He has no reasonable obligation to talk to an ATM repair man
True. But once he was done buying his part he didn't walk away; he stuck around arguing with both the ATM guys and the REI security guys. That's pretty much the only assholish thing he did though.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't those "toxic" mortgage bonds also have AAA ratings?
There are currently 6 AAA rated companies. Microsoft, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer and three others I don't recall.
I believe some of the debt was AAA rated. Credit companies are slow to downgrade ratings. But, if you have to loan to someone, its still better than nothing.
However, if you stuff some Yen bills under the mattress, you will still get a resonable return on them as they will buy you more goods now than they did last year
Which is why no one wants to risk the money in investments. Which means investments have to be rock-solid or pay even higher interest rates.
If you think inflation is coming, it's a good time to purchase assets (land, whatever). If you think deflation is coming, it's a good time to keep cash on hand.
Either will likely raise interest rates, so it's a good time to borrow money.
Deflation benefits lenders, not borrowers. Inflation benefits borrowers.
Inflation benefits borrowers who spend the money. Deflation causes interest rates to go up (at least from the levels they are at now), and thus benefit borrowers who still have the capital on hand.
And deflation could only benefit lenders if you ignore the higher likelihood of defaults.
But the point is, deflation benefits people with assets and hurts people with debts, and inflation hurts people with assets and helps people with debts. Since Microsoft still has substiantal assets, deflation will help. It doesn't make sense to loan out money if you are expecting deflation, better to stay liquid and loan money later... unless you can loan money to a AAA rated company of course.
Microsoft has a AAA rating. At this point in time, people are desperate for a safe place to park their money. Interest rates are low. Simply by holding onto it in cash now, they're betting they can make back the interest plus some later. And if deflation occurs, woo-hoo!
It'd be foolish not to borrow money given how cheap it is now, and how it's not likely to last at that level.
Take a book you've bought, write notes in it, highlight it, cross some things out. You have every legal right to do those things to the copy you own.
That's fair use.
17 U.S.C. 106 the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:...(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work...
17 U.S.C. 101 A derivative work is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a derivative work.
Hence, editing out mentions of Coca-Cola (R) in a song, (an editorial revision) is a derivative work and can only be done with the copyright owners consent.
Fair use may allow you to subsitute "Pepsi" as a parody, but that's a question for a lawyer.
in fact people continue to use "xerox" as a generic verb for "photocopy" and yet Xerox has not lost its trademark.
Some people do, sure. But they've been pretty good about getting TV shows/movies/etc. to use "copy" and "copier" instead of "xerox" and "xerox machine"
You can do WTF ever you want to copyrighted works, you just can't (necessarily) distribute the original work and/or its derivatives.
No, you cannot. Just like you need permission to make a copy, you need a version to make a derivative work. This is true even if you use one copy to produce one derivative copy.
If I hated Coca Cola but loved a song that referenced it, I could clip that part out and only listen to my version
Only because it's unlikely to come to anyone's attention. It doesn't make it legit.
I just couldn't (under most licensing schemes) give the Coke-free version to anyone else
Well, if you get a license to create derivative works and/or distribute them that's a different story.
I could even write a program that cut that part out for other people, taking an MP3 or wav file or whatever as input, and distribute the program.
The program would probably also be a derivative work if it was focused on modifying one specific song.
IANAL, run all this by one before investing a lot of time or money in any of this.
When people google, who do they use? Google. Google has a complete monopoly when it comes to googling.
Kind of amazing Google hasn't tried to stop people from using "google" as a verb. After all, you were trying to be funny, but Xerox was forced to stop people from "xeroxing" to make the verb no longer under their monopoly, else they would have been split from it.
In the USA it's perfectly legal under copyright law for browsers to alter the display to remove ads. If webmaster wants to replace his homepage with a TOS contract, that's another story.
It's legal to creative derivative works without the consent of the copyright owner?
US Postal Regulations (8.4.6 Intentions of the Permit Holder) BRM [Business Reply Mail] may not be used for any purpose other than that intended by the permit holder, even when postage is affixed. In cases where a BRM card or letter is used improperly as a label, the USPS treats the item as waste.
Now, the internet source I went to may be incorrect. IANAL. But it seems to both both logical and proper to be illegal to abuse the system.
In some ways, it's like repackaging all of those unwanted mail solicitations, stuffing them back into the postage-paid return envelope... and dropping it into the mail.
Definately not nice, but seemingly poetic justice.
And just like that, also illegal.
IANAL, but the law isn't like a compiler. Intent matters, and intent in both cases is clear.
Uhhh because screens never become more power efficent and battery technology becomes weaker over time?
A 17" screen will always use more power than a 8.5" screen. Probably 4x (assuming the same aspect ratio.) So, it'll always last longer with a smaller screen, especially as the screen becomes a larger and larger part of the total power. Given underclocked chips and SSD remove moving parts and wasted energy as heat, that seems likely to happen.
Also, a bigger screen leads to it being harder to carry around, harder to get out for a quick look-up, etc. I'm still pissed that the EEE's are getting bigger and bigger. I want to get a little one... maybe 7" (depends mostly on the keyboard.) But now they're latest ones are over 10".
And while we would agree with your sig statement, liberty is a very personal quality. The Wisconsin court erred. They should be ashamed..
They said it wasn't unconstitutional. They also said the legislature should make a law against it. It was more a case of abdicating power and responsibility (possibly justly, possibly not) then think they made the ruling that would make society the best.
If this is legal for the police, I presume it is legal for anyone else who wishes to track someone
Apparently in WI this is true. The second paragraph is the Judge asking that legislature regulate both civilian and police use of GPS tracking devices. If it was already illegal for citizens, he wouldn't have had to specify both.
IANAL, but I read the ruling. Don't blame me if I'm wrong and you get in legal trouble.
I've got a better idea: demand to see a warrant to search the car when they come back to get it.
Better idea: Send a bill to the police department for transporting their property. Impound it and demand that they more that it's worth to get it back, like they do when they tow your car.
Unfortunately, police are granted many powers that citizens are not given.
Why is that a problem?
Just try to hold someone against their will and search them, for example. Or wear a gun on your hip here in Chicago. Or force someone off the road. Or force a hooker to service you with the threat of arrest.
Well, with the exception of the last, the police have a need to do all those things. And, with the possible exception of carrying a weapon, no one else really has a reason to do those things. It's good that non-cops cannot.
Not only has the generic Zipper product had the trademarked stripped, but registered is a subset of trademark. You lose both or neither due to the brand becoming a generic word.
DRM and copyright protect stuff, technology or data or ideas
Patents protect ideas. Copyright protects the expression of ideas (and boat hulls). DRM is an extralegal enforcement of copyright.
But, you are right. Trademarks only protect identity.
Trademarks get lost when the identity does. A long time ago a Zipper, was a Zipper(tm). But it became so associated with the idea, that they lost the trademark.
Slashdot Mirror
True. But once he was done buying his part he didn't walk away; he stuck around arguing with both the ATM guys and the REI security guys. That's pretty much the only assholish thing he did though.
There are currently 6 AAA rated companies. Microsoft, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer and three others I don't recall.
I believe some of the debt was AAA rated. Credit companies are slow to downgrade ratings. But, if you have to loan to someone, its still better than nothing.
Which is why no one wants to risk the money in investments. Which means investments have to be rock-solid or pay even higher interest rates.
Woo-hoo, warp drive, here we come!
Oh, only "cold fusion here we come"? Fine, lets just solve our enrgy crisis then. *kicks rock, wishes for holodeck*
If you think inflation is coming, it's a good time to purchase assets (land, whatever). If you think deflation is coming, it's a good time to keep cash on hand.
Either will likely raise interest rates, so it's a good time to borrow money.
Inflation benefits borrowers who spend the money. Deflation causes interest rates to go up (at least from the levels they are at now), and thus benefit borrowers who still have the capital on hand.
And deflation could only benefit lenders if you ignore the higher likelihood of defaults.
But the point is, deflation benefits people with assets and hurts people with debts, and inflation hurts people with assets and helps people with debts. Since Microsoft still has substiantal assets, deflation will help. It doesn't make sense to loan out money if you are expecting deflation, better to stay liquid and loan money later... unless you can loan money to a AAA rated company of course.
Except they didn't. They ordered a new trial without the GPS records.
Microsoft has a AAA rating. At this point in time, people are desperate for a safe place to park their money. Interest rates are low. Simply by holding onto it in cash now, they're betting they can make back the interest plus some later. And if deflation occurs, woo-hoo!
It'd be foolish not to borrow money given how cheap it is now, and how it's not likely to last at that level.
That's fair use.
17 U.S.C. 106 the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: ...(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work...
17 U.S.C. 101 A derivative work is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a derivative work.
Hence, editing out mentions of Coca-Cola (R) in a song, (an editorial revision) is a derivative work and can only be done with the copyright owners consent.
Fair use may allow you to subsitute "Pepsi" as a parody, but that's a question for a lawyer.
Some people do, sure. But they've been pretty good about getting TV shows/movies/etc. to use "copy" and "copier" instead of "xerox" and "xerox machine"
No, you cannot. Just like you need permission to make a copy, you need a version to make a derivative work. This is true even if you use one copy to produce one derivative copy.
Only because it's unlikely to come to anyone's attention. It doesn't make it legit.
Well, if you get a license to create derivative works and/or distribute them that's a different story.
The program would probably also be a derivative work if it was focused on modifying one specific song.
IANAL, run all this by one before investing a lot of time or money in any of this.
Kind of amazing Google hasn't tried to stop people from using "google" as a verb. After all, you were trying to be funny, but Xerox was forced to stop people from "xeroxing" to make the verb no longer under their monopoly, else they would have been split from it.
It's legal to creative derivative works without the consent of the copyright owner?
US Postal Regulations (8.4.6 Intentions of the Permit Holder) BRM [Business Reply Mail] may not be used for any purpose other than that intended by the permit holder, even when postage is affixed. In cases where a BRM card or letter is used improperly as a label, the USPS treats the item as waste.
Now, the internet source I went to may be incorrect. IANAL. But it seems to both both logical and proper to be illegal to abuse the system.
And just like that, also illegal.
IANAL, but the law isn't like a compiler. Intent matters, and intent in both cases is clear.
There was, until 1965. The snopes article even says so.
And alternate shells. But users rarely customize their machines to that level.
A 17" screen will always use more power than a 8.5" screen. Probably 4x (assuming the same aspect ratio.) So, it'll always last longer with a smaller screen, especially as the screen becomes a larger and larger part of the total power. Given underclocked chips and SSD remove moving parts and wasted energy as heat, that seems likely to happen.
Also, a bigger screen leads to it being harder to carry around, harder to get out for a quick look-up, etc. I'm still pissed that the EEE's are getting bigger and bigger. I want to get a little one... maybe 7" (depends mostly on the keyboard.) But now they're latest ones are over 10".
Why do they keep getting bigger.
They said it wasn't unconstitutional. They also said the legislature should make a law against it. It was more a case of abdicating power and responsibility (possibly justly, possibly not) then think they made the ruling that would make society the best.
Apparently in WI this is true. The second paragraph is the Judge asking that legislature regulate both civilian and police use of GPS tracking devices. If it was already illegal for citizens, he wouldn't have had to specify both.
IANAL, but I read the ruling. Don't blame me if I'm wrong and you get in legal trouble.
Better idea: Send a bill to the police department for transporting their property. Impound it and demand that they more that it's worth to get it back, like they do when they tow your car.
Why is that a problem?
Well, with the exception of the last, the police have a need to do all those things. And, with the possible exception of carrying a weapon, no one else really has a reason to do those things. It's good that non-cops cannot.
Blackwater training cops is just... wrong.
Not only has the generic Zipper product had the trademarked stripped, but registered is a subset of trademark. You lose both or neither due to the brand becoming a generic word.
Well, they have the most popular netbook: the iPhone/iTouch.
Patents protect ideas. Copyright protects the expression of ideas (and boat hulls). DRM is an extralegal enforcement of copyright.
But, you are right. Trademarks only protect identity.
Trademarks get lost when the identity does. A long time ago a Zipper, was a Zipper(tm). But it became so associated with the idea, that they lost the trademark.