And at no point did he say they shouldnt have reported it - just that, in the normal course of doing their job, they would never have seen it. they acted unproffesionally and I would say illegially - certainly in the UK I would consider them in breach of the DPA, as they became trusted users with a set remit at the point it was handed over.
Just like in the normal course of my job I can have complete access to payroll for a FTSE100 company, as part of Data Quality testing. I DON'T look for anything "interesting" as that would be a violation of privacy, as well as massivley unethical.
Becasue you setup Truecrypt to give a 100MB file partition. No matter if you have another, hidden partition in there or not, it will still be 100MB. Therefore, under oath, you can TRUTHFULLY state that the reason it is much bigger than the fiels is that is how you set it up.
They cannot ask a leading question (well, they can try, your council should stop it) so you would not have to give another answer. ever.
Also, if its anything like the UK, all they party chair has to do is allow a "free vote" (i.e. no party whip) and they can "vote with their conscience" - i.e. not let it pass.
Lets see - UK Sales of Goods Act 1974. Any goods unfit for purpose can be returned, with no exception. Minimum 1 year warranty on all goods (about to be 2 years to bring in line with rest of Europe) as well - none of this 90 day rubbish
UK Distance Selling regs (applies to companies on Ebay as well:) ) - if the goods arrive and you dont like them you can return them within 7 days of reciept. NO RESTOCKING fee can be applied to this.
Trades Descriptions Acts - statutory penalties for mis selling goods, including jail time.
The EU is growing....we just absorb more countries.
As for the weak dollar - you dont really export much apart from information, and you are importing increasing amounts. THAT is mucking up your own economy....
Ok, population density in Sweden is on par with the US, yet their internet access is cheaper and faster.
Next question? Shouldn't you be complaining to the telcos who took billions in subsidies, land apporpriation rights etc in order to provide you with these POS conections?
In the states they weren't sensible enough to put all mobile phone numbers on a different prefix (Uk = 07 for mobile, 01/02 landline) hence there is no way for the caller to know who they are calling - mobile or landline, hence it is seen as "fair" that the caller pays the same price regardless, and the mobile user pays the difference.
BUilding regs in the UK state that all powerpoints have to be switched, fr example double plug sockets have 2 switches. Very sensible, means you can isolate devices as you need...
then dont visit those premises if theyre that bad - as you have already said, you are fine with them passivley blocking, so whats the difference. I have lots of restaurants I would be happy with passing me messages. I suggest you do the same, or dont visit place that you dont trust and have jamming.
and why would htey have the jammers on part of the time? they are relatively low power (esp compared to air con, lights etc) and having staff remember to turn them on is fairly unlikely. that would be an extra thing for them to remember after all....
Again, should the building have to put up signs if they don't have cellphone reception at all, just because of how they were built? (i.e. no concerted effort to jam, just (bad) luck)
If no, then why should buildings that jam - passively or not? It's either one or the other, as reception is not 100% g'teed [i]or to be expected to be g'teed[/i] [b]anywhere[/b]
Perhaps you should just look at your phone on the way in to a new building? Is that so difficult? if you cant do without it, then plan ahead and let people know where they can reach you - you know, like in the pre-mobile phone days.
Exactly - people believe their personal "rights" to use their mobile overrule everyone elses, and the fact that the only vague argument that can be made is essentially "bbbbut thin of the children / accidents / doctors / sys admins" when all it takes to avoid all this is to PLAN AHEAD!
Seriously - if youre going to a cinema where you may have no signal, or anywhere else for that matter, then plan ahead - leave the number of the place you are due at with work / hospital etc, and tell the cinema manager that this is important, please could you let me know as XYZ depends on it. most are reasonable, and if you're not a dick about it will come let you know - however if XYZ is frankly meaningless, don't expect them to come find you.
It's exactly how "on call" used to work, you just have to plan.
Why should it be an offence, using either passive (currently 100% legal) or active, to deny access to certain radiated signals on *your own property*?
Surely as the owner of an establishment you are allowed, as long as it is non discriminatory, to determine what is allowed on your property? You are suggesting that somehow mobile phones are now a legally backed right, or simply put, utter bollocks....
However, 99.99% of txt user in cinemas is NOT life or death, so how about, if you think there is something that may be life or death you just dont go into the cinema? Or perhaps go out every half hour (which is much less distracting than a really bright light being waved about....) to check?
Your 0.01% chance is low enough that, as long as the cinema tells people about it (so, you know, you can make a choice) there is no reason not to implement this.
You could then let the free market decide, which is something most americans bang on about every 2 nminutes as if it's a solution to everything....
Sorry, then don't go into a cinema, a place that is purposely kept DIM, and use abright screen to txt every few minutes.
You may be important, as you say, then take it seriously - don't put yourself in a situation where you get no signal, or where you can expect that no signal is a desirable situation for the majority.
I personally feel that theatres, cinemas etc should have no reception at all, ever - the vast majority of people there are there to watch $show, and your inability to plan properly is not anyone elses fault, and they should not be inconvenienced by you
Well, she's only liable if they could prove any uploads, according to a court finding in another court. However, that aside, I would say she knew what she was doing.
However, this doesnt alter the fact that damages of more the 10x actual cost have been shown as unconstituional in other cases, and that is what the motion is about - should the RIAA be exempt from your constitution? If not then it should not be able to claim 1000x damages for items in this case. Once the issue of damages is decided, she can then appeal - or not. As you havent read the FA I guess you just made assumptions about what this stage is about....
As they are a service provider they are not responsible for the actions of their users, unless they induce users into committing infringing acts.
Your version would lead to Comcast or Sky getting sued due to users downloading movies. This would only happen if comcast ran ads saying "join us, and download for FREEEEEE!!!!!"
Becuase you didn't read the rest of it - that the university cannot say it was only the users in that dorm room that accessed it, it still leaves all potnetial visitors, cleaning staff etc who may have done somehting. It still does not reduce the poool of people by any reasonable amount....
As I'm friends with (and briefly went out with, as in 2 dates before we decided we were better as friends) someone who used to develop software for RM, I have to agree in some parts.
They do have superb support, even if needs be speaking to my friend (which he hated; if it was in person he had to wear a suit, instead of normal programmers wear;) ) and getting him to write a custom fix for your problem (which would then get bundled into the next release)
They do try to be ambitious; for example did you know there is a 32bit limit for the number of objects in an AD forest? NOT 32bit per tree, either, the ENTIRE forest! Now RM want to have the entire UK (starting with Scotland, iirc) schools system on a single AD forest; every teacher, pupil, parent and governor would have an account. This alone took them over this limit - their answer was to get MS to change the code, and write a 64bit version for them. They actually have a fair amount of pull, so "closed source" or not when youre a big customer you can get things changed. Not as efficiently as if it were open soutce, bt still...
As for the stranglehold - they speciliase in supporting schools, and understanding them, and THAT s why schools still use them - why pay pretty much the same, for as you say, crap Dell support, which you then have to integrate into your RM stuff (unless youre rich, and replace the school in one go) when you can carry on with RM, and not taake such a risk.
Anyways, this is way too long - cheers for sticking up (a little) for RM - the programmers and techs are goind their best, it's management that are a problem.
I think he / she believed "C#" to be the first C language, or else he was an idiot and forgot to add the "#":)
Either way, he seems to not understand the difference between a Monopoly and any other company, and that a monopoly has to follow different rules. It is simply part of their charter and they have to deal with it, or else split themselves down so they no longer constitute a monopoly. Simple....except MS have so far completlely failed to uphold their end. So much so that the DOJ should have actually enforced their rulling, and did a 'Bell on MS.
However, it's an AC, so not sure why I've wasted my time!
Exactly - in the UK we had a fuel (petrol, diesel) tax "escalator" for a few years, that dramatically raised the price of fuel. In order to compete, car companies had to create better, more efficient cars. The same thing would happen here - if all get taxed on an equitable i.e. what they waste basis, then there will be the same economic pressures to provide a benefit (lower cost to customer) through lowering their own costs.
it is a definate, provable solution. it really hurts for a few years though!
Slashdot Mirror
DMCA has specific exemptions for interoperability - so still totally legal
EULAs that say you can't arealso completely bogus, but then surprise....
And at no point did he say they shouldnt have reported it - just that, in the normal course of doing their job, they would never have seen it. they acted unproffesionally and I would say illegially - certainly in the UK I would consider them in breach of the DPA, as they became trusted users with a set remit at the point it was handed over.
Just like in the normal course of my job I can have complete access to payroll for a FTSE100 company, as part of Data Quality testing. I DON'T look for anything "interesting" as that would be a violation of privacy, as well as massivley unethical.
Becasue you setup Truecrypt to give a 100MB file partition. No matter if you have another, hidden partition in there or not, it will still be 100MB. Therefore, under oath, you can TRUTHFULLY state that the reason it is much bigger than the fiels is that is how you set it up.
They cannot ask a leading question (well, they can try, your council should stop it) so you would not have to give another answer. ever.
Also, if its anything like the UK, all they party chair has to do is allow a "free vote" (i.e. no party whip) and they can "vote with their conscience" - i.e. not let it pass.
It's very easy to use fake bills....
wow, theyve finally taken over...after a massive price cut. Surprise.
Wii is the fastest selling console ever, and has made a whole new section of people gamers.
Huh? LESS consumer protection?
:) ) - if the goods arrive and you dont like them you can return them within 7 days of reciept. NO RESTOCKING fee can be applied to this.
Are you smoking a crack pipe?
Lets see - UK Sales of Goods Act 1974. Any goods unfit for purpose can be returned, with no exception. Minimum 1 year warranty on all goods (about to be 2 years to bring in line with rest of Europe) as well - none of this 90 day rubbish
UK Distance Selling regs (applies to companies on Ebay as well
Trades Descriptions Acts - statutory penalties for mis selling goods, including jail time.
Shall I continue?
Is being investigated by the EU competitions commision, which may block the sale.
NEXT
and if there's anyone else in the car, that's a performance of the work and you get sued ;)
The EU is growing....we just absorb more countries.
As for the weak dollar - you dont really export much apart from information, and you are importing increasing amounts. THAT is mucking up your own economy....
Ok, population density in Sweden is on par with the US, yet their internet access is cheaper and faster.
Next question? Shouldn't you be complaining to the telcos who took billions in subsidies, land apporpriation rights etc in order to provide you with these POS conections?
In the states they weren't sensible enough to put all mobile phone numbers on a different prefix (Uk = 07 for mobile, 01/02 landline) hence there is no way for the caller to know who they are calling - mobile or landline, hence it is seen as "fair" that the caller pays the same price regardless, and the mobile user pays the difference.
Wow, inefficient design.
BUilding regs in the UK state that all powerpoints have to be switched, fr example double plug sockets have 2 switches. Very sensible, means you can isolate devices as you need...
then dont visit those premises if theyre that bad - as you have already said, you are fine with them passivley blocking, so whats the difference. I have lots of restaurants I would be happy with passing me messages. I suggest you do the same, or dont visit place that you dont trust and have jamming.
and why would htey have the jammers on part of the time? they are relatively low power (esp compared to air con, lights etc) and having staff remember to turn them on is fairly unlikely. that would be an extra thing for them to remember after all....
Again, should the building have to put up signs if they don't have cellphone reception at all, just because of how they were built? (i.e. no concerted effort to jam, just (bad) luck)
If no, then why should buildings that jam - passively or not? It's either one or the other, as reception is not 100% g'teed [i]or to be expected to be g'teed[/i] [b]anywhere[/b]
Perhaps you should just look at your phone on the way in to a new building? Is that so difficult? if you cant do without it, then plan ahead and let people know where they can reach you - you know, like in the pre-mobile phone days.
Exactly - people believe their personal "rights" to use their mobile overrule everyone elses, and the fact that the only vague argument that can be made is essentially "bbbbut thin of the children / accidents / doctors / sys admins" when all it takes to avoid all this is to PLAN AHEAD!
Seriously - if youre going to a cinema where you may have no signal, or anywhere else for that matter, then plan ahead - leave the number of the place you are due at with work / hospital etc, and tell the cinema manager that this is important, please could you let me know as XYZ depends on it. most are reasonable, and if you're not a dick about it will come let you know - however if XYZ is frankly meaningless, don't expect them to come find you.
It's exactly how "on call" used to work, you just have to plan.
Why should it be an offence, using either passive (currently 100% legal) or active, to deny access to certain radiated signals on *your own property*?
Surely as the owner of an establishment you are allowed, as long as it is non discriminatory, to determine what is allowed on your property? You are suggesting that somehow mobile phones are now a legally backed right, or simply put, utter bollocks....
However, 99.99% of txt user in cinemas is NOT life or death, so how about, if you think there is something that may be life or death you just dont go into the cinema? Or perhaps go out every half hour (which is much less distracting than a really bright light being waved about....) to check?
Your 0.01% chance is low enough that, as long as the cinema tells people about it (so, you know, you can make a choice) there is no reason not to implement this.
You could then let the free market decide, which is something most americans bang on about every 2 nminutes as if it's a solution to everything....
Sorry, then don't go into a cinema, a place that is purposely kept DIM, and use abright screen to txt every few minutes.
You may be important, as you say, then take it seriously - don't put yourself in a situation where you get no signal, or where you can expect that no signal is a desirable situation for the majority.
I personally feel that theatres, cinemas etc should have no reception at all, ever - the vast majority of people there are there to watch $show, and your inability to plan properly is not anyone elses fault, and they should not be inconvenienced by you
Well, she's only liable if they could prove any uploads, according to a court finding in another court. However, that aside, I would say she knew what she was doing.
However, this doesnt alter the fact that damages of more the 10x actual cost have been shown as unconstituional in other cases, and that is what the motion is about - should the RIAA be exempt from your constitution? If not then it should not be able to claim 1000x damages for items in this case. Once the issue of damages is decided, she can then appeal - or not. As you havent read the FA I guess you just made assumptions about what this stage is about....
Why not?
As they are a service provider they are not responsible for the actions of their users, unless they induce users into committing infringing acts.
Your version would lead to Comcast or Sky getting sued due to users downloading movies. This would only happen if comcast ran ads saying "join us, and download for FREEEEEE!!!!!"
Becuase you didn't read the rest of it - that the university cannot say it was only the users in that dorm room that accessed it, it still leaves all potnetial visitors, cleaning staff etc who may have done somehting. It still does not reduce the poool of people by any reasonable amount....
However, as you pay for incoming calls (I believe...) surely this doesn't compare like for like?
Or to go for the groan, Apples to Oranges....
As I'm friends with (and briefly went out with, as in 2 dates before we decided we were better as friends) someone who used to develop software for RM, I have to agree in some parts.
;) ) and getting him to write a custom fix for your problem (which would then get bundled into the next release)
They do have superb support, even if needs be speaking to my friend (which he hated; if it was in person he had to wear a suit, instead of normal programmers wear
They do try to be ambitious; for example did you know there is a 32bit limit for the number of objects in an AD forest? NOT 32bit per tree, either, the ENTIRE forest! Now RM want to have the entire UK (starting with Scotland, iirc) schools system on a single AD forest; every teacher, pupil, parent and governor would have an account. This alone took them over this limit - their answer was to get MS to change the code, and write a 64bit version for them. They actually have a fair amount of pull, so "closed source" or not when youre a big customer you can get things changed. Not as efficiently as if it were open soutce, bt still...
As for the stranglehold - they speciliase in supporting schools, and understanding them, and THAT s why schools still use them - why pay pretty much the same, for as you say, crap Dell support, which you then have to integrate into your RM stuff (unless youre rich, and replace the school in one go) when you can carry on with RM, and not taake such a risk.
Anyways, this is way too long - cheers for sticking up (a little) for RM - the programmers and techs are goind their best, it's management that are a problem.
I think he / she believed "C#" to be the first C language, or else he was an idiot and forgot to add the "#" :)
Either way, he seems to not understand the difference between a Monopoly and any other company, and that a monopoly has to follow different rules. It is simply part of their charter and they have to deal with it, or else split themselves down so they no longer constitute a monopoly. Simple....except MS have so far completlely failed to uphold their end. So much so that the DOJ should have actually enforced their rulling, and did a 'Bell on MS.
However, it's an AC, so not sure why I've wasted my time!
Exactly - in the UK we had a fuel (petrol, diesel) tax "escalator" for a few years, that dramatically raised the price of fuel. In order to compete, car companies had to create better, more efficient cars. The same thing would happen here - if all get taxed on an equitable i.e. what they waste basis, then there will be the same economic pressures to provide a benefit (lower cost to customer) through lowering their own costs.
it is a definate, provable solution. it really hurts for a few years though!