Bullshit. The current government has only been in power for 12 months and the previous government spent $100M trying to do exactly the same thing. I'm curious, which of the two major parties are you going to vote for to turn this thing around ??
Apart from a vote being 2-3 years away...this simply isn't going to be an election issue come voting time. Outside of people who actually understand what it means (a very, very small number), this is not an issue - and with the global financial crisis dominating the news - it can't become one either.
APO/FPO mail is notorious for being delayed days, weeks or even months for just simple letters. Packages can vanish into smoke.
That may be the case, but its still Dell's call. Dell need to make a business decision as to whether or not they are going to the location in question. If they go ahead and take your money then they are also taking on the responsibility of getting the package to that address.
I agree that if Dell can show they DID get the shipment to the address specified - then its no longer Dell's responsibility, but until someone authorised at the destination address signs for it and takes ownership, its Dell's problem.
If Dell DOESN'T want that responsibility - its up to Dell to review where it will and won't ship to.
you have a dodgy supply chain to your location. bother the supply chain
uh... no. The supply chain is Dell's responsibility. The ability to purchase a machine over the Internet and have it sent to you is THEIR BUSINESS MODEL. Thats what they're promising for your cash - if they aren't able to reliably deliver the machine to your location, they shouldn't be taking your cash.
First of all, this guy had the sleaze not to bother showing up in court.
Forgetting the actual details of the case for a minute...What possible motivation would any individual have to go to a foreign country, to fight a lawsuit filed in that foreign country, by a company based in that foreign country, unless they were compelled to through an extradition process or to protect financial interests ? Absolutely none.
Why didn't Facebook sue him in Canada instead? At least he may have been compelled to show up.
While I agree with the sentiments, it won't deter anyone.
They'll just pay a nobody $50 to put their name on the door as the "owner" and then provide "consultancy" services to "the company" and charge "the company" %100 of the profit. Then they're simply a HR company, and Joe Patsy takes the fall.
They might even get a tax break for running the company at a loss;-)
Come to think of it, an even better analogy thats closer to argument is holding an airline legally responsible for the pirated CDs in its cargo hold - afterall, they're as much a part of the distribution chain as the ISP is.
SO th MAFIAA_OSO need to sue the following: - The Theatre Chain who sold the movie ticket and failed to stop the filming of a shaky-cam version - The video camera manufacturer for not preventing the recording of copyright content - The HD card/SD card/digital tape/USB manufacturer for the same thing - The manufacturer of the vehicle used to carry the camera to the house of the copyright violator - The hardware manufacturer of the PC used to upload the content to the Internet - The ISP (or provider) of the Internet link of the perpetrator for allowing the movement of pirated content across its network. - ALL ISPs who carried the content on their networks between the two host machines. - The ISPs, PC hardware, and TV manufacturers who allowed the download and subsequent display of pirated content, as well as the downloaders themselves....And Bill Gates.
While I agree with your sentiments, the analogy doesn't really hold up.
The hammer shop has no way of knowing what the hammer is used for, after it leaves the shop. The ISP on the otherhand, does have the ability to know what an account is being used for, or what type of data is being sent.
A better analogy would be an airline being held responsible for the cocaine that a passenger is carrying, or a tollway operator being charged because a car on its road network is carrying illegal firearms - in effect, you're making the service operator criminally responsible for the actions of its patrons.
Of course.. they're not going after Telstra, the No.1 telco in the country because that would be a Title Fight, as opposed to the David & Goliath battle they've waged here.
There IS a simple way to fix this. Require IP holders to sue for ALL breaches of their IP content that they become aware of, otherwise they lose their hold on that IP. That means they HAVE TO sue the senators son for mp3s he's downloaded. They HAVE TO sue the No1 Telco for copyright infringements, not just the No2 ISP.
In the end the MAFIAA will be suing so many different people that the people will demand a rewrite of the IP laws.
The only way that this can come to a head is to prevent the MAFIAA from selectively picking their targets as example cases.
You are broadly correct - in the USA or most other countries, the courts would likely NOT have jurisdiction over the case. But France is France.
Bullshit. There are many, many cases where the US courts claim jurisdiction for breaches of US law that occur outside the United States, where US citizens or companies are harmed, and the courts will freeze any US-based assets of the foreign entities in question if the court rules against them, to pay damages.
Yes, and I will be doing my best to educate and raise MY kids to look after themselves.
But, again, the point is - Joe Public will not. Joe Public will demand a technical solution from their government (UK, Australia, US.. it doesn't matter) for OUR kids irrespective of whether a technical solution is practical or appropriate.
They want "this filth" off their computers FULL STOP.
The government will first look to the industry to provide a solution to the perceived problem, and failing that, they will then mandate a solution of their own (not something we want to see) to appease the people.
As we can see from this story and others, its already happening.
We can choose to ignore the issue, in which case we lose any say we might have had in addressing it, or, whether we believe the issue is real or not, we can attempt to do something about it.
Thats the point. Joe Public perceives this as an issue and, as a result, "something" will be done about by the powers that be - its up to us to decide how much we influence the end result.
says the moron who keeps manually line-breaking his text. congratulations! you broke html! do us all a favour and dont teach your kids to do that
and yes, I'll teach my kids to avoid AC fuck tards too..
IF MY MANUAL LINE BREAKS ARE BREAKING YOUR HTML, THEN YOUR HTML IS BROKEN. PERHAPS YOU SHOULD BUY A NEW ONE,
OR STOP READING SLASHDOT ON YOUR FUCKING IPHONE.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
'scuse me for shouting..
Apart from the response from ImOriginal, I'll thank the rest of you for making my point.
I DO teach my kids to self-censor. I DO stick the computer in the lounge room. I DO educate my kids about what the dangers are and why. I AM internet savvy, and I'll endeavour to make sure my kids are too.
But its not about me. The point is, the General Public (tm) will DEMAND a technical solution, whether its possible, practical or not... and if we cant alleviate their perceived problems, the politicians will do it for us..even if its only smoke and mirrors.
And while the actual "save our kids" part might be smoke and mirrors, the politicians will use it as an opportunity to include their necessary enhancements (you know, the stuff they missed because they didnt understand the Internet the first time around) to "protect us", and they'll have the full backing of Joe Public.
The public perceives that there is serious danger and none of you, or me, are going to convince them otherwise.
So its simple - argue with me about the pros and cons all you want - question my parenting skills too if it makes you feel better - but if WE dont address the issues and clean it up,
Big Brother will do it for us.
Most of those responding have missed my point.
Having a go at me, or my parenting abilities is pointless. I'm not the
one you need to convince.
I am a concerned parent when it comes to what my kids have access to online.
I'm also a 20+ year software developer. There are many, many more people like
me with concerns about the of the content available and dangers on the net, with
far less a grasp on the technology or understanding of the pros and cons than I have.
IF we can't find an IT solution to this problem (note: whether YOU think its
a problem is irrelevant) then the politicians will. There are simply too many
votes to be had.
I'm torn on this. The filtering plan is bullshit obviously and I'm also sure that someone will post the funny "Please god.. won't someone think of the children!?" but heres the rub...
They're my children. MY kids. Not someone theoretical child somewhere that needs saving. And after 15 years on the net, I know exactly how bad and sadistic some of the content is out there.
My kids are of the age where they're becoming independent. I've educated them. I've implemented my own rules of engagement when it comes to my kids accessing the internet at home.
But I can't guide them 100% of the time. They know whats ok, and whats not, but they're still kids.
I'm lucky in that I was in Uni when the Internet went mainstream in early 90s. I could make decisions for myself, but for kids these days, the Internet has always been ON.
Its time we stopped bagging the HOW and started thinking about the WHY.
WHY is the (insert your government here) trying to censor the internet ?
The main reason is simple - people are worried about their kids and the ease with which they can end up in touch with seriously maladjusted, sick and sadistic motherf**ers online.
Most parents learn that while the world can be wonderful - it can also be a nasty, mind numbingly horrendous place at times. The internet is representation of that. All things wonderful, all things horrible, all at the same time. You can't critisize parents for wanting to come between their kids and the nastier elements.
This is Slashdot - one of the biggest collection of people with the talent and ideas to find a solution to this problem in the world. SO WHAT IS IT ??? 2 internets ? registered and unregistered ? make it an over 18 network ?
How do we use a technical solution to enforce a line in the sand that noone can agree on anyway ? If the geeks can't find a solution to this dilemma, then ultimately the politicians will - and we won't like the bonus pack I'm sure.
So, to pose the question: Dont put your head in the sand. The predators are there. They're real. They exist. Given this, how do we protect OUR kids online ?
Remember, this is the network that tried (and failed) to stop another network (ABC)from filming the fireworks over Sydney Harbour Bridge on Millenium Eve because they owned the trademark on the "Eternity" logo displayed on the bridge.
This is similar to the argument thats already been had over the humble phonebook.
In essence, the phone book is also just a collection of factual information: Name, Address, Phone Number But the High Court in Australia deemed that the effort required to compile the data gave it copyright status.
Presumably the Nine Network will be arguing a similar point and, given that any version of schedule will ultimately be derived from the programming material put out by Nine, the only other way to compile the list is after the programs have aired... which is kinda useless.
There is an easy way to bring about a revolution in IP laws.
Make every copyright holder enforce their IP rights through the courts for EVERY infringement that they become aware of, otherwise their claim to that IP is null and void.
In essense, this would force the RIAA and MPAA etc, to sue for every breach of copyright they know about (eg. the Senators daughter, the Fortune 500 CEOs son etc)
- to the point where the general public is forced to wake up to the faults of the system and demand change.
At the moment, these bodies can selectively sue whoever they want as a show of strength, but by and large leave the masses alone. As a result, they pick and choose which infringements they want to fight for to ram home the message.
A case in point - under Australian law, it is still technically illegal to make a copy of copyright content YOU OWN. As such EVERY iPod and MP3 player in Australia (and probably every PC and laptop) contains illegal music. But are the music companies enforcing this ?? No. Its not in their best interests to highlight the fact that you can't legally copy a CD that you legally bought, to your MP3 player or a backup.
To my mind, this would be the same as working for a vendor and then taking a job working on their competitor's product. It works, but is it ethical?
Its not ethical (or legal in most cases) if you take your previous employers IP to a competitor, but a paycheck wasn't your ONLY remuneration for your previous job, you skills set and knowledge base was also (hopefully) enhanced by what you were working on.
You have a right to ply your trade and trade on your skills (and don't ever sign those rights away unless its for a retirement type wad of cash). Your previous employer was paying for the use of those skills and anything you developed while employed, but they didn't OWN your skills.
A large part of providing a solution is understanding the problem, and if you already have experience in the field, then you are more desirable in the marketplace than someone who doens't - you just need to come up with a different solution to a problem you've potentially already solved for someone else. More than one way to skin a cat, as they say.
Bullshit. The second the principal became the target on MySpace, it became a school matter. If the student were to stand just outside the school grounds with a banner claiming that the principal is a paedophile, would this still be considered a joke ? No. Its slander with consequences. The principal has every right to take disciplinary action and the student (and parents) should have been thankful AND GRATEFUL that thats where it ended.
Yawn. Take a look at my life if you want, but let me save you the calculations.
I had a busy, if somewhat mundane, day at work after which I came home, ate
some pizza, caught an episode of Top Gear and Boston Legal, checked in on my
facebook account, and - as the missus is away - there is probably some internet
porn in my near future.
Tomorrow, being a Tuesday, will most likely turn out to be a carbon copy of today,
with the following exceptions, Top Gear becomes Criminal Minds followed by NCIS
instead of Boston Legal.
THE END.
Its funny you should mention Apple...because, while your basic point is correct, many corporations these days just competing in one event, but trying to compete in as many events as they are able to.
This makes the whole issue of Trademarks much more complex, and blurring markets and international exposure increase conflict exponentially. Just take a look at DNS.
Back to Apple. Apple dont just make computers anymore. Now they're a multinational and a major player in multimedia, including distribution and publishing.
If its just Bob's Printer Ink thats one thing... but now its Bob's Printer Ink / Media / Car Tyres / MP3 Players and GlobalNewsNetwork (tm) all rolled into Bob's Megacorp... if you happen to run Bob's Fresh Juice..even if you've been trading for 30 years...you're in for a fight...and the lawyers win again.
Here in Australia, we already have a DO NOT CALL register which *basically* prevents telemarketers from calling you once you've signed up.
I say *basically* because there are exemptions.
- Any company you do business with is exempt - even for cold calling.
So I have my power company trying to get me to switch my gas, and my gas company trying to get me to switch my power. My home phone company hassling me about my mobile and Internet connections, my ISP trying to move me onto their VOIP connections, and my mobile (cell) provider wanting me to change plans.
- Any charitable or not-for-profit organisation.
Which pretty much means open slather for tea-time hassles for donations on everything from kidney disease to abandoned kittens.
- Any government organisation
Which, again, means cold-called surveys, opinion polls, election promo calls etc.
So much for DO NOT CALL!
Worse, those who are exempt now use the DO NOT CALL Register as a call list. (After all, 75% of the competition has been removed)
Unfortunately, its like email... how do you effectively manage the signal-to-noise ratio?
I agree with your sentiments entirely.
This is what I absolutely HATE about warranties and, in particular, extended warranties that you pay extra for...they imply that you now have rights to service that you otherwise arent't entitled to...which is complete bullshit.
In Australia, and I'm sure the US too, consumer protection laws will generally provide a level of protection well beyond the conditions stated in the warranty or extended warranty for hardware.
The "warranty" acts as a mechanism for making a customer think they have less rights than they actually do under the law.
Kinda sad that the press is the only one able to enforce this, though it would be financial suicide to actually carry out their threats
Wrong. I agree with your sentiments but "The Media" are exactly what their name is defined as - a medium. The ONLY one able to enforce this is the consumer. No consumer, no market, no money, no publicity.
It is not that the media will tut-tut the censorship and move forward regardless - the problem is that WE, as consumers, will tut-tut the censorship and then DEMAND our sound and pictures from the Olympics anyway.
"WOW. The Chinese Government censoring the Internet is terrible. What a horrible regime to be living under! I wish the world wasnt so fscked up...BTW...How'd we do in the pool? 10 Gold 3 Silver and 15 Bronze...Not bad! When's the 100m Final ? I reckon the US just might get rolled in the Basketball this time round..."
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. The current government has only been in power for 12 months and the previous government spent $100M trying to do exactly the same thing. I'm curious, which of the two major parties are you going to vote for to turn this thing around ??
Apart from a vote being 2-3 years away...this simply isn't going to be an election issue come voting time. Outside of people who actually understand what it means (a very, very small number), this is not an issue - and with the global financial crisis dominating the news - it can't become one either.
APO/FPO mail is notorious for being delayed days, weeks or even months for just simple letters. Packages can vanish into smoke.
That may be the case, but its still Dell's call. Dell need to make a business decision as to whether or not they are going to the location in question. If they go ahead and take your money then they are also taking on the responsibility of getting the package to that address.
I agree that if Dell can show they DID get the shipment to the address specified - then its no longer Dell's responsibility, but until someone authorised at the destination address signs for it and takes ownership, its Dell's problem.
If Dell DOESN'T want that responsibility - its up to Dell to review where it will and won't ship to.
you have a dodgy supply chain to your location. bother the supply chain
uh... no. The supply chain is Dell's responsibility. The ability to purchase a machine over the Internet and have it sent to you is THEIR BUSINESS MODEL. Thats what they're promising for your cash - if they aren't able to reliably deliver the machine to your location, they shouldn't be taking your cash.
First of all, this guy had the sleaze not to bother showing up in court.
Forgetting the actual details of the case for a minute...What possible motivation would any individual have to go to a foreign country, to fight a lawsuit filed in that foreign country, by a company based in that foreign country, unless they were compelled to through an extradition process or to protect financial interests ? Absolutely none.
Why didn't Facebook sue him in Canada instead? At least he may have been compelled to show up.
While I agree with the sentiments, it won't deter anyone.
They'll just pay a nobody $50 to put their name on the door as the "owner" and then provide "consultancy" services to "the company" and charge "the company" %100 of the profit. Then they're simply a HR company, and Joe Patsy takes the fall.
They might even get a tax break for running the company at a loss ;-)
Come to think of it, an even better analogy thats closer to argument is holding an airline legally responsible for the pirated CDs in its cargo hold - afterall, they're as much a part of the distribution chain as the ISP is.
SO th MAFIAA_OSO need to sue the following: ...And Bill Gates.
- The Theatre Chain who sold the movie ticket and failed to stop the filming of a shaky-cam version
- The video camera manufacturer for not preventing the recording of copyright content
- The HD card/SD card/digital tape/USB manufacturer for the same thing
- The manufacturer of the vehicle used to carry the camera to the house of the copyright violator
- The hardware manufacturer of the PC used to upload the content to the Internet
- The ISP (or provider) of the Internet link of the perpetrator for allowing the movement of pirated content across its network.
- ALL ISPs who carried the content on their networks between the two host machines.
- The ISPs, PC hardware, and TV manufacturers who allowed the download and subsequent display of pirated content, as well as the downloaders themselves.
While I agree with your sentiments, the analogy doesn't really hold up.
The hammer shop has no way of knowing what the hammer is used for, after it leaves the shop.
The ISP on the otherhand, does have the ability to know what an account is being used for, or what type of data is being sent.
A better analogy would be an airline being held responsible for the cocaine that a passenger is carrying, or a tollway operator being charged because a car on its road network is carrying illegal firearms - in effect, you're making the service operator criminally responsible for the actions of its patrons.
Of course.. they're not going after Telstra, the No.1 telco in the country because that would be a Title Fight, as opposed to the David & Goliath battle they've waged here. There IS a simple way to fix this. Require IP holders to sue for ALL breaches of their IP content that they become aware of, otherwise they lose their hold on that IP. That means they HAVE TO sue the senators son for mp3s he's downloaded. They HAVE TO sue the No1 Telco for copyright infringements, not just the No2 ISP. In the end the MAFIAA will be suing so many different people that the people will demand a rewrite of the IP laws. The only way that this can come to a head is to prevent the MAFIAA from selectively picking their targets as example cases.
You are broadly correct - in the USA or most other countries, the courts would likely NOT have jurisdiction over the case. But France is France.
Bullshit. There are many, many cases where the US courts claim jurisdiction for breaches of US law that occur outside the United States, where US citizens or companies are harmed, and the courts will freeze any US-based assets of the foreign entities in question if the court rules against them, to pay damages.
To say this is a "French" thing is ridiculous.
Yes, and I will be doing my best to educate and raise MY kids to look after themselves.
But, again, the point is - Joe Public will not.
Joe Public will demand a technical solution from their government (UK, Australia, US.. it doesn't matter) for OUR kids irrespective of whether a technical solution is practical or appropriate.
They want "this filth" off their computers FULL STOP.
The government will first look to the industry to provide a solution to the perceived problem, and failing that, they will then mandate a solution of their own (not something we want to see) to appease the people.
As we can see from this story and others, its already happening.
We can choose to ignore the issue, in which case we lose any say we might have had in addressing it, or, whether we believe the issue is real or not, we can attempt to do something about it.
Thats the point. Joe Public perceives this as an issue and, as a result, "something" will be done about by the powers that be - its up to us to decide how much we influence the end result.
says the moron who keeps manually line-breaking his text. congratulations! you broke html! do us all a favour and dont teach your kids to do that and yes, I'll teach my kids to avoid AC fuck tards too.. IF MY MANUAL LINE BREAKS ARE BREAKING YOUR HTML, THEN YOUR HTML IS BROKEN. PERHAPS YOU SHOULD BUY A NEW ONE, OR STOP READING SLASHDOT ON YOUR FUCKING IPHONE. > > > > > > > 'scuse me for shouting..
Apart from the response from ImOriginal, I'll thank the rest of you for making my point.
I DO teach my kids to self-censor.
I DO stick the computer in the lounge room.
I DO educate my kids about what the dangers are and why.
I AM internet savvy, and I'll endeavour to make sure my kids are too.
But its not about me. The point is, the General Public (tm) will DEMAND a technical
solution, whether its possible, practical or not... and if we cant alleviate their
perceived problems, the politicians will do it for us..even if its only smoke and mirrors.
And while the actual "save our kids" part might be smoke and mirrors, the politicians will
use it as an opportunity to include their necessary enhancements (you know, the stuff they
missed because they didnt understand the Internet the first time around) to "protect us",
and they'll have the full backing of Joe Public.
The public perceives that there is serious danger and none of you, or me, are going to convince
them otherwise.
So its simple - argue with me about the pros and cons all you want - question my parenting
skills too if it makes you feel better - but if WE dont address the issues and clean it up,
Big Brother will do it for us.
Most of those responding have missed my point. Having a go at me, or my parenting abilities is pointless. I'm not the one you need to convince. I am a concerned parent when it comes to what my kids have access to online. I'm also a 20+ year software developer. There are many, many more people like me with concerns about the of the content available and dangers on the net, with far less a grasp on the technology or understanding of the pros and cons than I have. IF we can't find an IT solution to this problem (note: whether YOU think its a problem is irrelevant) then the politicians will. There are simply too many votes to be had.
Serious question. What IS the solution ??
I'm torn on this. The filtering plan is bullshit obviously and I'm also sure that someone
will post the funny "Please god.. won't someone think of the children!?" but heres the rub...
They're my children. MY kids. Not someone theoretical child somewhere that needs saving.
And after 15 years on the net, I know exactly how bad and sadistic some of the content is
out there.
My kids are of the age where they're becoming independent. I've educated them. I've
implemented my own rules of engagement when it comes to my kids accessing the internet at home.
But I can't guide them 100% of the time. They know whats ok, and whats not, but
they're still kids.
I'm lucky in that I was in Uni when the Internet went mainstream in early 90s. I could make
decisions for myself, but for kids these days, the Internet has always been ON.
Its time we stopped bagging the HOW and started thinking about the WHY.
WHY is the (insert your government here) trying to censor the internet ?
The main reason is simple - people are worried about their kids and the ease
with which they can end up in touch with seriously maladjusted, sick and sadistic
motherf**ers online.
Most parents learn that while the world can be wonderful - it can also be a nasty,
mind numbingly horrendous place at times. The internet is representation of that.
All things wonderful, all things horrible, all at the same time. You can't critisize
parents for wanting to come between their kids and the nastier elements.
This is Slashdot - one of the biggest collection of people with the talent and ideas
to find a solution to this problem in the world. SO WHAT IS IT ???
2 internets ? registered and unregistered ? make it an over 18 network ?
How do we use a technical solution to enforce a line in the sand that noone can agree
on anyway ? If the geeks can't find a solution to this dilemma, then ultimately the
politicians will - and we won't like the bonus pack I'm sure.
So, to pose the question: Dont put your head in the sand. The predators are there.
They're real. They exist. Given this, how do we protect OUR kids online ?
Remember, this is the network that tried (and failed) to stop another network (ABC)from filming
the fireworks over Sydney Harbour Bridge on Millenium Eve because they owned the trademark on
the "Eternity" logo displayed on the bridge.
This is similar to the argument thats already been had over the humble phonebook.
In essence, the phone book is also just a collection of factual information: Name, Address, Phone Number
But the High Court in Australia deemed that the effort required to compile the data gave it copyright status.
Telstra Corporation Limited v Desktop Marketing Systems Pty Ltd:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2001/612.html
Presumably the Nine Network will be arguing a similar point and, given that any version
of schedule will ultimately be derived from the programming material put out by Nine,
the only other way to compile the list is after the programs have aired... which is kinda useless.
...says one 7 year old to another: GIMP? Isnt that the name of that guy with the funny face in Pulp Fiction ??
There is an easy way to bring about a revolution in IP laws.
Make every copyright holder enforce their IP rights through the courts for
EVERY infringement that they become aware of, otherwise their claim to that
IP is null and void.
In essense, this would force the RIAA and MPAA etc, to sue for every breach
of copyright they know about (eg. the Senators daughter, the Fortune 500 CEOs son etc)
- to the point where the general public is forced to wake up to the faults of the
system and demand change.
At the moment, these bodies can selectively sue whoever they want as a show of
strength, but by and large leave the masses alone. As a result, they pick and
choose which infringements they want to fight for to ram home the message.
A case in point - under Australian law, it is still technically illegal to make a
copy of copyright content YOU OWN. As such EVERY iPod and MP3 player in Australia
(and probably every PC and laptop) contains illegal music. But are the music companies
enforcing this ?? No. Its not in their best interests to highlight the fact that you
can't legally copy a CD that you legally bought, to your MP3 player or a backup.
To my mind, this would be the same as working for a vendor and then taking a job working on their competitor's product. It works, but is it ethical?
Its not ethical (or legal in most cases) if you take your previous employers IP to a competitor, but a paycheck wasn't your ONLY remuneration for your previous job, you skills set and knowledge base was also (hopefully) enhanced by what you were working on.
You have a right to ply your trade and trade on your skills (and don't ever sign those rights away unless its for a retirement type wad of cash). Your previous employer was paying for the use of those skills and anything you developed while employed, but they didn't OWN your skills.
A large part of providing a solution is understanding the problem, and if you already have experience in the field, then you are more desirable in the marketplace than someone who doens't - you just need to come up with a different solution to a problem you've potentially already solved for someone else. More than one way to skin a cat, as they say.
Its like seeing a car you sold 10 years ago drive past.
Is that thing STILL RUNNING ? Wow...
Bullshit. The second the principal became the target on MySpace, it became a school matter.
If the student were to stand just outside the school grounds with a banner claiming that the principal is a paedophile, would this still be considered a joke ? No. Its slander with consequences. The principal has every right to take disciplinary action and the student (and parents) should have been thankful AND GRATEFUL that thats where it ended.
Yawn. Take a look at my life if you want, but let me save you the calculations. I had a busy, if somewhat mundane, day at work after which I came home, ate some pizza, caught an episode of Top Gear and Boston Legal, checked in on my facebook account, and - as the missus is away - there is probably some internet porn in my near future. Tomorrow, being a Tuesday, will most likely turn out to be a carbon copy of today, with the following exceptions, Top Gear becomes Criminal Minds followed by NCIS instead of Boston Legal. THE END.
Its funny you should mention Apple...because, while your basic point is correct, many corporations these days just competing in one event, but trying to compete in as many events as they are able to.
This makes the whole issue of Trademarks much more complex, and blurring markets and international exposure increase conflict exponentially. Just take a look at DNS.
Etoys vs Etoy http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/12/29/1538212/
Nissan Motors vs Nissan Computers http://www.ncchelp.org/The_Story/the_story.htm/
Back to Apple. Apple dont just make computers anymore. Now they're a multinational and a major player in multimedia, including distribution and publishing.
Apple vs The Beatles http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/27/1135251/
If its just Bob's Printer Ink thats one thing... but now its Bob's Printer Ink / Media / Car Tyres / MP3 Players and GlobalNewsNetwork (tm) all rolled into Bob's Megacorp... if you happen to run Bob's Fresh Juice..even if you've been trading for 30 years...you're in for a fight...and the lawyers win again.
Here in Australia, we already have a DO NOT CALL register which *basically* prevents telemarketers from calling you once you've signed up. I say *basically* because there are exemptions. - Any company you do business with is exempt - even for cold calling. So I have my power company trying to get me to switch my gas, and my gas company trying to get me to switch my power. My home phone company hassling me about my mobile and Internet connections, my ISP trying to move me onto their VOIP connections, and my mobile (cell) provider wanting me to change plans. - Any charitable or not-for-profit organisation. Which pretty much means open slather for tea-time hassles for donations on everything from kidney disease to abandoned kittens. - Any government organisation Which, again, means cold-called surveys, opinion polls, election promo calls etc. So much for DO NOT CALL! Worse, those who are exempt now use the DO NOT CALL Register as a call list. (After all, 75% of the competition has been removed) Unfortunately, its like email... how do you effectively manage the signal-to-noise ratio? I agree with your sentiments entirely.
This is what I absolutely HATE about warranties and, in particular, extended warranties that you pay extra for...they imply that you now have rights to service that you otherwise arent't entitled to...which is complete bullshit.
In Australia, and I'm sure the US too, consumer protection laws will generally provide a level of protection well beyond the conditions stated in the warranty or extended warranty for hardware.
The "warranty" acts as a mechanism for making a customer think they have less rights than they actually do under the law.
Kinda sad that the press is the only one able to enforce this, though it would be financial suicide to actually carry out their threats
Wrong. I agree with your sentiments but "The Media" are exactly what their name is defined as - a medium.
The ONLY one able to enforce this is the consumer. No consumer, no market, no money, no publicity.
It is not that the media will tut-tut the censorship and move forward regardless - the problem is that WE, as consumers, will tut-tut the censorship and then DEMAND our sound and pictures from the Olympics anyway.
"WOW. The Chinese Government censoring the Internet is terrible. What a horrible regime to be living under! I wish the world wasnt so fscked up...BTW...How'd we do in the pool? 10 Gold 3 Silver and 15 Bronze...Not bad! When's the 100m Final ? I reckon the US just might get rolled in the Basketball this time round..."