They do. The defendant only has to pay the court if he loses (as far as I know - any lawyers care to comment?). Did you mean s/he should pay the defendant's attorney's fees?
Wonder if you had any misidentifications? (false hits). Did the police realize or were the innocent customers still kicked out or arrested? Did any human try to double check the computer (with physical photos) or was the computer's word treated as Gospel? Any lawsuits?
I am glad we in the geek community can maintain such a united front against Disney and the rest of the MPAA even when they produce stuff we crave like anime. I am glad we can resist the urge to let our "geek portal" put up an article which would encourage the consumption of Disney and the MPAA's content right on the front page, with nary a reference to the freedoms that they are taking away. I am glad we don't have people here that want to get lots of DVDs of that stuff, in spite of Johannsen and others who put their livelihood and personal liberty on the line for freedom. I am glad we aren't supporting a technology like DVD which is so entwined with the DMCA, which is the law used to illegally arrest Dmitry Sklyarov under the legal theory that the DMCA has jurisdiction in Moscow.
</sarcasm>
Before you mod this down as offtopic, think, what are you supporting here?
Go back to Russia and then you can work for a company the writes software that Adobe/FBI doesn't like. Then the next time you visit Las Vegas you can get arrested.:(
If they leave off that part "Under penalty of perjury", it is a defective notice, but still substantially complies. The DMCA does require the ISP to take action then too. Especially with the precendent set by ALS Scan vs RemarQ.
It is illegal to wait for proof. It is even illegal to wait for a proper DMCA notice if you've been given a defective one. See the ALS Scan vs RemarQ case for details.
I think it is due to contractual penalities provided for in the license agreement (the agreement doesn't even have all the terms, you agree to agree to other terms which are in other documents you don't see). Out courts enforce this for Microsoft. Then BillyG says that he doesn't like judicially interference (in his monopoly). He does like judicial control when it suits (pun intended) him.
Speaking of lawsuits, due process is guaranteed by the Constitution, but not in practice. You can be subjected to "summary judgement for the plaintiff" in which case you lose without a trial.
If they don't cut you off they are liable for MONETARY DAMAGES. There is precendent for multi-million dollar damages - they have been assessed in copyright cases quite recently.
If they do cut you off they aren't civilly liable for damages done to you.
BOTH of these are due to the DMCA. The gov't can't do "guilty unless proven innocent", but they can use extortion by court to force the ISP to act that way.
Gov't taking your money and giving it to the MPAA is a very damaging and frightening thing. A small ISP can be killed easily. A big one can take a lot of damage, or be killed off by huge enough damages. Plus the big ones usually are in cahoots with (or actually are) the content providers.
What's wrong with an arrangement where both parties benefit? I thought that was suppoed to be a GOOD thing. They get code, we get docs to write the code and the ability to use the product under Linux. They have an incentive to support Open Source, so that makes them more likely to do it.
I want more partnerships between hardware companies and Linux, not less.
Does the the new OpenGL 1.3 spec support pixel and vertex shaders?
If those features are missing from the new OpenGL spec, then we are in trouble and the OpenGL board needs to act to remedy this situation.
To win against Microsoft, we need to have their be NOTHING useful that Microsoft products do that ours CAN'T. We MIGHT be able to get over the market share/monopoly/compatibility lock-in because our product is free (as in free speech and free beer), and does some things better. But if the pro-Microsoft forces can point to a TECHNICAL INFERIORITY of our product we are doomed.
Well if you end up laid off, unable to find another job, and get kicked out of where you live because you can't pay the rent/mortgage then I bet your tune will change real quick.
No job = no money = no place to live
Hacing a job is not a luxury, it is a necessity.
As for reality (vs denying reality), we pay for the homeless problem,
either in taxes and donations for shelters, or in crime and other disturbances caused by people living on the street.
So even if the human cost doesn't bother you, there is a good economic (and quality of life) argument for you.
Well then cars with Firestone tires should have the governor set to zero MPH. Any faster would be unsafe with those tires.;)
P.S. How would YOU know what the limiter is set to?:)
What THEY can do
on
Taming the Web
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Well one could hack one's TCP stack so an initial SYN-ACK with certain fields set a certain way is treated as a normal SYN packet. That blasts a hole in the not allowing incoming packets filter. Of course, they can filter out that hack, etc. As was said in another post, they have to REACT, and would be one step (or more) behind.
What they could do, is change the rules. Right now things are permitted unless prohibited. If the laws were changed so that things were by default prohibited, instead of permitted, and made it illegal (preferrable as a felony - heck, then they could eventually take away the right of a felon to be on the net too), and made it illegal for hardware or software to exist that doesn't enofrce that, they they could win.
THey could require you pay the gov't a $10M license to provide content, and revoke licenses from any "troublesome" sites (so rich "eccentrics" would not be a threat).
Put enough people in jail for YEARS of their life, take every thing they own and sell it, and make them felons without the right of self-defense or even to vote (so the politicians can IGNORE them - and their fellow "citizens" will think of them as EVIL UNTRUSTWORTHY CRIMINALS), and people will be scared off and/or neutralized as a threat to the New World Order.
WE NEED TO FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS POLITICALLY, NOT JUST TECHNICALLY. IF YOU GET SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN PRISON FOR USING FREENET, NO TECHNOLOGY WILL HELP YOU (except a shovel to try to "tunnel" your way out of prison).
It's not a tech arms race. The copy-"protection" don't have to work. Their very existance makes using content in unapproved manners ILLEGAL under the DMCA. That is what it is all about - the DMCA allows even a trivial amount of programming to have the same legal force as Federal legislation.
Using the DMCA, Adobe can, and has, written a copyright "law" that applies to their products which goes beyond the old standard copyright law and infringes on fair use.
And the courts enforce those "protection" algorithm "laws" with sometimes draconian severity. Just ask Dmitry Sklyarov.
Slashdot Mirror
"the forms of legal behavior were followed even though the spirit was completely ignored."
Of course. We in the USA are the world leaders in that kind of thing. :/
Not necessarily. We deposed Noriega, and took him to within our borders, tried, convicted, and sentenced him to prison.
On a less extreme note, there are plenty of extradition treaties and agreements.
The US is supposedly using 48 volts, but I measured 72.9 on a friend's phone line.
I also know that in the past, I could touch my phone line posts, no problem. Now they have a ZING to them. Maybe they increased the voltage.
They do. The defendant only has to pay the court if he loses (as far as I know - any lawyers care to comment?). Did you mean s/he should pay the defendant's attorney's fees?
Wonder if you had any misidentifications? (false hits). Did the police realize or were the innocent customers still kicked out or arrested? Did any human try to double check the computer (with physical photos) or was the computer's word treated as Gospel? Any lawsuits?
How do you keep it hidden when you have to kick out the first customer that your system THINKS is a criminal?
How do you keep it hidden when the first innocent person with enough time, money and guts SUES you?
I am glad we in the geek community can maintain such a united front against Disney and the rest of the MPAA even when they produce stuff we crave like anime. I am glad we can resist the urge to let our "geek portal" put up an article which would encourage the consumption of Disney and the MPAA's content right on the front page, with nary a reference to the freedoms that they are taking away. I am glad we don't have people here that want to get lots of DVDs of that stuff, in spite of Johannsen and others who put their livelihood and personal liberty on the line for freedom. I am glad we aren't supporting a technology like DVD which is so entwined with the DMCA, which is the law used to illegally arrest Dmitry Sklyarov under the legal theory that the DMCA has jurisdiction in Moscow.
</sarcasm>
Before you mod this down as offtopic, think, what are you supporting here?
Go back to Russia and then you can work for a company the writes software that Adobe/FBI doesn't like. Then the next time you visit Las Vegas you can get arrested. :(
Credit bureaus are private - they don't even need preponderance of the evidence as far as I know.
If they leave off that part "Under penalty of perjury", it is a defective notice, but still substantially complies. The DMCA does require the ISP to take action then too. Especially with the precendent set by ALS Scan vs RemarQ.
It is illegal to wait for proof. It is even illegal to wait for a proper DMCA notice if you've been given a defective one. See the ALS Scan vs RemarQ case for details.
The Business Software Alliance can fine people without trial.
I think it is due to contractual penalities provided for in the license agreement (the agreement doesn't even have all the terms, you agree to agree to other terms which are in other documents you don't see). Out courts enforce this for Microsoft. Then BillyG says that he doesn't like judicially interference (in his monopoly). He does like judicial control when it suits (pun intended) him.
Speaking of lawsuits, due process is guaranteed by the Constitution, but not in practice. You can be subjected to "summary judgement for the plaintiff" in which case you lose without a trial.
If they don't cut you off they are liable for MONETARY DAMAGES. There is precendent for multi-million dollar damages - they have been assessed in copyright cases quite recently.
If they do cut you off they aren't civilly liable for damages done to you.
BOTH of these are due to the DMCA. The gov't can't do "guilty unless proven innocent", but they can use extortion by court to force the ISP to act that way.
Gov't taking your money and giving it to the MPAA is a very damaging and frightening thing. A small ISP can be killed easily. A big one can take a lot of damage, or be killed off by huge enough damages. Plus the big ones usually are in cahoots with (or actually are) the content providers.
Sued, not locked up. It is civil, not criminal. Until Congress passes a Digital Millenium Libel Act or something.
Blame the abuse of the tools, not the tools themselves. That's what we say regarding DeCSS, and that is what we should say here.
Web browsers nonsensically treat
/> works right, but Slashdot won't let you use it, it removes the whole thing. So much for XHTML compliant comments.
;)
exactly like a
. So
gives one 2 newlines.
Perhaps I should post a rant to Source Forge?
P.S. Why doesn't Slashdot do HTML unescaping on the Subject when you select Extrans mode? < and > get eaten up, and so do their contents.
What's wrong with an arrangement where both parties benefit? I thought that was suppoed to be a GOOD thing. They get code, we get docs to write the code and the ability to use the product under Linux. They have an incentive to support Open Source, so that makes them more likely to do it.
I want more partnerships between hardware companies and Linux, not less.
Does the the new OpenGL 1.3 spec support pixel and vertex shaders?
If those features are missing from the new OpenGL spec, then we are in trouble and the OpenGL board needs to act to remedy this situation.
To win against Microsoft, we need to have their be NOTHING useful that Microsoft products do that ours CAN'T. We MIGHT be able to get over the market share/monopoly/compatibility lock-in because our product is free (as in free speech and free beer), and does some things better. But if the pro-Microsoft forces can point to a TECHNICAL INFERIORITY of our product we are doomed.
Do you like the idea of the Attorney General knowing where you live? ;)
Well if you end up laid off, unable to find another job, and get kicked out of where you live because you can't pay the rent/mortgage then I bet your tune will change real quick.
No job = no money = no place to live
Hacing a job is not a luxury, it is a necessity.
As for reality (vs denying reality), we pay for the homeless problem,
either in taxes and donations for shelters, or in crime and other disturbances caused by people living on the street.
So even if the human cost doesn't bother you, there is a good economic (and quality of life) argument for you.
What would a company do if they were a Linux shop? I'm not trolling, I'm serious. I don't think there is Dragon Naturally Speaking (TM) for Linux.
Well then cars with Firestone tires should have the governor set to zero MPH. Any faster would be unsafe with those tires. ;)
P.S. How would YOU know what the limiter is set to? :)
Well one could hack one's TCP stack so an initial SYN-ACK with certain fields set a certain way is treated as a normal SYN packet. That blasts a hole in the not allowing incoming packets filter. Of course, they can filter out that hack, etc. As was said in another post, they have to REACT, and would be one step (or more) behind.
What they could do, is change the rules. Right now things are permitted unless prohibited. If the laws were changed so that things were by default prohibited, instead of permitted, and made it illegal (preferrable as a felony - heck, then they could eventually take away the right of a felon to be on the net too), and made it illegal for hardware or software to exist that doesn't enofrce that, they they could win.
THey could require you pay the gov't a $10M license to provide content, and revoke licenses from any "troublesome" sites (so rich "eccentrics" would not be a threat).
Put enough people in jail for YEARS of their life, take every thing they own and sell it, and make them felons without the right of self-defense or even to vote (so the politicians can IGNORE them - and their fellow "citizens" will think of them as EVIL UNTRUSTWORTHY CRIMINALS), and people will be scared off and/or neutralized as a threat to the New World Order.
WE NEED TO FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS POLITICALLY, NOT JUST TECHNICALLY. IF YOU GET SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN PRISON FOR USING FREENET, NO TECHNOLOGY WILL HELP YOU (except a shovel to try to "tunnel" your way out of prison).
Cars are already speed governed to not go faster than a certain speed - even though they have the horsepower to do it.
You try to go faster and it just won't - it cuts back the throttle for you.
It's not a tech arms race. The copy-"protection" don't have to work. Their very existance makes using content in unapproved manners ILLEGAL under the DMCA. That is what it is all about - the DMCA allows even a trivial amount of programming to have the same legal force as Federal legislation.
Using the DMCA, Adobe can, and has, written a copyright "law" that applies to their products which goes beyond the old standard copyright law and infringes on fair use.
And the courts enforce those "protection" algorithm "laws" with sometimes draconian severity. Just ask Dmitry Sklyarov.