It says "prevents your OS from starting". If your machine triple-boots Linux, OS X, and Windows, and a Windows trojan overwrites the boot loader, it's going to keep you from booting into all three OSes.
I am not a lawyer, but if someone used LaBeouf's video to sell shoes, I imagine they would in fact be liable to Nike.
In this case the trademark statement covers "Electronic transmission and streaming of video games via global and local computer networks; streaming of audio, visual, and audiovisual material via global and local computer networks", which does sound like it could cover Let's Play videos as we know them. That would depend of course on how exactly Sony uses the mark.
The water rights aren't necessarily owned by the government, but by the people downstream who were using the water before you—maybe a municipal water system, but just as likely a farmer, an industrial plant, etc. By capturing rainwater you would be infringing on their private property rights in that water.
Colorado, in 2009, began issuing permits for residential rainwater collection, in part because of a study that showed that in some locations most rainwater evaporated or was used by plants before it reached a stream.
How would most users respond if their ISP told them "You must add these certificates to your browser" (with instructions, or even a little installer program)? They could then use their bogus CA to MitM every use of facebook/google/whatever.
This seems no different, since it's up to the browser (not just the ISP) to enable the trusted proxy stuff. If a browser enables it without your consent (just as if they deliberately add a bogus CA to the trusted cert list), the browser is being evil and needs to be fixed. If it is left to the user, who enables it without understanding, that's unfortunate, but no worse than what can currently happen.
Somehow she managed to win the 1996 Bram Stoker Prize for a "2009 novel". But the "(P.S.)" was removed by the time machine, and the protagonist was renamed from Zombie to Quentin P.
I am auctioning this off for the stated price to fund a legal team in DC dig into my dismissal from the company and to determine where the AWA intellectual property went after the demise of AWA.
And what is the interesting part of the auction? A backup CD full of AWA intellectual property. If someone sues him over selling that CD and infringing upon their IP, then he knows who currently owns the IP, and he can in discovery find out how they obtained it—providing the evidence needed to file his own lawsuit.
It sounds like a bit of a gamble, though: What if, say, the customer lists and the patents went to different places? Then the owners of the former could sue him, but he would not get the information he's looking for.
Here's a choropleth map based on the first table. Unfortunately the map generator doesn't seem to handle non-integers, so "1" really means "1.0 to 1.999" and so on.
It appears I was wrong, anyway, with regards to US law. IP licensees are specifically allowed to retain their rights to the IP even if the contract is rejected: 11 USC 365(n). It may still be a problem in other jurisdictions.
Unless a bankruptcy court or the receiver can terminate the license (as a contract entered into by a non-bankrupt entity). Apparently this is an issue in Germany at least; there have been some attempts to make an exception for open source licenses, but I don't believe those have been successful yet.
As I understand it (I am not a lawyer), under US bankruptcy law the same holds: IP licenses are typically "executory contracts" (there are continuing obligations on both sides) and can be either assumed or rejected (terminated) by the trustee with court approval. A licensee would be able to sue for monetary damages, but not to continue the license. It might be possible to argue that a particular free software license doesn't meet the criteria to be an executory contract, but I have no idea how likely it would be for a court to accept such an argument.
This is why you shouldn't work on free software that requires you to hand over your copyright. This includes GNU software as well. Of course the FSF would be ideologically opposed to selling their copyrights to a proprietary software company, but what happens if one day donations dry up and they go bankrupt? Then the purchasers of the assets would be perfectly entitled to relicense your code however they want. Even if a bankrupt FSF tried to sell their assets to free-software-friendly companies, the court would probably block that if a proprietary software company made a higher offer. Furthermore, in some jurisdictions, the bankruptcy trustee, administrator, or court can terminate existing licenses—meaning that users couldn't even use an older version of the software, since they would no longer have a license to do so.
It doesn't violate copyright, it violates the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions—exactly the thing that the current proposal would change. Part of the proposed change:
It shall not be a violation of this section to circumvent a technological measure in connection with a work protected under this title if the
purpose of such circumvention is to engage in a use that is not an infringement of copyright under this title.
Circumventing an access control measure was never (by itself) an "infringement of copyright": It is a separate offense created by the DMCA.
I cast a ballot to vote for a slate of electors who claimed they would cast their electoral vote in a particular way. The duplicity is the ballot had the Presidential candidate's name and not the electors' names, but in my state only politics, and not law, demands that the electors actually vote for the name I selected.
who's the numbnuts who thought it would be a great idea to make this information available to anyone who asks for it?
Changing the color of a link you've visited has been around forever. Changing the style of a link you've visited to one that can send information back to the server eg "background-image:url(/visited.pl?site=slashdot)", that's newer.
Sorry but I don't think I fully understand how that relates to this story. Would you elaborate please? What you describe there sounds like a re-implementation of so-called "http ping."
By putting this CSS under an a:visited selector, they only get the ping if the link points to a URL you have visited. Though they can't get your entire history list, they can query whether (your browser thinks) you've been to a specific page.
You're right. According to that document (p. 4, about halfway down), the machine draws 1.6 to 2.7 W (depending on model) in standby; 1.5 to 2.1 W in soft-off with wake-on-LAN enabled; and no power in soft-off with wake-on-LAN disabled ("wake up power button only"). So the article is simply wrong when it says the computer is "able to use no power while in standby mode", unless they're redefining "standby" to mean S5 rather than S3.
It may simply be that, when WOL is disabled, shutting down the machine puts it into "mechanical off" rather than "soft off"—just like in pre-ATX PCs.
Slashdot Mirror
It says "prevents your OS from starting". If your machine triple-boots Linux, OS X, and Windows, and a Windows trojan overwrites the boot loader, it's going to keep you from booting into all three OSes.
I am not a lawyer, but if someone used LaBeouf's video to sell shoes, I imagine they would in fact be liable to Nike.
In this case the trademark statement covers "Electronic transmission and streaming of video games via global and local computer networks; streaming of audio, visual, and audiovisual material via global and local computer networks", which does sound like it could cover Let's Play videos as we know them. That would depend of course on how exactly Sony uses the mark.
There are combined characters that are not represented by a single codepoint: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
The article even quotes you, but does not appear to indicate that you were the submitter of the slashdot story you were "incredulous" of.
Or, as the Washington Free Beacon and Fox News say (and several people submitted to /.): Feds Creating Database to Track Hate Speech on Twitter. Seriously.
Of course, it makes sense for Fox News to raise the alarm about attempts to expose astroturfing.
Isn't 67.6% to 60.8% a decrease of 10% (6.8 percentage points)?
So how much should a 5-foot-6-inch male weigh in order to avoid obstructive sleep apnea? 120 pounds? 100? 80?
The water rights aren't necessarily owned by the government, but by the people downstream who were using the water before you—maybe a municipal water system, but just as likely a farmer, an industrial plant, etc. By capturing rainwater you would be infringing on their private property rights in that water.
Colorado, in 2009, began issuing permits for residential rainwater collection, in part because of a study that showed that in some locations most rainwater evaporated or was used by plants before it reached a stream.
Or if a kid knocked on your front door and said "excuse me, your car door is unlocked".
That said, twisting the doorknob is probably an offense under the CFAA.
I didn't want to medicate unless it was a medicine which could cure me, which doesn't exist (yet)
Got a medical marijuana certificate. Best when used judiciously.
I am not sure how to reconcile these two. Selective seratonin reuptake inhibitors count as medicine, but partial CB1 agonists do not?
This seems no different, since it's up to the browser (not just the ISP) to enable the trusted proxy stuff. If a browser enables it without your consent (just as if they deliberately add a bogus CA to the trusted cert list), the browser is being evil and needs to be fixed. If it is left to the user, who enables it without understanding, that's unfortunate, but no worse than what can currently happen.
250,000 * .004 * $300 = $300,000, not $30 million. I think someone confused 0.4% with 40%.
Somehow she managed to win the 1996 Bram Stoker Prize for a "2009 novel". But the "(P.S.)" was removed by the time machine, and the protagonist was renamed from Zombie to Quentin P.
I am auctioning this off for the stated price to fund a legal team in DC dig into my dismissal from the company and to determine where the AWA intellectual property went after the demise of AWA.
And what is the interesting part of the auction? A backup CD full of AWA intellectual property. If someone sues him over selling that CD and infringing upon their IP, then he knows who currently owns the IP, and he can in discovery find out how they obtained it—providing the evidence needed to file his own lawsuit.
It sounds like a bit of a gamble, though: What if, say, the customer lists and the patents went to different places? Then the owners of the former could sue him, but he would not get the information he's looking for.
Here's a choropleth map based on the first table. Unfortunately the map generator doesn't seem to handle non-integers, so "1" really means "1.0 to 1.999" and so on.
It appears I was wrong, anyway, with regards to US law. IP licensees are specifically allowed to retain their rights to the IP even if the contract is rejected: 11 USC 365(n). It may still be a problem in other jurisdictions.
Unless a bankruptcy court or the receiver can terminate the license (as a contract entered into by a non-bankrupt entity). Apparently this is an issue in Germany at least; there have been some attempts to make an exception for open source licenses, but I don't believe those have been successful yet.
As I understand it (I am not a lawyer), under US bankruptcy law the same holds: IP licenses are typically "executory contracts" (there are continuing obligations on both sides) and can be either assumed or rejected (terminated) by the trustee with court approval. A licensee would be able to sue for monetary damages, but not to continue the license. It might be possible to argue that a particular free software license doesn't meet the criteria to be an executory contract, but I have no idea how likely it would be for a court to accept such an argument.
This is why you shouldn't work on free software that requires you to hand over your copyright. This includes GNU software as well. Of course the FSF would be ideologically opposed to selling their copyrights to a proprietary software company, but what happens if one day donations dry up and they go bankrupt? Then the purchasers of the assets would be perfectly entitled to relicense your code however they want. Even if a bankrupt FSF tried to sell their assets to free-software-friendly companies, the court would probably block that if a proprietary software company made a higher offer. Furthermore, in some jurisdictions, the bankruptcy trustee, administrator, or court can terminate existing licenses—meaning that users couldn't even use an older version of the software, since they would no longer have a license to do so.
Circumventing an access control measure was never (by itself) an "infringement of copyright": It is a separate offense created by the DMCA.
I cast a ballot to vote for a slate of electors who claimed they would cast their electoral vote in a particular way. The duplicity is the ballot had the Presidential candidate's name and not the electors' names, but in my state only politics, and not law, demands that the electors actually vote for the name I selected.
who's the numbnuts who thought it would be a great idea to make this information available to anyone who asks for it?
Changing the color of a link you've visited has been around forever. Changing the style of a link you've visited to one that can send information back to the server eg "background-image:url(/visited.pl?site=slashdot)", that's newer.
Sorry but I don't think I fully understand how that relates to this story. Would you elaborate please? What you describe there sounds like a re-implementation of so-called "http ping."
By putting this CSS under an a:visited selector, they only get the ping if the link points to a URL you have visited. Though they can't get your entire history list, they can query whether (your browser thinks) you've been to a specific page.
You're right. According to that document (p. 4, about halfway down), the machine draws 1.6 to 2.7 W (depending on model) in standby; 1.5 to 2.1 W in soft-off with wake-on-LAN enabled; and no power in soft-off with wake-on-LAN disabled ("wake up power button only"). So the article is simply wrong when it says the computer is "able to use no power while in standby mode", unless they're redefining "standby" to mean S5 rather than S3.
It may simply be that, when WOL is disabled, shutting down the machine puts it into "mechanical off" rather than "soft off"—just like in pre-ATX PCs.
And since the Senate is smaller than the house, McCain's almost-a-no was even more important than Paul's.