pas en étant moins exigeante. En comprenant que votre culpabilité n'est pas la vôtre. Que vous l'avez héritée.La vérité ? Avoir des standards n'est pas égoïste. Avoir des besoins n'est pas "too much." Prendre de la place n'est pas mal. Et vous n'êtes pas difficile. Vous êtes simplement digne.

Washington Gun Law's William Kirk joins Cam to discuss a variety of topics, including today's hearing in Curtis v. Katz, where plaintiffs are raising a challenge to Virginia's gun and magazine ban based on the militia clause in the Virginia Constitution.

Pajak is here with today's news. An update on Mo Salah, Rayan's release clause and Inter Milan make their first offer for Curtis Jones. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Your weekly guide to the music biz and how it all works. This week, Stu and Joe go football crazy and stick a reducer early doors on this week's music biz news:→ 270. That's how many ‘unofficial anthems' called ‘World Cup 2026' have been uploaded to Deezer… and 70% of them are AI slop.→ YouTube reckons that its terms of service allow it to use independent musicians' uploads to train AI models. Is that really true?→ Tupac Shakur has been dead for 30 years – or HAS he, etc etc – but if you think that will stop him returning to his acting career for a new console game, you're wrong…→ Say You, Say Me… just don't Say It In My Voice Without Permission. Why has Lionel Richie been filing trademarks for some of his most famous sung phrases?→ UK indie streaming service Cantilever has raised £250,000 of funding from a group of independent labels. Can it carve out a niche for itself against giants like Spotify though?→ Ariana Grande is one of the ‘good eggs' of the pop world, and this week brought more evidence of that: her new charitable foundation, and beef with the White House…→ The Happy Mondays want to sell you a giant pill. But wait, it's not what it seems! This is the latest, very literal meeting of physical music and merchandise…And in the special post-show lock-in section just for our ⁠⁠Patreon Superfans⁠⁠, Stu and Joe prop themselves up at the bar – in this week's bonus material: Stu has used AI to make a stereotypical England-oriented World Cup song. But is it any good? (No.) We listen anyway.Joe and Stu dig into the weird and wonderful Official FIFA World Cup AlbumWhat other overly-literal packaging could be made? (Stu has ideas for 'Revolver' and Portishead's 'Dummy')Last week, Stu saw Rufus Wainwright and Joe saw Mike D – but which had the sparkliest shoes? And which one brought out a Pussycat Doll to do a duet?Joe explains why he only buys his gravy and chips on The Strand===================================As ever, we welcome your feedback, emails and – in particular – any questions you might have about how the music biz works!Email us: ⁠⁠thepriceofmusicpodcast@gmail.com⁠⁠See you next week!Stuart and Joe======TPOM online: http://tpom.uk/Support The Price of Music on Patreon:⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/ThePriceofMusic⁠⁠Follow Stuart on X - @stuartdredgeFollow The Price of Music on X - @PriceofMusicpodFor sponsorship opportunities, please email - ⁠⁠joe@musically.com

Épisode des abonnés #21 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

Voice Of GO(r)D is very happy to bring you an in depth discussion with Roleigh Martin, a lifelong data systems analyst and inventor, who has written an as yet unpublished book which will be of great interest to many of my listeners.”The Forgotten Half of The Patent Clause” advertises itself as a ‘constitutional law litigation strategy and a citizen's playbook' and Mr Martin joins the show to explain his thesis on how two words in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, ‘time limited', have been left out of the equation within the only monopoly the Constitution grants, patents for new products. With time limitations being abandoned in the understanding and execution of patent law, Roleigh explains that 58% of our economy are effectively protected from the free market competition that the founders had envisioned for America when they wrote the Constitution. Amongst that 58% includes the manufacture of cars, trucks, and other types of equipment, and a series of past judicial rulings has vaporized the market for remanufacture of patent expired equipment which should, constitutionally, pass into the public domain. This situation is, in part, why we see the prices of cars and trucks have become totally untethered from reality, and way out of the budgets for most people to purchase them, a problem that has created a drag on the economy and radically increased the cost of living for everyone. This problem with abandoning the time limitation on patents has combined with the wicked incursion of the regulatory state into every facet of life, and turned every new vehicle into an expensive surveillance liability that most people wouldn't purchase - if they had a choice.Roleigh goes through the history of a number of cases that brought us to this problem, and then a number of more recent cases, which, when combined with the 2024 Chevron Deference ruling, have created an opportunity to correct this unconstitutional incursion into our economy, and give competing manufacturers access to expired patents as originally envisioned in the Constitution.I sure would like to buy an inexpensive brand new version of a 1983 Ford F-150 or a 1999 Peterbilt rather than a wildly overpriced and larded down with unnecessary surveillance and automation tech 2026 model, wouldn't you?Roleigh's book shows us how we might re-orient industry towards making these offerings a legal reality, and you will enjoy this conversation greatly.You can find Roleigh on Twitter, and read this summary of his idea and his book -https://x.com/RoleighMartin/status/2042726307931287738You can also read over 30 Twitter Articles he has published explaining various aspects of his proposal -https://x.com/RoleighMartin/articlesHow I initially found Roleigh was through this article he wrote connecting truckers to his larger idea -https://x.com/RoleighMartin/status/2039522355702100013I've been honored to be asked to write a foreword to Roleigh's book, and as soon as he figures out a publisher and gets it out into the universe, the listeners of my podcast and readers of this Substack will be amongst the first to know.https://autonomoustruckers.substack.com/I am always open to questions and comments, and especially look forward to any you might have regards this episode and Mr Martin's ideas.Send them here - gordilocks@protonmail.comAnd if you enjoyed the show, tell a friend and send it to them! Word of mouth is the best advertising, and the only type I can afford.Roleigh quite liked my own book, End of The Road - Inside The War on Truckers and if you have yet to avail yourself of a copy, please visit my publishers website, where you can find options for a hardcover, e-reader, or audiobook narrated by me.https://creedandculture.com/books/end-of-the-road-inside-the-war-on-truckers/Thanks for listening!

Épisode des abonnés #20 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

Épisode des abonnés #19 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

Richard Epstein examines the 14th Amendment's opening clause, distinguishing the robust rights of citizens from the conditional privileges of aliens. He argues that naturalization was historically a federal prerogative, noting that early statutes, influenced by Thomas Jefferson, included explicit racial exclusions for persons of African or Asian descent.18751

Paul Hamilton joins WGR to discuss the possibility of the Buffalo Sabres acquiring Dylan Larkin this offseason. They evaluate Larkin's potential fit with Tage Thompson and the trade assets required to land a top-line center. Additionally, the conversation touches on the team's defensive core, the ongoing Stanley Cup Finals, and recent officiating controversies in the NHL playoffs. 01:42 - Yankees and Knicks update 03:20 - Dylan Larkin trade rumors 09:38 - Sabres trade currency 12:10 - Buffalo's defensive core 19:10 - Stanley Cup Finals analysis

Épisode des abonnés #18 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

Welcome back to Transfer Hub, your home of Aston Villa's transfer news, rumours, noise, murmerings, incoming and outgoings. On the show Luke is discussing the unraveling transfer saga of Morgan Rogers and reacting to Ben Jacobs comments on Morgan Rogers having a buy back clause to Manchester City. Im calling it out and wanting the respect on Aston Villa's name. #astonvilla #morganrogers #premierleague

J'ai jasé plus d'une heure avec Xavier. Je partage l'épisode puisque je pense que son podcast mérite d'être mieux connu.On jase de plusieurs sujets, notamment un scoop sur mon changement de stratégie!Bonne écoute!Le podcast de Xavier: https://open.spotify.com/show/2BRmdcOxeQlApzKkM1bbXoAbonne-toi pour soutenir mon travail et obtenir un épisode supplémentaire chaque mois : https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/financesfondamentales/subscribe Page Instagram du podcast : https://www.instagram.com/finances.fondamentales/?hl=fr  Gmail: ⁠⁠⁠⁠Financesfondamentales@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ Clause de non-responsabilitéInvestir comporte des risques deperte. Ce podcast est uniquement à des fins d'information et ne doit pas êtreconsidéré comme un conseil en investissement personnalisé ou être utilisé pourprendre des décisions d'investissement. L'animateur du podcast peut détenir despositions dans les titres discutés.L'animateur du podcast reçoit despaiements de diverses entités pour des publicités. L'inclusion de tellespublicités ne constitue ni n'implique une approbation, un parrainage ou unerecommandation de ceux-ci, ou toute affiliation avec ceux-ci. Lesinvestissements dans des titres comportent des risques de perte. Toute mentiond'un titre particulier et des données de performance associées ne constitue pasune recommandation d'acheter ou de vendre ce titre. Les informations fourniessur le podcast ne sont pas destinées à un investisseur ou à une catégoried'investisseurs spécifiques et sont fournies uniquement à titre d'informationgénérale.Évidemment, rien sur ce podcast nedoit être considéré comme un conseil financier personnalisé ou unesollicitation d'achat ou de vente de titres. Pour tout conseil spécifique,veuillez consulter un professionnel. L'animateur du podcast ne peut être tenuresponsable de vos décisions financières.

Kevin Mack, the new president of Via Licensing Alliance, joins Eli for the Clause 8 season finale.Kevin talks about Via's plans to build its next patent pools around "de facto" standards — technology the market adopted on its own, with no standards body behind it — which would push collaborative licensing into territory it has never touched. Mack also takes a hard look at the royalty-free models spreading through tech and AI, from AV1 to the new Shared AI License Foundation (SAIL), argues that "free" rarely stays free, and explains why he's optimistic about where the patent system is heading.Kevin and Eli also discuss:*Via's model and the "tipping point" that turns a pool from a few licensors into thousands of licensees*"De facto" standards: pooling patents for technology no standards body ever blessed*Leadership turnover at Via, the HEVC pool's move to Access Advance, and a new strategy-and-growth group*The push into semiconductors, including a new DRAM memory program*AV1, SAIL, and why Mack thinks royalty-free rarely stays free*Whether AI patents are as "foundational" as advertised — and why "AI is not new"*Efficient infringement, patents as property rights, and why companies ultimately take a license*The mood out of Via's Rome summit and a US patent system tilting back toward ownersNotable names, companies & standardsPeople: Kevin Mack (president, Via Licensing Alliance); Heath Hoglund (former Via president); John Amster (Jamster Capital; RPX co-founder)Organizations: Via Licensing Alliance (Via LA), MPEG LA, Dolby, Access Advance, Alliance for Open Media, Shared AI License Foundation (SAIL), WIPO (PatentScope), DOJ, USPTOSAIL founders / board (public): Anthropic, Genentech, IBM, Meta, Microsoft; board observers eBay and TD Bank Group; members include Block and FigmaStandards & technologies: AAC, AVC (H.264), HEVC (H.265), AV1, MPEG-2, Qi wireless charging, DRAM memory, SEP / FRANDDisclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

Épisode des abonnés #17 en rediffusion, maintenantaccessible à tout le monde. Attention : les informations présentées dans cet épisode ne sontpeut-être plus à jour. Il a été enregistré il y a au moins 6 mois. 

In this Federalist Society America250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.In 2022, the Supreme Court overruled the "Lemon Test" for interpreting the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, holding that the Clause must instead be interpreted by reference to "historical practices and understandings." To do this, the Court suggested it would look to certain historical "hallmarks of religious establishments the framers sought to prohibit when they adopted the First Amendment." This has kicked off a vigorous debate, in both caselaw and scholarship, about what constituted "an establishment of religion" at the time of the Founding, and how that history should inform interpretation of the Establishment Clause today. Join a gathering of the foremost scholars and litigators of the Establishment Clause to discuss the Clause's historical meaning both as a matter of originalist theory and in its application to current church-state controversies, such as displays of the Ten Commandments in public schools.Featuring:Joe Davis, Senior Counsel, The Becket Fund for Religious LibertyDouglas Laycock, Robert E. Scott Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Virginia; Alice McKean Young Regents Chair in Law Emeritus, University of TexasMichael McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law, Stanford Law School(Moderator) Hon. Ryan D. Nelson, Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Some people want love to be a laugh a minute. Others want it to be malleable like a balloon. And others think love is a monster lying in wait in a sewer to devour them. And we're celebrating all of those today with Clowns! For this circus of an episode we read "Clause, Clown & Ferret" by Meghan Amy, and "Stop Me If You've Heard This One: A Novel" by Kristen Arnett. Our buffoonish hosts discuss self-sabotage, moms with kinks, and at one point they get so worked up that they had to pause recording for a second. Support us on Patreon! patreon.com/fmklitpod

EP — Adam Pope on why Manchester outperforms cities twice its size.Manchester's business culture is built on graft, confidence and doing things without waiting for permission. Adam Pope explains why the city's attitude consistently turns small firms into serious operators and why founders underestimate the Northern Powerhouse region at their cost.The conversation covers how Greater Manchester's geography, talent pool, transport links and industrial heritage shape commercial behaviour, plus the practical realities of scaling outside London. We also look at hiring, governance, legal blind spots and how AI is already changing professional services.What You'll Learn in This Episode:• Spot the cultural traits that drive Manchester's commercial confidence• Judge when to base operations inside or outside the city centre• Avoid common legal and governance gaps that derail SMEs• Use AI without weakening decision‑making or risk controls• Build trust in a region where people value straight dealingThis episode is for UK founders deciding where to build, scale or expand — especially if you're considering life outside the M25.*For Apple Podcast chapters, access them from the menu in the bottom right corner of your player*Spotify Video Chapters:0:00 Manchester isn't trying to be London01:34 Industrial heritage and tech investment04:02 Greater Manchester's expansion06:23 Culture, friendliness and swagger10:11 Wealth, influence and the city's vibe15:21 Starting and hiring in Manchester18:10 Northern Powerhouse and regional funding22:47 HS2, infrastructure and wasted budgets24:58 What high‑speed rail would really change32:18 Scaling across the North33:24 Trust, class and regional attitudes39:04 Legal sector differences48:35 AI, law and Adam's Clause platform57:13 Automation, headcount and future roles1:03:43 Where SMEs go wrong legally1:13:33 Business or BullshitWatch and subscribe to us on YouTubeFollow us:InstagramTikTokLinkedInTwitterFacebookIf you'd like to be on the show, get in contact - mail@businesswithoutbullshit.me

Bruce Lehman, head of USPTO from 1993 to 1998, joins Clause 8 for a wide-ranging conversation about the modern IP system, the internet boom, and why the AI era may require a new copyright response from Congress.Lehman helped shape internet-era copyright policy from the USPTO, including the work that led to the WIPO Copyright Treaties and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). He also played a major role in the broader 1990s pro-IP moment, when the United States was strengthening IP rights globally through TRIPS, WIPO, and trade policy.Now, Lehman argues that courts have spent the last two decades weakening copyright through an expansive view of fair use — creating a system where AI companies can train on massive amounts of human-created content without giving creators a meaningful stake. Asked whether new legislation is needed to protect creators in the AI age, Lehman does not hesitate: “The short answer is yes.”The episode also covers:*Lehman's “patent pendulum” theory and why he believes the US is now in a low-protection IP era*How the DMCA emerged from the Clinton administration's internet copyright work*TRIPS, WIPO, and the globalization of IP rights in the 1990s*Bayh-Dole and the rise of the university-to-startup pipeline*Lehman's historic confirmation as the first openly gay man confirmed by the Senate*His role in turning the USPTO into a “prominent perch” for national IP policy*Gilbert Hyatt, submarine patents, and SAWS*USPTO telework, examiner retention, and modernization*His message that current leadership should “stop tormenting the Patent Corps”*The limits of AI — and why Lehman thinks it lacks the "metaphysical" spark behind true invention*Judge Pauline Newman and her pro-patent legacyWatch the full episode and read the companion post on Voice of IP: https://voiceofip.com/Subscribe to the Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/@clause8Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

Guest: Tess Lynch, Founding Attorney, Clause and AffectWhen Crimson Desert announced "no AI in our game," the internet applauded. But does anyone agree on what that actually means? Tess Lynch — gaming and IP attorney, founder of Clause and Affect, and one of the more practical legal voices covering this space — joined Greg to untangle what studios are really promising when they make that pledge, and what they're leaving dangerously undefined.What we get into:The three tiers of AI in games that almost nobody distinguishes clearly — procedural generation (been here forever, deterministic, mostly fine), machine learning trained on licensed data (DLSS, Adobe Firefly, getting complicated), and generative AI trained on scraped data (the one everyone's actually upset about, and for good reason).Why "no AI" policies get weird fast — no Gmail, no Copilot, no AI meeting notes — and why the real target is almost always generative AI replacing human creative work, not automation tools embedded in software you're already using.The consent problem hiding inside "licensed" datasets. Adobe Firefly is built on licensed images, but did those photographers consent to having their work used to train the model? Tess breaks down where that gets legally murky, and why the Scarlett Johansson standard she uses is a useful gut check.UGC platforms and the IP trap studios don't see coming. When players generate content in your game — especially with AI tools — the question of who owns it, who's liable for it, and whether you can even copyright it is almost entirely unsettled law right now.Why purely AI-generated work can't be copyrighted (current U.S. law requires human authorship), and what that means for studios shipping games with AI-generated assets as placeholders they forgot to swap out. Clair Obscure and Crimson Desert both came up.The patchwork regulatory problem. Every state has its own privacy laws, its own AI laws, its own age assurance rules. Tess calls it what it is: an amalgamation that will never get cleaner until it becomes a federal issue — which she doesn't expect soon.When should you actually talk to a lawyer? Her answer: yesterday. But more practically — before you touch sensitive data, before you go live with anything using AI in a novel way, and definitely before you sign contractor agreements that don't address it.And on the business side: what it's actually like to build a solo law firm serving indie devs and creatives who can't pay BigLaw rates. Billing, time management, and figuring out what your work is worth.Tess Lynch: LinkedIn | Clause and Affect website | Your AI NPC Might Be IllegalPlayer Driven: Discord | Newsletter

Ade Oladipo and Spencer Oliver are reporting live from the Dave Allen v Fillip Hrgovic weigh-ins as part of the Fight Night Daily Podcast and Allen's homecoming fight in Doncaster. Aswell as this fight, they also discuss Fabio Wardley activating the rematch clause for his fight with Daniel Dubois!Check out talkSPORT's Socials:

Sai Prakash joins to discuss his new book, The Presidential Pardon: The Short Clause with a Long, Troubled History. The Constitution's Pardon Clause grants the president a power unmatched in scope and consequence. In The Presidential Pardon, Prakash explores how this brief clause has grown into the most expansive and controversial tool of the modern presidency. Thomas Donnelly, lead scholar at the National Constitution Center, moderates. Additional Resources  Sai Prakash, The Presidential Pardon: The Short Clause with a Long, Troubled History National Constitution Center, Article II and the Pardon Clause National Constitution Center, The Nixon pardon in constitutional retrospect National Constitution Center, 10 famous people who received presidential pardons Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr Explore the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support our important work ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

Tom Bartlett spent 22 years inside the NHS. For three and a half years, he led the 150-person engineering team at NHS England that built the £330M Federated Data Platform with Palantir.He a month ago and he's the only insider speaking publicly about what the platform actually does, what it costs, and whether the NHS has any credible alternative.We cover the architecture, the cost, the CLOUD Act, the BMJ exposé, the conflicts of interest at Chelsea & Westminster, and whether ministers should trigger the break clause.

Rex Heuermann's guilty plea resolved eight murder charges in one proceeding. But the structure of the deal itself raises questions that go beyond the confession. During a confidential session with prosecutors, Heuermann raised the name Karen Vergata — a woman he was never charged with killing. Her case was absorbed into the plea agreement, effectively closing it without a separate prosecution or public evidentiary hearing. The cooperation agreement with the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit reportedly includes no mechanism to compel truthful participation or penalize refusal.This week's True Crime Today review revisits the most significant Gilgo Beach developments — the legal architecture of the plea, the evidentiary rulings that forced it, and the psychological dimensions revealed through documentary footage.Every defense motion had been denied. Whole genome sequencing — the forensic technique that matched Heuermann's DNA to evidence recovered from victim remains — was ruled admissible. The court ordered all charges tried in a single proceeding, eliminating any possibility of severance. Heuermann's defense had exhausted its options. The plea, framed by his attorney as a calculated pivot, followed a thousand days of maintained innocence.The Peacock documentary captured the private aftermath. Asa Ellerup, Heuermann's ex-wife, heard him describe the killings during a jailhouse visit — including confirmation of dismemberment conducted inside their shared residence. His daughter Victoria confronted him directly about whether the victims registered as human to him. He said they did not. Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott analyzes the family dynamics under that level of sustained psychological exposure — the denial structures, the trauma responses, and what Heuermann's clinical detachment during these conversations reveals about how he processed decades of violence.The DA's office has acknowledged reviewing hundreds of cold cases across Suffolk County. Sentencing is pending. Whether this plea represents justice or an engineered exit remains the central unresolved question.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#RexHeuermann #GilgoBeach #GilgoBeachKiller #KarenVergata #SuffolkCounty #LISK #GuiltyPlea #SerialKiller #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers

When Alice came down in 2014, much of the patent prosecution bar reacted with denial. Most practitioners hoped the USPTO, the Federal Circuit, or Congress would clean things up — and that adding some magic language to claims and specifications would eventually be enough.Eli Mazour and Ngai Zhang, separately, came to a different conclusion: there had to be a new, better way to obtain strong patents in the post-Alice world. They started comparing notes more than a decade ago, eventually converged on a shared approach, and now implement these strategies together at Foley & Lardner.On this episode of Clause 8, Eli and Ngai walk through what they actually do — their unique strategies for avoiding and overcoming Section 101 issues, why it's difficult for other attorneys to implement these strategies, and how they think their practice will be impacted in the age of AI.In this episode:* Why relying only on art unit prediction tools & wordsmithing is a losing strategy for § 101* Why claim 1 shouldn't be your broadest claim* How taking features out of independent claims helps advance prosecution - and how the strategy also leaves clients routinely surprised by how broad their issued claims end up* Examiner interviews as hostage negotiations: Ngai's framework based on Chris Voss's Never Split the Difference* Differing approaches that Ngai and Eli have on whether to push for an explicit on-the-record agreement before ending an interview* AI as a collaborator for patent drafting and prosecution* The importance of human interactions and communication for patent prosecution even in the age of AIWatch the full episode and read the companion post on Voice of IP: https://voiceofip.com/Subscribe to the Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/@clause8

A prenuptial agreement. One clause. If Eric Richins died while they were married, Kouri would inherit everything. Divorce meant walking away with nothing. Death meant millions. That single clause in a document signed on their wedding day became the engine of a murder that a jury needed less than three hours to see through. In this first installment of our five-part definitive series, we examine the woman behind the mask — the $7.5 million debt spiral, the $250,000 line of credit taken without her husband's knowledge, the fifteen failed renovation projects, and the forensic accountant who testified that Kouri's financial enterprise was collapsing so completely that selling everything she owned wouldn't have gotten her back to zero. We reveal how Eric quietly restructured his estate in 2020 to protect his children after discovering her fraud — and how Kouri, who didn't know she'd been cut out, accelerated her plan. Eric Richins wasn't her husband. He was her insurance policy. And when he tried to protect himself, she cashed him in.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#KouriRichins #KouriRichinsTrial #EricRichins #FentanylPoisoning #MurderConviction #UtahCase #PrenupMurder #InsuranceFraud #SummitCountyUtah #JusticeForEric

Send us Fan Mail

One business group alleges language in the proposed bill that would give the legislature power to change the threshold on the wealth tax ideaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Constitutional Deep Dive with Eric: Article 4 - Section 4 - The Guarantee Clause! www.buchanandisability.com or www.headlinesandopinions.com Conversations centered around the American Experiment and our Constitution and Bill of Rights! Our goal is to provide different perspectives - give historical context - model how to talk with those whom we may disagree with - tie foundational principals to today's headlines - PLUS, have some fun along the way. Please leave us a review and share with your friends! (A PODCAST PROVIDED AND OWNED BY DURING THE BREAK PODCASTS) Brought to you by Eric Buchanan and Associates: www.buchanandisability.com This podcast is hosted by ZenCast.fm

In today's conversation, you'll hear two friends talk through a super real (and super frustrating) situation: trying to cancel a gym membership and getting blocked at every step. You'll listen to natural, emotional English that native speakers use when they're venting and pushing back.You'll learn:clause: a specific rule or condition written into a contract“give someone the runaround”: to keep sending someone from person to person (or step to step) without actually solving the problemfluency tip: choose one line from the dialogue and say it three different ways, changing only your tone to practice sounding more naturalKeep listening, repeat out loud, and don't worry about being perfect—focus on sounding clear, confident, and natural one step at a time.

Date with a Debut is a podcast hosted by writer Nick Wasiliev: shining a light on debut authors, their incredible books, and their journeys to publication. In our second episode of series four, Nick sits down with Bridie Blake, the debut author of romance novel The Boyfriend Clause. WARNING: This podcast contains coarse language. Enjoy the show? Drop us a review, it really helps the show out! You can also subscribe to our new monthly newsletter: https://nickwasiliev.substack.com/ Check out our brand new podcast website: https://dwad.podpixels.com/ Check out the 2026 sponsor of the podcast, Pod Pixels: https://bit.ly/4cbG1Zt Subscribe on Podbean to never miss an episode: https://www.podbean.com/site/podcatcher/index/blog/3mRME5IMoSJx Date with a Debut is featured as part of the Australian literary platform Words & Nerds. Check out all shows on the platform here: https://danivee.com.au/podcasts/ BOOKS: Debut: The Boyfriend Clause / Bridie Blake: https://booktopia.kh4ffx.net/QYKVaz Additional books mentioned: The Butterfly Women / Madeleine Cleary: https://booktopia.kh4ffx.net/9VevmY What Did I Miss? / Holly Brunnbauer: https://booktopia.kh4ffx.net/Vx5MZj Looking For Alibrandi / Melina Marchetta: https://booktopia.kh4ffx.net/bay9Jb ADDITIONAL LINKS: Bridie's piece with the Australian Writers Centre: https://www.writerscentre.com.au/blog/bridie-blake-the-boyfriend-clause/ PRODUCTION NOTES: Host: Nick Wasiliev Guest: Bridie Blake Editing & Production: Nick Wasiliev Podcast Theme: ‘Chill' by Sakura Hz Production Code: 4.2 Episode Number: #60 Additional Credits: Dani Vee (Words & Nerds), Aideen Gallagher, Fruzsi Gal (Text Publishing) FOLLOW NICK WASILIEV (+ DATE WITH A DEBUT): A LITTLE IDEA PODCAST: Feed NEWSLETTER: nickwasiliev.substack.com WEBSITE: www.nicholaswasiliev.com YOUTUBE: @NickWasiliev_Official INSTAGRAM: @nickwasiliev TWITTER/X: @Nick_Wasiliev FACEBOOK: Nick Wasiliev TIKTOK: @nickwasiliev © 2026 Nick Wasiliev and Breathe Art Holdings ‘Date With A Debut' is a Words and Nerds and Breathe Art Podcasts co-production recorded and edited on Awabakal Country, and we pay our respects to all elders past and present.

President Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick pride themselves on being dealmakers and on making the kind of unconventional deals for America no one else could have gotten done. Gil Hyatt is offering them one that sounds like a no-brainer. However, the question remains whether that dealmaking reputation is enough to overcome thirty years of inertia from prior administrations focused on opposing Hyatt, including most notably on keeping any more of his patents from ever issuing.Inventor Gil Hyatt returns to Clause 8 to discuss his proposal to donate foundational AI patents to the Pioneering AI Foundation, a nonprofit he says could help give the U.S. government new leverage to advance American interests. Hyatt also reflects on his decades-long battle with the USPTO, the motivation behind the foundation, and why he sees the project as a gift to America ahead of the nation's 250th birthday.Will America accept the gift?The episode covers:* 00:23 — the ongoing battle with the USPTO* 02:44 — the Pioneering AI Foundation* 05:35 — using the ITC and trade agreements as leverage* 07:11 — human rights and labor unions: leveling the global playing field* 10:24 — AI in the classroom: the “super headstart” for children* 12:35 — relieving drudgery: AI as a catalyst for creative thinking* 14:27 — addressing skepticism: motives and financials* 16:16 — repaying the dream: the legacy of immigrant parents* 17:34 — advice for the next generation of inventors* 18:22 — final thoughts: destiny and helping America

In this episode of JJ Meets World, JJ and Tucker finally tackle one of the most important topics of our time: pizza. From Chicago deep dish vs New York style to thin crust, Detroit-style, and stuffed crust, nothing is off limits. The conversation dives into the origins of pizza obsession (shoutout to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles), the evolution of crust styles, and why pizza might be the ultimate "canvas food." Along the way, things take a surprising turn into the U.S. judicial system, including a real-life court opinion that uses pizza to explain federal law.

Chaque jour, en quelques minutes, un résumé de l'actualité culturelle. Rapide, facile, accessible.Notre compte InstagramDES LIENS POUR EN SAVOIR PLUSAUTEURS CLAUSE GRASSET: LeHuffpost, Marianne, RadioFrance, LibérationRETOUR WIL AIME : Wil Aime, Kultur AUTEURS TRIBUNE : Le Huffpost, Marianne LANA DEL REY JAMES BOND : RadioFrance, BBC FESTIVAL DU LIVRES : FranceInfo, Le Figaro DOC GYNECO : Le Figaro, Charts In FranceÉcriture : Mathys DebrilIncarnation : Mathys Debril Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Legacy Audio Archive

This week Rich has on comedian Mike Mancusi!

Austin shares how you can increase your email response rate by 3X by giving the recipient a way out!Time Stamped Show Notes:[0:25] - Triple your response rate by using an “exit clause”[1:11] - Why typical sign-offs are a bad idea[2:27] - First impressions matter [2:52] - What to do instead - give them an out[5:05] - Try it for yourself and track the outcomesHave questions about how to use an exit clause? Text them to Austin at (201) 479-9511.Exit Clause Mentioned In Today's Episode:“Lastly, I know your time is valuable and I know this is a big ask coming from a stranger. If it's too much right now, that's totally fine! Feel free to say no. I'm grateful for whatever info you're able to share here or over the phone. Either way, have a fantastic week.”Want To Level Up Your Job Search?Click here to learn more about 1:1 career coaching to help you land your dream job without applying online.Check out Austin's courses and, as a thank you for listening to the show, use the code PODCAST to get 5% off any digital course:The Interview Preparation System - Austin's proven, all-in-one process for turning your next job interview into a job offer.Value Validation Project Starter Kit - Everything you need to create a job-winning VVP that will blow hiring managers away and set you apart from the competition.No Experience, No Problem - Austin's proven framework for building the skills and experience you need to break into a new industry (even if you have *zero* experience right now).Try Austin's Job Search ToolsResyBuild.io - Build a beautiful, job-winning resume in minutes.ResyMatch.io - Score your resume vs. your target job description and get feedback.ResyBullet.io - Learn how to write attention grabbing resume bullets.Mailscoop.io - Find anyone's professional email in seconds.Connect with Austin for daily job search content:Cultivated CultureLinkedInTwitterThanks for listening!

Is anything in the patent world ever really free?That question anchors a new Clause 8 conversation between host Eli Mazour and Professor Kristen Osenga, a University of Richmond law professor and one of the leading academic voices on standard essential patents.At the center of the discussion is the rise of so-called “royalty-free” technology standards. Osenga's point is straightforward: “free” often comes with strings attached — particularly for smaller innovators that may be required to cross-license valuable patent rights or accept terms they may later regret.Her main example is the Alliance for Open Media, the tech consortium behind a “royalty-free” video compression standard. The pitch sounds simple: use the standard without paying royalties. But, as Osenga explains, the real question is what companies may be giving up in return — and whether they fully understand the long-term cost of joining.She offers a simple analogy: a store gives away free croissants to get customers in the door. Customers build habits around it. Then one day the sign changes. In Osenga's view, the same risk exists here. Companies can build products and business models around terms that may not remain as favorable as they first appeared.From there, the discussion broadens into the wider ecosystem of royalty-free standards, cross-licensing organizations, defensive patent pledges, and emerging AI-related IP initiatives. What is driving these arrangements? Collaboration? Public relations? Strategic control? And what, exactly, should companies think through before signing on?As Osenga puts it: “Follow the money … where are these groups making their money? Because it's probably coming from some other part of their business model.”The episode also covers:* what the pattern of withdrawals from major cross-licensing organizations reveals about how these arrangements play out over time* SEP policy whiplash across US administrations, the Standard Essential Royalties Act (SERA), and where things stand now* the EU's proposed SEP framework, and why it stalled* the litigation funding debate, including why Osenga founded The Inventors Defense Alliance* the Tillis-Schiff letter to ANSI, China's push to shape global standards bodies, and the implications for US innovation leadership* why Osenga believes the RESTORE Act is critical to preserving US innovation leadershipIt is a conversation worth sharing with anyone focused on licensing, standards, or innovation policy.

The notwithstanding clause has been controversial since it was written into Canada's Constitution, and now it's facing its biggest test yet. The Supreme Court of Canada just wrapped up its longest-ever hearing on Bill 21 — Quebec's law on religious symbols. What started as a debate over laïcité has become a major constitutional showdown. Host Noor speaks with Pearl Eliadis to break down what's really at stake, and what this case could mean for the future of the notwithstanding clause in Canada.Plus, an update on the controversial Liberal Bill C-12 from Adam B. Sadinsky.Host: Noor AzriehCredits: Aviva Lessard (Senior Producer), Sam Konnert (Host/Producer), Noor Azrieh (Host/Producer), Caleb Thompson (Audio Editor and Technical Producer), Max Collins (Director of Audio) Jesse Brown (Editor), Tony Wang (Artwork)Guests: Pearl Eliadis, Adam B. SadinskyImage credit: Pat LachanceBackground reading:A Canadian Supreme Court Case Could Test the Country's Unity – The New York Times A Supreme constitutional clash: Canadians' rights against government powers – The Globe and Mail6 key moments from the Supreme Court challenge of Quebec's secularism law – CBC NewsOpinion: Bill 21 the product of modern identity politics, not the Quiet Revolution – Montreal GazetteBill 21: Supreme Court chief justice calls English community's argument 'almost outrageous' – Montreal GazetteA major immigration reform bill is now law in Canada. Some worry it rolls back refugee rights – CBC NewsSponsors: Douglas is giving our listeners a FREE Sleep Bundle with each mattress purchase. Get the sheets, pillows, mattress and pillow protectors FREE with your Douglas purchase today at douglas.ca/canadalandVisit fizz.ca to learn more about Fizz mobile and its long list of added-value features. Activate a first plan using the referral code CAN40 to get 40$ off and 10GB of free data.Everyone is still finding their way. Find yours and feel lighter.Sign up and get 10% off at BetterHelp.Did you know we have a monthly supporter exclusive show? Last episode, we asked you if you've ever fallen for fake news. I guess even our savvy, discerning audience isn't infallible. You all had a lot to say! If you want to hear that (or if you want to catch up on all the great episodes of Off The Record you've missed!) become a supporter at canadaland.com/join.It's crowd-finding time at Canadaland! Share this episode with three people or simply send them over to canadaland.com/share and we'll help them get started with a starter pack of some of our favourite episodes.If you value this podcast, Support us! You'll get premium access to all our shows ad free, including early releases and bonus content. You'll also get our exclusive newsletter, discounts on merch, tickets to our live and virtual events, and more than anything, you'll be a part of the solution to Canada's journalism crisis, you'll be keeping our work free and accessible to everybody. Can't get enough Canadaland? Follow @Canadaland_Podcasts on Instagram for clips, announcements, explainers and more. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Trump, President of U.S. v. Barbara | 04/01/26 | Docket #: 25-365 25-365 TRUMP V. BARBARA DECISION BELOW: CERT. GRANTED 12/5/2025 QUESTION PRESENTED: The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that those "born * * * in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," are U.S. citizens. U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, § 1. The Clause was adopted to confer citizenship on the newly freed slaves and their children, not on the children of aliens temporarily visiting the United States or of illegal aliens. On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order No. 14,160, Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship , which restores the original meaning of the Citizenship Clause and provides, on a prospective basis only, that children of temporary visitors and illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens by birth. The Citizenship Order directs federal agencies not to issue or accept citizenship documents for such children born more than 30 days after the Order's effective date. The question presented is whether the Executive Order complies on its face with the Citizenship Clause and with 8 U.S.C. 1401(a), which codifies that Clause. LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 25-1861

A crafty new breed of social engineering attack is tricking users into launching malware straight from their clipboard, exposing a fresh vulnerability in Windows that even tech pros could fall for. Leo Laporte and Steve Gibson break down how the latest ClickFix and CrashFix exploits are outsmarting traditional defenses. The lowdown on last week's "no turn" picture of the week. Is an AI-driven hacking campaign a big deal now. Clause used in multiple Mexican government attacks. Apple continues to be confronted with age restrictions. COPPA needs an exception to allow age collection. Meta swamps law enforcement with AI-slop CSAM reports. Roskomnadzor has been busy blocking VPNs. Guess how many. The UK tries to report their self-scanning success. Remember that hacker who extorted the psychotherapy patients. Scattered Lapsus$ Hunters is actively recruiting women. Cisco lands another breathtakingly rare 10.0 CVSS. VulnCheck's report on 2025 vulnerabilities and exploits. Steve discovers a fabulous $72 Hardware Security Module. A listener shares an interesting AI service discovery. The very potent "ClickFix" exploit evolves Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1067-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: meter.com/securitynow guardsquare.com threatlocker.com/twit adaptivesecurity.com outsystems.com/twit

A crafty new breed of social engineering attack is tricking users into launching malware straight from their clipboard, exposing a fresh vulnerability in Windows that even tech pros could fall for. Leo Laporte and Steve Gibson break down how the latest ClickFix and CrashFix exploits are outsmarting traditional defenses. The lowdown on last week's "no turn" picture of the week. Is an AI-driven hacking campaign a big deal now. Clause used in multiple Mexican government attacks. Apple continues to be confronted with age restrictions. COPPA needs an exception to allow age collection. Meta swamps law enforcement with AI-slop CSAM reports. Roskomnadzor has been busy blocking VPNs. Guess how many. The UK tries to report their self-scanning success. Remember that hacker who extorted the psychotherapy patients. Scattered Lapsus$ Hunters is actively recruiting women. Cisco lands another breathtakingly rare 10.0 CVSS. VulnCheck's report on 2025 vulnerabilities and exploits. Steve discovers a fabulous $72 Hardware Security Module. A listener shares an interesting AI service discovery. The very potent "ClickFix" exploit evolves Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1067-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: meter.com/securitynow guardsquare.com threatlocker.com/twit adaptivesecurity.com outsystems.com/twit

This week we have our very first guest in the studio and it's none other than comedian Sandy Danto. We discuss loud friends, First Lady Melania's 2025 Chreemus decor, Netflix's garbage show All's Fair worst lines so far, Holiday AI movies and so much more. Make sure to rate and review on YouTube! More Sandy! IG: https://www.instagram.com/sandydanto/ More Justin! IG: https://www.instagram.com/justinmartindale/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Produced by Keida Mascaro IG: https://www.instagram.com/keidamascaro/ The Cave Podcast Studio ⁠⁠⁠ https://keidamascaro.com/the-cave⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices