I'm petty sure that in America convicted felons can write books about their crimes. I'm also relatively sure (though not positive on this part) that they can make money form writing about their crimes, speaking about their crimes, hell they could even draw diagrams for people, and sell them.
Millions of dollars a year for bandwidth is an extreme exageration. If the university was paying commercial rates for their lines (which is not often the case) they would have to have 2 T3s to hit even a million dollars. To hit multiple million? We're talking about 4 T3s. Not at any school in America.
IU is one of the largest schools in the nation, and is in the top ten for most connected (not just my bragging, actual rankings have said that).
We pay $25,000/month for our connection. Which may be lower than some other schools, simply because IU has always been active in increasing the backbone and bandwidth in the state.
So most likely, the most any school pays is three or four hundred thousand dollars.
Actually, there are very few for-profit colleges in the United States. Private schools are non-profits. They run at a (hopefully) even budget, neither making nor losing money after all expenses.
I'm not sure what you meant about "No profit= no money to run the school and pay employees." Profit is defined as money left over after expenses.
Yes, private schools lack that "state budget," but they make up for it in their endowment. Without such funds, very few private schools would be able to operate today.
Trademarks were made to prevent people from 1:) piggy backing on a companies hard spent marketing efforts. 2:) defaming the companies product.
So to violate trademark law (in the US, no idea about over there, but since the whole copyright/trademakr/intellectual proprty treaties everyone has signed, it is probably pretty close)you have to mis-use their trademark in the context of their product.
So selling Coca-Cola from the site would be a violation. Putting up information about Coca-Cola would be a violation.
Owning the domain name "coke.ch" is not. why not?
It is contextless. We're talking about a word with three definitions. Coca-Cola has the right to use that trademark in the context of the beverage business. They have the right to defend it in that context.
But they have neither the right nor the need to try and wrestle control over a dictionary word from the general public.
His use/disuse of the domain has no effect on if it violates trademark laws. If anything, it merely insures that he hasn't.
Actually, we have 35,000 undergraduates on this campus ( over 100,000 in the system). IU is one of the larger universities. They pay (as far as I can tell), $25,000 flat rate per month for the physical T3 connection. Before Napster this was not being utilized 100%, or if it was, it was in rare instances. This year, Napster began to take up over 50% of that bandwidth, and that means that at peak times the bandwidth was being 100% utilized, meaning a slow down for everyone involved. With 35,000+ students, unused badnwidth is basically a dream. Ryan
So you're sayins Universities don't pay lots of money for their connection?
I'm at IU, which is one of the examples cited. IU pays $25,000 per month for their connection.
Exactly $0 of this is covered by any student fees. It is funded entirely by the state.
Students here do pay some network fees, and those fees go to the tech support and computer labs that the University maintains, not the bandwidth.
And if $25,000 per month isn't a lot, then I'd like to know how much is. Especially when you consider that 61% of IU's bandwidth was being used by Napster the morning they shut that down. That means Indiana was paying over $12,500 per month so we could use napster. (If you do the math, that comes to almost $150,000 a year)
Being a journalist, it would be unethical for them to ignore this story. The judgement on such things is if they would report the story if it did not involve them. I.E. would they report the suit if it involved Earthlink or Microsoft instead of AOL? In this case, they most certainly would report in either of those cases, simply due to the size of the suit. Ryan Stultz
Only being able to speak for Indiana, our senators and congressmen are wonderful at replying.
Of probably 15 snail-mails I've sent, I've always received atleast a form letter back.
Of 30+ emails I've sent (member of ACLU, and send a letter for a lot of campaigns), I've always received a reply from my two senators. I receive a reply from my congressman about half the time.
One of my senators was new this year, and starting with my first email in january, I got a reply.
My advice is to use email with them as much as possible, and when they don't reply, follow up with snail mail asking why they are ignoring a valuable form of communication.
Slashdot Mirror
Ryan
IU is one of the largest schools in the nation, and is in the top ten for most connected (not just my bragging, actual rankings have said that).
We pay $25,000/month for our connection. Which may be lower than some other schools, simply because IU has always been active in increasing the backbone and bandwidth in the state.
So most likely, the most any school pays is three or four hundred thousand dollars.
Ryan Stultz
I'm not sure what you meant about "No profit= no money to run the school and pay employees." Profit is defined as money left over after expenses.
Yes, private schools lack that "state budget," but they make up for it in their endowment. Without such funds, very few private schools would be able to operate today.
Ryan Stultz
Trademarks were made to prevent people from 1:) piggy backing on a companies hard spent marketing efforts. 2:) defaming the companies product.
So to violate trademark law (in the US, no idea about over there, but since the whole copyright/trademakr/intellectual proprty treaties everyone has signed, it is probably pretty close)you have to mis-use their trademark in the context of their product.
So selling Coca-Cola from the site would be a violation. Putting up information about Coca-Cola would be a violation.
Owning the domain name "coke.ch" is not. why not?
It is contextless. We're talking about a word with three definitions. Coca-Cola has the right to use that trademark in the context of the beverage business. They have the right to defend it in that context.
But they have neither the right nor the need to try and wrestle control over a dictionary word from the general public.
His use/disuse of the domain has no effect on if it violates trademark laws. If anything, it merely insures that he hasn't.
Ryan
It is a bit slow, but what can one expect?
Ryan Stultz
Ryan
Actually, we have 35,000 undergraduates on this campus ( over 100,000 in the system). IU is one of the larger universities. They pay (as far as I can tell), $25,000 flat rate per month for the physical T3 connection. Before Napster this was not being utilized 100%, or if it was, it was in rare instances. This year, Napster began to take up over 50% of that bandwidth, and that means that at peak times the bandwidth was being 100% utilized, meaning a slow down for everyone involved. With 35,000+ students, unused badnwidth is basically a dream. Ryan
I'm at IU, which is one of the examples cited. IU pays $25,000 per month for their connection.
Exactly $0 of this is covered by any student fees. It is funded entirely by the state.
Students here do pay some network fees, and those fees go to the tech support and computer labs that the University maintains, not the bandwidth.
And if $25,000 per month isn't a lot, then I'd like to know how much is. Especially when you consider that 61% of IU's bandwidth was being used by Napster the morning they shut that down. That means Indiana was paying over $12,500 per month so we could use napster. (If you do the math, that comes to almost $150,000 a year)
I think I understand why they shut it down.
Ryan
Being a journalist, it would be unethical for them to ignore this story. The judgement on such things is if they would report the story if it did not involve them. I.E. would they report the suit if it involved Earthlink or Microsoft instead of AOL? In this case, they most certainly would report in either of those cases, simply due to the size of the suit. Ryan Stultz
Of probably 15 snail-mails I've sent, I've always received atleast a form letter back.
Of 30+ emails I've sent (member of ACLU, and send a letter for a lot of campaigns), I've always received a reply from my two senators. I receive a reply from my congressman about half the time.
One of my senators was new this year, and starting with my first email in january, I got a reply.
My advice is to use email with them as much as possible, and when they don't reply, follow up with snail mail asking why they are ignoring a valuable form of communication.