I agree, especially since AT&T had admitted she didn't accept the call. She can not be held responsible for a collect call she didn't accept. AT&T has to prove she accepted it.
How about a feature of SlashCode that, at preview time, it searches the site for words similar to ones in the story to be submitted, and displays the results. This would allow the submitter to determine if he is submitting a likely dupe.
The hardware is probably failing, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to find drivers for '95 for new hardware. Instead of running systems with different OSes, which becomes a support nightmare. Mass upgrade.
This is very similar to a music contact, but without the "evil":
* The developers get 70% instead of 7%-10% (or less) * Development costs are *NOT* recoverable (except they are paid after the fact) * There is no mention of who owns the copyright, that should be ironed out, but it appears the developers would.
Why are they using this flimsy temerature evidence that the ice is water and not C02? It seems to me that they could use a spectrometer to determine its exact chemical composition...
Anyone know which patents these are? SysV has been around a long time, and AT&T sold it a long time ago, the patents may not have a lot of life left in them.
Because these alerts are like a mailing list subscription and the phone number is like an email address. The problem is phone numbers are reused, where email addresses, generally, are not.
Yahoo or MSN do not receive notification when someone cancels their phone account.
IANAL, but I thought once a brief is filed, it is a matter of public record. And isn't the "public record" owned by the public?
I, at any time, can go to my County Court and order a copy of any brief filed with that court. I don't believe any restrictions have been placed on the use of that information after it has been given to me.
This is insane. We can't have a free society if legal briefs filed in a court case are subject to copyright.
While someone has every right to get upset at the sheer volume of political mail received around election time (electronic or otherwise), EFF and the Courts are correct. Political discussion is at the heart of the Constitution and it will be a cold day in hell before there is a successful law to stop it.
As for Elizabeth Dole's decision to use email for communication to her (future) constituents, when there is so much anger over SPAM (eventhough it technically isn't SPAM), is another matter. If I were her political consultant I would have advised against it.
I have heard in various other cases that if a copyright holder uses his copyright to commit antitrust, they lose the ability to defend their copyright.
Clearly, Microsoft has been found guilty of using its copyright on Windows 95 to kill Netscape.
Is is possible for a pirate to successfully defend himself by claiming Microsoft has lost its copyright? (I assume this applies to only that software specifically mentioned in the case. Not all software produced by Microsoft)
He was talking about housing prices and why they haven't dropped during this latest crash.
The reason is simple. In the early '90s, the crash was localized and mostly based on military cut-backs. Since the rest of the country was not experincing the bust, interest rates were still high.
Therefore, the housing bust was causeed by 10% unemployment (people having to sell because they lost thier job) with 11% 30-yr-fixed mortgage rates (people unable to qualify for mortgages).
Today, with high unemployment we have 6.5% interest rates since the problem is nationwide. Now, people with decent jobs can qualify for mortgages and the houses are flying off the market and the unemployed/less income are either selling or simply refinancing.
Jack up the interest rates and the housing market will crash.
Remember when Adobe sued that guy for breaking up the Adobe packaged software and sold them individually. Adobe sued for voilating the license. The judge ruled that the seller had the "Right of First Sale" and was permitted to sell the software.
The same holds for K-Mart. They own the software licenses, they have the right to sell their license to anyone, and I am confident the court will hold as such.
Crack to stop all this...
on
"Squishy" DRM?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
All it will take, and I am sure it is inevitable, is for someone to write a virus/worm/trojan that will make all data on the victims computer DRM controlled and expired.
Trillions of dollars in damage to protect a billion dollar industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Thy HAVE to disclose it prior to trial. They will have to give it to IBM. IBM can then find the author and determine the truth.
The difference it that you don't "license" a GM oil filter, you "buy" it. Since software is licensed they have more leeway in their licensing terms.
I agree, especially since AT&T had admitted she didn't accept the call. She can not be held responsible for a collect call she didn't accept. AT&T has to prove she accepted it.
How about a feature of SlashCode that, at preview time, it searches the site for words similar to ones in the story to be submitted, and displays the results. This would allow the submitter to determine if he is submitting a likely dupe.
This can be repeated for the poster...
I bet you could hit most of your employees' homes with a 50km reach.
One tower. Bunch of 802.11/802.16 devices to send home, matched with 802.1x/p/q and IPphones...
Remote access in a box.
The hardware is probably failing, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to find drivers for '95 for new hardware. Instead of running systems with different OSes, which becomes a support nightmare. Mass upgrade.
I bet slashdot could get an interview with him.
I agree, and this sums it up...
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
This is very similar to a music contact, but without the "evil":
* The developers get 70% instead of 7%-10% (or less)
* Development costs are *NOT* recoverable (except they are paid after the fact)
* There is no mention of who owns the copyright, that should be ironed out, but it appears the developers would.
Why are they using this flimsy temerature evidence that the ice is water and not C02? It seems to me that they could use a spectrometer to determine its exact chemical composition...
1g caffeine
5g Pizza
1pt Alcohol (beer form)
5L oxygen
Consider this next time you post...
Anyone know which patents these are? SysV has been around a long time, and AT&T sold it a long time ago, the patents may not have a lot of life left in them.
Has anyone tried using a heatpipe to move heat to the case?
Seems to me, someone should be able to use the entire case as a heatsink to dissipate the heat of the CPU and GPU and do so without a fan.
Because these alerts are like a mailing list subscription and the phone number is like an email address. The problem is phone numbers are reused, where email addresses, generally, are not.
Yahoo or MSN do not receive notification when someone cancels their phone account.
IANAL, but I thought once a brief is filed, it is a matter of public record. And isn't the "public record" owned by the public?
I, at any time, can go to my County Court and order a copy of any brief filed with that court. I don't believe any restrictions have been placed on the use of that information after it has been given to me.
This is insane. We can't have a free society if legal briefs filed in a court case are subject to copyright.
Open Source legal representation already exists.
While someone has every right to get upset at the sheer volume of political mail received around election time (electronic or otherwise), EFF and the Courts are correct. Political discussion is at the heart of the Constitution and it will be a cold day in hell before there is a successful law to stop it.
As for Elizabeth Dole's decision to use email for communication to her (future) constituents, when there is so much anger over SPAM (eventhough it technically isn't SPAM), is another matter. If I were her political consultant I would have advised against it.
Read this:
y =c net
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-243394.html?legac
I have heard in various other cases that if a copyright holder uses his copyright to commit antitrust, they lose the ability to defend their copyright.
Clearly, Microsoft has been found guilty of using its copyright on Windows 95 to kill Netscape.
Is is possible for a pirate to successfully defend himself by claiming Microsoft has lost its copyright? (I assume this applies to only that software specifically mentioned in the case. Not all software produced by Microsoft)
He was talking about housing prices and why they haven't dropped during this latest crash.
The reason is simple. In the early '90s, the crash was localized and mostly based on military cut-backs. Since the rest of the country was not experincing the bust, interest rates were still high.
Therefore, the housing bust was causeed by 10% unemployment (people having to sell because they lost thier job) with 11% 30-yr-fixed mortgage rates (people unable to qualify for mortgages).
Today, with high unemployment we have 6.5% interest rates since the problem is nationwide. Now, people with decent jobs can qualify for mortgages and the houses are flying off the market and the unemployed/less income are either selling or simply refinancing.
Jack up the interest rates and the housing market will crash.
Remember when Adobe sued that guy for breaking up the Adobe packaged software and sold them individually. Adobe sued for voilating the license. The judge ruled that the seller had the "Right of First Sale" and was permitted to sell the software.
The same holds for K-Mart. They own the software licenses, they have the right to sell their license to anyone, and I am confident the court will hold as such.
Has he been hit with trademark infringement yet?
All it will take, and I am sure it is inevitable, is for someone to write a virus/worm/trojan that will make all data on the victims computer DRM controlled and expired.
Trillions of dollars in damage to protect a billion dollar industry.
Link
Great post...
One more:
The Right of Habaes Corpus: Those declared "enemy combatants" are never arraigned, nor have to be told why they are being held.
You covered this with RIGHT TO TRIAL, but its even worse they you describe.