If I remember right, they claimed that some large entity had threatened Userfriendly and friends with legal action to shut them down for some unclear reason.
I would have assumed the entity just really hated lousy artwork...
"Differences in skull features are related to genetics, and genetic variation depends on how much mixing occurs with other populations. "The main problem with the paper is that it takes some assumptions from genetics papers of 10 to 15 years ago that we now know are wrong," Hawks said.
Ok it's been a few years since I formally studied anthropology, but from what I remember Boas' (father of American anthropology) most famous paper dealt with facial characteristics and ethnicity, and he found that facial features changed drastically with diet and environment, so presumably cranial shape is part of that.
Even with the MS tax, can you realistically buy or assemble a full PC with those specs for that kind of price?
Sure. This plus this plus this plus this plus this plus this. Similar or better stats for $299 (and that includes shipping). And I guarantee the components are of better quality.
It should of course come from the lawyer, who does it at a personal loss.
So the wrongdoer should get to avoid paying attorney's fees for their wrongdoing?
First of all, a lot of lawyers do their pro bono work through a pro bono organization, where if they do win attorneys fees in a case that goes back to the organization to help them fund other pro bono work.
Secondly, fraud implies deceit; this is all done very publicly.
Much like when I set up computers and networking for non-profit charity, I don't charge anyone for those hours, but accept that I won't be paid for those hours, and thus make less.
There is a huge difference in the amount of work and effort put in. You can walk off that volunteer work when you want; if a lawyer agrees to represent a client pro bono, the attorney-client relationship kicks in and the lawyer is on the hook for what could potentially add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of "volunteer" work.
If I charged other clients more to cover getting paid for those hours too, I would be committing fraud.
Is it fraud when a store raises their prices to cover the cost of shoplifting? You (presumably) don't have a gun to your clients' heads. You offer to perform certain work for a certain price, and they are welcome to accept or reject that offer. It's none of their damn business why you're charging them one thing and someone else differently. There is absolutely no fraud here; fraud requires the making of a false statement.
It all depends on how deep you are in it. However, my troubles with the law fell into the category of standard operating procedure. I'm not alone in my law breaking, and they've pretty much got some of the common things figured out, and can give a flat fee
Generally criminal lawyers charge a flat fee up front, while civil lawyers either do hourly or contingency.
Vista, George W. Bush, elected because of his name, even though the prior iteration wasn't especially respected or well-liked. Introduced instability and performance issues, all in the name of "security". Many of the corporate interests who promoted him early on are having second thoughts.
I've heard from other sources that Judge Garcia is well known to be a great judge, and his decision proves it, in my book. His action speaks well for the federal court in New Mexico, so let's keep an open mind. As far as I'm concerned the whole country owes that court a debt of gratitude.
I think any judge should look at this stuff extremely carefully due to the ex parte nature of the proceedings; in fact, the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that there might be a legitimate bar grievance against the attorney who filed the motion, because of their failure to fully explain the pertinent statute and their omission of key elements.
I don't know about the bars in Texas, but around here in a non-adversarial proceeding it is the attorney's ethical obligation to inform the tribunal of every aspect of law that will impact their decision, even those aspects that will hurt their argument.
You can get a good 42 inch 1080P LCD TV for less than $1500 these days.
Hint: Repurchasing all your DVD's is a poor use. Try funding a scholarship or something.
Who's repurchasing all their DVDs? I plan on getting either an HD DVD or blu-ray player soon, but I won't even stop buying regular DVDs (since it will be years since everything I'd want is on high definition DVD), let alone rebuy things I already have.
Will they ever get in trouble for all this ex parte crap? I fear that they'll keep pulling the same tricks until they get punished for it, and no one thus far has taken any note of that Texas ruling ordering them not to join all these unrelated cases together.
There are three basic ways of approaching this kind of thing I think; the first is just sanctions (usually attorneys fees and costs for the party fighting the motion). The other is to attack the lawyers themselves with a bar complaint. The third is to actually file a claim or counterclaim. I don't know if anything they did rises to the level where the second and third things would work, but (I'm not familiar with the case) based on the Order it looks like nobody actually showed up to contest it. So I don't know who the fees would be awarded to.
The credit department (I don't want credit) had denied my application, not because of all the stuff in the contract that I'd marked up, but because I hadn't signed the personal guarantee.
They also probably decided that someone who was going to bother them over every single little aspect of a contract was probably more trouble than they were worth as a customer.
How about my idea: punitive damages go to the federal government's general fund. That way, you can still punish corporations that don't understand motivations other than financial penalties, but remove all profit incentive from the equation. Would this have any drawbacks?
Maybe they all shouldn't be. If you want games to evolve into a respected art form maybe there should be ones that have some other goal other than "fun".
Slashdot Mirror
I can't wait to see what the pitch is gonna be like. I predict a beanball to the tune of several million $$ in the plaintiff's favor.
You think the RIAA is really going to win millions here? Well that's a brave position to take on slashdot, at least...
If I remember right, they claimed that some large entity had threatened Userfriendly and friends with legal action to shut them down for some unclear reason.
I would have assumed the entity just really hated lousy artwork...
"Differences in skull features are related to genetics, and genetic variation depends on how much mixing occurs with other populations. "The main problem with the paper is that it takes some assumptions from genetics papers of 10 to 15 years ago that we now know are wrong," Hawks said.
Ok it's been a few years since I formally studied anthropology, but from what I remember Boas' (father of American anthropology) most famous paper dealt with facial characteristics and ethnicity, and he found that facial features changed drastically with diet and environment, so presumably cranial shape is part of that.
Last one should have been this.
Even with the MS tax, can you realistically buy or assemble a full PC with those specs for that kind of price?
Sure. This plus this plus this plus this plus this plus this. Similar or better stats for $299 (and that includes shipping). And I guarantee the components are of better quality.
Never mind this is slashdot, we don't have any friends.
I have a friend. Her name is Cortana. She lives in my helmet.
I challenge you to name one measure that manufacturers will not do voluntarily that has been brought in through legislation, in the last 25 years.
Nutritional labels.
I know the pro windows crowd will jump up and down but I hope they will hear me out.
Uh....the huge pro windows crowd on slashdot?
They do make component-to-composite converters.
That sounds more like a malicious prosecution claim.
It should of course come from the lawyer, who does it at a personal loss.
So the wrongdoer should get to avoid paying attorney's fees for their wrongdoing?
First of all, a lot of lawyers do their pro bono work through a pro bono organization, where if they do win attorneys fees in a case that goes back to the organization to help them fund other pro bono work.
Secondly, fraud implies deceit; this is all done very publicly.
Much like when I set up computers and networking for non-profit charity, I don't charge anyone for those hours, but accept that I won't be paid for those hours, and thus make less.
There is a huge difference in the amount of work and effort put in. You can walk off that volunteer work when you want; if a lawyer agrees to represent a client pro bono, the attorney-client relationship kicks in and the lawyer is on the hook for what could potentially add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of "volunteer" work.
If I charged other clients more to cover getting paid for those hours too, I would be committing fraud.
Is it fraud when a store raises their prices to cover the cost of shoplifting? You (presumably) don't have a gun to your clients' heads. You offer to perform certain work for a certain price, and they are welcome to accept or reject that offer. It's none of their damn business why you're charging them one thing and someone else differently. There is absolutely no fraud here; fraud requires the making of a false statement.
It all depends on how deep you are in it. However, my troubles with the law fell into the category of standard operating procedure. I'm not alone in my law breaking, and they've pretty much got some of the common things figured out, and can give a flat fee
Generally criminal lawyers charge a flat fee up front, while civil lawyers either do hourly or contingency.
I started going to LUG meetings over nine years ago. As much I love Linux, I don't think its rate of adoption could go much slower than it already is.
That will change very soon--I heard it's almost ready for the desktop!
The really funny thing is it cost them $350 to actually file the lawsuit...
Vista, George W. Bush, elected because of his name, even though the prior iteration wasn't especially respected or well-liked. Introduced instability and performance issues, all in the name of "security". Many of the corporate interests who promoted him early on are having second thoughts.
current Linux desktops seem very responsive even when running multiple apps
I'm guessing you never used BeOS; by comparison Linux looks weak in terms of responsiveness.
I've heard from other sources that Judge Garcia is well known to be a great judge, and his decision proves it, in my book. His action speaks well for the federal court in New Mexico, so let's keep an open mind. As far as I'm concerned the whole country owes that court a debt of gratitude.
I think any judge should look at this stuff extremely carefully due to the ex parte nature of the proceedings; in fact, the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that there might be a legitimate bar grievance against the attorney who filed the motion, because of their failure to fully explain the pertinent statute and their omission of key elements.
I don't know about the bars in Texas, but around here in a non-adversarial proceeding it is the attorney's ethical obligation to inform the tribunal of every aspect of law that will impact their decision, even those aspects that will hurt their argument.
Double major.
You can get a good 42 inch 1080P LCD TV for less than $1500 these days.
Hint: Repurchasing all your DVD's is a poor use. Try funding a scholarship or something.
Who's repurchasing all their DVDs? I plan on getting either an HD DVD or blu-ray player soon, but I won't even stop buying regular DVDs (since it will be years since everything I'd want is on high definition DVD), let alone rebuy things I already have.
Will they ever get in trouble for all this ex parte crap? I fear that they'll keep pulling the same tricks until they get punished for it, and no one thus far has taken any note of that Texas ruling ordering them not to join all these unrelated cases together.
There are three basic ways of approaching this kind of thing I think; the first is just sanctions (usually attorneys fees and costs for the party fighting the motion). The other is to attack the lawyers themselves with a bar complaint. The third is to actually file a claim or counterclaim. I don't know if anything they did rises to the level where the second and third things would work, but (I'm not familiar with the case) based on the Order it looks like nobody actually showed up to contest it. So I don't know who the fees would be awarded to.
Did you not even read the summary: "... stealing the source code, design, and business plan ..."?
Please remember Rule of Slashdot #17, "All lawsuits are frivolous, unless they're against Microsoft."
First, let's kill all the lawyers.
Oh, thought you were anti-murder based on the rest of your post. Kind of confused here.
The credit department (I don't want credit) had denied my application, not because of all the stuff in the contract that I'd marked up, but because I hadn't signed the personal guarantee.
They also probably decided that someone who was going to bother them over every single little aspect of a contract was probably more trouble than they were worth as a customer.
How about my idea: punitive damages go to the federal government's general fund. That way, you can still punish corporations that don't understand motivations other than financial penalties, but remove all profit incentive from the equation. Would this have any drawbacks?
Some states already do that.
Videogames are meant to be fun
Maybe they all shouldn't be. If you want games to evolve into a respected art form maybe there should be ones that have some other goal other than "fun".