The banning of the use of dihydrogen monoxide (also known as hydric acid) in the preparation of food would be an excellent admentment to this bill. Yes, I know what dihydrogen monoxide is. In our lab at my previous place of employment we even had a material safety data sheet for it. Check it out here Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division.
And you appear to be a troll. He i a VP for Microsoft and not just an employee. VPs set the direction of a company. Therefore what he says is the direction of Microsoft.
You are out of your bloody mind. You know nothing of the United States of America except what those who hate the USA have filled your head with. As some one said what you apparently want is an Anarchy where you are not constrained nor responsible. The fact is that all Anarchies eventually become Totalitarian Dictatorships because people desire some degree of order.
BTW, while John Lennon was an okay musician; he was a political and social IDIOT.
ABC/CBS/NBC/AP/etc.,etc. traffic in lies, propaganda and demagoguery much worse than Fox News. As a matter of fact the mainstream media (or lamestream media as it should rightly be called) are just mouth pieces for the Liberals. They make up things such as the CBS Bush documents which were made with MS Word. They report false hoods and call them truth. They report only half of the facts and then turn the article into an editorial for their blatantly pro-Leftist views. Oh, and they think they are smarter than the majority of idiots that post to/.
So for all of you truthers, Socialist, and others who inhabit/. -- GET STUFFED!!
As one poster to this comment noted, if it isn't copyrighted in your jurisdiction then singing "Happy Birthday" is fine. In much of the English speaking world it has gone out of copyright. Only in the US where its copyright was forced by a court against evidence to the contrary (there are strong indications that the tune and lyrics existed independently and as a song long before the copyright was granted)and essentially extended indefinitly is it against copyright law if done for money.
You are wrong on loaning or giving a book to a friend. Once you purchase a book you are free to do with it as you please other than copying it. You can loan it; you can give it away; you can sell it. All of that is legal.
In some of your statements you try to turn copyright into patent. Not so!
You are spreading FUD on copyright. Are you astroturfing?
Fifteen years ago? Twenty two (22) years ago I was told that we would have fiber-to-the-premesis within a year or two by the Southwestern Bell installer. It hasn't happened in that area yet. When you have a monoply there is no incentive to change.
This has been done in the past and there are people who would like to try this again. Imputed income is money that you never saw but they claim that you received the benefit of. To give an example, there was an attempt in the early 1990's by the US Congress to chrage people for imputed income on their mortgages. If the taxing authority (IRS) determined that your house payment was less than what the going rate for rent in your neighborhood was, they imputed that the difference was income on which you would be taxed. To put numbers to this, if you have $1000 a month house payments and houses in your area lease for $1500 a month you have an imputed income of $500 a month. At the end of the year they tag an additional, imaginary $6000 on your annual income on which they want real money paid for taxes. This idea could be applied to sales/use taxes for goods received.
Now move this to software. If the MSRP of MS Office is $600 (I don't have an exact number) then you are imputed to have earned $600 if you download OpenOffice. Therefore you own sales tax on $600 dollars even though you didn't pay any money. That would be about $50 here in Texas that you owe.
They can dream up about any way to gain tax revenue.
The procedural error in The SCO Group's view is that they were not allowed a jury trial. They have thrown a bunch of other stuff into the application for appeal but that is their main point. If the appeals court overturns Judge Kimballs final rulings and any preliminary rulings it would go back to his court for a jury trial. I don't know if Darl McBride and company are slick enough con-men to pull off fooling a jury but they might. Even in a civil trial, I believe that hersay evidence is inadmissable.
Unfortunately you just described what the Leftist Socialist Liberals would do with such technology.
They would "totally disable" individuals who spoke about religion.
They would zap those individuals who spoke against homsexuality.
If a person were offended by or took action against their spouse for extra-marital sex they would be "totally disabled".
They would force abortion on their opponents so that their oppnents would declince in number to total extinction.
Quoting you "And off course we can disable everybody's arm that does attempt to vote the wrong party at the ballot box." Then we dont have to worry about using clean voting machines that can't be tampered with becasue we won't need voting machinces since the government will know what the people want and need. And the big thing the people don't need is to interfere with the Leftist Socialist Liberals' "good" govenment.
Liberal Socialist like you have no concept of reality anyway. You are the worst at trying to rearrange reality to fit what you want. If it doesn't fit your outcome then it must not be true.
I bet you believe the US Government was behind the 9/11 attacks.
The problem is that in the last 20 or 30 years atheist have tried to make the BSA athiest. Athiest, now, are generally the most adamant about making other people belive like them than the reverse (Dawkins, Brown, etc). Some of the most outspoken atheist have made statements to the effect that religon should be forced out of existance by the government through a muliplicty of methods (taxation, banning signage, criminalizing religious speech). They especially disdain Christians of any sort. It is the atheist right to not belive in any god(s) but it is not their right to remove all religion from the public space.
I think you've probably hit the nail on the head in one way. This law would show that these tools are needed for good reasons and then another law would be passed to certify people to develop and/or use these tools. This would require very indepth background checks maybe even government security clearances therefore resticting the use of these tools to the select few who work for large businesses that can afford the tens of thousands of dollars, pounds sterling, euros to have these certifications.
Yep! I've have been involved with this avocation for over 30 years. It has its resemblence to Linux in that way. I've known Amateur Operators both young and old that have bad attitudes. They are the ones you remember because of their negativity. I know many more that don't have those attitudes and try to help others to enjoy Amateur Radio or benifit from it.
Law applies in civil lawsuits. I have been on civil law juries and know. The level of proof is lesser and the punishments do not include jail time.
A judge will dismiss a lawsuit if there is no applicable law broken. For those that abuse the legal system by repeatedly filing such lawsuits, judges can make a finding against them (i.e. a legal ruling) that will stop their abuse of the system.
You are excerpting the excerpts. The details of the transfer of assets were in an attachment to the APA. Copyrights in general were specifically excluded from the sale. Caldera/tSCOg requested the transfer of the copyrights in 2003. Therefore by their own actions Caldera/tSCOg admitted that they did not have the copyrights.
Using your logic, digital media shouldn't be covered by law since it isn't mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. From what I can discern, interpretation of past judicial findings on new innovations (here new technology) is to look at the new innovation as equivilant to older usages. For example, government has argued that your thoughs contained in e-mails did not meet the qualification of the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as applied to mail; therefore, they could intercept your e-amil without a warrant. The courts have turned against this.
The men who wrote the U.S. Constitution were very broad in their words to provide for change. They tried not to be overly specific. As said earlier some people what to eat their cake and have it too.
Really us folks in the country shuda just ride our horses into town to get the sheriff and the mail. We shuda take our buckboard in on Saturday to do our shoppin at the wounderful Wal-Mart.
Brriiiittt (sound of phonograph needle scrathing record or finger nails on a blackboard).
All that I see here in the replies is a bunch of useless condemnation of living in the country by most probably underaged semi-illiterate urbanites who think that Starbuck's coffee is a necessity and not a luxury. You probably don't even know where your food comes from; it just magically appears in the Whole Foods Market near you. And one other thing, if you call the Internet entertainment, then you are probably a telecom astroturfer!!
Now that I have gotten my rant off of my chest, let me try to be reasonable. Broadband was not a necessity 10 years ago, however it now is a utility. Unfortunately the American public has been ripped off for the past decade by a combination of congress and the telecom companies when it comes to the introduction of broadband in rural areas. VoIP is rapidly replacing POTS (Plain old telephone service). More and more business is being done over the Internet including providing support for farming and ranching (I recently saved about 30% delivered cost on a part for a farm implement by buying on the internet).
As to the parent post's -- So far, all I hear is "I want it faster!" --, when one has to deal with the huge file size of current webpages over dial-up, then even minimal broadband is a necessity. Before I got wireless broadband, AT&T's copper gave me a whopping 21k bps data rate. It often took 1 to 3 minutes to download minimal pages from the Internet. I don't have all day to wait, I've got work to do.
Per Milton Friedman, companies have no morals (and I would extend that to the people that run them). However back to the point. If GE or GM or whomever can get the Government to make a law that you can only use their filter or bolt or whichever part then you are in a bad position. These companies then can say it is not their "fault" but the Government said it is so, a very circular argument.
Along this line, I believe that the auto manufateurers one time attempted to get a law passed to make it illegal for person to work on their particular brand(s) unless trained by them. The reasoning they tried to push was that environmental and safety considerations could not be met. The rest of the story would be that you could only get trained if you worked for them or their authorized dealers and you would have to sign an agreement not use this information elsewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
The banning of the use of dihydrogen monoxide (also known as hydric acid) in the preparation of food would be an excellent admentment to this bill. Yes, I know what dihydrogen monoxide is. In our lab at my previous place of employment we even had a material safety data sheet for it. Check it out here Dihydrogen Monoxide Research Division.
And you appear to be a troll. He i a VP for Microsoft and not just an employee. VPs set the direction of a company. Therefore what he says is the direction of Microsoft.
You are out of your bloody mind. You know nothing of the United States of America except what those who hate the USA have filled your head with. As some one said what you apparently want is an Anarchy where you are not constrained nor responsible. The fact is that all Anarchies eventually become Totalitarian Dictatorships because people desire some degree of order.
BTW, while John Lennon was an okay musician; he was a political and social IDIOT.
ABC/CBS/NBC/AP/etc.,etc. traffic in lies, propaganda and demagoguery much worse than Fox News. As a matter of fact the mainstream media (or lamestream media as it should rightly be called) are just mouth pieces for the Liberals. They make up things such as the CBS Bush documents which were made with MS Word. They report false hoods and call them truth. They report only half of the facts and then turn the article into an editorial for their blatantly pro-Leftist views. Oh, and they think they are smarter than the majority of idiots that post to /.
So for all of you truthers, Socialist, and others who inhabit /. -- GET STUFFED!!
Yeah and the whole world should be just like him!
You made an excellent example of why the second sample is better. The first is nearly impossible to read.
As one poster to this comment noted, if it isn't copyrighted in your jurisdiction then singing "Happy Birthday" is fine. In much of the English speaking world it has gone out of copyright. Only in the US where its copyright was forced by a court against evidence to the contrary (there are strong indications that the tune and lyrics existed independently and as a song long before the copyright was granted)and essentially extended indefinitly is it against copyright law if done for money.
You are wrong on loaning or giving a book to a friend. Once you purchase a book you are free to do with it as you please other than copying it. You can loan it; you can give it away; you can sell it. All of that is legal.
In some of your statements you try to turn copyright into patent. Not so!
You are spreading FUD on copyright. Are you astroturfing?
Love the shill, hate the behavior.
Fifteen years ago? Twenty two (22) years ago I was told that we would have fiber-to-the-premesis within a year or two by the Southwestern Bell installer. It hasn't happened in that area yet. When you have a monoply there is no incentive to change.
This has been done in the past and there are people who would like to try this again. Imputed income is money that you never saw but they claim that you received the benefit of. To give an example, there was an attempt in the early 1990's by the US Congress to chrage people for imputed income on their mortgages. If the taxing authority (IRS) determined that your house payment was less than what the going rate for rent in your neighborhood was, they imputed that the difference was income on which you would be taxed. To put numbers to this, if you have $1000 a month house payments and houses in your area lease for $1500 a month you have an imputed income of $500 a month. At the end of the year they tag an additional, imaginary $6000 on your annual income on which they want real money paid for taxes. This idea could be applied to sales/use taxes for goods received.
Now move this to software. If the MSRP of MS Office is $600 (I don't have an exact number) then you are imputed to have earned $600 if you download OpenOffice. Therefore you own sales tax on $600 dollars even though you didn't pay any money. That would be about $50 here in Texas that you owe.
They can dream up about any way to gain tax revenue.
The procedural error in The SCO Group's view is that they were not allowed a jury trial. They have thrown a bunch of other stuff into the application for appeal but that is their main point. If the appeals court overturns Judge Kimballs final rulings and any preliminary rulings it would go back to his court for a jury trial. I don't know if Darl McBride and company are slick enough con-men to pull off fooling a jury but they might. Even in a civil trial, I believe that hersay evidence is inadmissable.
You both sound as if the highlights of literature to you are the letters in the front of a Penthouse magazine. Anything else is just drivel.
1) There is a 250 Kilometer (155.3 mile) limit on Citizen Band Communications.(Title 47, Part 95.413(9))
2) Linears have never been leagal on CB.
3) Until 1958, the 11 Meter Band was assigned to Amateur Radio use. Eleven Meters was taken away for Class D Citizens Band.
Unfortunately you just described what the Leftist Socialist Liberals would do with such technology.
They would "totally disable" individuals who spoke about religion.
They would zap those individuals who spoke against homsexuality.
If a person were offended by or took action against their spouse for extra-marital sex they would be "totally disabled".
They would force abortion on their opponents so that their oppnents would declince in number to total extinction.
Quoting you "And off course we can disable everybody's arm that does attempt to vote the wrong party at the ballot box." Then we dont have to worry about using clean voting machines that can't be tampered with becasue we won't need voting machinces since the government will know what the people want and need. And the big thing the people don't need is to interfere with the Leftist Socialist Liberals' "good" govenment.
Liberal Socialist like you have no concept of reality anyway. You are the worst at trying to rearrange reality to fit what you want. If it doesn't fit your outcome then it must not be true.
I bet you believe the US Government was behind the 9/11 attacks.
The problem is that in the last 20 or 30 years atheist have tried to make the BSA athiest. Athiest, now, are generally the most adamant about making other people belive like them than the reverse (Dawkins, Brown, etc). Some of the most outspoken atheist have made statements to the effect that religon should be forced out of existance by the government through a muliplicty of methods (taxation, banning signage, criminalizing religious speech). They especially disdain Christians of any sort. It is the atheist right to not belive in any god(s) but it is not their right to remove all religion from the public space.
A DoS violates Federal Criminal Law. Copyright is generally a Civil statute and is prosecuted via lawsuits.
What MediaDefender did is therefore being investigated under criminal law.
I think you've probably hit the nail on the head in one way. This law would show that these tools are needed for good reasons and then another law would be passed to certify people to develop and/or use these tools. This would require very indepth background checks maybe even government security clearances therefore resticting the use of these tools to the select few who work for large businesses that can afford the tens of thousands of dollars, pounds sterling, euros to have these certifications.
Yep! I've have been involved with this avocation for over 30 years. It has its resemblence to Linux in that way. I've known Amateur Operators both young and old that have bad attitudes. They are the ones you remember because of their negativity. I know many more that don't have those attitudes and try to help others to enjoy Amateur Radio or benifit from it.
WD5HHH (you may look me up on QRZ.com)
Law applies in civil lawsuits. I have been on civil law juries and know. The level of proof is lesser and the punishments do not include jail time.
A judge will dismiss a lawsuit if there is no applicable law broken. For those that abuse the legal system by repeatedly filing such lawsuits, judges can make a finding against them (i.e. a legal ruling) that will stop their abuse of the system.
You are excerpting the excerpts. The details of the transfer of assets were in an attachment to the APA. Copyrights in general were specifically excluded from the sale. Caldera/tSCOg requested the transfer of the copyrights in 2003. Therefore by their own actions Caldera/tSCOg admitted that they did not have the copyrights.
Using your logic, digital media shouldn't be covered by law since it isn't mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. From what I can discern, interpretation of past judicial findings on new innovations (here new technology) is to look at the new innovation as equivilant to older usages. For example, government has argued that your thoughs contained in e-mails did not meet the qualification of the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as applied to mail; therefore, they could intercept your e-amil without a warrant. The courts have turned against this.
The men who wrote the U.S. Constitution were very broad in their words to provide for change. They tried not to be overly specific. As said earlier some people what to eat their cake and have it too.
Really us folks in the country shuda just ride our horses into town to get the sheriff and the mail. We shuda take our buckboard in on Saturday to do our shoppin at the wounderful Wal-Mart.
Brriiiittt (sound of phonograph needle scrathing record or finger nails on a blackboard).
All that I see here in the replies is a bunch of useless condemnation of living in the country by most probably underaged semi-illiterate urbanites who think that Starbuck's coffee is a necessity and not a luxury. You probably don't even know where your food comes from; it just magically appears in the Whole Foods Market near you. And one other thing, if you call the Internet entertainment, then you are probably a telecom astroturfer!!
Now that I have gotten my rant off of my chest, let me try to be reasonable. Broadband was not a necessity 10 years ago, however it now is a utility. Unfortunately the American public has been ripped off for the past decade by a combination of congress and the telecom companies when it comes to the introduction of broadband in rural areas. VoIP is rapidly replacing POTS (Plain old telephone service). More and more business is being done over the Internet including providing support for farming and ranching (I recently saved about 30% delivered cost on a part for a farm implement by buying on the internet).
As to the parent post's -- So far, all I hear is "I want it faster!" --, when one has to deal with the huge file size of current webpages over dial-up, then even minimal broadband is a necessity. Before I got wireless broadband, AT&T's copper gave me a whopping 21k bps data rate. It often took 1 to 3 minutes to download minimal pages from the Internet. I don't have all day to wait, I've got work to do.
This has been a good lunch break.
Per Milton Friedman, companies have no morals (and I would extend that to the people that run them). However back to the point. If GE or GM or whomever can get the Government to make a law that you can only use their filter or bolt or whichever part then you are in a bad position. These companies then can say it is not their "fault" but the Government said it is so, a very circular argument.
Along this line, I believe that the auto manufateurers one time attempted to get a law passed to make it illegal for person to work on their particular brand(s) unless trained by them. The reasoning they tried to push was that environmental and safety considerations could not be met. The rest of the story would be that you could only get trained if you worked for them or their authorized dealers and you would have to sign an agreement not use this information elsewhere.
How much were you paid by MS to astoturf?