I was under the impression that the line separating entrapment was one of who initiated it; i.e., if the cops walk up to someone and offer to sell him drugs, it's entrapment. If the cop stands on a street corner and looks like a dealer, if the addict comes up and asks for drugs it's not entrapment.
The problem with this mindset is that rape is not about sex. It's about power. Take his penis away, and next time the rapist will use a baseball bat, or a gun, or kidnap and torture the victim. Castration will only make the problem worse.
Investigations can be secret - there's hardly anything insidious about that. (Able to be abused, yes - but what in the legal system isn't?)
If actual trials were held in secret, that would be insidious. (Note: A Grand Jury is not a trial - it's a pre-trial hearing deciding if the prosecution even has enough evidence to start a trial.)
Good analogy. But I disagree, because 3D movies never really look "3D." At best they look "stereoscopic," like a bunch of flat layers arranged in a diorama.
Then they're not doing the 3D right, and/or not using 3D equipment while filming. IMAX has had incredible 3D capability since the early 90s - if they could do it then, there's no reason it couldn't be done now.
I have read where others say that the only copyright duration that makes any sense is the life of the author. I do not know that this always makes sense, but it does seem like a good upper-bound.
I have always held that "life of the author" is a horrible, horrible concept - this unfairly rewards people for nothing more than living longer. Add in the complications of books being published after an author dies, or of an author being obscure enough that his/her death is unknown, and it makes this an even worse concept. A simple flat time limit is much more fair, and much simpler to keep track of.
I would, however, go further and say that copyrights should be non-transferable, and that the most an employment contract should be able to do is require an exclusive license for sale over a limited period. While the company is aiding in the creative process by pumping resources into the author, the idea still comes from the individual.
This is another bad concept, for one major reason; collaborative works (such as movies, TV shows, and software), where there can be dozens and dozens of people involved in creation.
Since he lives in London and cannot possibly know where the homes of all these numerous people are, it seems to mean that he can be arrested for leaving his house.
Congress passed a new law adjusting the statute of limitations, and the Supreme Court case of Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. was thus overruled.
Not overruled; it was made moot for the specific case of that law. The ruling itself can still be considered precedent for other laws worded in the same way as the original law.
if worse comes to worst, a constitutional amendment can fix a bad supreme court decision.
You're misunderstanding what the Supreme court does; the only thing that can "fix" a "bad Supreme Court decision" is another Supreme court decision. A new Constitutional Amendment will change the boundaries of the government, but will not change what court rulings mean; they will still stand as precedent on any related cases that the Amendment did not address.
What I think you're trying to say is that an Amendment can make a SCOTUS decision moot. In that case, you're going for overkill, though - a simple change in law is all that is needed, not an Amendment.
Does your wild speculation come with witnesses? There were witnesses that saw them struggling.
Comments elsewhere in this thread say the only witness who said he saw that later recanted, stating police coerced him into saying it.
Your speculation is also a bit off in that it only explains a blood covered nose, not both the front and back of his head bleeding from injuries,
Incorrect. I clearly stated that it was only the back of his head bleeding, and that touching the back and then front of his face caused blood to appear on both.
not to mention the reported broken nose that Zimmerman suffered.
Again, as others have pointed out, if his nose was broken, why does he have absolutely no signs of such in any photographs taken at any time after that night?
And, of course, the 9mm isn't exactly known as a hand cannon of the sort to flip one backwards.
I said the kickback caused him to stumble backwards and trip, not get "flipped over".
Other than that, great job!
Other than glossing over and ignoring half of what I said, great job!
So Zimmerman fired his gun, and the kickback made him stumble backwards and fall over, bumping his head on the ground as he fell. He then grabbed the back of his head, as people are wont to do after getting a sharp pain there. Afterward he wiped his nose with his bare hands that had some blood on them.
...see, I can give wild speculation with the best of them!
The point here is no that Zimmerman should have been injured before defending himself. The point is that Zimmerman lied about being injured. If he lied about being injured, that makes his entire version of events suspect.
which is kinda standard procedure for those who need medical attention.
It's also standard procedure if there is reason to believe there even might be an injury. (Such as someone saying they've been in a fight - the paramedics will check them out for concussions or any injuries the person may not notice.) After a traumatic event (such as a shooting) paramedics will even treat people for shock - which is emotional, not physical.
What I would want to see is the paramedic's report on if he had any injuries - not some camera footage too grainy to tell what's actually going on. (Of course, paramedics are probably covered under doctor-patient confidentiality, so unless Zimmerman releases the reports himself...)
911 dispatchers may not have legal authority to force you to do something, but they have been trained to tell you the best course of action. If your doctor tells you to do something related to your health he'll generally know what he's talking about, and you disobey at your own peril. The same is true of 911 dispatchers - you ignore their advice at your own (and others') peril.
A 'great' book is 'A Canticle for Leibowitz', not hunger games.
No comment on Hunger Games's quality (I've never read it), but I'm really not a fan of Canticle. I can see why some people like it (especially those looking for Christian Sci-Fi), but I found it to be fairly boring and largely pointless.
Not sure where hunger games is even sci-fi.........
This coming from someone who brings up Canticle?
However, from summary/comments I've read about it in the last 10 minutes: Dsytopian future, high-tech environment control, use of technology to comment on present culture... sounds pretty much like Sci-Fi to me.
Enter: iPhone on AT&T's GoPhone Plan. No Data Plan at all. Just buy minutes/text. Then you go to any McDonald's to use their Wifi free for data.
If only. Pretty much every cell phone company in the country requires a data access plan if you have a smartphone. No opt-out, even if you didn't buy the phone from them.
...right up until someone with a valid key has their software think they don't, and it starts putting dicks into a television broadcast. Now you've just lost one customer for sure, probably a few more, and you have the FCC calling...
You HONESTLY expect THIS crowd to talk about DRM without it being followed by DIAF? You haven't actually read Slashdot before, have you?
I'd say this is the perfect crowd for him to talk to; while he will get some DIAF crap responses, he also will get responses from many people who (a) buy software, (b) pirate software, and (c) have actual knowledge of this type of thing.
Oh and $10k software? GTFO of here, in a dead economy you are just begging for piracy with a price like that.
Agreed. Even specialized software for high-$$ industries don't charge that for anything that isn't customized to the individual customer. If you're just going to put the software out there, try a price tag in the $100-150 range instead. At $10k, you better be providing some serious support, like customized plug-ins, feature implementation, and on-demand inter-application support with other software suites. Anything less than that and you're going to price yourself out of the market.
Personally, I'd split the two methods: Have a "consumer" version for ~$100 that is what it is. Have some "premium" plug-ins that have an extra charge for them (only do this for exceptionally complex and special-use plugins). Have a "premium" version for ~$10k that gets them a direct line to the developers and custom feature implementation. Use the demands of the premium users to figure out what to put into the next baseline iteration of your software.
I used to live in an apartment on an approach vector for the local airport, and a lot of those planes coming in for a landing would have been within shotgun range... now I'm mad that I never realized that it would have been perfectly legal to shoot at the damn things every time they woke me up in the mornings!
Because it's not illegal. (Anything you sign in a contract, no matter how awful, is legally binding unless the law makes it unenforceable. In other words, contract law uses a blacklist, not a whitelist.)
His statements sound completely reasonable, why do you think they make him out to be claiming the employee's whole life? He said that they just want to make sure the employee isn't either doing IP-related work for a competitor (fair, since that'll cause no end of IP-related legal issues on anything he's working on), or creating a product that competes with their own products (fair again).
Slashdot Mirror
The only important difference between competitive Pokemon and competitive chess is that chess is old and respected.
No, there are two major differences between Pokemon (and other CCGs) and chess.
I was under the impression that the line separating entrapment was one of who initiated it; i.e., if the cops walk up to someone and offer to sell him drugs, it's entrapment. If the cop stands on a street corner and looks like a dealer, if the addict comes up and asks for drugs it's not entrapment.
The problem with this mindset is that rape is not about sex. It's about power . Take his penis away, and next time the rapist will use a baseball bat, or a gun, or kidnap and torture the victim. Castration will only make the problem worse.
Investigations can be secret - there's hardly anything insidious about that. (Able to be abused, yes - but what in the legal system isn't?)
If actual trials were held in secret, that would be insidious. (Note: A Grand Jury is not a trial - it's a pre-trial hearing deciding if the prosecution even has enough evidence to start a trial.)
Good analogy. But I disagree, because 3D movies never really look "3D." At best they look "stereoscopic," like a bunch of flat layers arranged in a diorama.
Then they're not doing the 3D right, and/or not using 3D equipment while filming. IMAX has had incredible 3D capability since the early 90s - if they could do it then, there's no reason it couldn't be done now.
I have read where others say that the only copyright duration that makes any sense is the life of the author. I do not know that this always makes sense, but it does seem like a good upper-bound.
I have always held that "life of the author" is a horrible, horrible concept - this unfairly rewards people for nothing more than living longer. Add in the complications of books being published after an author dies, or of an author being obscure enough that his/her death is unknown, and it makes this an even worse concept.
A simple flat time limit is much more fair, and much simpler to keep track of.
I would, however, go further and say that copyrights should be non-transferable, and that the most an employment contract should be able to do is require an exclusive license for sale over a limited period. While the company is aiding in the creative process by pumping resources into the author, the idea still comes from the individual.
This is another bad concept, for one major reason; collaborative works (such as movies, TV shows, and software), where there can be dozens and dozens of people involved in creation.
Since he lives in London and cannot possibly know where the homes of all these numerous people are, it seems to mean that he can be arrested for leaving his house.
Possibly even for staying in it...
So, I wonder what will happen if they pass new laws revoking the legislation now that they've won the Olympic bid?
Congress passed a new law adjusting the statute of limitations, and the Supreme Court case of Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. was thus overruled.
Not overruled; it was made moot for the specific case of that law. The ruling itself can still be considered precedent for other laws worded in the same way as the original law.
if worse comes to worst, a constitutional amendment can fix a bad supreme court decision.
You're misunderstanding what the Supreme court does; the only thing that can "fix" a "bad Supreme Court decision" is another Supreme court decision.
A new Constitutional Amendment will change the boundaries of the government, but will not change what court rulings mean; they will still stand as precedent on any related cases that the Amendment did not address.
What I think you're trying to say is that an Amendment can make a SCOTUS decision moot. In that case, you're going for overkill, though - a simple change in law is all that is needed, not an Amendment.
Does your wild speculation come with witnesses? There were witnesses that saw them struggling.
Comments elsewhere in this thread say the only witness who said he saw that later recanted, stating police coerced him into saying it.
Your speculation is also a bit off in that it only explains a blood covered nose, not both the front and back of his head bleeding from injuries,
Incorrect. I clearly stated that it was only the back of his head bleeding, and that touching the back and then front of his face caused blood to appear on both.
not to mention the reported broken nose that Zimmerman suffered.
Again, as others have pointed out, if his nose was broken, why does he have absolutely no signs of such in any photographs taken at any time after that night?
And, of course, the 9mm isn't exactly known as a hand cannon of the sort to flip one backwards.
I said the kickback caused him to stumble backwards and trip, not get "flipped over".
Other than that, great job!
Other than glossing over and ignoring half of what I said, great job!
So Zimmerman fired his gun, and the kickback made him stumble backwards and fall over, bumping his head on the ground as he fell. He then grabbed the back of his head, as people are wont to do after getting a sharp pain there. Afterward he wiped his nose with his bare hands that had some blood on them.
...see, I can give wild speculation with the best of them!
The point here is no that Zimmerman should have been injured before defending himself.
The point is that Zimmerman lied about being injured. If he lied about being injured, that makes his entire version of events suspect.
which is kinda standard procedure for those who need medical attention.
It's also standard procedure if there is reason to believe there even might be an injury. (Such as someone saying they've been in a fight - the paramedics will check them out for concussions or any injuries the person may not notice.) After a traumatic event (such as a shooting) paramedics will even treat people for shock - which is emotional, not physical.
What I would want to see is the paramedic's report on if he had any injuries - not some camera footage too grainy to tell what's actually going on.
(Of course, paramedics are probably covered under doctor-patient confidentiality, so unless Zimmerman releases the reports himself...)
911 dispatchers may not have legal authority to force you to do something, but they have been trained to tell you the best course of action.
If your doctor tells you to do something related to your health he'll generally know what he's talking about, and you disobey at your own peril. The same is true of 911 dispatchers - you ignore their advice at your own (and others') peril.
A 'great' book is 'A Canticle for Leibowitz', not hunger games.
No comment on Hunger Games's quality (I've never read it), but I'm really not a fan of Canticle. I can see why some people like it (especially those looking for Christian Sci-Fi), but I found it to be fairly boring and largely pointless.
Not sure where hunger games is even sci-fi.........
This coming from someone who brings up Canticle?
However, from summary/comments I've read about it in the last 10 minutes: Dsytopian future, high-tech environment control, use of technology to comment on present culture... sounds pretty much like Sci-Fi to me.
Enter: iPhone on AT&T's GoPhone Plan. No Data Plan at all. Just buy minutes/text. Then you go to any McDonald's to use their Wifi free for data.
If only. Pretty much every cell phone company in the country requires a data access plan if you have a smartphone. No opt-out, even if you didn't buy the phone from them.
While you were typing this an altar boy remained un-raped.
Did I miss one?
...right up until someone with a valid key has their software think they don't, and it starts putting dicks into a television broadcast.
Now you've just lost one customer for sure, probably a few more, and you have the FCC calling...
You HONESTLY expect THIS crowd to talk about DRM without it being followed by DIAF? You haven't actually read Slashdot before, have you?
I'd say this is the perfect crowd for him to talk to; while he will get some DIAF crap responses, he also will get responses from many people who (a) buy software, (b) pirate software, and (c) have actual knowledge of this type of thing.
Oh and $10k software? GTFO of here, in a dead economy you are just begging for piracy with a price like that.
Agreed. Even specialized software for high-$$ industries don't charge that for anything that isn't customized to the individual customer. If you're just going to put the software out there, try a price tag in the $100-150 range instead.
At $10k, you better be providing some serious support, like customized plug-ins, feature implementation, and on-demand inter-application support with other software suites. Anything less than that and you're going to price yourself out of the market.
Personally, I'd split the two methods: Have a "consumer" version for ~$100 that is what it is. Have some "premium" plug-ins that have an extra charge for them (only do this for exceptionally complex and special-use plugins). Have a "premium" version for ~$10k that gets them a direct line to the developers and custom feature implementation. Use the demands of the premium users to figure out what to put into the next baseline iteration of your software.
In the video they clearly showed the damage to the rotors.
I used to live in an apartment on an approach vector for the local airport, and a lot of those planes coming in for a landing would have been within shotgun range... now I'm mad that I never realized that it would have been perfectly legal to shoot at the damn things every time they woke me up in the mornings!
Did you even read my post?
Why is this even legal?
Because it's not illegal. (Anything you sign in a contract, no matter how awful, is legally binding unless the law makes it unenforceable. In other words, contract law uses a blacklist, not a whitelist.)
His statements sound completely reasonable, why do you think they make him out to be claiming the employee's whole life?
He said that they just want to make sure the employee isn't either doing IP-related work for a competitor (fair, since that'll cause no end of IP-related legal issues on anything he's working on), or creating a product that competes with their own products (fair again).