I am always asked about interpretation of rules and regulations related to information security. Hopefully someone will bring up the “wardrobe malfunction” example in discussion soon, so I can point to the recent court ruling. This seems like a fair interpretation to me:

“The Commission’s determination that CBS’s broadcast of a nine-sixteenths of one second glimpse of a bare female breast was actionably indecent evidenced the agency’s departure from its prior policy,” the court found. “Its orders constituted the announcement of a policy change — that fleeting images would no longer be excluded from the scope of actionable indecency.”

And people think it is hard to figure out what constitutes virtual system security compliance…