Because the law states it's the subscriber's liability for any infringement done on the connection. This also has nothing to do with e ISP's ToS. Lastly, this is not a criminal matter.
Actually yes they can as long as they don't remove copyrights from the source or misuse Google's trademarks. Why would they need Google's permission to use and sell Apache v2 code when the license carries no such restriction?
Adding to my previous comment, a win in court or a settlement with a big firm (like they did with Microsoft) also makes it more likely others will follow suit (which also happened in this case). Then this means you can move on to smaller and even more vulnerable targets.
They also got other big corps to settle like Oracle, JP Morgan Chase, etc. It's no different to the current mobile patent war where people who proclaim to hate software patents or patents in general cheer when the side they hate loses. Even when it means that the very software patents they claim to dislike only gain further legitimacy in the courts. Fanboism trumps logic every time.
Why? They sued and got Microsoft to settle back in 2007. They also got companies like TI, JP Morgan Chase and Oracle to also license their patents. They've also still have outstaninding lawsuits against bigger companies. Facebook and Disney are small potatoes versus a Microsoft or Apple that they've already sued.
This is not true. They can get a warrant from the FISA court up to 24 hours after the fact to specifically make it easier for themselves. That anyone still claims and believes it's hard to get a warrant is laughable.
I don't make my happiness relative to those around me which is why I actually have very few fancy things (and most of them are going on 5 years old so it's hardly that ritzy), but at the same time I'm not going to let myself be underpaid just because I should be kissing at someone's feet because they gave me a job and taught me a skill. There are always other jobs out there and someone willing to pay more.
I'll lower my standards when the people in charge commanding salaries 10 to 1000 times mine do so as well. I'm not going to be overworked and underpaid just cause some asshat thinks they're a saint for giving me a job.
Exactly. It's not the employee's fault for wanting to be paid equivalent to their worth. You as an employer want to underpay me? Well you better be one hell of a place to work for and have other perks to make up for it otherwise I'm going to naturally find a new job. I've never understood the hypocrisy why it's okay for executives to jump around to get promotions and better pay but us plebes are given shit for doing the same thing and painted as being disloyal.
In fairness, that's because the scarcity of talent has created a mercenary culture: "Now that my employer paid me to learn a new skill, let me check to see if there's an ad for it on Dice or Craigslist with a higher rate of pay."
Actually, in true fairness people do this because most companies have no loyalty to their engineers are more than willing to ship their jobs overseas or give it to some less experience person so that they can pay the person shit wages while overworking them.
Slashdot Mirror
And one that has blatantly wrong "facts" on it, too. timothy posting this is clearly baiting the Apple fanbois.
By sealing them. Did you think they wouldn't think of that?
The lighter weight is due to using thinner platters not the helium.
Well we will look out for it when they release HDDs with hydrogen in them.
No, it is quite right. The law states that liability for infringement is on the subscriber of the internet service.
Forgot to add, being an 'exclusive licensee' doesn't mean you're the only licensee. See 'WiAV Solutions v. Motorola.'.
They are an excusive licensee of the patents. That's how they have standing.
Because the law states it's the subscriber's liability for any infringement done on the connection. This also has nothing to do with e ISP's ToS. Lastly, this is not a criminal matter.
Well if you keep it open you face liability. As the article mentions, it's the subscriber's liability.
Actually yes they can as long as they don't remove copyrights from the source or misuse Google's trademarks. Why would they need Google's permission to use and sell Apache v2 code when the license carries no such restriction?
You're off base. Public universities holding patents is nothing even remotely new. Welcome to the results of the Bayh-Dole Act passed in 1980.
Never heard of Apple or Oracle have you? Both setttled with Eolas.
Adding to my previous comment, a win in court or a settlement with a big firm (like they did with Microsoft) also makes it more likely others will follow suit (which also happened in this case). Then this means you can move on to smaller and even more vulnerable targets.
They also got other big corps to settle like Oracle, JP Morgan Chase, etc. It's no different to the current mobile patent war where people who proclaim to hate software patents or patents in general cheer when the side they hate loses. Even when it means that the very software patents they claim to dislike only gain further legitimacy in the courts. Fanboism trumps logic every time.
Why? They sued and got Microsoft to settle back in 2007. They also got companies like TI, JP Morgan Chase and Oracle to also license their patents. They've also still have outstaninding lawsuits against bigger companies. Facebook and Disney are small potatoes versus a Microsoft or Apple that they've already sued.
You actually speak for a minority of Americans. Most people love the security theater.
This is not true. They can get a warrant from the FISA court up to 24 hours after the fact to specifically make it easier for themselves. That anyone still claims and believes it's hard to get a warrant is laughable.
It's close enough that no one cares. 15.975:9 vs 16:9 is such a miniscule difference.
Well, yes. It would also be magnitudes faster than this.
Actually many normal desktops are IO limited for a number of applications. That hardly qualifies them as supercomputers.
I don't make my happiness relative to those around me which is why I actually have very few fancy things (and most of them are going on 5 years old so it's hardly that ritzy), but at the same time I'm not going to let myself be underpaid just because I should be kissing at someone's feet because they gave me a job and taught me a skill. There are always other jobs out there and someone willing to pay more.
I'll lower my standards when the people in charge commanding salaries 10 to 1000 times mine do so as well. I'm not going to be overworked and underpaid just cause some asshat thinks they're a saint for giving me a job.
Exactly. It's not the employee's fault for wanting to be paid equivalent to their worth. You as an employer want to underpay me? Well you better be one hell of a place to work for and have other perks to make up for it otherwise I'm going to naturally find a new job. I've never understood the hypocrisy why it's okay for executives to jump around to get promotions and better pay but us plebes are given shit for doing the same thing and painted as being disloyal.
Pay your employees decent ages and treat them well? That's fucking communism! GTFO.
In fairness, that's because the scarcity of talent has created a mercenary culture: "Now that my employer paid me to learn a new skill, let me check to see if there's an ad for it on Dice or Craigslist with a higher rate of pay."
Actually, in true fairness people do this because most companies have no loyalty to their engineers are more than willing to ship their jobs overseas or give it to some less experience person so that they can pay the person shit wages while overworking them.