My site is legal. But Mattel tried to shut me down anyways.
A large company may convince the ISP to shut you down, with the threat of a lawsuit. Or they can just file a lawsuit against you and run up your legal costs.
Even if you win on the basis free speech (or even truth), you would have had paid out large legal bills. That is why the both Massachusetts and California have implemented Anti-SLAPP statutes.
Even if you set up a site in Cuba, it does not matter.
If you reside, or have asets in a country that will recognize the rulings from a country that makes it illegal, then they can take those asets.
A court can grant juridiction over a website because it is targeted to an area that they have jurisdiction. Since it is then intended to cause the harm in an area that the court has jurisdiction, you can be sued in that court.
If you don't appear, you will be defaulted. If there are assets that can be reached by the court, even though the website can't be, you lose.
If in Boston, you have your death ray satelite kill someone in Boston, they still will arrest you in Boston. They don't have to have jurisdiction in space.
It might be because they have the fear of the MPAA!
This is the main reason that they (MPAA, RIAA, Mattel) fight litigate the way they do. If put the fear into ISPs(and the university is their ISP), and companies will not dare go after them or speak up against them.
If you don't fight back, then the corporations that abuse people (smaller companies) like that would not only get away with it, but scare others from standing up for their rights.
The reasoning behind the case was because Mattel bought the rights to the CPHack code and filed a lawsuit against people who did not have the funds.
In the decision and determinminations of laws and facts, there was no mention of the DMCA. The issue argued was that they violated the stink (oops, shrink) wrap license agreement.
If you look at it, there is no argument from the defendants. It all refers to the "verified complaint" and counsel's affadavit.
Of couse, they repeat some of the same misrepresentations. That they decompiled the object code, onverted object code to source code. In the article, Schwartz claims that CyberPatrol was changed to make CPHack ineffective. But in the their papers, Mattel claimed that by not issuing the injunction, they would be subject to irreperable harm. If CyberPatrol was changed, how would it be subject to harm by an out of date, incompatble program?
In a civil case, or at least in most jurisdictions, a supeona is issued by an attorney. Not by a court.
A party may move to quash a supeona, without action needed by the recipient.
It is not a violation of a court order until an order to compell is issued by a court.
There are many cases where a company filed a lawsuit, then dropped it after getting the names.
At the very least, Yahoo should have contacted the user, with a small amount of time to respond with a copy of the motion to quash that had been entered in the court.
The lawsuit is about a an agreement by Yahoo to keep the information about him private.
Their is a number of cases that keep the information about keeping the speakers of certain things private. Revealing this information quell full expression of free speech.
On the other hand, if one publishes truly defamatory information, then there is a responsibility for it. There has been cases for mentioned in the news commpanies filing lawsuits, and once they get the names, they will cease the prosecution of the case.
This type of action is obviously abusive. Now, if Yahoo (or someone else) receives a nasty letter from a lawyer, w/o giving a chance for the individual to oppose(via a motion to quash), it is wrong.
In a lawsuit, if an attorney sends a request for information, it is not required to be provided until the court compels it.
How about a new acronym? YAFAL - Yet Another Friggen Abusive Lawsuit.
Program code is instructions to a computer. HTML is program code. So is VB Script, or holes on paper tape. It may not be real programming, but it's programming of sorts. Isn't the binary copyrightable even if it was written in C? If I translate the movie "First Contact" into Greek, it is still a violation of copyright.
Even if it's not program code, it is still a copyrightable expression.
The main issue is that you hired him to write this for you. Most people have a work hire hire contract in the agreement. This will be the main issue.
Some tactics to consider. In deposition, ask why certain HTML coding was done in different ways. That will make him look like a fool. It may give you the argument of him just typing advertising copy into a HTML word processor.
Did you get a refund for the whole amount? If he was creating a product, they never finished to product that they were paid to do.
It's now thousand monkeys on a thousuand word processing programs.
Remeber the voice activated typerwriter in one of the original Start Trek episodes?
The idea behind the review of the books is to get ideas. Sometimes when you work in an area, you see the logical progressions, but you don't take jumps.
Back in 1983, I saw a 10mb r/w magneto/optical prototype written up in EE times. I told my boss about an idea of sticking one of these things in the trunk of a car. Put up all the local maps on the drive and have the car tell you where to turn. An idea that I got from Knight Rider.
If FSF fought every violation, then they would not longer be well equipt to fight other battles.
In my case, I had spoken to the ACLU, not to have them fight for me, but just to make them aware (Mattel using litigation and threats of litigation to intimidate people into surrendering their rights). I provided the ACLU with information to make more clear the misrepresentations that Mattel / MSI made in their briefs.Mp>
It's legal for the employer to monitor your office computer usage.
They can even fire you for it in some cases. There are some cases where they cannot use the information against you. When discussing job benefits, working conditions, union organizing, or something along that line. Also, if you are speaking out against discrimination. Another is if you have filed a complaint of law, and the law prohibits retalition, and then they monitor you because you filed a complaint, then that is another form of retaliation (increased scrutiny, see the EEOC guidelines).
You don't need to recalibrate the gravitational constant to make you buff.
What you need is a device that will dynamically adjust gravity. It will increase gravity on you, so that you get a continual and constant workout during the day. But, then when you need to lift things or jump (and land too) it will reduce gravity.
This would use the increased gravity to build and tone muscle. Then the reduced gravity to lift the car, jump over buildings. And of course, increase gravity between your fist and the bully's face so, when you punch him/her you get a gravity assist.
Now if it can be done for less than $6,000,000 it's a deal.:)
Once the genie is out of the bottle, it's not easy to put back in the bottle.
But, the web is not a bottle. There is a big difference. A genie does not mirror itself all over the world.
With CPHack and DeCSS genies, once the genie got out, it got out and replicated itself to make sure that even if it was forced back into the bottle, there is still thousands of the same genie that is still out of the bottle.
My comments here are relevent. I was trying to contrast this to the CPHack case.
Ralph Metzler and and Tony Bennett exchanged a few emails, problem solved.
In the CPHack case, there were hearings, spammed supeona, more hearings, etc. Still lots of mirrored sites, lots of bad feelings. And lots of legal bills.
Mattel and all the other lawsuit happy companies, maybe you should take a lesson.
In the CPHack case, if Mattel / MSI didn't file the lawsuit, it would have been a non-story. No thousands of mirror sites, not people talking about email bombs.
MSI could have changed the encryption (really scrambling) technique, then use a different technique for the passwords. Then block the sites with the code. And block the site
That is of course assuming that they didn't do this for publicity.
Once a company files a lawsuit, people dig in their heels, call for publicity, and then fight back hard.
In my lawsuit, most of the press coverage was due to their countersuit for the website libel.
and multi-year immersion is a much better strategy
I agree imersion is better, for adults too. The best way is to learn it from some someone you date, that is learning English. That is how I learned my Spanish. And going to Spain, Mexico, and Venuzeula for vacations.
Now, if we can have a two week Geek session in Madrid in June.
Why does the person who says, "Here is something I worked on, have it for free, have fun." have any responsibility for it? (meaning as far as it's legal).
Commericial software complanies deny responsibility for anything their software may do.
It's good to know what does not work right and I try to fix it. But when someone who pays nothing demands something?
That's the type of attitude that will discourage people from giving away software.
I was talking with a linguest a couple of weeks ago.
He told me that Esparanto was a joke. It was a language that was developed for people who did not want to learn another language. Ok, so you learn a new language because you don't want to learn a new language.
He's working on teaching multiple languages simultaniously.
Slashdot Mirror
A large company may convince the ISP to shut you down, with the threat of a lawsuit. Or they can just file a lawsuit against you and run up your legal costs.
Even if you win on the basis free speech (or even truth), you would have had paid out large legal bills. That is why the both Massachusetts and California have implemented Anti-SLAPP statutes.
If you reside, or have asets in a country that will recognize the rulings from a country that makes it illegal, then they can take those asets.
A court can grant juridiction over a website because it is targeted to an area that they have jurisdiction. Since it is then intended to cause the harm in an area that the court has jurisdiction, you can be sued in that court.
If you don't appear, you will be defaulted. If there are assets that can be reached by the court, even though the website can't be, you lose.
If in Boston, you have your death ray satelite kill someone in Boston, they still will arrest you in Boston. They don't have to have jurisdiction in space.
If you don't fight now, you won't be able to say anything later.
This is the main reason that they (MPAA, RIAA, Mattel) fight litigate the way they do. If put the fear into ISPs(and the university is their ISP), and companies will not dare go after them or speak up against them.
In the decision and determinminations of laws and facts, there was no mention of the DMCA. The issue argued was that they violated the stink (oops, shrink) wrap license agreement.
If you look at it, there is no argument from the defendants. It all refers to the "verified complaint" and counsel's affadavit.
Of couse, they repeat some of the same misrepresentations. That they decompiled the object code, onverted object code to source code. In the article, Schwartz claims that CyberPatrol was changed to make CPHack ineffective. But in the their papers, Mattel claimed that by not issuing the injunction, they would be subject to irreperable harm. If CyberPatrol was changed, how would it be subject to harm by an out of date, incompatble program?
No offers to buy spamming software?
A party may move to quash a supeona, without action needed by the recipient.
It is not a violation of a court order until an order to compell is issued by a court.
There are many cases where a company filed a lawsuit, then dropped it after getting the names.
At the very least, Yahoo should have contacted the user, with a small amount of time to respond with a copy of the motion to quash that had been entered in the court.
Their is a number of cases that keep the information about keeping the speakers of certain things private. Revealing this information quell full expression of free speech.
On the other hand, if one publishes truly defamatory information, then there is a responsibility for it. There has been cases for mentioned in the news commpanies filing lawsuits, and once they get the names, they will cease the prosecution of the case.
This type of action is obviously abusive. Now, if Yahoo (or someone else) receives a nasty letter from a lawyer, w/o giving a chance for the individual to oppose(via a motion to quash), it is wrong.
In a lawsuit, if an attorney sends a request for information, it is not required to be provided until the court compels it.
How about a new acronym? YAFAL - Yet Another Friggen Abusive Lawsuit.
Program code is instructions to a computer. HTML is program code. So is VB Script, or holes on paper tape. It may not be real programming, but it's programming of sorts. Isn't the binary copyrightable even if it was written in C? If I translate the movie "First Contact" into Greek, it is still a violation of copyright.
Even if it's not program code, it is still a copyrightable expression.
The main issue is that you hired him to write this for you. Most people have a work hire hire contract in the agreement. This will be the main issue.
Some tactics to consider. In deposition, ask why certain HTML coding was done in different ways. That will make him look like a fool. It may give you the argument of him just typing advertising copy into a HTML word processor.
Did you get a refund for the whole amount? If he was creating a product, they never finished to product that they were paid to do.
It's now thousand monkeys on a thousuand word processing programs.
Remeber the voice activated typerwriter in one of the original Start Trek episodes?
The idea behind the review of the books is to get ideas. Sometimes when you work in an area, you see the logical progressions, but you don't take jumps.
Back in 1983, I saw a 10mb r/w magneto/optical prototype written up in EE times. I told my boss about an idea of sticking one of these things in the trunk of a car. Put up all the local maps on the drive and have the car tell you where to turn. An idea that I got from Knight Rider.
Then of couse, Mattel sued a lawyer that handled a case against Mattel for libel.
Did anyone notice, most of Mattel's lawsuits are against little guys? Am I wrong about it?
If FSF fought every violation, then they would not longer be well equipt to fight other battles.
In my case, I had spoken to the ACLU, not to have them fight for me, but just to make them aware (Mattel using litigation and threats of litigation to intimidate people into surrendering their rights). I provided the ACLU with information to make more clear the misrepresentations that Mattel / MSI made in their briefs.Mp>
One useful item that they didn't include is the part of speech. Then you know that the noun run is not the same as the verb run.
Also the tiny keypad makes the entry inconvienent. You can't keep a conversation going, if you have to keep using this device.
They can even fire you for it in some cases. There are some cases where they cannot use the information against you. When discussing job benefits, working conditions, union organizing, or something along that line. Also, if you are speaking out against discrimination. Another is if you have filed a complaint of law, and the law prohibits retalition, and then they monitor you because you filed a complaint, then that is another form of retaliation (increased scrutiny, see the EEOC guidelines).
They sold most of it in 1997. For more information you can go to http://www.cyberpatrol.com/handiw/def ault.htm.
It used to include screen magnifiers, morsecode to ascii, key predictors, word completion, remote control of X10 devices.
Another option might be touch screen. It might be easier to touch than to move a mouse.
What you need is a device that will dynamically adjust gravity. It will increase gravity on you, so that you get a continual and constant workout during the day. But, then when you need to lift things or jump (and land too) it will reduce gravity.
This would use the increased gravity to build and tone muscle. Then the reduced gravity to lift the car, jump over buildings. And of course, increase gravity between your fist and the bully's face so, when you punch him/her you get a gravity assist.
Now if it can be done for less than $6,000,000 it's a deal. :)
But, the web is not a bottle. There is a big difference. A genie does not mirror itself all over the world.
With CPHack and DeCSS genies, once the genie got out, it got out and replicated itself to make sure that even if it was forced back into the bottle, there is still thousands of the same genie that is still out of the bottle.
Ralph Metzler and and Tony Bennett exchanged a few emails, problem solved.
In the CPHack case, there were hearings, spammed supeona, more hearings, etc. Still lots of mirrored sites, lots of bad feelings. And lots of legal bills.
In the CPHack case, if Mattel / MSI didn't file the lawsuit, it would have been a non-story. No thousands of mirror sites, not people talking about email bombs.
MSI could have changed the encryption (really scrambling) technique, then use a different technique for the passwords. Then block the sites with the code. And block the site
That is of course assuming that they didn't do this for publicity.
Once a company files a lawsuit, people dig in their heels, call for publicity, and then fight back hard.
In my lawsuit, most of the press coverage was due to their countersuit for the website libel.
I agree imersion is better, for adults too. The best way is to learn it from some someone you date, that is learning English. That is how I learned my Spanish. And going to Spain, Mexico, and Venuzeula for vacations.
Now, if we can have a two week Geek session in Madrid in June.
Now everything will be on your permanent record.
It's not Microsoft. They can't force everyone to learn Esperanto.
I can't imagine learning 3 languages at a time. I have a nephew, he speaks Farsi, Spanish, and English. He was raised in a three language environment.
I have a hard enough time with Spanish conjugations.
Commericial software complanies deny responsibility for anything their software may do.
It's good to know what does not work right and I try to fix it. But when someone who pays nothing demands something?
That's the type of attitude that will discourage people from giving away software.
He told me that Esparanto was a joke. It was a language that was developed for people who did not want to learn another language. Ok, so you learn a new language because you don't want to learn a new language.
He's working on teaching multiple languages simultaniously.