According to the Supreme Court Decision Pennsylvania Rail Co. vs. Jones:
A large amount of evidence was put in on behalf of the plaintiffs for the purpose of sustaining their allegations of negligence on the part of employees of one or more of the defendant companies, and to show that the roads owned by those companies were operated in connection with each other on joint account, or that there was such community of interests among them as would make all of them liable for the acts of agents or employees of one.
I think the domain registrars should take note. Legal precedents like this have been around for over a century for a reason.
No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
If that's not an obstacle to personal agendas throughout Congress, I don't know what is.
Food for thought - below is an excerpt from the Tariff Act of 1930, Section 337, which can be viewed in its entirety at this site.
2.2 Under Section 337 of the United States Tariff Act of 1930 unfair methods of competition and unfair acts in the importation of articles into the United States, or in their sale, are unlawful if these unfair acts or methods of competition have the effect or tendency to (i) destroy or to substantially injure an industry efficiently and economically operated in the United States, (ii) prevent the establishment of such an industry, or (iii) restrain or monopolise trade and commerce in the United States.
Absolutely correct. If I own a domain, it's like my own little plot in cyberspace. It's my virtual home.
Now some corporate entity is going to take that away, put someone else up on that domain? There is no justification for this. The Third Amendment states:
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Now I know Netsol is not the U.S. government. I do not consent to have my domains compromised by two-bit enterprises. There will be no quartering of cybersquatters on my virtual real estate. We have to stand up for our rights if we want to keep them!
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
Forcing me to reveal my identity to commercial sites outside of U.S. soil is utter bullshit. This is like the WTO telling the U.S. its environmental laws have to go in the name of good trade. That's right, trample the constitution, make way for corporatism!
Excellent point. One should also take into account the 5th amendment to the U.S Constitution. I'll let the amendment speak for itself.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This company can't make you incriminate yourself, plain as day!
I think you'll find the answer here in Article III of the Constitution:
Section. 3
Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Declaration of Independence "holds these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." Technocracy by hackers is not in good faith as regards the intents of our Founding Fathers, as it elevates hackers above the status of equality afforded by U.S. law.
The U.S. is a republican democracy, not a hacker oligarchy!
If you looked at the facts, you'd have noticed that Napster has violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. Maybe you should think before you support such fragrant violators of U.S. law.
Or are you saying that I really do own a stake in the Internet, and have every right to walk into the offices of my service provider and tell them how to run their business?
Of course not. That violates Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution, not to mention the legal precedent set by Marbury vs. Madison.
This couldn't have more truth in it. If you look at the 10th Amendment, it clearly states:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The internet belongs to the people, not the federal government.
Remember, the INTENT of piracy laws is to allow people to protect the product of their hard work and not have some 3rd party make cheap knockoffs of it and undercut the author into bankruptcy.
But what about my rights as a citizen? The Bill of Rights states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This means that companies can't go through my personal belongings and steal things that are rightfully mine.
I think YOU are missing the INTENT of piracy laws. Piracy laws deal with piracy. Piracy is defined as "an act of robbery on the high seas." I really don't see the connection or application of piracy laws to the issues you have presented.
Just because they aren't eligible doesn't make it right. This is a violation of my 25th amendment rights! We don't live in the Communist States of America! I demand restitution! How many times will Danielle Steele's works be passed over for best screenplay before the Academy pulls its collective head out of its ass? I hope the Academy will seriously reconsider their blatant acts of censorship.
Slashdot Mirror
A large amount of evidence was put in on behalf of the plaintiffs for the purpose of sustaining their allegations of negligence on the part of employees of one or more of the defendant companies, and to show that the roads owned by those companies were operated in connection with each other on joint account, or that there was such community of interests among them as would make all of them liable for the acts of agents or employees of one.
I think the domain registrars should take note. Legal precedents like this have been around for over a century for a reason.
... we really owe thanks to the 27th Amendment:
No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
If that's not an obstacle to personal agendas throughout Congress, I don't know what is.
Food for thought - below is an excerpt from the Tariff Act of 1930, Section 337, which can be viewed in its entirety at this site.
2.2 Under Section 337 of the United States Tariff Act of 1930 unfair methods of competition and unfair acts in the importation of articles into the United States, or in their sale, are unlawful if these unfair acts or methods of competition have the effect or tendency to (i) destroy or to substantially injure an industry efficiently and economically operated in the United States, (ii) prevent the establishment of such an industry, or (iii) restrain or monopolise trade and commerce in the United States.
Maybe someone should stick it to the oil cartels.
Absolutely correct. If I own a domain, it's like my own little plot in cyberspace. It's my virtual home.
Now some corporate entity is going to take that away, put someone else up on that domain? There is no justification for this. The Third Amendment states:
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Now I know Netsol is not the U.S. government. I do not consent to have my domains compromised by two-bit enterprises. There will be no quartering of cybersquatters on my virtual real estate. We have to stand up for our rights if we want to keep them!
... is violating my 11th Amendment rights.
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
Forcing me to reveal my identity to commercial sites outside of U.S. soil is utter bullshit. This is like the WTO telling the U.S. its environmental laws have to go in the name of good trade. That's right, trample the constitution, make way for corporatism!
Excellent point. One should also take into account the 5th amendment to the U.S Constitution. I'll let the amendment speak for itself.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This company can't make you incriminate yourself, plain as day!
I think you'll find the answer here in Article III of the Constitution:
Section. 3
Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
You're damn right.
When a company smells, I consider that a violation of my 8th Amendment rights.
The Declaration of Independence "holds these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." Technocracy by hackers is not in good faith as regards the intents of our Founding Fathers, as it elevates hackers above the status of equality afforded by U.S. law.
The U.S. is a republican democracy, not a hacker oligarchy!
If you looked at the facts, you'd have noticed that Napster has violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. Maybe you should think before you support such fragrant violators of U.S. law.
Or are you saying that I really do own a stake in the Internet, and have every right to walk into the offices of my service provider and tell them how to run their business?
Of course not. That violates Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution, not to mention the legal precedent set by Marbury vs. Madison.
It's sad that you have no brain to fill.
By the power vested in me by the United States Constitution, I declare you a fucking moron.
The true owner was us -- the hackers.
This couldn't have more truth in it. If you look at the 10th Amendment, it clearly states:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The internet belongs to the people, not the federal government.
But what about my rights as a citizen? The Bill of Rights states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This means that companies can't go through my personal belongings and steal things that are rightfully mine.
I think YOU are missing the INTENT of piracy laws. Piracy laws deal with piracy. Piracy is defined as "an act of robbery on the high seas." I really don't see the connection or application of piracy laws to the issues you have presented.
------------------
Don't tread on me!
Just because they aren't eligible doesn't make it right. This is a violation of my 25th amendment rights! We don't live in the Communist States of America! I demand restitution! How many times will Danielle Steele's works be passed over for best screenplay before the Academy pulls its collective head out of its ass? I hope the Academy will seriously reconsider their blatant acts of censorship.