http://www.baidu.com/
The funniest part is they allow songs and websites about killing US citizens and solider's, along with destroying Democracy and racism but they will not allow my cite.
As per US Supreme Court cases, if they are providing a service to the public which means everybody and they do not have equality of discrimination against other such entities. Then they may not discriminate against somebody who is causing no physical harm to them or their business.
Here is the case number. I will see where the I fight is on what document they are. As if they win or if it settles I am going in for the battle too. Especially in my district where folks are all about freedom of speech and non discrimination.
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/baidu-sued-by-new-york-activists/30150/
By the way after going to Baidu's cite a couple of times to test to see if they are discriminating. My computer browser shut down on its own.
I do not have an ECF account so I will not be able to see it. Along with that the old one I used was my bosses so I can't use that one. So I will just call the courts and ask like I did last time. They never sent me the petition like I asked them too. Either that or it was hacked and not sent. I think if I remember correctly Pacer charges for views too. I do not remember been a year since on it.
My district created the fair use doctrine to fight evil rich political elitist via our poors need to fight without making funds from it by collecting data for middle to other rich to take them down. Some may say it was for me, others will say it was for them. However, either way, what an idea I mean our whole world will become smarter by being allowed to create special libraries online. I have an article somewhere in here about my families ancient tradition of special libraries. In which we have used to help stop tyrannical regimes all through history. Used to keep the books and ideas and drawings in a hollowed out tree. Protected by a group of birds tied to trees that where very social and if one moved the other's would move. Ya Pacer wants a credit card. I should just give it to them. I mean the case could be worth a lot. We can easily place liens on servers in the US that host them. I worked on enforcement cases on websites for a while too. I did not like collections though.
I think forcing the public to have to have special paid for accounts to view documents is upsetting. However, they need to make funds for the program upkeep. So you know.
"Fourth, in interpreting Section 1609 of the FSIA, which is the independent statute that governs immunity from attachment and execution, the Court finds that the specific exceptions to immunity set forth in Sections 1610 and 1611 must be met in order to qualify for such immunity. For purposes of this appeal, the property of the non-U.S. sovereign that is subject to execution must satisfy either the "waiver" or "commercial activity" exceptions and "must not only be (1) used generally for commercial activity in the United States, but it must also be (2) subject to a waiver of immunity, or (b) used for the specific commercial activity upon which the underlying claim was based". "
Walters v. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Ltd, et al., Dkt. No. 10-806-cv (2d. Cir. July 2011)
There is no waiver fee for the unemployed or poor.
I will try and see if they have an area in the mailed format for it. I would like to get access anyways. As it is a good way to provide proof of know how in the field. Then again knowing attorneys they will have me use my account and not reimburse me until the case is one.
It is more or less like stating that doing business in Communist China Google may remove all cites that pertain to the Communist Parties propaganda.
As Baidu is a separate entity from the Communist State, as a private entity. Controlled by private parties, the sovering immunity clauses does not fall as a defense to enforcement for violations of a domestic law that they do business in. As per Daniel v Paul if they where to turn away a man for his skin tone, they could be sued, so if they turn away a man because of his political tone, they it is analogous in my non professional opinion.
http://www.internationalpractice.org/book/search/sovereign%20immunity/section-9/chapter-43/page-28/page_section-33/#page_section33
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=395&invol=298
"Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 enacted a sweeping prohibition of discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin at places of public accommodation whose operations affect commerce."
"a place of public accommodation" as defined by 201 (b) of the 1964 Act"
Definition of public accommodation is not limited to physical arena's.
Carparts v. Automotive Wholesaler’s Ass’n., 37 F.3d 12, 22-23 (1st Cir. 1994).
May not discriminate whether physical space or in electronic space
Doe v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 179 F.3d 557, 559 (7th Cir. 1999)
Along with that the Baidu server's that are attached in the US where server manager's are created a physical concrete place where things like porn are allowed through. Which are not allowed through in the Chinese servers. As such, under the definition of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 02-21734-CIV-SEITZ/DANDSTRA, of Public Accommodations, the server itself is discriminating against my ability to enter the server. Which is a concrete nexus to the actual business entity of Baidu. Whether this place be a gigantic mall, or a small little tree hollow public to all. This is a public accommodations issue that wishes to discriminate against my national origin and my cultural beliefs.
They are basically discriminated against me because of my national origin as my culture is freedom of speech. Which is the idea we can speak freely. They are saying no you can't speak freely. So they are discriminating against my national origin and my culture. I personally identify with a culture of being able to speak freely, along with a culture of Druids that tell stories for investigation and implementation of further interest into that specific area of story.
Baidu practices cultural discrimination. The only reason they discriminate against me is because of my cultural views. I have written other blog post. Where Baidu allows porn to be searched in the US, but not CCP land. They allow killing of citizen's and very indecent speech towards my culture and national origin. However, they discriminate against my national origin which is primarily linked to four wars against SOE's and single fascist countries. Which my national origin is to fight against Imperialist State Owned Enterprises from the time of the tea tax for the King's tea SOE to destroy the colonies so specific individuals writing against the King would lose their funds, all the way to the German Socialist, push for more resources, to the Soviet's and MSS's invasion of North Korea and Vietnam to implement SOE dictator controlled countries. That is my national origin. I am an American, my culture is free speech. baidu is discriminating against my culture and national origin.
With more and more places of physical accommodations going to business via server. It is not hard to see the nexus of a brick and mortar being applied to a server. The implications to society of not applying the definition of public accommodations to a server as a concrete place where a person is physically rejected by a specific code. Is that any website could start to reject people based on civil rights issues. Which means commerce could start to segregate online and become a pre Martin Luther King issue on the internet.
As per the definition of physical going from anything from a specific number, to a tiny finger print to a hair. One can see that the nexus to the concrete discrimination is the server itself. Which has jurisdiction based in the country that the server is in. Which as per Baidu's use of server management to allow porn in but not my cite. We can see that there is a physical cite in the US that is physically discriminating against my website.
The idea that discrimination is based on a person's physicality is easily distinguished as per civil right laws. This is as per the definitions of many issues defining discrimination from religion as an idea, all the way to speech. Therefore, if we look at the concrete nexus, what should be shown is the idea that discrimination of speech in a concrete box that allows all other speech has a nexus to a physical location and a physical discrimination against the civil rights issue of speech based on national origin and my cultural beliefs in letting it all hang out.
The Airline case shows that the place doing the discriminating must be a concrete place. As such, the management server which is easily accessible via a concrete location by Baidu is the discriminating concrete physical location.
Issues of national origin, American's started a civil war against a Fascist SOE type regime
Issues of Culture, freedom of speech is the reason why the King attached tea taxes to stop freedom of speech.
Issue of concrete location, is the management server that physically discriminates via a physical chip that is coded by a person to discriminate.
Issue of nexus to concrete location of discrimination strictly scrutinized down to a structure of concrete would nexus to the location of the server and then the person managing the server, then the chip.
I believed the court erroed when it stated "Second, whereas the defendants in Rendon conceded, and the Eleventh Circuit agreed, that the game show at issue took place at a physical, public accommodatian (a concrete television studio), and that the fast finger telephone selectian process used to select contestants tended to screen out disabled individuals, the Intemet website at issue here is neither a physical, public accommodation itself as defined by the ADA, nor a means to accessing a concrete space such as the specific television studio in Rendon.11 294 F.3d at 1284." Airplane case.
As the internet is to broad a definition to apply to the specific bigger server manager of Baidu. Who owns major server concrete locations. That is a concrete location. Where as the court above erred in wishing to strictly scrutinize the definition of public, then not strictly scrutinizing the internet and its concrete location of public concrete access.
This is also not true "a unique medium - known to its users as 'cyberspace' - located in no particular geographical location but available to anyone, anywhere in the world, with access to the Intemet." Voyeur Dorm, L.C. v. Citv of Tampa 265 F.3d 1232, 1237 n.3 (11th Cir. 2001) (quoting Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 851 (1997))" The internet is to broad a definition for such a case that wishes to use strict scrutiny as its weight then go back to a wider scrutiny of an issue as per its own wishes and inability to understand the issue at hand. The concreate location of Baidu is a specific server manager at a specific concreate place where the server manager can go to code in discrimination points. Which is exactly where the concrete discrimination is going. Therefore, allowing jurisdiction, as if they can change the law for Baidu for one country for porn to another country to allow it, then also abide by a countries civil rights laws to allow things. If they can abide by a foreign countries law to ban things.
I could hold you hand and take you to the place where Baidu has its servers in the US. Then show you the physical location and the individual who placed in the discriminated policy in a concrete location that has been changed and through strict scrutiny can such be applied as a physical public location.
It would seem that the strict scrutiny of Congress would not be hampered when it used the word public or places of such concrete location to state that a server is a place of public concrete location.
To me the jurisdiction argument that a computer server is not under jurisdiction because it is not a large concrete entity. Is like saying ok well then a tiny piece of C4 is not illegal, as it is to small to cause any damage or harm. or the viral disease none as ZIA, Zombe in Asia which is lethal in less than a drop is so small that it is not under our jurisdiction.
The server is not under my jurisdiction as it is not defined under the word public. So then ZIA is not under the judges or governments jurisdiction as is not defined as a lethal weapon or biological chemical agent as it does not kill or mame it just turns folks hungry for human body parts. Does not hurt them though. It just brings out the natural instinct to carnivorousness things, and devour and hunt. Which in most areas means the only thing they can obtain the relief from that hormone or instinct is to hunt their fellow human. It is that feeling that you get if you have been hunting with your wife and you conceive a child directly upon pulling the trigger, that specific hormone, synthesized. Then the coolest part is when the rat's bite each other and we separate them the bitten one get's all crazy to only eat other rat's, it is crazy how a single hormone from a very masculine activity of creating a baby inside of a women and taken a life to devour it for sustenance works. The hormone is even better if your starve yourself for a couple days and your wife acts like she does not want it.
That is the same kind of logic that a server with a program does not fall under public. When the common text definition of public is, I am going to webster's for this one judges. lol to small to be public concrete
"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accommodation?show=0&t=1318260547
So in common sense as per any normal person's understanding of public accommodations. Public accomodations are defined as a : exposed to general view : for : something supplied for convenience or to satisfy a need: as or a : accessible to or shared by all members of the community
Therefore, strictly scrutinized if the venue like a lecture hall is under definition something supplied for convenience and accessible to or shared by all members of the community. Then it is falls under the common text of public accommodations. Which is what congress specifically stated. That is the definition of public accommodations. Which was not given, they just gave examples. They did not give the example of a bathroom in a park, however, that falls under the purview.
I miss legal briefs. All these kids wine about law school and having to know the case. I knew it was a good idea to work in the industry under real pressure of human life and millions of dollars. As a professional asking a question no prob Doc. Oh the pressure of some one's life in your hands and research, the swet the coffee the anxiety ohhhh. Can;'t wait for law school. I bet I get at least one Doc to allow me to teach the class.
This webpage is not available
The connection to www.baidu.com was interrupted.
Here are some suggestions:
- Reload this webpage later.
- Check your Internet connection. Restart any router, modem, or other network devices you may be using.
- Add Google Chrome as a permitted program in your firewall's or antivirus software's settings. If it is already a permitted program, try deleting it from the list of permitted programs and adding it again.
- If you use a proxy server, check your proxy settings or contact your network administrator to make sure the proxy server is working. If you don't believe you should be using a proxy server, adjust your proxy settings: Go to the wrench menu >Options > Under the Hood > Change proxy settings... > LAN Settings and deselect the "Use a proxy server for your LAN" checkbox.
Error 101 (net::ERR_CONNECTION_RESET): The connection was reset.
It is pretty interesting place this in their search engine then it will kick you off their server.
I should find out how the New York Supreme Court ruled against the other websites they where doing that too. If they can discriminate via political free speech.
As per US Supreme Court cases, if they are providing a service to the public which means everybody and they do not have equality of discrimination against other such entities. Then they may not discriminate against somebody who is causing no physical harm to them or their business.
Here is the case number. I will see where the I fight is on what document they are. As if they win or if it settles I am going in for the battle too. Especially in my district where folks are all about freedom of speech and non discrimination.
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/baidu-sued-by-new-york-activists/30150/
By the way after going to Baidu's cite a couple of times to test to see if they are discriminating. My computer browser shut down on its own.
I do not have an ECF account so I will not be able to see it. Along with that the old one I used was my bosses so I can't use that one. So I will just call the courts and ask like I did last time. They never sent me the petition like I asked them too. Either that or it was hacked and not sent. I think if I remember correctly Pacer charges for views too. I do not remember been a year since on it.
My district created the fair use doctrine to fight evil rich political elitist via our poors need to fight without making funds from it by collecting data for middle to other rich to take them down. Some may say it was for me, others will say it was for them. However, either way, what an idea I mean our whole world will become smarter by being allowed to create special libraries online. I have an article somewhere in here about my families ancient tradition of special libraries. In which we have used to help stop tyrannical regimes all through history. Used to keep the books and ideas and drawings in a hollowed out tree. Protected by a group of birds tied to trees that where very social and if one moved the other's would move. Ya Pacer wants a credit card. I should just give it to them. I mean the case could be worth a lot. We can easily place liens on servers in the US that host them. I worked on enforcement cases on websites for a while too. I did not like collections though.
I think forcing the public to have to have special paid for accounts to view documents is upsetting. However, they need to make funds for the program upkeep. So you know.
"Fourth, in interpreting Section 1609 of the FSIA, which is the independent statute that governs immunity from attachment and execution, the Court finds that the specific exceptions to immunity set forth in Sections 1610 and 1611 must be met in order to qualify for such immunity. For purposes of this appeal, the property of the non-U.S. sovereign that is subject to execution must satisfy either the "waiver" or "commercial activity" exceptions and "must not only be (1) used generally for commercial activity in the United States, but it must also be (2) subject to a waiver of immunity, or (b) used for the specific commercial activity upon which the underlying claim was based". "
Walters v. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Ltd, et al., Dkt. No. 10-806-cv (2d. Cir. July 2011)
There is no waiver fee for the unemployed or poor.
I will try and see if they have an area in the mailed format for it. I would like to get access anyways. As it is a good way to provide proof of know how in the field. Then again knowing attorneys they will have me use my account and not reimburse me until the case is one.
It is more or less like stating that doing business in Communist China Google may remove all cites that pertain to the Communist Parties propaganda.
As Baidu is a separate entity from the Communist State, as a private entity. Controlled by private parties, the sovering immunity clauses does not fall as a defense to enforcement for violations of a domestic law that they do business in. As per Daniel v Paul if they where to turn away a man for his skin tone, they could be sued, so if they turn away a man because of his political tone, they it is analogous in my non professional opinion.
http://www.internationalpractice.org/book/search/sovereign%20immunity/section-9/chapter-43/page-28/page_section-33/#page_section33
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=395&invol=298
"Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 enacted a sweeping prohibition of discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin at places of public accommodation whose operations affect commerce."
"a place of public accommodation" as defined by 201 (b) of the 1964 Act"
Definition of public accommodation is not limited to physical arena's.
Carparts v. Automotive Wholesaler’s Ass’n., 37 F.3d 12, 22-23 (1st Cir. 1994).
May not discriminate whether physical space or in electronic space
Doe v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 179 F.3d 557, 559 (7th Cir. 1999)
Along with that the Baidu server's that are attached in the US where server manager's are created a physical concrete place where things like porn are allowed through. Which are not allowed through in the Chinese servers. As such, under the definition of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 02-21734-CIV-SEITZ/DANDSTRA, of Public Accommodations, the server itself is discriminating against my ability to enter the server. Which is a concrete nexus to the actual business entity of Baidu. Whether this place be a gigantic mall, or a small little tree hollow public to all. This is a public accommodations issue that wishes to discriminate against my national origin and my cultural beliefs.
29 C.F.R. § 1606.1 Definition of national origin discrimination.
§ 1606.1 Definition of national origin discrimination.
The Commission defines national origin discrimination broadly as including, but not limited to, the denial of equal employment opportunity because of an individual's, or his or her ancestor's, place of origin; or because an individual has the physical, cultural or linguistic characteristics of a national origin group. The Commission will examine with particular concern charges alleging that individuals within the jurisdiction of the Commission have been denied equal employment opportunity for reasons which are grounded in national origin considerations, such as (a) marriage to or association with persons of a national origin group; (b) membership in, or association with an organization identified with or seeking to promote the interests of national origin groups; (c) attendance or participation in schools, churches, temples or mosques, generally used by persons of a national origin group; and (d) because an individual's name or spouse's name is associated with a national origin group. In examining these charges for unlawful national origin discrimination, the Commission will apply general title VII principles, such as disparate treatment and adverse impact."
Civil Rights Act (1964) - Public Law 88-352
"SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation,"
"SEC. 202. All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political subdivision thereof."
Civil Rights Act (1964) - Public Law 88-352
"SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation,"
"SEC. 202. All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political subdivision thereof."
They are basically discriminated against me because of my national origin as my culture is freedom of speech. Which is the idea we can speak freely. They are saying no you can't speak freely. So they are discriminating against my national origin and my culture. I personally identify with a culture of being able to speak freely, along with a culture of Druids that tell stories for investigation and implementation of further interest into that specific area of story.
Baidu practices cultural discrimination. The only reason they discriminate against me is because of my cultural views. I have written other blog post. Where Baidu allows porn to be searched in the US, but not CCP land. They allow killing of citizen's and very indecent speech towards my culture and national origin. However, they discriminate against my national origin which is primarily linked to four wars against SOE's and single fascist countries. Which my national origin is to fight against Imperialist State Owned Enterprises from the time of the tea tax for the King's tea SOE to destroy the colonies so specific individuals writing against the King would lose their funds, all the way to the German Socialist, push for more resources, to the Soviet's and MSS's invasion of North Korea and Vietnam to implement SOE dictator controlled countries. That is my national origin. I am an American, my culture is free speech. baidu is discriminating against my culture and national origin.
With more and more places of physical accommodations going to business via server. It is not hard to see the nexus of a brick and mortar being applied to a server. The implications to society of not applying the definition of public accommodations to a server as a concrete place where a person is physically rejected by a specific code. Is that any website could start to reject people based on civil rights issues. Which means commerce could start to segregate online and become a pre Martin Luther King issue on the internet.
As per the definition of physical going from anything from a specific number, to a tiny finger print to a hair. One can see that the nexus to the concrete discrimination is the server itself. Which has jurisdiction based in the country that the server is in. Which as per Baidu's use of server management to allow porn in but not my cite. We can see that there is a physical cite in the US that is physically discriminating against my website.
The idea that discrimination is based on a person's physicality is easily distinguished as per civil right laws. This is as per the definitions of many issues defining discrimination from religion as an idea, all the way to speech. Therefore, if we look at the concrete nexus, what should be shown is the idea that discrimination of speech in a concrete box that allows all other speech has a nexus to a physical location and a physical discrimination against the civil rights issue of speech based on national origin and my cultural beliefs in letting it all hang out.
The Airline case shows that the place doing the discriminating must be a concrete place. As such, the management server which is easily accessible via a concrete location by Baidu is the discriminating concrete physical location.
Issues of national origin, American's started a civil war against a Fascist SOE type regime
Issues of Culture, freedom of speech is the reason why the King attached tea taxes to stop freedom of speech.
Issue of concrete location, is the management server that physically discriminates via a physical chip that is coded by a person to discriminate.
Issue of nexus to concrete location of discrimination strictly scrutinized down to a structure of concrete would nexus to the location of the server and then the person managing the server, then the chip.
I believed the court erroed when it stated "Second, whereas the defendants in Rendon conceded, and the Eleventh Circuit agreed, that the game show at issue took place at a physical, public accommodatian (a concrete television studio), and that the fast finger telephone selectian process used to select contestants tended to screen out disabled individuals, the Intemet website at issue here is neither a physical, public accommodation itself as defined by the ADA, nor a means to accessing a concrete space such as the specific television studio in Rendon.11 294 F.3d at 1284." Airplane case.
As the internet is to broad a definition to apply to the specific bigger server manager of Baidu. Who owns major server concrete locations. That is a concrete location. Where as the court above erred in wishing to strictly scrutinize the definition of public, then not strictly scrutinizing the internet and its concrete location of public concrete access.
This is also not true "a unique medium - known to its users as 'cyberspace' - located in no particular geographical location but available to anyone, anywhere in the world, with access to the Intemet." Voyeur Dorm, L.C. v. Citv of Tampa 265 F.3d 1232, 1237 n.3 (11th Cir. 2001) (quoting Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 851 (1997))" The internet is to broad a definition for such a case that wishes to use strict scrutiny as its weight then go back to a wider scrutiny of an issue as per its own wishes and inability to understand the issue at hand. The concreate location of Baidu is a specific server manager at a specific concreate place where the server manager can go to code in discrimination points. Which is exactly where the concrete discrimination is going. Therefore, allowing jurisdiction, as if they can change the law for Baidu for one country for porn to another country to allow it, then also abide by a countries civil rights laws to allow things. If they can abide by a foreign countries law to ban things.
I could hold you hand and take you to the place where Baidu has its servers in the US. Then show you the physical location and the individual who placed in the discriminated policy in a concrete location that has been changed and through strict scrutiny can such be applied as a physical public location.
It would seem that the strict scrutiny of Congress would not be hampered when it used the word public or places of such concrete location to state that a server is a place of public concrete location.
To me the jurisdiction argument that a computer server is not under jurisdiction because it is not a large concrete entity. Is like saying ok well then a tiny piece of C4 is not illegal, as it is to small to cause any damage or harm. or the viral disease none as ZIA, Zombe in Asia which is lethal in less than a drop is so small that it is not under our jurisdiction.
The server is not under my jurisdiction as it is not defined under the word public. So then ZIA is not under the judges or governments jurisdiction as is not defined as a lethal weapon or biological chemical agent as it does not kill or mame it just turns folks hungry for human body parts. Does not hurt them though. It just brings out the natural instinct to carnivorousness things, and devour and hunt. Which in most areas means the only thing they can obtain the relief from that hormone or instinct is to hunt their fellow human. It is that feeling that you get if you have been hunting with your wife and you conceive a child directly upon pulling the trigger, that specific hormone, synthesized. Then the coolest part is when the rat's bite each other and we separate them the bitten one get's all crazy to only eat other rat's, it is crazy how a single hormone from a very masculine activity of creating a baby inside of a women and taken a life to devour it for sustenance works. The hormone is even better if your starve yourself for a couple days and your wife acts like she does not want it.
That is the same kind of logic that a server with a program does not fall under public. When the common text definition of public is, I am going to webster's for this one judges. lol to small to be public concrete
"
Definition of PUBLIC
1
a : exposed to general view : openb : well-known, prominentc : perceptible, material
2
a : of, relating to, or affecting all the people or the whole area of a nation or state <public law>b : of or relating to a governmentc : of, relating to, or being in the service of the community or nation
4
: of or relating to business or community interests as opposed to private affairs : social
5
: devoted to the general or national welfare : humanitarian
6
a : accessible to or shared by all members of the communityb : capitalized in shares that can be freely traded on the open market —often used with go
7
: supported by public funds and private contributions rather than by income from commercials <public radio> <publictelevision>"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/public
"
"
Definition of ACCOMMODATION
1
: something supplied for convenience or to satisfy a need: asa : lodging, food, and services or traveling space and related services —usually used in plural <tourist accommodations on the boat> <overnight accommodations>b : a public conveyance (as a train) that stops at all or nearly all pointsc : loan
2
: the act of accommodating : the state of beingaccommodated: asa : the providing of what is needed or desired for convenienceb : adaptation, adjustmentc : a reconciliation of differences : settlementd : the automatic adjustment of the eye for seeing at different distances effected chiefly by changes in the convexity of the crystalline lens; also : the range over which such adjustment is possible"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accommodation?show=0&t=1318260547
So in common sense as per any normal person's understanding of public accommodations. Public accomodations are defined as a : exposed to general view : for : something supplied for convenience or to satisfy a need: as or a : accessible to or shared by all members of the community
Therefore, strictly scrutinized if the venue like a lecture hall is under definition something supplied for convenience and accessible to or shared by all members of the community. Then it is falls under the common text of public accommodations. Which is what congress specifically stated. That is the definition of public accommodations. Which was not given, they just gave examples. They did not give the example of a bathroom in a park, however, that falls under the purview.
I miss legal briefs. All these kids wine about law school and having to know the case. I knew it was a good idea to work in the industry under real pressure of human life and millions of dollars. As a professional asking a question no prob Doc. Oh the pressure of some one's life in your hands and research, the swet the coffee the anxiety ohhhh. Can;'t wait for law school. I bet I get at least one Doc to allow me to teach the class.
No comments:
Post a Comment