The Off Topic Topic

[Barrister]

That seems wild. The plaintiff seems to have argued that this was part of common law (I assume there's no specific laws on the books in Kansas to cover this), which the courts rejected.

Privacy is a comparatively recent concept, at least in terms of the law.  You can sort of understand why - if you live in some medieval village everybody knows everybody's business.

So there's no historical concept of privacy in the common law.  Now I believe courts have created a tort of invasion of privacy - but it's more been dealt with by statutes.  And I'm shocked Kansas wouldn't have some kind of health records privacy law.  Scanning through the ruling it looks like they do, but that either they don't apply or don't create a cause of action.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah given all my experience with US companies and their absolute terror of HIPAA I find that slightly wild.

There is a common law duty of confidentiality and (at least in England) a tort of misuse of private information. In general, though, privacy claims here are related to Human Rights Act and ECHR (which I think has become way too broad and misused by English courts - but that's an aside).

Separately I didn't really pay much attention to the news for a couple of days - then looked today and there's been a crossbow murderer and someone leaving suitcases of human remains on Clifton Suspension Bridge

[crazy canuck]

Doctors here have professional obligations to protect the privacy of their patients that long predate privacy legislation.

[grumbler]

So this story cropped up in my feed:

https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-court-says-healthcare-providers-not-required-to-keep-medical-records-private/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral

Basically, a woman went in to the JayDoc Free Clinic of the University of Kansas Medical Center. The doctor asked if it was ok if two students joined the examination. During the examination, the woman noticed the doc taking a picture of her nether regions and sending it to the students' phones. She says she didn't give permission for that and that he violated safe keeping of medical records.

The court disagreed, and now the appeals court in Kansas confirmed the ruling. I was kind of expecting the article to misrepresent the decision to create the clickbait headline, but, according to the text of the appellate court's ruling:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/116356721.html

The district court correctly found that Kansas does not recognize a duty by a healthcare provider to safeguard, protect, and maintain the confidentiality of a patient's medical records.

That seems wild. The plaintiff seems to have argued that this was part of common law (I assume there's no specific laws on the books in Kansas to cover this), which the courts rejected.

Federal law protects the privacy of medical information when it can be tied to an individual.  Non-specific information is not covered, as that would preclude any sort of statistical or other general analysis of medical data.  I'm pretty sure that the non-specific nature of the information prevented her from making a complaint under HIPPA (the federal law governing protection of medical records) but I am boggled by a court ruling that "Kansas does not recognize a duty by a healthcare provider to safeguard, protect, and maintain the confidentiality of a patient's medical records." Surely Kansas recognizes duties imposed by Federal law, doesn't it?

[Admiral Yi]

Richest man in Asia spending an estimated $125 mill on his son's wedding.

[grumbler]

Richest man in Asia spending an estimated $125 mill on his son's wedding.

A job creator!

[Josquius]

Is it just me. Or when you do see arcade machines these days. It's always some weird off brand game by a no name company

[Tamas]

Are there still arcade machines?

[Duque de Bragança]

Is it just me. Or when you do see arcade machines these days. It's always some weird off brand game by a no name company

You.  I still see them  in some commercial centres, outside of cinemas, theme parks etc. Along with air hockey tables.

[Barrister]

Is it just me. Or when you do see arcade machines these days. It's always some weird off brand game by a no name company

To the extent I see arcade games it's always some emulator where you can play 100s of different games.

[Tonitrus]

Or boutique retro establishments (there is one that opened recently here) catering the nostalgic and/or hipster crowd.

[Admiral Yi]

The Rainbow(tm) bar where I run karaoke is two bars with the wall knocked out.  I work in the downstairs bar.  Up until recently the owner was trying to brand it as a comedy/arcade combo.  Neither of those worked great.  Not a bunch of demand for arcade games.  So he yanked 80% of the games, put in more seating, renamed the place and is trying to reposition as a live music venue.

The air hockey was a huge pain in the ass during karaoke.

[Norgy]

Are there still arcade machines?

I did find one in a remote place in Sweden. Golden Axe, if you remember it. But I think most are on their last legs. Who'd offer support? I am sure as hell Konami/Namco aren't employing service crews.

Besides, games need micro-transactions from what I hear. Not a coin slot.

[celedhring]

Local mall has a few ones, including a Terminator Salvation arcade machine that feels truly random. It's a really fancy one, too. Never seen anyone use them.

[Caliga]

Is it just me. Or when you do see arcade machines these days. It's always some weird off brand game by a no name company

To the extent I see arcade games it's always some emulator where you can play 100s of different games.

A friend of mine built one of those in his basement and has over 1,000 games on it.  I was over there Saturday night and me and three other dudes beat TMNT: Turtles in Time from 1991 on it.  It's got four neat 'insert coin' buttons on it so you can basically trick the program into thinking you inserted another coin.  I hit it probably 50 times before we beat the entire game.