It isn't especially difficult to violate a patent; there are a lot of them, a lot of them are closely related, and it is not reasonable to expect your programmers to do a patent search every day before work.
While the invasion of privacy torts share the same underlying principles as the defamation torts, tortious interference doesn't really; genetically it is closer to breach of contract.
A lot of it is word of mouth through the legal community, legal journals, and research I've done. Can't point to any specific sources but if you talk to a personal injury attorney or med mal plaintiff-side attorney in a lot of states they are very unhappy. And actually unlike some lawyers I'm not going to pretend med mal suits have no effect on medical costs--they do, especially preventive actions taken by doctors--but it's not nearly as much as the Republicans and malpractice insurers would have you believe. The main problem (I believe) is simply the fact that providing medical care has become so profitable, and the audience is such a captive one, that private sector medical companies pour on the fees as much as they can, aided by a health insurer bureaucracy that just won't police the medical service providers for some reason.
Seemed like a standard platformer to me. Challenging doesn't have much impact on my opinion of a game; I've played easy games that I thought were amazing (Loom) and ridiculously hard games that in effect beat me because I couldn't get through them that were amazing (the Dreamcast Ecco the Dolphin game).
Interesting, as a lawyer I believe the opposite; I think lawyers tend to charge too much per hour, but the number of hours billed is oftentimes really what needs to be put into the case. Not that there isn't padding (and young associates especially are basically put in a position where they frequently are implicitly encouraged to pad), but the adversarial nature of Anglo-American law means that in a lot of situations putting in those extra 10 or 20 hours of research on a motion might mean the difference between winning a million dollar case and losing it.
As a lawyer I can also tell you the case may turn on invasion of privacy principles. The long-recognized tort of invasion of privacy gives a right of action for
It doesn't matter how long it's been recognized if it's not in play here. The only tort mentioned in the news article is tortious interference; it is a completely separate tort than invasion of privacy.
That's counterintuitive. If one side wants the most gullible jurors because they have a weak case, then it stands to reason the other side likely wants the sharpest jurors they can get.
But the jury should have scratched the surface-- and the defendent's counsel ought to have been able to convince the jury that there should be no consequences. He/She did a bad job, unless it really was a dozen dullards.
Why do you assume they didn't? They're the ones who were in court for the entire proceedings listening to the evidence and being instructed as to the law.
I'm curious, how much do you think a lawyer should be able to legitimately charge per hour? You can put it in dollars or pounds if you choose to answer...
"'Defendants agree that this case should be over — indeed, it should never have started. But it should not end until Righthaven is called to account for the cost of the defense it provoked,' say attorneys for the EFF. 'To allow Righthaven to avoid compensating those who have no choice but to defend would be unjust and unsupportable.'"
The EFF has no moral authority on this issue, after they asked for legal fees of $400,000 for writing a letter in response to the DMCA takedown in Lenz v. Universal.
Honestly I know this goes against the Slashdot image, but ham radio has severe limitations when it comes to emergency services, notably bandwidth and speed. It's good for small-scale lifesaving operations, but if you're talking about a massive infrastructure breakdown ham radio is barely a blip on the radar.
"Democracy", with no modifiers, means pure democracy.
No, that's wrong. Democracy with no modifiers means any type of democracy. When people say "Democracy" they almost universally mean representative democracy.
Not really, you vote for electors, then the electors vote for president. The fact that upstream the people you vote for might not collectively vote for someone who in 100% of the time would have won if there had been a direct election doesn't mean the whole system is automatically not a representative democracy.
I have never really understood this whole criticism of sex vs. violence; these are two mostly unrelated aspects of humanity. Why do slashdotters conflate the two and argue that they should be treated similarly?
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't especially difficult to violate a patent; there are a lot of them, a lot of them are closely related, and it is not reasonable to expect your programmers to do a patent search every day before work.
who made a name for himself on Slashdot for repeatedly posting incorrect and inflammatory posts
Yes, because that really set him apart from the rest of the posters here in a very visible way.
While the invasion of privacy torts share the same underlying principles as the defamation torts, tortious interference doesn't really; genetically it is closer to breach of contract.
A lot of it is word of mouth through the legal community, legal journals, and research I've done. Can't point to any specific sources but if you talk to a personal injury attorney or med mal plaintiff-side attorney in a lot of states they are very unhappy. And actually unlike some lawyers I'm not going to pretend med mal suits have no effect on medical costs--they do, especially preventive actions taken by doctors--but it's not nearly as much as the Republicans and malpractice insurers would have you believe. The main problem (I believe) is simply the fact that providing medical care has become so profitable, and the audience is such a captive one, that private sector medical companies pour on the fees as much as they can, aided by a health insurer bureaucracy that just won't police the medical service providers for some reason.
Seemed like a standard platformer to me. Challenging doesn't have much impact on my opinion of a game; I've played easy games that I thought were amazing (Loom) and ridiculously hard games that in effect beat me because I couldn't get through them that were amazing (the Dreamcast Ecco the Dolphin game).
Interesting, as a lawyer I believe the opposite; I think lawyers tend to charge too much per hour, but the number of hours billed is oftentimes really what needs to be put into the case. Not that there isn't padding (and young associates especially are basically put in a position where they frequently are implicitly encouraged to pad), but the adversarial nature of Anglo-American law means that in a lot of situations putting in those extra 10 or 20 hours of research on a motion might mean the difference between winning a million dollar case and losing it.
As a lawyer I can also tell you the case may turn on invasion of privacy principles. The long-recognized tort of invasion of privacy gives a right of action for
It doesn't matter how long it's been recognized if it's not in play here. The only tort mentioned in the news article is tortious interference; it is a completely separate tort than invasion of privacy.
That's counterintuitive. If one side wants the most gullible jurors because they have a weak case, then it stands to reason the other side likely wants the sharpest jurors they can get.
But the jury should have scratched the surface-- and the defendent's counsel ought to have been able to convince the jury that there should be no consequences. He/She did a bad job, unless it really was a dozen dullards.
Why do you assume they didn't? They're the ones who were in court for the entire proceedings listening to the evidence and being instructed as to the law.
I'm curious, how much do you think a lawyer should be able to legitimately charge per hour? You can put it in dollars or pounds if you choose to answer...
It's kind of silly in areas where there is little to no risk of venomous things hiding in there.
Ow. Do people use the term "boxen" still? I had hoped that unfortunate cutesy term had become extinct.
Because it's not especially good?
Actually wait, that might have been for litigation fees. I need to look into this. Still stupidly high though.
"'Defendants agree that this case should be over — indeed, it should never have started. But it should not end until Righthaven is called to account for the cost of the defense it provoked,' say attorneys for the EFF. 'To allow Righthaven to avoid compensating those who have no choice but to defend would be unjust and unsupportable.'"
The EFF has no moral authority on this issue, after they asked for legal fees of $400,000 for writing a letter in response to the DMCA takedown in Lenz v. Universal.
Why not? Tort and med mal reform has nearly killed attorney's fees in certain areas.
Honestly I know this goes against the Slashdot image, but ham radio has severe limitations when it comes to emergency services, notably bandwidth and speed. It's good for small-scale lifesaving operations, but if you're talking about a massive infrastructure breakdown ham radio is barely a blip on the radar.
"Democracy", with no modifiers, means pure democracy.
No, that's wrong. Democracy with no modifiers means any type of democracy. When people say "Democracy" they almost universally mean representative democracy.
Not really, you vote for electors, then the electors vote for president. The fact that upstream the people you vote for might not collectively vote for someone who in 100% of the time would have won if there had been a direct election doesn't mean the whole system is automatically not a representative democracy.
You're completely wrong; a republic and a democracy are not mutually exclusive. The U.S. is both.
I have never really understood this whole criticism of sex vs. violence; these are two mostly unrelated aspects of humanity. Why do slashdotters conflate the two and argue that they should be treated similarly?
I need some advice about a good exercise regimen; is moving goalposts effective for you?
They had no duty to.
You do not have to produce your expert's analyses to the other side or the court under the Federal rules.
Uhhh...Windows vs. Linux anyone?