Considering there's considerable debate on the morality of exposing government corruption the evil bit would probably have an undefined value in this case.
I'm all for copyright owners getting their due according to the law as it stands (different argument as to if that law itself needs fixing), but it's not fair for creative third parties to require navigating a mnefield to locate rightsholders who can run the gamut from "Oh I'm so happy someone is finally letting my dusty creativity see the light of day again" to "greedy I am, pay me a fortune or I sue you to hell", and some of which may pull a Rambus and hide in the shadows waiting for a substantial investment to be made before they swoop in with a racket.
What needs to happen is that for a publisher who has done his due diligence and failed to find any copyright owner, he should be able to profit from his work after paying the most possible to an escrow account.
I'd create a "orphan works trustee" that auctions off annual publishing contracts based on who offers to pay the most in royalties per copy. Contracts are reauctioned annually, and royalties collected are held in escrow for the copyright holder after deduction of reasonable overhead expenses not to exceed 20 percent of gross.
Once the copyright owner is found, any existing publishing contract is assigned to them and the work in question, as well as all other works by them, become blacklisted in the registry, and they become responsible for any further publisher negotiation.
Still need to work out how long to wait, if ever, to actively seek out orphan works copyright holders, and how much, if any, of royalty revenues to "bill" for the expenses involved, as well as what to do with royalties left over if a search is fruitless.
I'm pretty sure cutting the calls short isn't the ONLY thing they're doing if they're listening to the conversation closely enough to decide to cut it off in the first place.
In theory, once you get busted for burglary, the patent application itself would count as prior art because the guy who filed wasn't the same one that filled it out.
Microsoft probably likes it that OEMs are keeping their specs under wraps and writing their own drivers.
A pleasant side effect for them is that it makes it very difficult for Linux to take advantage of that proprietary hardware, leaving more of the gaming market for Microsoft.
I am your potential boss, the economy sucks ass, and you're desperate for a job.
How can I not exploit this to my advantage? I have all the leverage I need to both be picky and biased all to hell, as well as force you to walk on pins and needles if you want to keep your job.
And that means I'll be perfectly free in every practical way that matters to be a prejudicial scumbag.
Slashdot Mirror
Impeachment from the same congress critters that are feeding from the same corporate trough the judge herself is?
Yeah, like that'll work.
If it weren't for lawyers doing a lot of grandstanding and dragging out court cases for eons on end I'd have less sympathy for bored jurors.
The radio station broadcasting it already paid the royalties for a license to broadcast it.
Double dipping hogwash.
Supposing you need to dispute your bill becuase, oh I dunno, your data usage is getting mismetered by 4700 percent?
If they shred the data they conveniently lose the evidence you need to have your bill corrected.
Considering there's considerable debate on the morality of exposing government corruption the evil bit would probably have an undefined value in this case.
What we need is better orphan works legislation.
I'm all for copyright owners getting their due according to the law as it stands (different argument as to if that law itself needs fixing), but it's not fair for creative third parties to require navigating a mnefield to locate rightsholders who can run the gamut from "Oh I'm so happy someone is finally letting my dusty creativity see the light of day again" to "greedy I am, pay me a fortune or I sue you to hell", and some of which may pull a Rambus and hide in the shadows waiting for a substantial investment to be made before they swoop in with a racket.
What needs to happen is that for a publisher who has done his due diligence and failed to find any copyright owner, he should be able to profit from his work after paying the most possible to an escrow account.
I'd create a "orphan works trustee" that auctions off annual publishing contracts based on who offers to pay the most in royalties per copy. Contracts are reauctioned annually, and royalties collected are held in escrow for the copyright holder after deduction of reasonable overhead expenses not to exceed 20 percent of gross.
Once the copyright owner is found, any existing publishing contract is assigned to them and the work in question, as well as all other works by them, become blacklisted in the registry, and they become responsible for any further publisher negotiation.
Still need to work out how long to wait, if ever, to actively seek out orphan works copyright holders, and how much, if any, of royalty revenues to "bill" for the expenses involved, as well as what to do with royalties left over if a search is fruitless.
And you have exposed a perverse incentive with letting anything hinge on the death of the author.
I'm pretty sure cutting the calls short isn't the ONLY thing they're doing if they're listening to the conversation closely enough to decide to cut it off in the first place.
Neither is *eavesdropping* on said phone calls for the purpose of determining whether or not to censor.
Oddly enough, arbitrary cutoffs aren't the scariest implication in this.
If penalties for perjury on patent applications were even half decent that would actually be a good idea.
I think banning people for what they're posting (unless it's spam or CP) is equally petty.
Actually, I'd call it treason and/or espionage.
Things escalate in a hurry when foreign sovereignties get involved.
You're guilty of aiding and abetting.
In theory, once you get busted for burglary, the patent application itself would count as prior art because the guy who filed wasn't the same one that filled it out.
You're not stealing the code, what you're stealing is the exclusivity of its use.
Including from starvation.
Microsoft probably likes it that OEMs are keeping their specs under wraps and writing their own drivers.
A pleasant side effect for them is that it makes it very difficult for Linux to take advantage of that proprietary hardware, leaving more of the gaming market for Microsoft.
ICANN controls the internet through it's IANA function, and it is headquartered in the US.
Followed by the .xxx registry charging 100s of bucks for domain registration and renewal.
Devices are not locked. Though it will cost you your warranty, you are able to unlock your bootloader.
That can have serious consequences if the guys you owe favors to have enough connections to fuck you over if you betray them.
It's not like you're the *only* politician they've got their tentacles around.
The professor is the one who grades your test, and he will evaluate you on if you've complied with the "holy scriptures" of your course textbook.
So you don't complete your test based on what is correct. You complete it based on what the book says, what your professor says.
Which is basically how the real world works: Sit down, shut the fuck up, and do what the hell you're told.
It might not affect the institution, but it might affect the government's privilege to issue the funding.
I am your potential boss, the economy sucks ass, and you're desperate for a job.
How can I not exploit this to my advantage? I have all the leverage I need to both be picky and biased all to hell, as well as force you to walk on pins and needles if you want to keep your job.
And that means I'll be perfectly free in every practical way that matters to be a prejudicial scumbag.
What about cheese eating surrender monkeys?