Wondering So who cares? is hardly a condition unique to the modern age. Every generation must (to some extent) rediscover and reinvent the purposes of life as we live it. Change breaks the old models and requires new ones to be constructed.
Which really matters more to you, though?
Is it whether your actions are remembered in a few hundred years, or whether they make a meaningful difference to those you care about here and now?
"Now then, If you Copyright something, then give it out for free to anyone who asks, and try to complain when someone ELSE gives it out for free then you are going to get laughed out of court."
Sounds good, but it's not true.
Consider the Book of Mormon, for instance. Anyone who asks can get a free copy of it (well, the latest version of it, since it has been redacted often). Nonetheless, the copyright has not only failed to be laughed out of court, but actually been given a special extension. This may be an unusual case, but it does illustrate that the law doesn't always match our expectations of what makes sense.
One need not be a "free-speech-zealot" (howeer that is defined) in order to recognize the bullying legal tactics that Microsoft is accustomed to using as a means of coercion against others. Those tactics do not require legitimacy to work. They need only the threat of litigation to force most into compliance with demands that may or may not be legitimate in various cases.
In this case, I believe the demands made by Microsoft are ethically dubious, legally weak, and potentially self-destructive with regard to public relations.
Andover.Net is perfectly within its rights, both legally and ethically, to challenge the allegations. It would be wrong to roll over and play dead every time a corporate bully demanded it.
1. Copyright infringement is only an allegation at this point. The Fair Use doctrine cannot be so lightly dismissed. 2. The GPL is a tool to promote what is actually being defended: Free (or Open) Software. In the absence of copyright, the GPL would not be effective, but then so what? It would not be needed, either. 3. No one is breaking the law by standing up to a known monopolistic corporate bully and contesting its highly questionable claims.
he limit of up to $20.00 "cash back" from your debit card when making a purchase applies to any store that offers this service (again, no fee). Publix, Kmart, Target, Winn Dixie, wherever.
For a larger withdrawal, use the ATM in front of the Publix, though.
Or make several separate purchases of a pack of gum, if desperate. Or if you really like chewing gum.
Claimed: "According to the MSN rebat e form, they may sue you under 18 USC 1341"
No, the above link refers to the mail-in rebate and fraud such as trying to get multiple rebates by making copies of the store receipt, and other things of that nature. For the mail-in rebate, you pay the whole purchase price up front then wait for reimbursement. The instant rebate is more immediate, and the contract for it contains no such language as mentioned above.
The stores which offer the instant option will only fall back on the mail-in option if the special system they use for creating MSN accounts is down, which is rare indeed.
Residents of CA and OR have an ethical choice to make, but the facts are clear. They are not legally obligated to pay MSN if they should choose, for any reason, to cancel the account they created to get the instant rebate being offered with full knowledge of those applicable laws. The lawyers know this and MSN made the choice to bet enough people will like the service to offset the cost of those who merely play the system.
I wonder how long before MSN withdraws the offer in those two states.
If you call MSN customer service to cancel an account that was set up with a contractual agreement, you will be advised that account cancellation will result in a charge to your credit card for the instant rebate amount (whatever that was, as it differs depending on the length of the contract) UNLESS you are a resident of CA or OR. Well, OK, you might be advised of it anyway, but just mention again what state you're calling from. (The state you're calling to will happen to be Florida or Kentucky, depending on what buttons you press, but that's another story altogether.)
Residents of those two states have their cancellations processed without any fee whatsoever. Anyone else gets billed. Those are the only two options in this particular dichotomy.
P.S. If you're cancelling because you returned a computer to the place of purchase, then something's wrong. The stores participating in these promos are supposed to handle that themselves using their own internal procedures. Calling MSN customer service will get you nothing more productive than a referrel back to the store after you finish punching numbers on your touch tone and listening to the hold music. The right freebie for the right state.
One stop shopping sounds like a good deal for the business that gets it, but open standards that let customers shop around more easily for services sounds even better! The one stop I like to make is at my keyboard, proceeding from there to whatever financial institution suits the need at hand.
For convenience and a great place to start, a free checking account that allows bill payments without any fees makes sense (I use SFNB with satisfaction, but there are others as well). For savings here in the U.S., credit unions provide a better return than commercial banks. For anything else, well, you tell me; I'm still working on it.
The right tool for the right job is the way to go.
Slashdot Mirror
Wondering So who cares? is hardly a condition unique to the modern age. Every generation must (to some extent) rediscover and reinvent the purposes of life as we live it. Change breaks the old models and requires new ones to be constructed.
Which really matters more to you, though?
Is it whether your actions are remembered in a few hundred years, or whether they make a meaningful difference to those you care about here and now?
"Now then, If you Copyright something, then give it out for free to anyone who asks, and try to complain when someone ELSE gives it out for free then you are going to get laughed out of court."
Sounds good, but it's not true.
Consider the Book of Mormon, for instance. Anyone who asks can get a free copy of it (well, the latest version of it, since it has been redacted often). Nonetheless, the copyright has not only failed to be laughed out of court, but actually been given a special extension. This may be an unusual case, but it does illustrate that the law doesn't always match our expectations of what makes sense.
One need not be a "free-speech-zealot" (howeer that is defined) in order to recognize the bullying legal tactics that Microsoft is accustomed to using as a means of coercion against others. Those tactics do not require legitimacy to work. They need only the threat of litigation to force most into compliance with demands that may or may not be legitimate in various cases.
In this case, I believe the demands made by Microsoft are ethically dubious, legally weak, and potentially self-destructive with regard to public relations.
Andover.Net is perfectly within its rights, both legally and ethically, to challenge the allegations. It would be wrong to roll over and play dead every time a corporate bully demanded it.
1. Copyright infringement is only an allegation at this point. The Fair Use doctrine cannot be so lightly dismissed. 2. The GPL is a tool to promote what is actually being defended: Free (or Open) Software. In the absence of copyright, the GPL would not be effective, but then so what? It would not be needed, either. 3. No one is breaking the law by standing up to a known monopolistic corporate bully and contesting its highly questionable claims.
he limit of up to $20.00 "cash back" from your debit card when making a purchase applies to any store that offers this service (again, no fee). Publix, Kmart, Target, Winn Dixie, wherever.
For a larger withdrawal, use the ATM in front of the Publix, though.
Or make several separate purchases of a pack of gum, if desperate. Or if you really like chewing gum.
English for Mittwoch? All right, you caught me. It's American for Mittwoch.
Claimed: "According to the MSN rebat e form, they may sue you under 18 USC 1341"
No, the above link refers to the mail-in rebate and fraud such as trying to get multiple rebates by making copies of the store receipt, and other things of that nature. For the mail-in rebate, you pay the whole purchase price up front then wait for reimbursement. The instant rebate is more immediate, and the contract for it contains no such language as mentioned above.
The stores which offer the instant option will only fall back on the mail-in option if the special system they use for creating MSN accounts is down, which is rare indeed.
Residents of CA and OR have an ethical choice to make, but the facts are clear. They are not legally obligated to pay MSN if they should choose, for any reason, to cancel the account they created to get the instant rebate being offered with full knowledge of those applicable laws. The lawyers know this and MSN made the choice to bet enough people will like the service to offset the cost of those who merely play the system.
I wonder how long before MSN withdraws the offer in those two states.
This is false. It's all or nothing.
If you call MSN customer service to cancel an account that was set up with a contractual agreement, you will be advised that account cancellation will result in a charge to your credit card for the instant rebate amount (whatever that was, as it differs depending on the length of the contract) UNLESS you are a resident of CA or OR. Well, OK, you might be advised of it anyway, but just mention again what state you're calling from. (The state you're calling to will happen to be Florida or Kentucky, depending on what buttons you press, but that's another story altogether.)
Residents of those two states have their cancellations processed without any fee whatsoever. Anyone else gets billed. Those are the only two options in this particular dichotomy.
P.S. If you're cancelling because you returned a computer to the place of purchase, then something's wrong. The stores participating in these promos are supposed to handle that themselves using their own internal procedures. Calling MSN customer service will get you nothing more productive than a referrel back to the store after you finish punching numbers on your touch tone and listening to the hold music. The right freebie for the right state.
I agree that the premise needs to be questioned.
One stop shopping sounds like a good deal for the business that gets it, but open standards that let customers shop around more easily for services sounds even better! The one stop I like to make is at my keyboard, proceeding from there to whatever financial institution suits the need at hand.
For convenience and a great place to start, a free checking account that allows bill payments without any fees makes sense (I use SFNB with satisfaction, but there are others as well). For savings here in the U.S., credit unions provide a better return than commercial banks. For anything else, well, you tell me; I'm still working on it.
The right tool for the right job is the way to go.
In Florida at least, you can use the ATMs at any Publix to withdraw money from an SFNB account without a fee.