If what the MTU Prez sez is correct, than the RIAA probably damaged their own legal case -- and dramatically. It seems they knew about the infringement, and allowed it to continue for a long time. This was done despite the fact they had a "relationship" with the University and had previously discussed infringement with the IT and Provost's department.
The RIAA essentially knowingly let the students swap files for a l o n g in order to crank up the damages . . . They may have waited too long -- The concept is called waiver, and its designed to prevent this exact scenario -- allowing a malicious plaintiff to forestall prosecution in order to artificially crank up the damages; Its manipulative, and the courts frown upon this sort nonsense.
Hopefully, a sharp judge will see thru this crap, and express his disdain for these tactics by slapping the RIAA upside their head (ie, costs and sanctions).
This process is a unique methodology for deriving the sub-total of any two (and in some instances, more) whole integers inclusively between "0" and "20."
This (patent pending) methodology assumes the use of the digits of one or both hands, and in rare instances, the additional use of one or both feet.
The system allows the combining of numerals via the following methodology:
Convert each numeral to be totaled into an equivalent number of digits - i.e., fingers, and where necessary, toes. "Count" the combined number of digits of the numerals to be totaled in their finger/toe equivalents. The total is IDENTICAL to what would be an otherwise mathematically derived sum.
The alternative, i.e. non-patented methodology, involves mentally adding the two numerals together without the benefit of error verification or correction on a consistent basis.
Other alternatives include a rote memorization of every possible combination of whole integers - and there must be dozens!!! These non-patented systems are inefficient and subject to inconsistencies and mathematical errors.
Slashdot Mirror
If what the MTU Prez sez is correct, than the RIAA probably damaged their own legal case -- and dramatically. It seems they knew about the infringement, and allowed it to continue for a long time. This was done despite the fact they had a "relationship" with the University and had previously discussed infringement with the IT and Provost's department.
The RIAA essentially knowingly let the students swap files for a l o n g in order to crank up the damages . . . They may have waited too long -- The concept is called waiver, and its designed to prevent this exact scenario -- allowing a malicious plaintiff to forestall prosecution in order to artificially crank up the damages; Its manipulative, and the courts frown upon this sort nonsense.
Hopefully, a sharp judge will see thru this crap, and express his disdain for these tactics by slapping the RIAA upside their head (ie, costs and sanctions).
This process is a unique methodology for deriving the sub-total of any two (and in some instances, more) whole integers inclusively between "0" and "20."
This (patent pending) methodology assumes the use of the digits of one or both hands, and in rare instances, the additional use of one or both feet.
The system allows the combining of numerals via the following methodology:
Convert each numeral to be totaled into an equivalent number of digits - i.e., fingers, and where necessary, toes. "Count" the combined number of digits of the numerals to be totaled in their finger/toe equivalents. The total is IDENTICAL to what would be an otherwise mathematically derived sum.
The alternative, i.e. non-patented methodology, involves mentally adding the two numerals together without the benefit of error verification or correction on a consistent basis.
Other alternatives include a rote memorization of every possible combination of whole integers - and there must be dozens!!! These non-patented systems are inefficient and subject to inconsistencies and mathematical errors.