Diebold may well believe (or claim to believe) that the memos are their property because the website's they're on say so. If they doscover they were wrong, I could still be sued for libel.
So.. They're not being punished for firing a blogger. They would still be being sued had they not done so.
Secondly, this patent causes problems for others as well. MS can simply exclude what is covered, but the people who actually use their products will be inconvenienced, as will developers of other software.
The only way to insure that this information remains available and something is done about it is to have the information available in as many places as possible so that it is impossible to bury it
Or to get a legal ruling stating that it is in thpublic interest that this information is made public.
Are you providing a mirror?
Nope. Insufficient evidence that they are genuine.
Well, if you don't want to take them on, don't put them up in the first place.
Many of these people have the resources to pay for a lawyer. Many lawyers would object so strogly to such an abuse of the law that they would take the case on pro-bone. If they took it to court, they would have to prove that the memos were genuine, as well as the fact that they were suffering harm by the memos being posted (other than harm done to their reputation), and that it was not in the public interest that this information is released.
Hell, if it came down to it, you could represent yourself. Or start a legal defence fund.
I'm sure the people of Iraq would have loved to vote a new leader when Saddam Hussein was in power, but couldn't.
What makes you think that? Saddam Hussein was standing up against the evil imperialist infodels that he was blaming for all of Iraq's problems. At least, the Iraqi people probably believed that. I reckon Saddam would have won even if the election was fair.
The DMCA is quite clear in its provisions for allowing questionable material to stay up. BlackBoxVoting had no need to roll over in the first place. The simply needed to submit a DMCA counter notice.
Simply send a counter notice stating that the documents do not breach copyright, and put the website back up. This moves the obligation to Diebold to bring suit!
Of course, a lot of software is quite clearly a licence. When you call up MS and ask for licences to install Windows on 100 machines, it's quite clear that you are buying a licence and not a copy of software, as opposed to when you purchase a CD with software on it.
I have to wonder whether it really is a licence when it looks so much like a sale. A piece of paper that the purchaser may or may not have read is probably not a legally binding document. Copyright may well cover making identical jigs. I seriosuly doubt it covers anything made using that jig.
I have my own opinion on this matter. It seems even open source develpers don't understand their development model. Many - possibly the majority - of open source coders are not writing code for purely altruistic reasons. They are writing code because it doesn't do what they want it to do. Since the developer is the customer, the developer has a vested interest in making a good product.
If this happened in Europe, the company that outsourced overseas would be liable. Data protection laws do not allow data to be sent to countries that don't have similarly strong data protection laws.
While the contract should have specified this, the law is also at fault since if patient confidentiality is important enough for legal protection, the law should be complete and prevent this sort of loophole.
the ability to rip digital copies from either medium (directly, over the Internet or via the "audio in" from the radio) is not much different, and doesn't justify the difference in cost per song per listener
True, but most people who want to record music from the radio will do so by tape or minidisk, whereas most people who record from internet radio will record straight to disk. Cassette and MD already have a levy applied to compensate the rightsholders, whereas hard disks do not. Charging the broadcasters goes some way to filling this gap.
Of course, it's a little inconsistent in that people who record from internet radio to minidisk pay twice, and those who record from broadcast radio to hard disk don't pay, but it does make it a little more balanced.
The most significant complaint is that they levy a minimum charge. This has the effect of making it cheaper per listener for large stations than smaller stations. However, this is not a copyright issue, but a monopolies issue.
I'm sorry. The first amendment has been sold to the "Down the river" corporation. Free speech now costs $10 000 000 for a licence to say something freely.
It would probably work, but it's a little complicated. Most people are not going to have the faintest idea how it works. Even most techies don't understand SHA hashes.
You're making it too complicated. Simply have the voter fill in a form with a pen, and put it in a box. A machine counts these bits of paper, logging all the ones it considers to be invalid. Any question about the accuracy, and humans can count them.
I think he was pointing out the contradiction. That they claimed that Windows was not secure, yet used it for the tabulation.
Quite honestly though, this is a load of hot air from both sides. Windows can be made secure, and isn't too bad with the web server, web browser and email client disabled. Any other OS can be made equally insecure.
What's the penalty for ignoring a cease-and-decist anyway? I bet it's not as heavy as a buldozer, but it's the same kinda deal.
I don't think there is one per se. It's simply that they can't claim that you were unaware of any party being injured by posting the memos. Since they're probably going to argue that there is overwhelming public interest in these being posted, and this is greater than Diebold's need for copyright protection.
They can make your life inconvenient. These places are a law unto themselves, and private institutions tend not to be too hot on due process.
The site needs to be offically run by a non-student for administration purposes. Then any challenges under state law can be challenged in a proper legal manner.
And AMD should profit MUCH more from 64 bit than g5:
So you're saying that if the code is recompiled and reoptimised for 64 bit processors, there will be a difference?
Anyway theory's all well and good, but in practice, the differences will be noticeable. Maybe AMD will be faster. Maybe G5. You can't tell for sure until you test them and see which is faster.
It warns people about the price of open source software, and that while the cost should be obvious, some people seem to have failed to take into account.
If people want to use linux, purely to avoid developing their own code, and don't want to give back to the community, then we really don't want them to use it in the first palce, and if they don't want to share their code, then they should know Linux is not for them.
Hang on to your SB16! Seriously, if you just want a 16 bit stereo sample player (and most people do), then they're much better than a newer one of the same spec.
When they were new they were serious bits of kit with the best sound quality available. They couldn't afford to scrimp on components because knocking costs down by $5 would have no noticable effect on a card costing about $150, but would seriously reduce quality. These days they use the cheapest components possible, and really don't care about noise and interference because they're cheap cards targetted at people who care more about the difference between $30 and $35 than they care about sound quality.
Slashdot Mirror
Diebold may well believe (or claim to believe) that the memos are their property because the website's they're on say so. If they doscover they were wrong, I could still be sued for libel.
So.. They're not being punished for firing a blogger. They would still be being sued had they not done so.
Secondly, this patent causes problems for others as well. MS can simply exclude what is covered, but the people who actually use their products will be inconvenienced, as will developers of other software.
The ISP is fairly well protected under the DMCA. They can pass the buck quite easily.
The only way to insure that this information remains available and something is done about it is to have the information available in as many places as possible so that it is impossible to bury it
Or to get a legal ruling stating that it is in thpublic interest that this information is made public.
Are you providing a mirror?
Nope. Insufficient evidence that they are genuine.
Well, if you don't want to take them on, don't put them up in the first place.
Many of these people have the resources to pay for a lawyer. Many lawyers would object so strogly to such an abuse of the law that they would take the case on pro-bone. If they took it to court, they would have to prove that the memos were genuine, as well as the fact that they were suffering harm by the memos being posted (other than harm done to their reputation), and that it was not in the public interest that this information is released.
Hell, if it came down to it, you could represent yourself. Or start a legal defence fund.
I'm sure the people of Iraq would have loved to vote a new leader when Saddam Hussein was in power, but couldn't.
What makes you think that? Saddam Hussein was standing up against the evil imperialist infodels that he was blaming for all of Iraq's problems. At least, the Iraqi people probably believed that. I reckon Saddam would have won even if the election was fair.
The DMCA is quite clear in its provisions for allowing questionable material to stay up. BlackBoxVoting had no need to roll over in the first place. The simply needed to submit a DMCA counter notice.
Simply send a counter notice stating that the documents do not breach copyright, and put the website back up. This moves the obligation to Diebold to bring suit!
Of course, a lot of software is quite clearly a licence. When you call up MS and ask for licences to install Windows on 100 machines, it's quite clear that you are buying a licence and not a copy of software, as opposed to when you purchase a CD with software on it.
I have to wonder whether it really is a licence when it looks so much like a sale. A piece of paper that the purchaser may or may not have read is probably not a legally binding document. Copyright may well cover making identical jigs. I seriosuly doubt it covers anything made using that jig.
True. It's not a coincidence that the more developed projects tend to be the ones that programmers use, like emacs and GCC.
I have my own opinion on this matter. It seems even open source develpers don't understand their development model. Many - possibly the majority - of open source coders are not writing code for purely altruistic reasons. They are writing code because it doesn't do what they want it to do. Since the developer is the customer, the developer has a vested interest in making a good product.
Not neccesarily.
If this happened in Europe, the company that outsourced overseas would be liable. Data protection laws do not allow data to be sent to countries that don't have similarly strong data protection laws.
While the contract should have specified this, the law is also at fault since if patient confidentiality is important enough for legal protection, the law should be complete and prevent this sort of loophole.
the ability to rip digital copies from either medium (directly, over the Internet or via the "audio in" from the radio) is not much different, and doesn't justify the difference in cost per song per listener
True, but most people who want to record music from the radio will do so by tape or minidisk, whereas most people who record from internet radio will record straight to disk. Cassette and MD already have a levy applied to compensate the rightsholders, whereas hard disks do not. Charging the broadcasters goes some way to filling this gap.
Of course, it's a little inconsistent in that people who record from internet radio to minidisk pay twice, and those who record from broadcast radio to hard disk don't pay, but it does make it a little more balanced.
The most significant complaint is that they levy a minimum charge. This has the effect of making it cheaper per listener for large stations than smaller stations. However, this is not a copyright issue, but a monopolies issue.
I'm sorry. The first amendment has been sold to the "Down the river" corporation. Free speech now costs $10 000 000 for a licence to say something freely.
What's the definition of "Capable of receiving"? Is it number of households with HDTV, or number that can receive HDTV signals?
http://www.calibresoftware.co.uk/acatalog/Software _Special_Interest_DVD_Region_X.html
It would probably work, but it's a little complicated. Most people are not going to have the faintest idea how it works. Even most techies don't understand SHA hashes.
You're making it too complicated. Simply have the voter fill in a form with a pen, and put it in a box. A machine counts these bits of paper, logging all the ones it considers to be invalid. Any question about the accuracy, and humans can count them.
I think he was pointing out the contradiction. That they claimed that Windows was not secure, yet used it for the tabulation.
Quite honestly though, this is a load of hot air from both sides. Windows can be made secure, and isn't too bad with the web server, web browser and email client disabled. Any other OS can be made equally insecure.
What's the penalty for ignoring a cease-and-decist anyway? I bet it's not as heavy as a buldozer, but it's the same kinda deal.
I don't think there is one per se. It's simply that they can't claim that you were unaware of any party being injured by posting the memos. Since they're probably going to argue that there is overwhelming public interest in these being posted, and this is greater than Diebold's need for copyright protection.
This woman opposes everything. I think a lot of people hate her.
They can make your life inconvenient. These places are a law unto themselves, and private institutions tend not to be too hot on due process.
The site needs to be offically run by a non-student for administration purposes. Then any challenges under state law can be challenged in a proper legal manner.
And AMD should profit MUCH more from 64 bit than g5:
So you're saying that if the code is recompiled and reoptimised for 64 bit processors, there will be a difference?
Anyway theory's all well and good, but in practice, the differences will be noticeable. Maybe AMD will be faster. Maybe G5. You can't tell for sure until you test them and see which is faster.
Bandwidth is pretty good as well if you're sending a lot of data.
Ban telemartketing unless people explicitely opt-in.
It warns people about the price of open source software, and that while the cost should be obvious, some people seem to have failed to take into account.
If people want to use linux, purely to avoid developing their own code, and don't want to give back to the community, then we really don't want them to use it in the first palce, and if they don't want to share their code, then they should know Linux is not for them.
Hang on to your SB16! Seriously, if you just want a 16 bit stereo sample player (and most people do), then they're much better than a newer one of the same spec.
When they were new they were serious bits of kit with the best sound quality available. They couldn't afford to scrimp on components because knocking costs down by $5 would have no noticable effect on a card costing about $150, but would seriously reduce quality. These days they use the cheapest components possible, and really don't care about noise and interference because they're cheap cards targetted at people who care more about the difference between $30 and $35 than they care about sound quality.