Actually flat fees are also becoming more common in corporate law. And obviously many plaintiffs' lawyers work on contingency fees. And some transactional lawyers take a percentage of the value of the deal.
Try calling a lawyer at 2A.M. and see just how "on-call" he is.
If he's a criminal lawyer chances there is an extremely good chance he'll pick up by the second ring, and be on his way to the police station in 15 minutes; those guys have to hustle like that to make money.
If you're a big corporate firm lawyer, and an important client calls you at 2 A.M., you're damn well going to answer.
The prosecutors found it was becoming more and more difficult to get juries to convict people when evidence was displayed in a traditional manner since juries seem to now have higher expectations in how evidence is displayed due to shows like CSI and the like.
Yeah, sucks how juries won't convict anymore just because the prosecutor asks them too...
It's just another case of USA forcing their laws, ideas and politics to other countries. Only taking, and not giving back
Forcing? How? Gunpoint? Or is this just another convenient way for Europeans to absolve themselves of responsibility for their own government by pretending the US is "forcing" them?
By that logic, if musicians don't want their music copied, they shouldn't sell digital copies.
You're missing the point, I'm not talking about copying and distributing, I'm talking about doing what you want with something for your personal use. If I buy Bob the pop singers' latest CD, then make 1,000 copies that I keep in my apartment, then it's still none of his business until I start distributing them. To get a better analogy, if I buy 1,000 copies of the album and distribute them with CD players I sell, still none of Bob's business.
This can hurt Apple, so they want to specifically protect those reasons that make them "Better" than Microsoft. And locking down their software is the way they do it.
No, being overly litigious is the way they do it. Apple has complete control over the software they bundle with their hardware. Psystar doesn't change that.
Microsoft has been doing the same for years now. Anyone that believes corporate propaganda should go out and get some fresh air.
And they are routinely derided for it. Like when they suddenly claimed that they invented symbolic links. Apple is not. It's not really the propaganda isn't what annoys me, it's the mindless worship from their fans that gets to me. And I LIKE Apple products. I think that right now they make the best computers out there. But I'm not going to switch that like to the company. A company is a piece of paper filed with the state.
Problem is, innovation doesn't sell and make large profits in the world of technology. Apple now plays it safe, copies ideas and makes them better and generally useable. Then they sell for a neat profit.
Which isn't a problem. What I don't like is the part where they turn around and proclaim themselves as innovators.
I have an iphone and love it. Amazing phone. But like just about everything else Apple has done, it's not really "innovative." They package well, but they never really come out with anything new. The closest thing they probably came to innovating on WAS the Newton.
If OS X didn't try to screw you on purchasing every software you need, and was faster, it would get used, but I don't like the OS anymore. It's not UNIX either, but a bastard from the netherworlds posing as something great;-)
See, OS X is the one reason I want to buy a mac right now (trying to convince myself the 27 inch imac is not hideously overpriced, but I am not doing a good job convincing myself.) Windows is Windows (though W7 seems to be kind of decent)and Linux is ugly and the media capabilities are patchwork to the point of annoyance.
They often made faster hardware, but it was generally less reliable, ran hotter, was more difficult to work on, etc. The clones gave Macintoshes a bad name.
And since Steve Jobs told you that, it MUST be true.
I don't know how manufacturer's got the idea of "Hey, I could run OS X on this box..." when Apple never gave them consent to. Its Apple's software, they decide who runs it.
Well if Apple wants complete control over what people do with their software, they shouldn't sell it.
Actually, and I say this as a liberal lawyer who thinks prison should be rehabilitative, there is strong evidence to suggest that the plummeting murder rates in the latter half of the 90s were a result of longer prison sentences of violent offenders.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not play Tesla instead?
When did they do that?
Actually flat fees are also becoming more common in corporate law. And obviously many plaintiffs' lawyers work on contingency fees. And some transactional lawyers take a percentage of the value of the deal.
Actually criminal lawyers charge flat fees.
Seriously, just STFU.
Hey, it's apparently important enough to write a 56 page report...
Try calling a lawyer at 2A.M. and see just how "on-call" he is.
If he's a criminal lawyer chances there is an extremely good chance he'll pick up by the second ring, and be on his way to the police station in 15 minutes; those guys have to hustle like that to make money.
If you're a big corporate firm lawyer, and an important client calls you at 2 A.M., you're damn well going to answer.
Well that's one hour I bill for, just like you mr lawyer.
Lawyers generally bill in 6 to 15 minute increments. They're not allowed to round up.
We'll call you when we need you and pay you on the go.
That's exactly how Mr. Lawyer IS paid. He's probably wondering why Mr. Webmaster deserves special treatment.
Just shoot the fuckers already. Pretty soon there won't be any more of them.
Yeah, that theory worked out so well in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Ha, you're talking about Alligator Lounge? I've still been meaning to check that place out...
Wow, thanks for bumming me out.
You live in NY and you think good pizza is more expensive than the mediocre pizza and that's why there are so many mediocre pizza places around?
A $1.50 slice in Brooklyn or Queens will generally be better than a $5 slice in some tourist trap or hipster pizza place in Manhattan.
He wasn't really complaining, he was just boasting about being a male slashdot poster who's actually married.
The prosecutors found it was becoming more and more difficult to get juries to convict people when evidence was displayed in a traditional manner since juries seem to now have higher expectations in how evidence is displayed due to shows like CSI and the like.
Yeah, sucks how juries won't convict anymore just because the prosecutor asks them too...
Well vote'em out. Don't just blame us.
Tell me where in that law it says the US will invade if Europe doesn't give up banking info.
It's just another case of USA forcing their laws, ideas and politics to other countries. Only taking, and not giving back
Forcing? How? Gunpoint? Or is this just another convenient way for Europeans to absolve themselves of responsibility for their own government by pretending the US is "forcing" them?
By that logic, if musicians don't want their music copied, they shouldn't sell digital copies.
You're missing the point, I'm not talking about copying and distributing, I'm talking about doing what you want with something for your personal use. If I buy Bob the pop singers' latest CD, then make 1,000 copies that I keep in my apartment, then it's still none of his business until I start distributing them. To get a better analogy, if I buy 1,000 copies of the album and distribute them with CD players I sell, still none of Bob's business.
This can hurt Apple, so they want to specifically protect those reasons that make them "Better" than Microsoft. And locking down their software is the way they do it.
No, being overly litigious is the way they do it. Apple has complete control over the software they bundle with their hardware. Psystar doesn't change that.
Microsoft has been doing the same for years now. Anyone that believes corporate propaganda should go out and get some fresh air.
And they are routinely derided for it. Like when they suddenly claimed that they invented symbolic links. Apple is not. It's not really the propaganda isn't what annoys me, it's the mindless worship from their fans that gets to me. And I LIKE Apple products. I think that right now they make the best computers out there. But I'm not going to switch that like to the company. A company is a piece of paper filed with the state.
Problem is, innovation doesn't sell and make large profits in the world of technology. Apple now plays it safe, copies ideas and makes them better and generally useable. Then they sell for a neat profit.
Which isn't a problem. What I don't like is the part where they turn around and proclaim themselves as innovators.
I have an iphone and love it. Amazing phone. But like just about everything else Apple has done, it's not really "innovative." They package well, but they never really come out with anything new. The closest thing they probably came to innovating on WAS the Newton.
If OS X didn't try to screw you on purchasing every software you need, and was faster, it would get used, but I don't like the OS anymore. It's not UNIX either, but a bastard from the netherworlds posing as something great ;-)
See, OS X is the one reason I want to buy a mac right now (trying to convince myself the 27 inch imac is not hideously overpriced, but I am not doing a good job convincing myself.) Windows is Windows (though W7 seems to be kind of decent)and Linux is ugly and the media capabilities are patchwork to the point of annoyance.
They often made faster hardware, but it was generally less reliable, ran hotter, was more difficult to work on, etc. The clones gave Macintoshes a bad name.
And since Steve Jobs told you that, it MUST be true.
I don't know how manufacturer's got the idea of "Hey, I could run OS X on this box..." when Apple never gave them consent to. Its Apple's software, they decide who runs it.
Well if Apple wants complete control over what people do with their software, they shouldn't sell it.
Actually, and I say this as a liberal lawyer who thinks prison should be rehabilitative, there is strong evidence to suggest that the plummeting murder rates in the latter half of the 90s were a result of longer prison sentences of violent offenders.