There are no "Copyright owners" in France, there are only the original Authors. Everyone else is just a licensee of the authors, even if he might be an exclusive one.
There's a broad variety of reasons to own guns. Some people own guns because the police are not there to protect you and in some areas you NEED protection. Some people own guns because no government fears an unarmed populace, and government only works in the interest of the people when the government fears the people and not the other way around.
Somehow you are contradicting yourself. Your government is unable to work for you and doesn't provide protection, and because you have a weapon the goverment works for your interest now?
There is an easy way to force your government to work in your interest: Don't reelect the jerks who are not working in your interest. Hold your government responsible for your wellbeing. If you expect your government to fail anyway, you will get a government, that fails all the way.
I doubt a government behaves well because it fears the weapons of the populace it governs. The last government that feared the populace I was living under was thrown out by a completely unarmed uprising, and this government had armed about 15% of the male populace between 18 and 60 to protect itself, while keeping all the other people unarmed. It wasn't weapons which overthrew the goverment. It was a populace unimpressed by the government's display of weapons that did it.
Weapons are a very ineffective way to make threats to your government. Your goverment will always have the better weapons and the better organized troups. Threatening it with weapons just makes you a prime and outstanding target.
Some people own guns because to them it is an economically advantageous way to acquire food. All of these are valid reasons in my book.
Most of them are fairytales in my book. My life experience contradicts them. As a scientific hypothesis they didn't work out.
Another famous case once lead to the "Audi" brand.
The founder of Audi, August Horch, was voted out of the board of his former company, Horch of Zwickau. So for his next company, he translated his name from German (Horch! = Hear!) to Latin, and thus Audi was born.
The shoe companies are (in Sweden) not the entities to complain or file suits. It's the original photographers, whose Author's Right might be infringend upon.
Because Sweden is a signator of the Berne Convention, where every new use is subject to the agreement of the original author. So even if the shoe company has paid the photographer for the picture, they paid him only to use it for the agreed upon purposes, and if the agreement doesn't contain "inclusion into a forensic database", then the shoe company is not allowed to sign a letter of agreement with the police for the inclusion of the picture into the police's database.
As I said: They should put on the bottle what they were doing, as the Hungarians do it. Is it only the dry berries (Eszencia)? Is it base wine, fermented for three years mixed with dry berries in some predefined relations (Aszú)? Is it all berries as harvested together without a previous selection (szamorodni)? Is it already pressed out berries from an Aszú preparation, filled up with must and then resting for 24 to 48 hrs (Forditás)?
There is not a single "Tokay" method which would justify calling a wine just "Tokay". There are several of them, and each wine from Tokay is clearly labelled which method was used to ferment it. Putting simply "Tokay" on a bottle proves that either the vineyard is not knowing anything about Tokay wine, or that they are selling to people who don't know either, but are willing to spend money on the famous name.
Or to clarify: If an australian vineyard is fermenting a "Tokay" wine, they should clearly label what they are doing.
Are they fermenting an Aszú? An Aszúeszencia? A Forditás?
Tokay is really only the place where the wine was fermented, it tells you nothing about the actual type of wine you are drinking. Labelling something "Tokay" is thus misleading, if it doesn't come from Tokay. That would be like a chinese toymaker selling stuff under the label "Made in U.S.".
Oops... Slashdot is eating non-ASCII-letters. The grape is called Hárslevelü, with the ü having something that looks like two accents and not the umlaut-dots.
The australians are free to name their wine after the grapes. The grapes used to ferment the Tokay wine are Furmint, Muscat lunel, Zéta and Hárslevel. Of them, Furmint and Hárslevel are authochtone, that means only cultivated in Hungary and in the south of Slovakia.
If an australian vineyard is cultivating e.g. Furmint grapes and fermenting them into wine, they are free to call them Furmint, and even Furmint szamorodni (meaning "Furmint as it grows itself", made from both dry and non dry berries). But for what reason they should call it "Tokay"? There is nothing in it that justifies the name. A Tokay wine is not called "Tokay" itself, it is called "Tokay Furmint szamorodni" for instance or "Tokay Eszencia", if they are made from dry berries only.
With the NASA not being the proprietor of the Moon, and other countries having the Moon in their coat of arms since ages and thus can point out to claims for the Moon older than NASA or the U.S., it will be difficult to argue that anyone in the U.S. has any legal standings when it comes to the question of ownership of any part of the Moon.
It's not just about law enforcement. India for example forbids encrypted phone calls completely. If the warning was turned on, phones in India would complain about non encrypted connections with every reconnect to an antenna.
I don't get you. If I have to travel a distance of 15 km each day, and I know my car uses 6 litres per 100 km, I know that it uses 0,06 l/km * 15 km = 0,9 litres for the trip, which I can do in my head... a simple multiplication. Where's your problem with that?
Which would be (rather bad) German and could be translated as "wet meadow shark" (even though the term "Ries" for a wet, grassy plain is not often used in contemporary German).
Slashdot Mirror
You know that this slogan was in fact not a slogan of the French Revolution, but retroactively attached to it?
There are no "Copyright owners" in France, there are only the original Authors. Everyone else is just a licensee of the authors, even if he might be an exclusive one.
They did already, they send the notices handwritten.
To complete this: 350 km/h is the regular speed for the Velaro E on the relation Madrid-Barcelona.
And even this is not a record, as the spanish Velaro E has made 404 km/h in regular operation.
But the Shinkansen made 443 km/h in diverse tests, still about 25 km/h faster than the chinese train.
... in what category this record is set, as the speed record for electrical trains on rail/wheel was set on Apr 3 2007 at 574,8 km/h (TGV-POS 4402).
There's a broad variety of reasons to own guns. Some people own guns because the police are not there to protect you and in some areas you NEED protection. Some people own guns because no government fears an unarmed populace, and government only works in the interest of the people when the government fears the people and not the other way around.
Somehow you are contradicting yourself. Your government is unable to work for you and doesn't provide protection, and because you have a weapon the goverment works for your interest now?
There is an easy way to force your government to work in your interest: Don't reelect the jerks who are not working in your interest. Hold your government responsible for your wellbeing. If you expect your government to fail anyway, you will get a government, that fails all the way.
I doubt a government behaves well because it fears the weapons of the populace it governs. The last government that feared the populace I was living under was thrown out by a completely unarmed uprising, and this government had armed about 15% of the male populace between 18 and 60 to protect itself, while keeping all the other people unarmed. It wasn't weapons which overthrew the goverment. It was a populace unimpressed by the government's display of weapons that did it.
Weapons are a very ineffective way to make threats to your government. Your goverment will always have the better weapons and the better organized troups. Threatening it with weapons just makes you a prime and outstanding target.
Some people own guns because to them it is an economically advantageous way to acquire food. All of these are valid reasons in my book.
Most of them are fairytales in my book. My life experience contradicts them. As a scientific hypothesis they didn't work out.
Another famous case once lead to the "Audi" brand.
The founder of Audi, August Horch, was voted out of the board of his former company, Horch of Zwickau. So for his next company, he translated his name from German (Horch! = Hear!) to Latin, and thus Audi was born.
The shoe companies are (in Sweden) not the entities to complain or file suits. It's the original photographers, whose Author's Right might be infringend upon.
Because Sweden is a signator of the Berne Convention, where every new use is subject to the agreement of the original author. So even if the shoe company has paid the photographer for the picture, they paid him only to use it for the agreed upon purposes, and if the agreement doesn't contain "inclusion into a forensic database", then the shoe company is not allowed to sign a letter of agreement with the police for the inclusion of the picture into the police's database.
It's that simple.
As I said: They should put on the bottle what they were doing, as the Hungarians do it. Is it only the dry berries (Eszencia)? Is it base wine, fermented for three years mixed with dry berries in some predefined relations (Aszú)? Is it all berries as harvested together without a previous selection (szamorodni)? Is it already pressed out berries from an Aszú preparation, filled up with must and then resting for 24 to 48 hrs (Forditás)?
There is not a single "Tokay" method which would justify calling a wine just "Tokay". There are several of them, and each wine from Tokay is clearly labelled which method was used to ferment it. Putting simply "Tokay" on a bottle proves that either the vineyard is not knowing anything about Tokay wine, or that they are selling to people who don't know either, but are willing to spend money on the famous name.
Or to clarify: If an australian vineyard is fermenting a "Tokay" wine, they should clearly label what they are doing.
Are they fermenting an Aszú? An Aszúeszencia? A Forditás?
Tokay is really only the place where the wine was fermented, it tells you nothing about the actual type of wine you are drinking. Labelling something "Tokay" is thus misleading, if it doesn't come from Tokay. That would be like a chinese toymaker selling stuff under the label "Made in U.S.".
Oops... Slashdot is eating non-ASCII-letters. The grape is called Hárslevelü, with the ü having something that looks like two accents and not the umlaut-dots.
The australians are free to name their wine after the grapes. The grapes used to ferment the Tokay wine are Furmint, Muscat lunel, Zéta and Hárslevel. Of them, Furmint and Hárslevel are authochtone, that means only cultivated in Hungary and in the south of Slovakia.
If an australian vineyard is cultivating e.g. Furmint grapes and fermenting them into wine, they are free to call them Furmint, and even Furmint szamorodni (meaning "Furmint as it grows itself", made from both dry and non dry berries). But for what reason they should call it "Tokay"? There is nothing in it that justifies the name. A Tokay wine is not called "Tokay" itself, it is called "Tokay Furmint szamorodni" for instance or "Tokay Eszencia", if they are made from dry berries only.
I like how your translation preserves the bad grammar of the original.
Oh yes.
It is the continent north of Africa and west of the Ural mountains.
Would winning against Cisco actually help?
With the NASA not being the proprietor of the Moon, and other countries having the Moon in their coat of arms since ages and thus can point out to claims for the Moon older than NASA or the U.S., it will be difficult to argue that anyone in the U.S. has any legal standings when it comes to the question of ownership of any part of the Moon.
No, it's not. Jacobson vs. Katzer was previously decided.
And outside the U.S. the GPL has been hold up several times already.
It's not just about law enforcement. India for example forbids encrypted phone calls completely. If the warning was turned on, phones in India would complain about non encrypted connections with every reconnect to an antenna.
I don't get you. If I have to travel a distance of 15 km each day, and I know my car uses 6 litres per 100 km, I know that it uses 0,06 l/km * 15 km = 0,9 litres for the trip, which I can do in my head... a simple multiplication. Where's your problem with that?
We are talking switch here:
monitor session 1 source interface Gi0/1 - 23
monitor session 1 destination interface Gi0/24
What? Marsha never was in Fucking (Austria) and in Petting (Germany)?
Which would be (rather bad) German and could be translated as "wet meadow shark" (even though the term "Ries" for a wet, grassy plain is not often used in contemporary German).