It costs a bundle to keep people from arbitrarily challenging any domain name at any time -- if it's going to take > $1000 to challenge, you're going to be PRETTY damned sure you have a case before you undertake.
In essence, it keeps the channels clear for serious challenges.
If you feel you have a case, challenge, then sue the party when you win to recover court costs.
I know this has probably been gone over four or five times, but why does this law apply against a company not within the legal jurisdiction of the United States of America?
Sure, try 'em under applicable Russian law, but... WTF?
Actions like these are just begging for class-action lawsuits. The fact that they not only don't play (which is fraud in and of itself), but seemingly intentionally damage equipment smacks of harmful intent. They can't say that they didn't know about the problems -- it states right on the cover that it won't play in Macs....
I've said for a year now that Amazon has been taking a loss on its retail divison to build up the most incredibly targeted marketing database in history. Customers of Amazon could see it in the extensive preferences & rating system that they have used throughout their site.
Retail booksales has such a narrow margin these days that if Amazon were ever to turn a profit, they HAD to do something like this.
Lessons learned:
1) Information is King, Queen, AND Crown Prince.
2) Don't exceed your comfort zone when it comes to giving away personal information just for a good price.
3) The almighty buck trumps the hell out of Privacy Statements.
It sounds to me like you should go to the department head and/or the Principal of the school and complain.
Assuming that the test was longer than just a few questions, curved, or the weighting of teh questions wasn't abnormally heavy towards the top question, there's no way that missing ONE question should land you a D-.
PLUS -- if you backed your arguments logically and factually, the teacher probably should not have even docked you for the question!
FYI: I had an experience like this in college, and by going up the ladder was able to make my case & prevail.
If most people are just taking from communities like Napster & the like, how is there any content at all? For these to even work, people need to be giving -- and they are, in copious quantities!
Yes, MORE people take than give, but as long as some people are giving, these file-sharing systems will continue to flourish.
I'm going to go buy property in Aruba and set up a nice little proxy server (with a nice FAT pipe) that people can log into & surf to anywhere from.... If internet gambling is a billion dollar industry and growing, this should be fairly easy to pull off.
And, the kicker is, since my company would be in Aruba, it would not be subject to the laws of the United States.
If this bill passes, how long until these are popping up in droves?
1) Breach of contract on the part of the seller. The seller states that a product does things A, B, and C. The product does A and C well, but loses a customer big money when they try and the product fails (repeatedly) to do B.... If this were ANY other product, it would constitute false claims about the product and would open the seller/producer to legal consequences.
But NOT in the case of software...
2) Caveat Emptor.
But should this wreak havoc on the shareware industry? I don't think so. The product hasn't caused irrevocable physical harm to anybody. The fault here was not only on the part of the software writer, but on the users of software. If I buy a calculator and it tells me that 5 + 3 = 9, and I use that answer....who's to blame? Sure, the calculator maker provided me with a bad product, but I also used its answer without double-checking my results.
IMHO, the liability of the software manufacturer should be limited (or be able to be limited) to the purchase price of the software in question. The message here is a simple one: You make crappy software, you make no money. You make good software, you reap the benefits.
Ultimately in a sane and peacfull society, Handguns, Assult rifles ( military oriented ), and automatic weapons are not needed, by the citezanry. Pardon my naivate.
I'll start this by saying that I'm not a member of the NRA. I don't own a gun, but probably will in the future -- assuming that my right to do so isn't taken away....and it's looking more and more like it will be.
You're excused for your naivate . The problem with that argument is that we DON'T LIVE IN a "sane and peacfull society". We live in a society that has crime, that has problems, and that instead of a true democracy has a government of officials over us. For the most part they're good folk....
Let's not forget that our founding fathers gave us the RIGHT to bear arms. Yes. they were thinking of personal survival, the right to hunt, and the right to have sport.
These were people who knew a thing or two about fighting for what you believe in. They designed their army around common citizens helping the national defense -- the militia. I'm not talking about the gun-toting whackos you saw portrayed on the news after the Waco incident and the Oklahoma City bombing, I'm talking about people like you and me who were trained in how to defend their country. The National Guard would be the closest thing that we have today.
But our founding fathers were ALSO people who knew a thing or two about governmental tyrrany. They made a very clear statement that when the government no longer governs "of the people, by the people, and FOR the people," that it was the citizenry's collective responsibility to change the status quo. If the people governing above you have guns, you need them as well.
If you can't fight for your rights as a last resort, what rights do you really have?
I had much the same problem (at least the Java one) with the Netscape that came with RH5.2. Erasing the installation by de-installing the RPM and then installing a fresh copy of the browser solved it.
Slashdot Mirror
sue to recover your challenge fee.
;)
God, I KNOW better than to stay up til 3am playing DAOC on a work night!
Scott
It costs a bundle to keep people from arbitrarily challenging any domain name at any time -- if it's going to take > $1000 to challenge, you're going to be PRETTY damned sure you have a case before you undertake.
In essence, it keeps the channels clear for serious challenges.
If you feel you have a case, challenge, then sue the party when you win to recover court costs.
Oh, and IANAL.
Scott
I know this has probably been gone over four or five times, but why does this law apply against a company not within the legal jurisdiction of the United States of America?
Sure, try 'em under applicable Russian law, but... WTF?
Scott
Big Blue didn't want to be known as "Big Blue Water"??
<insert groans here>
Scott
Actions like these are just begging for class-action lawsuits. The fact that they not only don't play (which is fraud in and of itself), but seemingly intentionally damage equipment smacks of harmful intent. They can't say that they didn't know about the problems -- it states right on the cover that it won't play in Macs....
Grrrr.....
Companies like this really cheese me off.
I've said for a year now that Amazon has been taking a loss on its retail divison to build up the most incredibly targeted marketing database in history. Customers of Amazon could see it in the extensive preferences & rating system that they have used throughout their site.
Retail booksales has such a narrow margin these days that if Amazon were ever to turn a profit, they HAD to do something like this.
Lessons learned:
Scott1) Information is King, Queen, AND Crown Prince.
2) Don't exceed your comfort zone when it comes to giving away personal information just for a good price.
3) The almighty buck trumps the hell out of Privacy Statements.
It sounds to me like you should go to the department head and/or the Principal of the school and complain.
Assuming that the test was longer than just a few questions, curved, or the weighting of teh questions wasn't abnormally heavy towards the top question, there's no way that missing ONE question should land you a D-.
PLUS -- if you backed your arguments logically and factually, the teacher probably should not have even docked you for the question!
FYI: I had an experience like this in college, and by going up the ladder was able to make my case & prevail.
Scott
If most people are just taking from communities like Napster & the like, how is there any content at all? For these to even work, people need to be giving -- and they are, in copious quantities!
Yes, MORE people take than give, but as long as some people are giving, these file-sharing systems will continue to flourish.
Scott
If there were a tax on stupidity, the government would be PAYING all of us!
I'm going to go buy property in Aruba and set up a nice little proxy server (with a nice FAT pipe) that people can log into & surf to anywhere from.... If internet gambling is a billion dollar industry and growing, this should be fairly easy to pull off.
And, the kicker is, since my company would be in Aruba, it would not be subject to the laws of the United States.
If this bill passes, how long until these are popping up in droves?
Scott
The way I see it, this can be taken two ways:
1) Breach of contract on the part of the seller. The seller states that a product does things A, B, and C. The product does A and C well, but loses a customer big money when they try and the product fails (repeatedly) to do B.... If this were ANY other product, it would constitute false claims about the product and would open the seller/producer to legal consequences.
But NOT in the case of software...
2) Caveat Emptor.
But should this wreak havoc on the shareware industry? I don't think so. The product hasn't caused irrevocable physical harm to anybody. The fault here was not only on the part of the software writer, but on the users of software. If I buy a calculator and it tells me that 5 + 3 = 9, and I use that answer....who's to blame? Sure, the calculator maker provided me with a bad product, but I also used its answer without double-checking my results.
IMHO, the liability of the software manufacturer should be limited (or be able to be limited) to the purchase price of the software in question. The message here is a simple one: You make crappy software, you make no money. You make good software, you reap the benefits.
Scott
Actually, the /. article title poses a possible solution to the RF emission problem.
BURY the lines and you should have little or no emitted RF.
I can't speak for the flickering lights, however.
Scott
I'll start this by saying that I'm not a member of the NRA. I don't own a gun, but probably will in the future -- assuming that my right to do so isn't taken away....and it's looking more and more like it will be.
You're excused for your naivate . The problem with that argument is that we DON'T LIVE IN a "sane and peacfull society". We live in a society that has crime, that has problems, and that instead of a true democracy has a government of officials over us. For the most part they're good folk....
Let's not forget that our founding fathers gave us the RIGHT to bear arms. Yes. they were thinking of personal survival, the right to hunt, and the right to have sport.
These were people who knew a thing or two about fighting for what you believe in. They designed their army around common citizens helping the national defense -- the militia. I'm not talking about the gun-toting whackos you saw portrayed on the news after the Waco incident and the Oklahoma City bombing, I'm talking about people like you and me who were trained in how to defend their country. The National Guard would be the closest thing that we have today.
But our founding fathers were ALSO people who knew a thing or two about governmental tyrrany. They made a very clear statement that when the government no longer governs "of the people, by the people, and FOR the people," that it was the citizenry's collective responsibility to change the status quo. If the people governing above you have guns, you need them as well.
If you can't fight for your rights as a last resort, what rights do you really have?
Scott
I had much the same problem (at least the Java one) with the Netscape that came with RH5.2. Erasing the installation by de-installing the RPM and then installing a fresh copy of the browser solved it.
Hope that helps ya!
Scott
Or how about a 100% compatible application?
One that runs MORE EFFICIENTLY, with LESS FILE SPACE...
I'm sure it can be done.
Scott
We'll just see what happens to sales of "Civilization, Call to Power", "VMWare", and the likes.