The NEC versus Intel case is illustrative though. There microcode was ruled to be copyrightable but reverse engineering and clean room implementation is protected.
But the license between AMD and Intel second guesses whether an instruction set can be protected by copyright; it just avoids a situation where there would be a lawsuit whether copyright applies or not. MIPS went after Lextra for patent infringement and not copyright infringement.
I thought there was a court decision or something which said instruction sets are not copyrightable but was unable to find it.
This is my understanding as well. Wireless cards are approved as part of the entire system including the antenna so only those cards which were tested may be used. The FCC would not approve the laptop without these restrictions.
So look at the language in the Senate Finance and HELP Committee bills which were merged to form the Affordable Care Act. The Senate Finance bill did not authorize subsidies for people where their state did not setup an exchange and the HELP committee bill specifically denied subsidies for people where their state did not setup an exchange for four years and included other punishments as well.
It means that these 3 did not look at, nor care, about intentions.
What were the intentions of the drafters?
As Pear recounts, there was language in the HELP bill clearly authorizing subsidies in federal exchanges[after 4 years, see below], but no such language in the Finance Committee bill.
Not only did the HELP bill hold off subsidies for up to four years in states that refused to create their own exchanges, it also barred subsidies in states that failed to enact other desired reforms
Congress also knew that they had no way to force the States to establish exchanges except by denying funds and subsidies and *that* was written into both of the bills which were merged to form the current law.
If the trouble lies with the wording of one part of the law, surely Congress should amend it so it clearly reflects their intent. That's what a functional legislative body would do.
Well, since we don't have a functional legislative body, we're fucked.
And if the court had not rewritten the law, the discontent with Congress would grow to the point of encouraging a change. As it is now, we have the court writing the law and Congress is just as dysfunctional as ever.
P Basically, this is a clear victory for 'the intent of the law', as opposed to the 'strict meaning of the law' legal theory
I have to disagree because the intent of the law in both versions, finance and health committee, was to punish the States by withholding subsidies and *that* is what was kept in the statute if only by not authorizing them:
Withholding subsidies was only a mistake in hindsight because so many states refused to create exchanges and that should have been up to Congress to fix and not the judiciary.
And the legislative intent was to deny subsidies to individuals where a State did not establish an exchange as a way to force the States to establish exchanges and the statute as passed was written to do that. It was not a bug; it was a feature however misguided.
If SCOTUS can twist these words what stops them from twisting ANY words?
Nothing. Public means private in Kelo v. City of New London and interstate means intrastate in Wickard v. Filburn and many others. The Necessary and Proper Clause can justify any result.
The documents and statements written at the time of secession were all about slavery.
Just like the documents and statements made at the time of the Iraqi War were all about Iraq supporting al-Qaeda and having Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Solar has a reliance on rare earth metals and the DOE has pegged China as having about half of the world's estimates and they're rather protective of them, never mind their poor record on doing anything in an environmentally friendly manner.
Are you thinking of wind because of the magnets needed for PM alternators? The material costs for solar is low but the processing cost is high.
I'm also fairly optimistic that we'll eventually solve many of the issues related to transmitting energy over long distances, but for now it's a good idea not to waste a lot of energy in moving that energy to where it needs to be.
The only issue is cost of the infrastructure and who pays for it. It takes wire and towers as well as big transformers or high voltage DC conversion.
So thus, can we conclude that Google did in fact turn over all of the requested metadata on the user without his knowledge for nearly 4 years?
Yes. Further we can conclude that all of this information from any provider is available to law enforcement under the standard of reasonable suspicion without a warrant. In many or all cases now however the same data is available with an administrative subpena which just requires the data to be relevant to an investigation.
Slashdot Mirror
I will not defend the Republicans; there is enough scum to paint both parties in this and other matters.
I linked this in other posts but not here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
In the US at least, "sweat of the brow" does not by itself allow copyright protection; it is irrelevant how much work is done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The NEC versus Intel case is illustrative though. There microcode was ruled to be copyrightable but reverse engineering and clean room implementation is protected.
http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/ar...
But the license between AMD and Intel second guesses whether an instruction set can be protected by copyright; it just avoids a situation where there would be a lawsuit whether copyright applies or not. MIPS went after Lextra for patent infringement and not copyright infringement.
I thought there was a court decision or something which said instruction sets are not copyrightable but was unable to find it.
Were they licensed by whoever owns the copyright?
Now we get to revisit whether the instruction set of a microprocessor is copyrightable.
Currently the premium to get ECC on an Intel system versus a comparable AMD system is about $250.
In the United States local jurisdictions view tourist taxes as free money. Tourists cannot vote.
This is my understanding as well. Wireless cards are approved as part of the entire system including the antenna so only those cards which were tested may be used. The FCC would not approve the laptop without these restrictions.
If the access points bridge to the same ethernet domain and have the same SSID, then it often works. Some wifi clients are dumb though.
So look at the language in the Senate Finance and HELP Committee bills which were merged to form the Affordable Care Act. The Senate Finance bill did not authorize subsidies for people where their state did not setup an exchange and the HELP committee bill specifically denied subsidies for people where their state did not setup an exchange for four years and included other punishments as well.
What were the intentions of the drafters?
As Pear recounts, there was language in the HELP bill clearly authorizing subsidies in federal exchanges[after 4 years, see below], but no such language in the Finance Committee bill.
Not only did the HELP bill hold off subsidies for up to four years in states that refused to create their own exchanges, it also barred subsidies in states that failed to enact other desired reforms
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Congress also knew that they had no way to force the States to establish exchanges except by denying funds and subsidies and *that* was written into both of the bills which were merged to form the current law.
And if the court had not rewritten the law, the discontent with Congress would grow to the point of encouraging a change. As it is now, we have the court writing the law and Congress is just as dysfunctional as ever.
I have to disagree because the intent of the law in both versions, finance and health committee, was to punish the States by withholding subsidies and *that* is what was kept in the statute if only by not authorizing them:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Withholding subsidies was only a mistake in hindsight because so many states refused to create exchanges and that should have been up to Congress to fix and not the judiciary.
And the legislative intent was to deny subsidies to individuals where a State did not establish an exchange as a way to force the States to establish exchanges and the statute as passed was written to do that. It was not a bug; it was a feature however misguided.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
And the writers also clearly wanted to punish states which did not establish exchanges by withholding subsidies:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
A majority of the States were already electing their United States senators via popular vote before the 17th Amendment so its effect was minor.
Nothing. Public means private in Kelo v. City of New London and interstate means intrastate in Wickard v. Filburn and many others. The Necessary and Proper Clause can justify any result.
Just like the documents and statements made at the time of the Iraqi War were all about Iraq supporting al-Qaeda and having Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Moore's law like scaling does not apply to batteries.
http://blogs.scientificamerica...
Are you thinking of wind because of the magnets needed for PM alternators? The material costs for solar is low but the processing cost is high.
The only issue is cost of the infrastructure and who pays for it. It takes wire and towers as well as big transformers or high voltage DC conversion.
So what kinds of base load power plants do not produce CO2? Hydroelectric and . . . what? Solar thermal? Anything with enough battery storage?
Yes. Further we can conclude that all of this information from any provider is available to law enforcement under the standard of reasonable suspicion without a warrant. In many or all cases now however the same data is available with an administrative subpena which just requires the data to be relevant to an investigation.
Or just support an external hard drive hooked up through USB or eSATA.
I would have gone with Lillian's Heart Attack. I was very disappointed when the trailer for Darkman used this but the movie used Danny Elfman's music.