And this project seems to be a circumventing technology and illegal under the DMCA.
Of course it’s illegal under the DMCA. However, take-down notices are solely, uniquely and only provided to remedy against actual copyright infringements, and clean-room reverse-engineering is **NOT** copyright infringement. Circumvention devices are covered in a totally different section of the law and the remedial mechanism is most definitely **NOT** a takedown notice.
And since the DMCA does not apply outside of the U.S., 95% of the people can safely mirror it and there isn’t a thing Adobe can do about it. Heck, they can’t even invoke patents because software patents as they are illegal here.
6000 years ago, a bunch of old rabbis decided that, since their flabby bodies were no match against the young squirts' bodies who picked-up all the young chicks, they should prevent people from being naked.
Oddly enough, 8000 years later, the silly notion that you should hide your peepee from others still lingers around.
It’s only christianity that brainwashed people about not wanting to be seen naked.
I am not christian, and have been carefully raised without any christian influence whatsoever, and I have absolutely no problem with being totally naked in public nor do I have any problem with seeing people naked.
I work at a University and having any copyrighted materials that you do not have permission to have on your computer (or any other electronic device owned by the University) you could be terminated and/or prosecuted.
I fly fairly regularly (about once a month), and I routinely have my camera out, taking pictures of various parts of the airport, including the aircraft. I don't point it at security lines, but that's mostly because I don't have much interest in them. Never been bothered once in any of the seven or eight airports I've been to or through so far this year.
Wha? Canadian geese range from 5-14lb (3.2-5.5kg) in weight. The largest goose is supposedly around 20lb. How's that supposed to work? Do you understand the concepts of mass, velocity, and energy?
You forgot to put the concept of “having guts” in your equation.
And while we would agree with your sig statement, liberty is a very personal quality. The Wisconsin court erred. They should be ashamed..... of course that never happens.
Erred in what? What is wrong in tracking the very public progress of a vehicle on public roads? What you do in public, in plain view of other people cannot be deemed to be subject to some “right to privacy”.
The right to free association also imbues privacy of that association. Such tracking without probable cause violates privacy, free speech, due process, and is high in calories.
No. Anything you do on the public roads and that it witnessed by the public can be recorded by anyone, including the police.
Also, there is no “right to privacy” in the US constitution.
How can warrantless GPS tracking be legal while warrantless car searching is illegal.
Very simple. Tagging a car with GPS registers where the car is going and when. This is no different than posting cops all over the place and noting where the car goes, or having someone tail the car all the time.
Nothing private is searched, nothing that is not publicly visible is recorded, so it only makes sense that it is legal.
What you call "greed" I call "putting the food on the table". A desire to gather money to feed, shelter, and clothe my family is personal responsibility, not greed.
There is a difference between putting the food on the table, living in a $200,000 house, driving a $25,000 car and bringing the family to Maxim’s every day, living in a $15,000,000 château and driving a $150,000 car.
The former is “personal responsibility”, the second is greed.
Oh boy can he sue! yes, and the case is so blatant that he shall not worry about having his job back, with a vengeance. The prud’hommes are gonna have a field day with this!
I happen to socially hang around a supreme court justice, with whom I share a hobby.
In the course of their tenure, they have to carefully shield themselves from the opinion currents (socially, they will remain mostly in their family circles, and avoid big social venues), as they their job requires them to strictly adhere to the Constitution and the jurisprudence (where relevant). As a matter of course, they will avoid reading newspapers articles relating to "their" cases, and blogs naturally fall in this category.
Whatever discussions we had about his work have been kept generic and mundane, and with the utmost care not to reveal the inner legal workings of the cases; in short, nothing more than what is available to court observers.
This is silly. WSJ readers will gladly pay for their "contents" because they have money, they are indoctrinated with "you get what you pay for" and they view themselves to be above the fray, and such privilege must have a cost.
On the other hand, the great ignorant unwashed masses the extreme right rely on for political support will not pay for something they can get for free elsewhere.
Although this is a boneheaded move, it will be beneficial because it will shink Murdoch's audience to the point of political irrelevance, which will allow a resurgence of socialism.
Slashdot Mirror
What is this buillshit? "A persistent problem is dashes in SSNs"???
How fucking hard is it to strip non-numeric characters from a string?
I cannot believe there could be such programmer incompetence; no, it has to be some managerial cluelessness and hard-headness.
Of course it’s illegal under the DMCA. However, take-down notices are solely, uniquely and only provided to remedy against actual copyright infringements, and clean-room reverse-engineering is **NOT** copyright infringement. Circumvention devices are covered in a totally different section of the law and the remedial mechanism is most definitely **NOT** a takedown notice.
And since the DMCA does not apply outside of the U.S., 95% of the people can safely mirror it and there isn’t a thing Adobe can do about it. Heck, they can’t even invoke patents because software patents as they are illegal here.
Sure it does, you insensitive clod
For the record,
yet another mirror
well outside the reach of the DMCA and also of software patents in particular.
Oddly enough, 8000 years later, the silly notion that you should hide your peepee from others still lingers around.
... is it made out of genuine baby seal fur???
You forgot
this one
and
this one
When there is one.
Stupid christians.
It’s only christianity that brainwashed people about not wanting to be seen naked.
I am not christian, and have been carefully raised without any christian influence whatsoever, and I have absolutely no problem with being totally naked in public nor do I have any problem with seeing people naked.
Sue.
I emphatize
Hence the need for “Truecrypt”
That’s because you live in Russia :) (or France)
Just because a cop says something doesn’t mean they’re not bullshitting
You forgot to put the concept of “having guts” in your equation.
Watch and learn!
Erred in what? What is wrong in tracking the very public progress of a vehicle on public roads? What you do in public, in plain view of other people cannot be deemed to be subject to some “right to privacy”.
No. Anything you do on the public roads and that it witnessed by the public can be recorded by anyone, including the police.
Also, there is no “right to privacy” in the US constitution.
Very simple. Tagging a car with GPS registers where the car is going and when. This is no different than posting cops all over the place and noting where the car goes, or having someone tail the car all the time.
Nothing private is searched, nothing that is not publicly visible is recorded, so it only makes sense that it is legal.
There is a difference between putting the food on the table, living in a $200,000 house, driving a $25,000 car and bringing the family to Maxim’s every day, living in a $15,000,000 château and driving a $150,000 car.
The former is “personal responsibility”, the second is greed.
LOL! La balayette à chiottes!
Oh boy can he sue! yes, and the case is so blatant that he shall not worry about having his job back, with a vengeance. The prud’hommes are gonna have a field day with this!
Sell. You’ll have plenty of dough to start something else if the conditions become unbearable and have to leave.
In the course of their tenure, they have to carefully shield themselves from the opinion currents (socially, they will remain mostly in their family circles, and avoid big social venues), as they their job requires them to strictly adhere to the Constitution and the jurisprudence (where relevant). As a matter of course, they will avoid reading newspapers articles relating to "their" cases, and blogs naturally fall in this category.
Whatever discussions we had about his work have been kept generic and mundane, and with the utmost care not to reveal the inner legal workings of the cases; in short, nothing more than what is available to court observers.
So true, so true...
On the other hand, the great ignorant unwashed masses the extreme right rely on for political support will not pay for something they can get for free elsewhere.
Although this is a boneheaded move, it will be beneficial because it will shink Murdoch's audience to the point of political irrelevance, which will allow a resurgence of socialism.