I've heard of the first sale doctrine being dodged on SOFTware...
But the day the courts let companies pull that bullshit on tangible goods is the day that pigs will fly so high they'll get a bad enough sunburn to have bacon rain from heaven.
Except that Holden could easily be presumed to have control over who uses the cars, whereas governments and phones don't easily control who uses the roads or phone lines.
In fact there was a case awhile ago in landlord tenant law where a property management company turned a blind eye to the ne'er-do-wellisms of the druggie tenants. The owner was lazy, unattentive, or otherwise unaware of the shenanigans the prop co was allowing...
Well, the government got wind of it and sued for asset forfeiture.
paraphrased due to memory holes: "The place was a heap of illegality that anyone would be aware of, *and the knowledge of the management company can be ***IMPUTED*** to the principle*"
The property was seized and became US government property.
That's right, if you hire someone and they allow the place to go to hell in a handbasket, YOU are the one that stands to lose out.
I never did find out if the owner ever got to sue the crap out of the management co.
Personally, I think this case is a fine example of how the government can worm its way around our rights.
I hope that the courts, while considering themselves "bound by precedent", do not forget that they are also bound by statute.
If some high muckety muck court decides to be crazy and make a precedent by legislating some outlandish ruling from the bench, what recourse does a lower court have if neither party appeals it high enough for the error to be fixed?
Which is why I said profitable, and not merely lucrative.
Scarce resources are expensive, that's basic supply and demand. Whether that scarcity is contrived by hoarding, derived from cost, or both, it matters not because it's going to get expensive.
And, no matter how expensive it is to give up a resource, if there's a potential for monopoly profit to be earned by hoarding, companies will do it long after the price has risen enough for them to break even.
Given the primary causes of the current recession, I wouldn't put it past simple greed to be playing a significant role in the problem.
Especially now that there's news of companies (I'm looking at YOU verizon) that are outright OBSTRUCTING v6 adoption, as a recent slashdot article revealed.
I think it is telling indeed that there are companies out there willing to actively oppose v6 adoption rather than passivly not supporting it.
Well they're not much for taste but you can't beat dealing with a species that spends its life soaking up sunlight, belching out oxygen, and building itself up into edible biomass.
Customer indifference isn't what keeps honest business out of the market.
Honest businesses simply can't compete with sleazeballs period, because let's face it, if you cheat and get away with it, you are better off than an honest john no matter what the customer thinks.
It's the same reason you can win a fight very quickly by hitting below the belt, and if the ref isn't watching it pays off every time.
Which will be absolutely crippled if NAT becomes commonplace enough.
And, while ISPs and the MAFIAA may be tickled pink about this, folks like redhat and canonical are going to be miffed that their low BW distribution channels over bittorrent get broken.
Not to mention WoW using p2p methods to send patches.
Right now there are no problems, however, in the time it will take to develop v6, there WILL eventually be problems with v4.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard of the first sale doctrine being dodged on SOFTware...
But the day the courts let companies pull that bullshit on tangible goods is the day that pigs will fly so high they'll get a bad enough sunburn to have bacon rain from heaven.
So the empty string wouldn't be valid?
What I don't like is being forced to jump through hoops to remember a password.
Recently gmail disallowed passwords shorter than 8 characters, and as a result I had to memorize some funky 14-digit number
Actual knowledge of a criminal offense usually makes you an accessory no matter what you allow or don't allow.
In theory this is ok, but in practice you can be imputed up the wazoo on the sayso of circumstantial evidence.
This forces you to be more diligent than you are normally required to be in order to stamp out piracy...unfortunately imputing yourself in more stuff.
Dammit you made me lose The Game!
Except that Holden could easily be presumed to have control over who uses the cars, whereas governments and phones don't easily control who uses the roads or phone lines.
In fact there was a case awhile ago in landlord tenant law where a property management company turned a blind eye to the ne'er-do-wellisms of the druggie tenants. The owner was lazy, unattentive, or otherwise unaware of the shenanigans the prop co was allowing...
Well, the government got wind of it and sued for asset forfeiture.
paraphrased due to memory holes: "The place was a heap of illegality that anyone would be aware of, *and the knowledge of the management company can be ***IMPUTED*** to the principle*"
The property was seized and became US government property.
That's right, if you hire someone and they allow the place to go to hell in a handbasket, YOU are the one that stands to lose out.
I never did find out if the owner ever got to sue the crap out of the management co.
Personally, I think this case is a fine example of how the government can worm its way around our rights.
I hope that the courts, while considering themselves "bound by precedent", do not forget that they are also bound by statute.
If some high muckety muck court decides to be crazy and make a precedent by legislating some outlandish ruling from the bench, what recourse does a lower court have if neither party appeals it high enough for the error to be fixed?
And to think that in the workplace, writing is actually the LEAST important skill.
Believe it or not, among skills needed in the work place, the most important is listening. Then comes speaking, then reading, then writing.
Completely BASS ACKWARDS to the way it's taught in school.
I propose that any network that has arseloads of IPs that can't be changed isn't being managed intelligently to begin with.
DHCP can take care of the vast majority of IPs, most commonly workstations as well as ISP clients.
DNS can take care of many other tasks.
Which is why I said profitable, and not merely lucrative.
Scarce resources are expensive, that's basic supply and demand. Whether that scarcity is contrived by hoarding, derived from cost, or both, it matters not because it's going to get expensive.
And, no matter how expensive it is to give up a resource, if there's a potential for monopoly profit to be earned by hoarding, companies will do it long after the price has risen enough for them to break even.
Given the primary causes of the current recession, I wouldn't put it past simple greed to be playing a significant role in the problem.
Especially now that there's news of companies (I'm looking at YOU verizon) that are outright OBSTRUCTING v6 adoption, as a recent slashdot article revealed.
I think it is telling indeed that there are companies out there willing to actively oppose v6 adoption rather than passivly not supporting it.
epic fail
Pillaging the environment doesn't really "make money"
It's more akin to "borrowing", and then blowing the dough and leaving your kids to pay back the loan...with interest.
Well they're not much for taste but you can't beat dealing with a species that spends its life soaking up sunlight, belching out oxygen, and building itself up into edible biomass.
Sounds similiar to the same problem that putting solar panels in assfault roads.
Sadly, for some, the "pick up your marbles from the big bad company" step never comes to pass because the company swallowed the marbles.
Customer indifference isn't what keeps honest business out of the market.
Honest businesses simply can't compete with sleazeballs period, because let's face it, if you cheat and get away with it, you are better off than an honest john no matter what the customer thinks.
It's the same reason you can win a fight very quickly by hitting below the belt, and if the ref isn't watching it pays off every time.
RTFFAQ
When it comes down to it all that matters is not pissing off the regulators that have the power to finger you and drag you into court over it.
The IRS, as an agency that you Just Don't Fuck With (tm), is not one you want to draw attention from by playing semantics games, for example.
I've never known abstract things as events to have speech capability, let alone gender.
Agreed.
One caveat though...
If the research is being accomplished by intercepting information being sent to their own computer, then it is completely legal.
Having said that, I disagree with publication for two reasons:
1. It can alert the botnet operators, and in such a case disclosure could very well be interpreted as obstructing an investigation.
2. Overzealous prosecutors may decide to pounce.
Not *my* NAT box, the one belonging to the ISP that my connection is stuck behind.
For starters, bittorrent.
Which will be absolutely crippled if NAT becomes commonplace enough.
And, while ISPs and the MAFIAA may be tickled pink about this, folks like redhat and canonical are going to be miffed that their low BW distribution channels over bittorrent get broken.
Not to mention WoW using p2p methods to send patches.
Right now there are no problems, however, in the time it will take to develop v6, there WILL eventually be problems with v4.
Which is exactly the sort of defeatist attitude that lets verizon get away with crap like this.
Verizon knows that its customers can't easily fight back, so it feels justified in screwing them.
A few lawsuits against Verizon for pulling this crap might change their tune.
Yes.
However, slashdot often gets its news from other sources.
Windows admins being sloppy doesn't make the news.
Also, the fud machine favors attention granted to linux's foibles.