And the cash you spend isn't subject to confiscation and return to the bank, because society deems the liquidity of cash as a whole to be more important than personal property rights.
I hate to say this, but facebook's already won this battle. They probably cheated but unless someone can prove it this guy needs to shut up.
Ceglia should have kept a watchful eye and documented the shit out of everything.
What's more, this lawsuit is ages old and he could have nipped this situation in the bud a long ass time ago.
If someone rips you off, you take care of it promptly. You don't just sit on your ass and let damages accrue.
I would dismiss his case with prejudice on grounds of either laches or statute of limitations or both. Besides, he already made a binding settlement in the form of what proved to be very lucrative stock options.
Unless he can show that Facebook somehow committed fraud *in that settlement* he has no standing to sue.
I'm all for fighting the good fight but once you've waved the white flag the game is over.
Considering how often high profile patents wind up getting overturned or narrowed on reexamination I propose that the front line of examiners of first instance that are simply rubber stamping everything that comes across their desk are either overworked or incompetent or both.
The fact that many of them are getting overturned later, either in court or on reexam, is strong evidence if not outright proof that most of them never should have been issued in the first place.
The USPTO needs to stop issuing bullshit patents. It also needs to hire more examiners so that patent busting reexaminations at least keep up with the rubber stamp train.
Finally, we need a loser pays court system that punishes companies that try to win cases, or even settlements, simply by outbudgeting their foes in court. All a company needs to do is use its legal department to harvest lucrative settlements and put the proceeds to hiring more lawyers and they're rolling in the dough.
Unfortunately the establishment is happy keeping things the way they are.
Even if I got into office and tried to stop it, my reforms would piss off enough companies that their lobbyists would force my fellow congress critters to give my ass the happy boot, either through expulsion or by impeachment.
When copyright cartels get so greedy they don't care about collateral damage from forcing innocent bystanders to cough up exorbitant settlements just to avoid an expensive legal defense. Standing up for yourself is suicide. Unfortunately, the MAFIAA knows this and accordingly sees fit to not care who they are aiming at. They are goliath.
They've sued dead people and old grandmothers that couldn't possibly have been guilty. They even got some default judgements and pressed on knowing damn well they had no case.
If they started leaving innocent bystanders alone, I would have a lot more respect for them.
We need a loser pays system so that they can get stung when they fuck up. And so that innocent bystanders aren't afraid to fight back, possibly with the help of white knight sponsors like the EFF and whatnot that can then fund their defenses and get their money back when the lawsuit blows up in the plaintiff's face.
Like many other industries, a lack of competition is what is wrong here. Verisign and others like them have a monopoly, and as such have no incentive to improve quality or lower costs.
Hold examiners accountable for the quality of their work.
Make it so the USPTO stops rubber stamping patent applications.
At present reexaminations stand a VERY good chance of narrowing or invalidating the patents in question.
Which means that most of the patents are complete buckets of shit in the first place.
Which means that the examiners at the USPTO aren't doing their fucking jobs like they're supposed to.
I'd say that any patent getting overturned on reexamination or trial bites the original examiner in the ass...hard enough to make them think twice about rubber stamping a pile of bullshit.
If the worst that can happen is you go bankrupt from legal fees, ratcheting them up to include the other side's expenses won't really hurt much more.
Once you're underground, you're underground.
Besides, once you start having "loser pays" you also imply that you get a refund on your legal bills if you win your case.
This in turn means that organizations like the EFF, ACLU, FSF, SFLC, and whatnot that provide legal defense funds will find their newly reusable donation dollars stretching much further, and they will be emboldened to step in more often.
The EFF chipping in 50k for a lawyer will be easier on their bottom line if they can use the same money once the vexatious plaintiff coughs it back up again.
1. Right to work specifically says they have every right to fire you at any time with or without cause just or otherwise. 2. Suing your ex boss is going to get you blacklisted with future employers who will quite justifiably be gun-shy.
All "cause" does is establish eligibility for unemployment benefits, or lack thereof.
If you were fired because the boss didn't like your political views or your sports team loyalties, you can collect.
I would much rather make it merit based and treat cell phones in cars the same way we treat guns, as useful tools that are dangerous if not used properly.
You should be required to get a license or permit to use a cell phone while driving, and getting one should require passing a quiz and possibly a demonstration about how to do so safely.
As it is we already let cops and truckers use cell phones because we presume them to be competent enough not to fuck up.
And more importantly, because *other people* will judge you based on your tastes. Even though you might (and with good reason) not personally value a high cost brand over a cheap one, you have to accept the fact that other people will be watching your price tags, and it will control whose shoulders and elbows you'll get to rub with.
The reason is that if you win you're not going to care if it was by fair or foul means. Most people are just greedy enough to leave it as "I win" and not give a shit if they cheated.
If you lose you're going to throw a fit and find out if you got cheated or lost fair and square, but if you win you're not going to care.
* It being against the rules, so the seller might be just ripping you off, since you have no recourse if you're cheated * Getting caught and either banned or having the PLEX confiscated by a GM * the buyer possibly being an undercover GM doing a sting.
It's black market for a reason. The guy selling it has no incentive except his reputation not to take your money and run. Since it's a TOS violation, you can't sue, and you can't complain to a GM.
Cereal boxes are sold by weight and not volume, there is thus no deception. After all, you can't make mass magically disappear, with the laws of physics and all. They don't even pretend to sell you more than what you're actually getting. They set it by pounds and ounces and you get exactly what you were entitled to expect.
Slashdot Mirror
You can also get good currency by robbing a bank.
And the cash you spend isn't subject to confiscation and return to the bank, because society deems the liquidity of cash as a whole to be more important than personal property rights.
I hate to say this, but facebook's already won this battle. They probably cheated but unless someone can prove it this guy needs to shut up.
Ceglia should have kept a watchful eye and documented the shit out of everything.
What's more, this lawsuit is ages old and he could have nipped this situation in the bud a long ass time ago.
If someone rips you off, you take care of it promptly. You don't just sit on your ass and let damages accrue.
I would dismiss his case with prejudice on grounds of either laches or statute of limitations or both. Besides, he already made a binding settlement in the form of what proved to be very lucrative stock options.
Unless he can show that Facebook somehow committed fraud *in that settlement* he has no standing to sue.
I'm all for fighting the good fight but once you've waved the white flag the game is over.
Considering how often high profile patents wind up getting overturned or narrowed on reexamination I propose that the front line of examiners of first instance that are simply rubber stamping everything that comes across their desk are either overworked or incompetent or both.
The fact that many of them are getting overturned later, either in court or on reexam, is strong evidence if not outright proof that most of them never should have been issued in the first place.
The USPTO needs to stop issuing bullshit patents. It also needs to hire more examiners so that patent busting reexaminations at least keep up with the rubber stamp train.
Finally, we need a loser pays court system that punishes companies that try to win cases, or even settlements, simply by outbudgeting their foes in court. All a company needs to do is use its legal department to harvest lucrative settlements and put the proceeds to hiring more lawyers and they're rolling in the dough.
Unfortunately the establishment is happy keeping things the way they are.
Even if I got into office and tried to stop it, my reforms would piss off enough companies that their lobbyists would force my fellow congress critters to give my ass the happy boot, either through expulsion or by impeachment.
And of course, the fact that it costs more to fight back than settle...
When copyright cartels get so greedy they don't care about collateral damage from forcing innocent bystanders to cough up exorbitant settlements just to avoid an expensive legal defense. Standing up for yourself is suicide. Unfortunately, the MAFIAA knows this and accordingly sees fit to not care who they are aiming at. They are goliath.
They've sued dead people and old grandmothers that couldn't possibly have been guilty. They even got some default judgements and pressed on knowing damn well they had no case.
If they started leaving innocent bystanders alone, I would have a lot more respect for them.
We need a loser pays system so that they can get stung when they fuck up. And so that innocent bystanders aren't afraid to fight back, possibly with the help of white knight sponsors like the EFF and whatnot that can then fund their defenses and get their money back when the lawsuit blows up in the plaintiff's face.
And what business is it of society to say what business it is of the parents?
sadly I think it's both.
Though lawyers giving wiseasses the boot during voire dire might make the more civic minded among us want to avoid jury duty anyway.
SSL certification isn't broken.
The economic system around it is broken.
Like many other industries, a lack of competition is what is wrong here. Verisign and others like them have a monopoly, and as such have no incentive to improve quality or lower costs.
If they admit they had no right to sue in the first place that establishes that the lawsuit was frivolous.
I'll do you one better.
Hold examiners accountable for the quality of their work.
Make it so the USPTO stops rubber stamping patent applications.
At present reexaminations stand a VERY good chance of narrowing or invalidating the patents in question.
Which means that most of the patents are complete buckets of shit in the first place.
Which means that the examiners at the USPTO aren't doing their fucking jobs like they're supposed to.
I'd say that any patent getting overturned on reexamination or trial bites the original examiner in the ass...hard enough to make them think twice about rubber stamping a pile of bullshit.
Maybe not.
If loser pays, then someone can donate to your legal expenses and get their money back when you win.
If the worst that can happen is you go bankrupt from legal fees, ratcheting them up to include the other side's expenses won't really hurt much more.
Once you're underground, you're underground.
Besides, once you start having "loser pays" you also imply that you get a refund on your legal bills if you win your case.
This in turn means that organizations like the EFF, ACLU, FSF, SFLC, and whatnot that provide legal defense funds will find their newly reusable donation dollars stretching much further, and they will be emboldened to step in more often.
The EFF chipping in 50k for a lawyer will be easier on their bottom line if they can use the same money once the vexatious plaintiff coughs it back up again.
Suing your ex boss won't ever fly.
1. Right to work specifically says they have every right to fire you at any time with or without cause just or otherwise.
2. Suing your ex boss is going to get you blacklisted with future employers who will quite justifiably be gun-shy.
All "cause" does is establish eligibility for unemployment benefits, or lack thereof.
If you were fired because the boss didn't like your political views or your sports team loyalties, you can collect.
Actually I think that if you threaten a civil suit in bad faith it counts as duress.
Media is already owned by the establishment that is hell bent on keeping things the way they are.
Better still would be not allowing lawyers to exclude jurors for being too smart.
The only reason lawyers get to bullshit Jose the Gardener in the first place is because Rosie the Rocket Scientist got expelled during voir dire.
On the other hand it's harder to be pushed into a settlement just to dodge hefty legal bills.
I would much rather make it merit based and treat cell phones in cars the same way we treat guns, as useful tools that are dangerous if not used properly.
You should be required to get a license or permit to use a cell phone while driving, and getting one should require passing a quiz and possibly a demonstration about how to do so safely.
As it is we already let cops and truckers use cell phones because we presume them to be competent enough not to fuck up.
It's conspicuous consumption.
You expend resources to prove that you have them.
And more importantly, because *other people* will judge you based on your tastes. Even though you might (and with good reason) not personally value a high cost brand over a cheap one, you have to accept the fact that other people will be watching your price tags, and it will control whose shoulders and elbows you'll get to rub with.
I guess then that the best defense to being robbed is to have nothing worth stealing?
The reason is that if you win you're not going to care if it was by fair or foul means. Most people are just greedy enough to leave it as "I win" and not give a shit if they cheated.
If you lose you're going to throw a fit and find out if you got cheated or lost fair and square, but if you win you're not going to care.
Pirates are like robbers, whereas scammers are like crooks.
The money may be fictional, but the guns the feds will point your way for not using them to pay your taxes, are very much real.
That discount reflects the following risks:
* It being against the rules, so the seller might be just ripping you off, since you have no recourse if you're cheated
* Getting caught and either banned or having the PLEX confiscated by a GM
* the buyer possibly being an undercover GM doing a sting.
It's black market for a reason. The guy selling it has no incentive except his reputation not to take your money and run. Since it's a TOS violation, you can't sue, and you can't complain to a GM.
Which is fine.
Cereal boxes are sold by weight and not volume, there is thus no deception. After all, you can't make mass magically disappear, with the laws of physics and all. They don't even pretend to sell you more than what you're actually getting. They set it by pounds and ounces and you get exactly what you were entitled to expect.
Internet bandwidth however is different.