It applies to all companies. The length of time you are required to retain documents before destroying can be different for different companies. Like a poster noted, Sarbanes-Oxley defines a time period for publically listed companies. But other than that (and other industries where regulations prescribe time periods for record retention), the courts have used a "reasonable time period" requirement in the past and most commentators expect that to continue under the new rules, which are, in many ways, a formalization of previous court practice.
Under the new rules, an information technology employee who routinely copies over a backup computer tape could be committing the equivalent of 'virtual shredding.
This is a bit misleading. Its only "virtual shredding" if you don't keep the records around for a reasonable period (either by statutory requirements or insutry standards) or if you have notice of litigation in which the evidence is relevant, and you continue to shred.
Thats why there is a document retention policy safe harbor in the rules themselves.
As amended, Rule 37 creates a "safe harbor," protecting a party from sanctions for failure to produce electronically stored information as long as it took reasonable steps to preserve electronically stored information when it knew or should have known such information was discoverable, or the failure results from loss of information during routine
operation of such party's electronic information system.
FWIW, lawyers, even the "technology experts" don't seem to understand technology as well as someone who came through IT before becoming a lawyer.
(disclaimer: IT guy-turned-lawyer, so I always think I know more than "pure lawyers" when it comes to tech).
Now, right before Christmas, the 360 is selling for $100.00 many places. If it is doing well, the price would stay high until after the first of the year.
Please tell me where. Microcenter has the "best deal" and that requires $100 rebate, $100 voucher for getting opening a credit card, and a $200 voucher for getting Vonage for 2 years. That's ONE place and its Microcenter, not Microsoft, offering the deal. The best you can do is about $340 from Overstock or Dell, though I think those deals are over now. Amazon had its $100 deal for 1000 Core systems - and Amazon's servers were hosed, along with endless bitching about it being a scam on digg. Amazon's server crashed. That just doesn't happen unless demand is there.
But please tell me where I can get a $100 Xbox 360. I would bet 75% of slashdot readers would get one at that price as well.
He was kicked upstairs, offered a window seat - whatever euphamism you like. Its a promotion in name only. He no longer controls the day-to-day operations of Sony's games unit. Its a loss of prestige and power.
Japanese executives are rarely fired for their mistakes as (I am told) the shame of it has led to hari-kari. (I am sure someone with more knowledge of Japanese corporate culture than I could affirm or deny that). So the result is a promotion to a position where you can't do any more damage.
But is it really worth the $200 more than a 360? Its entirely possible that the Blu-Ray feature will be useless in 2 or 3 years. At least with the 360, you have the option of buying the drive, and in theory MS could release a Blu-Ray drive if that format does win. The PS3 could have been a $299/$399 console (maybe lower) but Sony decided to force Blu-Ray on consumers and claim its a great idea to pay extra to get benefits that few people currently can use (and by the time Hi-Def becomes "standard" in homes, Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will have won).
Personally, I'd rather get a Wii and 360 than a PS3 and Blu-ray and that might be a better way of looking at it for most people. The rebate issue aside, you can get a Premium 360 from overstock or dell for about $340. $340 + $250 (Wii) = $590. Cheaper than the high-end PS3, plays *almost* the same games (as of now) and still allows you to choose Blu-ray or HD-DVD (or use the Xbox Live Marketplace) for hi-def movies.
Now if you want HD-DVD & an Xbox 360 the price comparable to the PS3, but its not required, and I would bet the price of the HD-DVD addon drops faster than the PS3. Likewise, the 360 should drop in price faster than the PS3.
Blu-Ray on the PS3 is simple tying. Everyone flipped out when Microsoft tied Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player by including it with Windows - that was the point of the antitrust trials in the US and Europe. The difference, of course, is that Microsoft has a monopoly in the Desktop OS market. I would love to know if the PS1/PS2 has anywhere near the marketshare that Windows has and see if the outcry would be the same.
I have 2 HDTVs. I don't care about Blu-Ray at $900. Its retarded to say its a no brainer. I don't know that Blu-Ray will win, I don't know that HD-DVD will win, I don't know if Digital Downloads will win (nor do I have a preference at the moment). I do know I don't need to spend $900 or $600 to be the first to watch Talladega Nights or Stealth in 1080p.
Just because Blu-Ray players are $900 and the PS3 is a $600 Blu-Ray player doesn't mean that Blu-Ray is worth either price. Nor does it make it a no-brainer. If someone wants a Blu-Ray player then maybe its a good deal for them. But stop saying that all HDTV owners need a PS3 for Blu-Ray when its obvious that they don't.
Oblivion was the big killer app that Sony hyped? Is there anythig about the PS3 version that makes it better than the PC or 360 version (seriously)?
I would think hyping an exclusive title, like Resistance, would be smarter. If some kid begs his parents for Oblivion for Christmas, his parents can either wait until PS3s are available (if they are available to average consumers by Christmas), or pick up a 360 & Oblivion at the same store, right then, for less. At least if their kid is dying for Resistance, they can't get that on a 360.
when the kids have grown and gone, maybe i'll return to trying to keep up with pc games but that's at least 15 years off. who knows what will be the best platform by then.
By that time, Vista will almost be ready to ship, so just wait a few more months.
...damages against corporate defendant Divineo, Inc., and Canadian resident Frederic Legault. ...damages against corporate defendants Divineo U.K. and Divineo SARL, and French resident Max Louarn.
It sounds like the suit wasn't defended. Plus, ESA won't see a dime unless Divineo corporate assets are in the US (which I would doubt). Legault, Lourn, and Divineo UK are not subject to personal jurisdiction in the US, and any judgment against them most likely won't be enforceble in their home countries. I would guess Legault and Lourn didn't appear in the US to defend the suit. If the above is true, this case has absolutely no precedential value, despite what the ESA claims. Plus its a N.D.Ca decision, so even if it was a fully litigated case, this "precedent" is only be binding in that judicial district.
Unless, of course, you have no interest in Blu-Ray. Then you are paying $600/$500 for a console that could have cost $250(?) without the feature that you don't want. Plus, getting the Blu-Ray player means buying new movies for it, otherwise its a waste, and getting an HDTV to experience the full effect of Blu-Ray, otherwise its a waste. That is unless you aren't going to use it at all in which case I just threw ~$250 out the window.
Make Blu-Ray an optional add-on (I believe I read that no games will be using Blu-Ray), sell the PS3 for $300, and make everyone happy. Or go with the $600 price tag and make me buy something I don't want, can't use without spending more money, and won't be impressive unless I spend even more. Either way.
I just finished a 9 year web development career. Decent pay, crappy sites, crappy companies, crappy hours, crappy offices, crappy management, crappy job security. Did the law school thing. Awesome pay, a good firm, crappy hours, amazing offices, intelligent management, good job security.
I could not imagine going back to work as a developer. I make twice as much as a first year associate in a major firm than I was as a senior developer working on some major web sites. While I probably work longer hours here (though not much longer, to be honest), I am treated much better, in terms of benefits, perks, respect etc. At least where I am (a top 50 NYC law firm), there are no stupid partners who lucked into their positions. The result is that as long as you are good and can get along with others, you will succeed because it is directly in their interest in having smart people working for them. When dealing with miserable middle managers whose lives suck and who seem to just want to be dicks for the hell of it, it doesn't always work out that way. To top it off, the work I do is far more intersting than the upteenth iteration of some crappy flash interface or search engine.
My advice to everyone in web development: get out.
IANAL but I believe that falls under legal precedence, so once a legal decision is made regarding one case, it is applied to all subsequent cases like it.
This is incorrect. Until a decision is rendered by an appellate court for whatever district the trial (lower) court is in, other judges within that district are free to ignore, modify, adopt etc. the others ruling. Even then a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (CA) isn't bind on the 2nd Circuit. Only a Supreme Court decision is binding across the US.
(IAAL but I haven't done much work with software patents)
Either the grandparent is mistaken or confused, and you are correct. Patents are published so that others can use and improve them. You can not use them in commercial products, though. But if it is a valid patent it would be available on the USPTO website, available to researchers to use for research projects.
If the code is copyrighted, then you won't be able to see it unless you sign their forms etc. (assuming the source isn't just floating around online) as you do not need to submit the entire work to the Copyright Office to get a copyright, and even when submitted for registration it is not published online.
That being said, you could develop your own code that performs exactly the same function in exactly the same way and as long as you can prove you had no access to the original (or if the hardware requires constraints that everyone would have to use), then you are in the clear, even if it 'infringes.' Getting a registered copyright costs little more then a stamp - its nothing like a patent. Since they won't release the code to you without a contract, you have a strong case that you didn't have access to it and developed the code on your own. So there is no problem with you developing your own code, or, if it truly is patented, seeing the patent and implementing the code as long as its for research.
Slashdot Mirror
It applies to all companies. The length of time you are required to retain documents before destroying can be different for different companies. Like a poster noted, Sarbanes-Oxley defines a time period for publically listed companies. But other than that (and other industries where regulations prescribe time periods for record retention), the courts have used a "reasonable time period" requirement in the past and most commentators expect that to continue under the new rules, which are, in many ways, a formalization of previous court practice.
This is a bit misleading. Its only "virtual shredding" if you don't keep the records around for a reasonable period (either by statutory requirements or insutry standards) or if you have notice of litigation in which the evidence is relevant, and you continue to shred.
Thats why there is a document retention policy safe harbor in the rules themselves.
FWIW, lawyers, even the "technology experts" don't seem to understand technology as well as someone who came through IT before becoming a lawyer.
(disclaimer: IT guy-turned-lawyer, so I always think I know more than "pure lawyers" when it comes to tech).
Now, right before Christmas, the 360 is selling for $100.00 many places. If it is doing well, the price would stay high until after the first of the year.
Please tell me where. Microcenter has the "best deal" and that requires $100 rebate, $100 voucher for getting opening a credit card, and a $200 voucher for getting Vonage for 2 years. That's ONE place and its Microcenter, not Microsoft, offering the deal. The best you can do is about $340 from Overstock or Dell, though I think those deals are over now. Amazon had its $100 deal for 1000 Core systems - and Amazon's servers were hosed, along with endless bitching about it being a scam on digg. Amazon's server crashed. That just doesn't happen unless demand is there.
But please tell me where I can get a $100 Xbox 360. I would bet 75% of slashdot readers would get one at that price as well.
He was kicked upstairs, offered a window seat - whatever euphamism you like. Its a promotion in name only. He no longer controls the day-to-day operations of Sony's games unit. Its a loss of prestige and power.
Japanese executives are rarely fired for their mistakes as (I am told) the shame of it has led to hari-kari. (I am sure someone with more knowledge of Japanese corporate culture than I could affirm or deny that). So the result is a promotion to a position where you can't do any more damage.
But is it really worth the $200 more than a 360? Its entirely possible that the Blu-Ray feature will be useless in 2 or 3 years. At least with the 360, you have the option of buying the drive, and in theory MS could release a Blu-Ray drive if that format does win. The PS3 could have been a $299/$399 console (maybe lower) but Sony decided to force Blu-Ray on consumers and claim its a great idea to pay extra to get benefits that few people currently can use (and by the time Hi-Def becomes "standard" in homes, Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will have won).
Personally, I'd rather get a Wii and 360 than a PS3 and Blu-ray and that might be a better way of looking at it for most people. The rebate issue aside, you can get a Premium 360 from overstock or dell for about $340. $340 + $250 (Wii) = $590. Cheaper than the high-end PS3, plays *almost* the same games (as of now) and still allows you to choose Blu-ray or HD-DVD (or use the Xbox Live Marketplace) for hi-def movies.
Now if you want HD-DVD & an Xbox 360 the price comparable to the PS3, but its not required, and I would bet the price of the HD-DVD addon drops faster than the PS3. Likewise, the 360 should drop in price faster than the PS3.
Blu-Ray on the PS3 is simple tying. Everyone flipped out when Microsoft tied Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player by including it with Windows - that was the point of the antitrust trials in the US and Europe. The difference, of course, is that Microsoft has a monopoly in the Desktop OS market. I would love to know if the PS1/PS2 has anywhere near the marketshare that Windows has and see if the outcry would be the same.
I have 2 HDTVs. I don't care about Blu-Ray at $900. Its retarded to say its a no brainer. I don't know that Blu-Ray will win, I don't know that HD-DVD will win, I don't know if Digital Downloads will win (nor do I have a preference at the moment). I do know I don't need to spend $900 or $600 to be the first to watch Talladega Nights or Stealth in 1080p.
Just because Blu-Ray players are $900 and the PS3 is a $600 Blu-Ray player doesn't mean that Blu-Ray is worth either price. Nor does it make it a no-brainer. If someone wants a Blu-Ray player then maybe its a good deal for them. But stop saying that all HDTV owners need a PS3 for Blu-Ray when its obvious that they don't.
You (and your friends) seem to be in the minorty.
Fastest Selling 360 Game
#3 Most Popular Game
9.4/10
9.6/10
that doesn't make it right.
That might be because the OS is NOT OUT YET
Sure it is. Maybe you can't buy it yet, but its out.
Oblivion was the big killer app that Sony hyped? Is there anythig about the PS3 version that makes it better than the PC or 360 version (seriously)?
I would think hyping an exclusive title, like Resistance, would be smarter. If some kid begs his parents for Oblivion for Christmas, his parents can either wait until PS3s are available (if they are available to average consumers by Christmas), or pick up a 360 & Oblivion at the same store, right then, for less. At least if their kid is dying for Resistance, they can't get that on a 360.
when the kids have grown and gone, maybe i'll return to trying to keep up with pc games but that's at least 15 years off. who knows what will be the best platform by then.
By that time, Vista will almost be ready to ship, so just wait a few more months.
idiot
You do not talk about Usenet.
...damages against corporate defendant Divineo, Inc., and Canadian resident Frederic Legault.
...damages against corporate defendants Divineo U.K. and Divineo SARL, and French resident Max Louarn.
It sounds like the suit wasn't defended. Plus, ESA won't see a dime unless Divineo corporate assets are in the US (which I would doubt). Legault, Lourn, and Divineo UK are not subject to personal jurisdiction in the US, and any judgment against them most likely won't be enforceble in their home countries. I would guess Legault and Lourn didn't appear in the US to defend the suit. If the above is true, this case has absolutely no precedential value, despite what the ESA claims. Plus its a N.D.Ca decision, so even if it was a fully litigated case, this "precedent" is only be binding in that judicial district.
Unless, of course, you have no interest in Blu-Ray. Then you are paying $600/$500 for a console that could have cost $250(?) without the feature that you don't want. Plus, getting the Blu-Ray player means buying new movies for it, otherwise its a waste, and getting an HDTV to experience the full effect of Blu-Ray, otherwise its a waste. That is unless you aren't going to use it at all in which case I just threw ~$250 out the window.
Make Blu-Ray an optional add-on (I believe I read that no games will be using Blu-Ray), sell the PS3 for $300, and make everyone happy. Or go with the $600 price tag and make me buy something I don't want, can't use without spending more money, and won't be impressive unless I spend even more. Either way.
Ted Bundy was polite and charming too.
I just finished a 9 year web development career. Decent pay, crappy sites, crappy companies, crappy hours, crappy offices, crappy management, crappy job security. Did the law school thing. Awesome pay, a good firm, crappy hours, amazing offices, intelligent management, good job security.
I could not imagine going back to work as a developer. I make twice as much as a first year associate in a major firm than I was as a senior developer working on some major web sites. While I probably work longer hours here (though not much longer, to be honest), I am treated much better, in terms of benefits, perks, respect etc. At least where I am (a top 50 NYC law firm), there are no stupid partners who lucked into their positions. The result is that as long as you are good and can get along with others, you will succeed because it is directly in their interest in having smart people working for them. When dealing with miserable middle managers whose lives suck and who seem to just want to be dicks for the hell of it, it doesn't always work out that way. To top it off, the work I do is far more intersting than the upteenth iteration of some crappy flash interface or search engine.
My advice to everyone in web development: get out.
Yeah, because Black and White was so good the first time.
Here, we are more concerned with opinions, facts, and discourse.
When did this happen????
IANAL but I believe that falls under legal precedence, so once a legal decision is made regarding one case, it is applied to all subsequent cases like it.
This is incorrect. Until a decision is rendered by an appellate court for whatever district the trial (lower) court is in, other judges within that district are free to ignore, modify, adopt etc. the others ruling. Even then a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (CA) isn't bind on the 2nd Circuit. Only a Supreme Court decision is binding across the US.
(IAAL but I haven't done much work with software patents)
Either the grandparent is mistaken or confused, and you are correct. Patents are published so that others can use and improve them. You can not use them in commercial products, though. But if it is a valid patent it would be available on the USPTO website, available to researchers to use for research projects.
If the code is copyrighted, then you won't be able to see it unless you sign their forms etc. (assuming the source isn't just floating around online) as you do not need to submit the entire work to the Copyright Office to get a copyright, and even when submitted for registration it is not published online.
That being said, you could develop your own code that performs exactly the same function in exactly the same way and as long as you can prove you had no access to the original (or if the hardware requires constraints that everyone would have to use), then you are in the clear, even if it 'infringes.' Getting a registered copyright costs little more then a stamp - its nothing like a patent. Since they won't release the code to you without a contract, you have a strong case that you didn't have access to it and developed the code on your own. So there is no problem with you developing your own code, or, if it truly is patented, seeing the patent and implementing the code as long as its for research.
Or maybe they get their money because they know how to spell.
Any list must begin and end with R.C. Pro-Am.
You'd have a lot of trouble convincing a judge that the Apple enjoys a monopoly on MP3 players and online music stores.
Its like saying Ford has a monopoly on Ford automobiles when there are plenty of competitors.
There is no monopoly without a relevant product market. There is no "iPod" market. There is only an MP3 player market.
Try submitting it again in a few hours. I'm sure it will get posted again.