Slashdot Mirror

The copy I found is signed by Mueller...

You want to keep on? Stay a cowardly AC, it suits you.

Go to the web site "http://Georgia.gov"
type "laws" into the search box.
first topic is "Learning about Georgia Law", and that has a link to the free on-line official code.
How hard is that?

Or, you can goto "law.georgia.gov" and click "Legal Resources" to get to the free site.

LexisNexis is a contractor to the state of Georgia for this service, so it's not that some random company threw it up.
The deal with the state is that LexisNexis does the work of creating the annotations for the state and then provides it online for free in return for being allowed to sell the printed copies. No one does that for free.

The law itself is NOT copyrighted, but the annotations are. It's stated in the Term and Conditions.
This is actually a sweet deal for the people of Georgia because we get access to the annotations for free. This is a boon for people who don't want to pay a lawyer to do research or go sit in the library to read the copy there.

As for the link you gave, http://www.le.state.ut.us/Docu... it has an invalid certificate.
If you change it to http://le.utah.gov/Documents/c... , it's OK.

Utah's government web site, like almost every other state, does not provide annotations. You can buy an annotated copy of Utah law for $1800 from here:
http://legalsolutions.thomsonr...

In Georgia, we get ours online for free.

Non-citizens of WHAT exactly?
ThomsonReuters is a Canadian company.

Quoting their 2015 regulatory report from http://ir.thomsonreuters.com/p...:
"We are a Canadian company with shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and New York Stock Exchange (symbol: TRI)."

Unless something changed, didn't Antigua and Barbados get the legal right from the WTO to ignore US copyrights due to the US's ban on internet gambling? http://blog.legalsolutions.tho...

Erickson actually paid for the R&D to create something new, unlike curved edges and a single button that Apple patented. Fuck Apple.

Ahem.

This independent Report from 2012, lists over 1200 Apple "mobile" Patents (which I'm sure has been added-to since then).

Obviously, there is a lot more than the Home Button and the Curved Corners here, eh?

Also, the Court will probably want the law to be accessible, so they'll likely find some logic to rule against the state.

Pretty much every state in the country has annotated laws that are owned by a private company under some kind of agreement with the state. The private company puts some money into indexing them, may have an el cheapo version available online, and charges very mysterious pricing for commercial use that varies by who your sales rep is and how big you are and the like. Physical copies may also be available.

In New York, for example, McKinney's costs about $10,500 for a physical copy: http://legalsolutions.thomsonr...

You can go to a library that has it, of course, but it's pretty ridiculous in today's day and age that you need to go to a library to get access to a law.

It's kind of like the building code--basically a group of experts is involved so the state lets them copyright the laws and sell them rather than having the state *pay* them for their work and make the result free.

Seife suggests the FDA is trapped in a co-dependent relationship with the pharmaceutical industry, and needs strong legislative support to end its bad behavior.

This is clearly the case, and this not only means that some drugs that should not be on the market are approved. It also means, and in my mind this is more important, that the big Pharma are using the FDA as a barrier of entry against startups. Getting a new drug on the market costs an average of $2.558 billion in 2013 dollars.

This days are the early days of the biotech revolution where we will gain enormous control over our health are just starting, and progress is slow due to regulation capture. If some of this money would be given back to researchers instead of lawyers and bureaucrats, we would get better treatments available sooner.

As an example, big pharma companies get old drugs whose patents are about to run out, change their chemical formula and improve them just a bit and then go to market with them so the can reap huge margins with basically the same compound. This is safer business than trying to produce a breakthrough with a completely new compound. And the reason for this is the way the FDA operates. This results in very valuable resources being used with little benefit to the public.

any more sense than buying a coffee maker that uses only one type of coffee

For most of 2014 Keurig was the #1 stock in the S&P 500, kicking Apple's and Google's butts, based wholly on people making a choice to buy a coffee maker that uses only one type (K cups) of coffee. http://alphanow.thomsonreuters.com/2014/11/keurigs-little-coffee-k-cups-brew-big-profits/

Slashdot has searched for years for the identity of Bad Analogy Guy and it seems Mr. Wolber has finally unmasked himself.

I'm skeptical of vaccines, but not completely against them. One thing that adds to my skepticism is the same people who recommend vaccines also recommend circumcisions. I am adamantly against circumcisions. I'm willing to bet most /.ers are pro-vaccine and anti-circumcision. How can you trust what the medical community says about one thing while disagreeing with them on another?

link 1

link 2

Here's an interesting history of the relevant legislation if you're curious.

Usefulness is not a valid criterium for arguing the Constitutionality of a law!

That needs some fine tuning.

Compelling-State-Interest-Test Law & Legal Definition

Compelling-state-interest-test refers to a method of determining the constitutional validity of a law. Under this test, the government’s interest is balanced against the individual’s constitutional right to be free of law. However, a law will be upheld only if the government’s interest is strong enough.

Tackling the most important topics of law school, Part 6a: Constitutional judicial review and strict scrutiny
Tackling the most important topics of law school, Part 6b: Rational basis, “with teeth,” and intermediate scrutiny

Usefulness is not a valid criterium for arguing the Constitutionality of a law!

That needs some fine tuning.

Compelling-State-Interest-Test Law & Legal Definition

Compelling-state-interest-test refers to a method of determining the constitutional validity of a law. Under this test, the government’s interest is balanced against the individual’s constitutional right to be free of law. However, a law will be upheld only if the government’s interest is strong enough.

Tackling the most important topics of law school, Part 6a: Constitutional judicial review and strict scrutiny
Tackling the most important topics of law school, Part 6b: Rational basis, “with teeth,” and intermediate scrutiny

True. But the sanctions were never all that impervious.

On the other hand, with reduced demand for their Oil, (due to the US being a net exporter of oil), there is more oil available on the market. Other oil importers don't need to go to Iran.

Theoretically, with less of a market for oil Iran should not need Nuclear power and could be meeting their energy demands with modern oil and gas generation facilities, Far less costly and easier to build.

Therefore, they don't NEED nuclear. And they can't make the claim that the do. If Iran was really after power production all along, they should be willing to delay nuclear. If that was never their real goal, then these talks may lead nowhere.

News reports suggest that a deal is no where near as close as this cheerleading article suggests.

So the article is a bit pre-mature. I think there are talks mostly because there was an election, and there was a change in tactics on the part of Iran, who probably realize they are inching closer to being on the receiving a preemptive strike and they see their last friend in the region, Syria, being ground into dust by civil war in spite of Iran's help).

Yeah - I saw that too. There is something fishy about this list. As if there is data missing.

Nothing there ...

I am using Firefox w/ NoScript. The so called "full table" is one big white space.

Stupid web developers. They can't even publish a simple list of countries without using Javascript.

Reminds me of this.

This is how it can be done. A simple image.

Nothing there ...

I am using Firefox w/ NoScript. The so called "full table" is one big white space.

Stupid web developers. They can't even publish a simple list of countries without using Javascript.

Reminds me of this.

This is how it can be done. A simple image.

Well, there are a couple little strings - at least in the government's opinion! It filed paperwork letting the bankruptcy judge know that, because of the federal financing, the government will have a say of some sort in who gets to buy the facilities it underwrote. That's generally thought to be code for "we will have more to say if a Chinese firm submits the winning bid." More here: http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Bankruptcy/News/2012/11_-_November/U_S__says_A123_sale_requires_its_consent/

Since the cases he never fully disclosed involved patents, you can pretty much assume bias in a patent case and rescind the verdict, for reasons of tainted jury.

From here:

According to Hogan, when Seagate hired him in the 1980s and he moved from Colorado to California, his new employer agreed to split the cost of paying off the mortgage on his Colorado home. But after Hogan was laid off in the early 1990s, he told us, Seagate claimed he owed the company that money. Hogan said he sued Seagate for fraud, Seagate countersued, and he ultimately declared personal bankruptcy to protect his house."

That suit against Seagate was over breach of contract and fraud, not patents.

They're all scumbags! (and it's nothing new)

http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index.php/mobile-patent-suits-graphic-of-the-day/

Already found that out; sorry that I didn't post an update. Also, that domain appears to belong to Thomson Reuters Financial. My bad, I had no idea that there may be any benefit for a behemoth like Amazon to host investor relations materials on a third-party website.

> A fact which means that if you do PCR or molecular cloning (or any other form of mass copying) on the gene you have violated there patent.

Since you are familiar with the field I'm sure that you are aware that patents on isolated genes like this one are working their way through the legal system, and are currently before the Supreme Court.

http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=50297

It will be a very interesting decision.

Critics say city employees could have done the work far less expensively. Bills spiraled out of control over the years, hitting $692 million, and city investigators brought federal prosecutors into the probe after uncovering payments routed through shell companies.

... SAIC agreed to pay $370.4 million in restitution to the city, as well as a penalty of $130 million, according to a deferred prosecution agreement made public on Wednesday. The city will get $96 million of the penalty, with the rest going to the federal government.

In addition, New York City will not have to pay about $40 million of the bills it was charged.

Let me see if I got this right:
-$692 million in bills +$40 million in canceled bills + $370.4 million in restitution + $(130-96) million in penalty payments = -$247.6 million

Shouldn't the restitution payment at least cover how much NYC originally paid?

Fingers crossed. The drug is pretty expensive but nursing homes are even more so... it will be huge if a bunch of people walk out of there.

http://thomsonreuters.com/content/science/pdf/ls/pharma_matters/movers_shakers-cwp-en_issue17.pdf shows the patent expiration as April 22, 2012, July 14, 2015, and October 5, 2016. I don't know what that means for an actual generic becoming available.

2. Oracle thinks that Java is not open, and they also have damning email correspondence showing that Google did not actually believe Java could be used without a license.

You mean the damning email that came out in August 2010 saying from engineer Tim Lindholm to Andy Rubin that said we need to license java?
(http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2011/11_-_November/Oracle_v__Google_and_the_most_relentlessly_litigated_email_ever/)
Remember that Oracle purchased Sun in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Microsystems) where Android was first released in 2008 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system))

Putting together a timeline:
1) Android released in 2008
2) Oracle purchased Sun in 2009
3) "Damning" email in 2010

So after Android is released, Oracle purchases Sun hoping to sue Google for $$$, then an engineer says yeah we better license java. That isn't damning, that's an opinion of one engineer (or more likely a team). Now if that timeline had #3 coming first, it would be damning, but to come last in the chain is hardly even worth mentioning. Oracle's case resting on that one email is laughable at best

"The clamp down on the OWS is not a free speech issue."

Actually... it very well may be. There is considerable debate regarding this very notion... Please don't rant and pretend that the speech aspect of this is settled.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/18/us-usa-protests-law-idUSTRE7AH2OE20111118
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2011/11_-_November/ANALYSIS__Is_sleeping_speech_/
http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-sleeping-zuccotti-park-free-speech-232305668.html

That the protestors are breaking existing law is NOT the same argument as whether or not those laws interfere with freedom of speech rights.
Those laws are being tested, as is the definition of what is considered to be freedom of speech.

Speaking as an authority on the hypothetical just makes you sound silly... Until this topic hits the Supreme Court, both arguments (laws restricting freedom of speech -leading to a valid protest being re-interpreted or discarded... AS WELL AS... freedom of speech trumping existing laws - leading to those laws being re-interpreted or discarded) have merit.

Sorry that your strong opinion isn't yet based in solid fact... time may prove you to be correct. For now, you're just ranting. =)

You know you can "opt out" of Facebook by simply not using it, right?

Apparently, you can't

Granted - you and I also no ways around that. But Mom & Pop don't ... and that's the point. They don't know that FB tracks them and even if they would, most of them have no idea how to avoid being tracked.

Well people can make their own determinations:

One

Two

Three

Four

"What we've actually been asked to do by Larry [Page] and Sergey [Brin] is to investigate what technical alternatives exist to Java for Android and Chrome. We've been over a bunch of these and think they all suck. We conclude that we need to negotiate a license for Java under the terms we need."

In case you didn't see it, another poster in this thread found it:

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/RNGS/2011/AUG/PATENT_CI.jpg

This looks to be an updated version from 8/17/2011

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/RNGS/2011/AUG/PATENT_CI.jpg

"Apple also filed a civil suit in March accusing Motorola Mobility of 'a pattern of unfair, deceptive and anticompetitive conduct' ".

Does anyone else see this as a hypocritical statement considering what Apple has been doing suing the pants off anyone who makes a smart phone or tablet?

A corporation, being hypocritical? What new depths of depravity has Apple reached now? Apple has introduced hypocrisy into the otherwise blissful world of corporate law. I, for one, think this should be an article all its own. To think, a major corporation saying one thing and doing the opposite. For shame, Apple, for shame! Come on, Slashdot, let's get the word out!

I, for one, will not stand for this. I will deal only with non-hypocritical corporations, like...ummm...

The fact is, everyone is suing everyone in the mobile phone market right now. Apple is being sued more than it's suing, actually. Hypocrisy doesn't even begin to cover it.

And the President is not a Democrat? The President could have vetoed the law yes? He could have let it sit around and not extend the PATRIOT act correct? What did our Democratic President do -- he went to great lengths to make sure it was signed.

If you think it makes a difference whether we have Democrats or Republicans in WA DC, you are deluded. Together they form a monoparty hell bent on shredding every word in the Constitution as we hurtle toward an Imperial Presidency.

Bush, Obama -- no difference except that even Bush didn't publicly suggest he could execute American citizens on his say so alone without even a show trial. Obama owns that.

The only "people" who have any power are the mega-corps. For example, the Supreme Court has consistently screwed humans with the State Secrets Doctrine, but when Boeing is on the chopping block, the Supreme Court tells the Feds to back off:

OK to invoke when torturing people (Obama's stated preference to the court): http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/California/News/2011/05_-_May/U_S__Supreme_Court_allows_Boeing_CIA_torture_suit_dismissal/

but the Feds can't get any money out of Boeing if the feds are going to invoke State Secrets with respect to one of Boeing's defenses:

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/2011/05/23/boeing-says-its-happy-with-suprem-courts-a-12-ruling/

Another interesting effect, of course, is the difference between provenance of researcher and location of publication. The US and the UK are particularly good at draining other countries of already well-educated people, but this doesn't mean that the US or the UK have performed the academic preparation necessary to produce excellent researchers.

Just a sec, it's mostly US and UK institutions that are doing the educating, at least at the post-grad level, not people studying abroad and then migrating. It is sad that so few Americans choose to peruse the sciences right at home, but given that Americans tend to value high salaries, good work-life balance, and healthy job prospects it's no wonder many of then shy away.

"Number of links" has always struck me as an odd metric (see also PageRank). The greatest work from the PoV of scientific advancement isn't necessarily the most cited. The greatest determinant will be how fashionable a particular field is - a few leading researchers in a particular field are likely to have a huge number of cites, especially if they constitently reach the well-known publications, but it doesn't necessarily mean the field is very scientifically interesting.

Then, even if great progress has been made, you get the effect that people don't necessarily cite the seminal investigations so much as the pioneering refiners.

Another interesting effect, of course, is the difference between provenance of researcher and location of publication. The US and the UK are particularly good at draining other countries of already well-educated people, but this doesn't mean that the US or the UK have performed the academic preparation necessary to produce excellent researchers.

Now imagine when the stocks are moving sideways (not much lows or highs, a bit of a flat line). When moving sideways most people are less interested in the stockmarket and most will put their money in other investment. In these cases the majority of trades happen to be done with high frequent trading systems (HFT computers without human intervention who do the bidding). Now imagine if someone in this case can manipulate them, even indirectly.

I quote this article

High-frequency trading now accounts for 60 percent of total U.S. equity volume, and is spreading overseas and into other markets. These traders stand ready to buy and sell shares at all times, providing the liquidity that keeps markets moving. As a result, trading is now cheaper and easier than ever.Yet critics worry fast trading may undermine the integrity of the U.S. equity market, a bastion of capitalism and corporate America, and could even spark another financial crisis.

This but also in itself beares also the risk that those HFT's go haywire. These kind of events already happened.

Also at relatively low trade volume days, sometimes stocks movement are sometimes totally inexplicable, that's also much of the time high frequency trading at work. HFT's are a big liability, as they have the power to send shockwaves rippling through the stockmarket.

The correct name is Thomson Reuters

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/F/07/GLB_SMPHN0710.gif

Who's falling again?! Ah yes, Apple...

Uh, dropping like a stone?!

Maybe you should check your facts a bit.

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/F/07/GLB_SMPHN0710.gif

I work in a biotech startup with 12 people total.
We have several thousand pdfs, mostly of scientific publications downloaded from places like pubmed, along with some .ppts and .docs and other files.
We use a endnote, a program from the behemoth in this area, thompson research, which has most of hte software in this area.
see http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/procite

Based on what I have seen, there is a huge need for software that meets our needs; the thompson products are very $$ and , awfull - a classic case of crappy software with a lot of marketing.
Programs like endnote were created back in the 90s, for DOS machines, and they still look and feel like it, once you get past the pretty home page gui of the software that thompson has added on.

if anyone out there is serious about making a product to compete, give me a hollar

This can be your answer. http://www.daeja.com

We have written our application utilizing this component

I work in a biotech startup with 12 people total. We have several thousand pdfs, mostly of scientific publications downloaded from places like pubmed, along with some .ppts and .docs and other files. We use a endnote, a program from the behemoth in this area, thompson research, which has most of hte software in this area. see http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/procite Based on what I have seen, there is a huge need for software that meets our needs; the thompson products are very $$ and , awfull - a classic case of crappy software with a lot of marketing. Programs like endnote were created back in the 90s, for DOS machines, and they still look and feel like it, once you get past the pretty home page gui of the software that thompson has added on. if anyone out there is serious about making a product to compete, give me a hollar

This is clearly a way to pump up the galactic PR machine for Web of Science.