Whether or not it is illegal (which it is) seems to be confusing you with respects to the action taken to penalise (or more likely not) the person, which will generally be limited to taking away the property and returning it to its owner.
Just because it’s illegal to buy stolen goods doesn’t mean that everyone has to be morons about how that is enforced and penalised. Sure if you knowingly did it that’s worse and punished accordingly... if you unknowingly did it you probably just have to give it back and lost whatever you paid for it.
“...and as I’m going on break in five minutes I’m not offering to get for him any paperwork for reporting a theft or take down the information”?
It takes all of what, five seconds to say “you’re going about it wrong, you need THIS”, and fifteen minutes to help them along the way of doing it? And that’s sort of their JOB? And these morons apparently won’t do that. What do they think they’re paid to do... drink coffee?
Guy goes to police. “My missing dog has been found, this company knows who has it, and they won’t tell me or help me get it back.” “You haven’t told us it was stolen, we can’t help you!”
Is it a fucking magic incantation or something? Does it have to be uttered in those exact words – MY DOG WAS STOLEN? And how about the intonation and emphasis of the syllables? Is it okay if I add “hey you fucking morons, get a clue...” at the beginning?
As several other posters have commented, the police say that they will investigate *if* he reports it to them. They're not psychic.
But they knew he was trying to get it back somehow without it being reported to them? Maybe they are psychic.
Or maybe they’re just fucking morons giving him the run-around to avoid having to do their damn jobs. He did report it to them. When he went to the police and told them “somebody has my dog and this company knows who but won’t tell me who or where or help me get it back”, he informed the police of anything and everything that they needed to be informed of.
This will happen even if the new owners have no idea what's going on.
Right, because when they took their new dog to the vet, had it checked, oh hey this dog is chipped, can we get the address changed over to ours please?... and all the while they were blissfully unaware of the fact that someone, somewhere, owned the dog before they did and had it chipped in the first place.
That’s actually rather easy to imagine, but the fact that nobody had the intelligence to tell them “hey, this dog was reported lost or stolen” (and/or just keep the dog and not give it back to them) is ridiculous.
Right, so the entry should be marked STOLEN in their database so that when a vet calls it up because the stolen dog is in his office at that moment and he’ll know to keep the dog there and who cares about the location of the guy who brought it in?
Right, imma go steal your car and sell it to my brudda, and since my brudda dun ask where I gets me cars he can sells em as he likes and that’s good enough faith to argue circles round the court. An if ye ask me brudda where he gets HIS cars he’ll just tell ye he can’t disclose that information under the Data Protection Act.
...if that’s actually the law where you live, you have some fucked up laws.
I’m still trying to figure out what the hell the mouth-breathers were thinking. (Okay, not really: they were thinking “go away and leave us alone about your stupid dog, we have ‘real’ work to do”.)
Mr Moorhouse contacted the police who also refused to disclose the information after concluding that there was no criminal case to answer.
Stolen dog. No criminal case. Stolen dog. No criminal case.... what the fuck?
A judge at Huddersfield County Court ruled that the matter was outside his jurisdiction.
You don’t report a dog as stolen the first day it turns up missing... and how incredibly dense and un-helpful is this system exactly where going to court to have a company disclose the location of your stolen dog isn’t more or less equivalent to reporting the dog as stolen and “going from there”?
The person who doesn't have the dog has not bothered to notify the police so they can look into it.
Er... no, actually they went to the police just as they were supposed to and ended up in court where some moron with a robe and gavel basically said “I don’t care, go away”.
They could even automate the process. "Your video was taken down by complaint here, click here to accept liability for accused copyright infringement and restore your video immediately."
Problem with that being they would then be mired in legal battles to try to extract a few drops of blood from the turnip-heads who clicked it with no concern for its meaning.
Um, did you actually read what you posted? (2).(B) and (C) places an explicit exception to the general non-liability offered under (1) if the service provider receives a counter-notice and subsequently fails to restore the material...
It’s not just an expected “replace every 10,000 miles or 2 years” sort of expense. It’s an insurance policy against the whoops moment that occurs when you’ve just knocked the fan off the window sill and now have to buy a new one because it was cheap crap... and the one you just broke was 2 days old, not 2 years.
Now if the message were recorded on a tape, CD, or some other device, and the device was sent to the recipient, I suppose an argument could be made that the original recording is copyright Buckyballs, but not a traditional voice mail.
Yes, and dammit, that’s the whole problem with copyright... turning a plain and simple notion of “who are these morons who think they can actually own this bit of information?” into “wait, do I own the media, or the information it contains, or both, or neither, or am I licensed to use it but don’t own it and can that license be revoked and how or why and... (head asplode)”
You should be grateful that they’re not self-righteous pricks who simply and flatly refuse to serve their carefully-written HTML to browsers that can’t display it properly!
Slashdot Mirror
Then there’s also possession of stolen goods, which is also illegal and begins the instant you find out the goods had been stolen.
The remedy, of course, is to give them up and let them be given back to their rightful owner.
Whether or not it is illegal (which it is) seems to be confusing you with respects to the action taken to penalise (or more likely not) the person, which will generally be limited to taking away the property and returning it to its owner.
Just because it’s illegal to buy stolen goods doesn’t mean that everyone has to be morons about how that is enforced and penalised. Sure if you knowingly did it that’s worse and punished accordingly... if you unknowingly did it you probably just have to give it back and lost whatever you paid for it.
“...and as I’m going on break in five minutes I’m not offering to get for him any paperwork for reporting a theft or take down the information”?
It takes all of what, five seconds to say “you’re going about it wrong, you need THIS”, and fifteen minutes to help them along the way of doing it? And that’s sort of their JOB? And these morons apparently won’t do that. What do they think they’re paid to do... drink coffee?
Yes, I posted that. I’m talking to myself. It’s fun. I do it often. You should try it.
I’m pretty sure I’m not made out of meat, because if so I’d probably be tasty. And magnetic.
Guy goes to police. “My missing dog has been found, this company knows who has it, and they won’t tell me or help me get it back.” “You haven’t told us it was stolen, we can’t help you!”
Is it a fucking magic incantation or something? Does it have to be uttered in those exact words – MY DOG WAS STOLEN? And how about the intonation and emphasis of the syllables? Is it okay if I add “hey you fucking morons, get a clue...” at the beginning?
As several other posters have commented, the police say that they will investigate *if* he reports it to them. They're not psychic.
But they knew he was trying to get it back somehow without it being reported to them? Maybe they are psychic.
Or maybe they’re just fucking morons giving him the run-around to avoid having to do their damn jobs. He did report it to them. When he went to the police and told them “somebody has my dog and this company knows who but won’t tell me who or where or help me get it back”, he informed the police of anything and everything that they needed to be informed of.
This will happen even if the new owners have no idea what's going on.
Right, because when they took their new dog to the vet, had it checked, oh hey this dog is chipped, can we get the address changed over to ours please? ... and all the while they were blissfully unaware of the fact that someone, somewhere, owned the dog before they did and had it chipped in the first place.
That’s actually rather easy to imagine, but the fact that nobody had the intelligence to tell them “hey, this dog was reported lost or stolen” (and/or just keep the dog and not give it back to them) is ridiculous.
Actually sounds to me like you can buy it from just about whoever. You don’t even have to give it back if it’s stolen.
Right, so the entry should be marked STOLEN in their database so that when a vet calls it up because the stolen dog is in his office at that moment and he’ll know to keep the dog there and who cares about the location of the guy who brought it in?
He must start a legal process in order to get the name of the people who now have the dog.
How exactly does one do that?
He went to the police and they told him “don’t bother us – your stolen dog is not a criminal case”.
He went to the court with jurisdiction in his region and they told him “don’t bother us – not our jurisdiction”.
Sounds to me like everyone whose responsibility it is has claimed that the responsibility theirs isn’t.
Right, imma go steal your car and sell it to my brudda, and since my brudda dun ask where I gets me cars he can sells em as he likes and that’s good enough faith to argue circles round the court. An if ye ask me brudda where he gets HIS cars he’ll just tell ye he can’t disclose that information under the Data Protection Act.
...if that’s actually the law where you live, you have some fucked up laws.
I’m still trying to figure out what the hell the mouth-breathers were thinking. (Okay, not really: they were thinking “go away and leave us alone about your stupid dog, we have ‘real’ work to do”.)
Mr Moorhouse contacted the police who also refused to disclose the information after concluding that there was no criminal case to answer.
Stolen dog. No criminal case. Stolen dog. No criminal case. ... what the fuck?
A judge at Huddersfield County Court ruled that the matter was outside his jurisdiction.
Then whose fucking jurisdiction is it under?
You don’t report a dog as stolen the first day it turns up missing... and how incredibly dense and un-helpful is this system exactly where going to court to have a company disclose the location of your stolen dog isn’t more or less equivalent to reporting the dog as stolen and “going from there”?
The person who doesn't have the dog has not bothered to notify the police so they can look into it.
Er... no, actually they went to the police just as they were supposed to and ended up in court where some moron with a robe and gavel basically said “I don’t care, go away”.
They could even automate the process. "Your video was taken down by complaint here, click here to accept liability for accused copyright infringement and restore your video immediately."
Problem with that being they would then be mired in legal battles to try to extract a few drops of blood from the turnip-heads who clicked it with no concern for its meaning.
Um, did you actually read what you posted? (2).(B) and (C) places an explicit exception to the general non-liability offered under (1) if the service provider receives a counter-notice and subsequently fails to restore the material...
Obviously not.
Nothing in you is magnetic...unless is was added later.
Good thing I’ve slept and shat a few times since last time I ate frog legs...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Frog_diamagnetic_levitation.jpg
It’s not just an expected “replace every 10,000 miles or 2 years” sort of expense. It’s an insurance policy against the whoops moment that occurs when you’ve just knocked the fan off the window sill and now have to buy a new one because it was cheap crap... and the one you just broke was 2 days old, not 2 years.
Replying just to taunt you and because I have karma to burn. You’re an idiot.
And I’m not even the guy you were arguing with.
n/t.
Now if the message were recorded on a tape, CD, or some other device, and the device was sent to the recipient, I suppose an argument could be made that the original recording is copyright Buckyballs, but not a traditional voice mail.
Yes, and dammit, that’s the whole problem with copyright... turning a plain and simple notion of “who are these morons who think they can actually own this bit of information?” into “wait, do I own the media, or the information it contains, or both, or neither, or am I licensed to use it but don’t own it and can that license be revoked and how or why and ... (head asplode)”
Hell, some states have one-party consent laws – if you simply know somebody is listening, you can be recorded.
You should be grateful that they’re not self-righteous pricks who simply and flatly refuse to serve their carefully-written HTML to browsers that can’t display it properly!