1. in order to identify her they used illegial methods. That makes their "evidence" already inadmissable.
2. How do you think you are supposed to prove your innocence of a crime such as that? You cannot prove a negative in that way - she offered them the chance to view a verfied copy of her harddisk. Deleting information systematically does show up and would show up as suspicious behaviour.
In other words she gave them every oppurtunity to back down, and when they eventually did it was on the eve of a verdict against them. A verdict that would have likely set State precedent and would have looked VERY VERY bad for them.
As such she is right to sue - illegial methods to gather evidence, which in itself can be a breach of RICO (as i understand, they broke it thousands of times) and as such she is seeking punitive damages - in exactly the same way THEY were seeking punitive (150k PER SONG!) damages against her. Turnabout is fair play, and all that.
That is a beautiful piece of logic you have there. If you violate the terms of MS' license, you're okay, because they were artificial and arbitrary restrictions, anyway. If you violate the GPL's equally artificial and arbitrary limitations, you're a pirate and a lawbreaker, because you've violated the terms of the license. See how absurd it is?
Erm, so you have never read the GPL?
The GPL has no artificial restrictions - it actually removes some of the restrictions copyright law puts in place in return for certain behvaiour on your part. It makes you free to distribute copies when otherwise you would not have been able to.
You can even argue that as the right to copy is the natural order, and any restrictions are therefore artificial, the GPL makes things less, not more, artificial.
It will have damaged your privacy; whether this can be shown to have caused damage that can actually be valued in some way is neither here nor there, damage has occured.
Surprising that, here in UK at least ADSL is quick enough to deal with Citrix no problem - i've got a high speed package (16meg / 768k up) whihc is quick enough to connect without any hassle - our cable isnt much quicker!
Fibre would be lovely, however the rate the UK lags behind we;ll just be moving onto fibre shortly after the worlds end....
1) Libraries lend out paper backs all the timne. they simply put horrible plastic covers on them.
2) it stops you taking the cover off and putting your own on it, which normally would remove the publishers logo. It is reasonable, as it does not stop you selling it, just you cannot alter it's form substantially before selling it.
1. You buy a book 2. The book comes with a EULA as you have only received a physical copy, you have no license to use the accompanying text ("to read it").... 3. Now do you see the error?
The GPL _only_ covers distribution - it is not a license to use, it is a license that grants you rights to distribute you idd not have before.
Only at that point do you have to "agree" to it, and there is no requirement to obtain an "I agree...." as if you didnt agree you cannot distribute....
Except the only part they suggested he violated was "you must not work around technological limitations in the software"
HOwever.....express supports plug ins, and he wrote it using published APIs. That does not violate the limits of the program, as the program has not limited what you can do.
And if there are delays because of other games, surely it's not just Halo3.
From a PS3 standpoint there is Heavnly sword, WarHawk, Rachet & Clank & the possibility of Tekken 6
Not to mention that Skate & Assassin's Creed will be coming out on both systems in September too.
But once you get to september your entering Christmas present territory anyway, surely when you release in the last six months only effects your first week sales anyway. If people want both Halo 3 and GTAIV or any of the other games out at the end of the year, they will buy them. If not by the end of the year, then Jan next year once they christmas money to spend
Even if your costs cannot be justified as required to support your case?
In the UK both sides have a requirement to mitigate any losses incurred, which INCLUDES legal fees. For example, hiring 100 expert witnesses which do not really have a bearing on the case would get those costs removed as frivolous.
PLus, we have a great small claims court system - for up to £5k claims a filing fee of about £35 gets you a hearing in front of a magistrate. Costs are capped and in general no lawyers are involved - in fact a magistrate is likely to look ill on a company that brings a horde of lawyers to defend a case brought by a member of the public. As a result most companies settle - it costs them too much to want to go through it unless they are 100% sure they'll win.
You drive up to a car park, a machne issues a ticket and grants you access. This is a perfect example of a MACHINE being able to grant permission as it has been delegated authority to.
Not necessarily - it would only be if they were doing business in that jurisdiction. Simply serving a web page does not normally carry that phrase.
IF they are accepting adverts then they would need to ensure it is legal for them to do so based upon where the person offering the ads was based*, however could advertise e.g. alcohol in a prohibited country.
*at least in the EU you are considered to be a party to the contract set in the EU and therefore under its jurisdiction by default.....
You've missed the point; every hypothesis has an H(0), the I am not true hypothesis.
Without evidence to support H(1): GOd exists, the default is H(0) - and at this point you have not proved the H(0) is correct, but simply you could not disprove it. THey are two entirely different concepts, which you dont appear to understand.
That is the inherent superiority of a scientific approach - once enough proof is found, you flip to H(1) and you can carry on. With religion there is not that approach - it is H(1) always, no matter the lack of evidence, because "I say so" is used.
Personally I see nothing wrong with making money through prostitution is not a shameing occupation. AS long as you have free choice about it and it is properly regulated, then I see no problem. But then I peronally believe sex between consenting parties is fine.
Finally, you made the classic straw man of suggesting because I liked ONE aspect therefore I must like it all. I agree Holland has problems, however it is a MUCH bettwer country to live in than the US. Much more free, in the ACTUAL versus religious rights idea of it....
You just get another coountry to produce it, under a compulsory license, and the drug company gets less money. The far more rational position for the drug company would have been to charge the same they did elsewhere.
youre an idiot if you think your crazy situation would work. Wait tiill WHO fuck over the drug companies themselves if they tried it....
wow, ignore the body of the post and attack the person. nice.
the US is known for using "abstinence" only, and not providing any barrier methods. that is plain stupid, and defies human nature.
the country with the highest abstinence age, lowest STI rate and highest public awareness is Holland. Sex education starts at 5, and teaches that sex is normal, fun but overall has to be SAFE. and it works. and your system doesnt
AACS is an open, published standard. As noone outswide the US thinks that software patents are worth shit, then anyone can write their own AACS decryption scheme:)
If you can get them, try Hotel Chocolat - UK Company that has some really good chocolate houses producing for them. They get hold of really rare, interesting chocolate (single estate Iara, mmmmmM!) and are making a killing over here.
American chocolate makes Cadburys taste good. and Cadbury's is mainly dog faeces i believe....
(IMO, not expressed as fact, not to be taken seriously, someone have a life...)
Slashdot Mirror
1. in order to identify her they used illegial methods. That makes their "evidence" already inadmissable.
2. How do you think you are supposed to prove your innocence of a crime such as that? You cannot prove a negative in that way - she offered them the chance to view a verfied copy of her harddisk. Deleting information systematically does show up and would show up as suspicious behaviour.
In other words she gave them every oppurtunity to back down, and when they eventually did it was on the eve of a verdict against them. A verdict that would have likely set State precedent and would have looked VERY VERY bad for them.
As such she is right to sue - illegial methods to gather evidence, which in itself can be a breach of RICO (as i understand, they broke it thousands of times) and as such she is seeking punitive damages - in exactly the same way THEY were seeking punitive (150k PER SONG!) damages against her. Turnabout is fair play, and all that.
Erm, so you have never read the GPL?
The GPL has no artificial restrictions - it actually removes some of the restrictions copyright law puts in place in return for certain behvaiour on your part. It makes you free to distribute copies when otherwise you would not have been able to.
You can even argue that as the right to copy is the natural order, and any restrictions are therefore artificial, the GPL makes things less, not more, artificial.
If the US company is dissolved however, wouldnt there be no way for SoundExchange to collect?
It will have damaged your privacy; whether this can be shown to have caused damage that can actually be valued in some way is neither here nor there, damage has occured.
Subsequent actions can exacerbate the damage.
Surprising that, here in UK at least ADSL is quick enough to deal with Citrix no problem - i've got a high speed package (16meg / 768k up) whihc is quick enough to connect without any hassle - our cable isnt much quicker!
Fibre would be lovely, however the rate the UK lags behind we;ll just be moving onto fibre shortly after the worlds end....
1) Libraries lend out paper backs all the timne. they simply put horrible plastic covers on them.
2) it stops you taking the cover off and putting your own on it, which normally would remove the publishers logo. It is reasonable, as it does not stop you selling it, just you cannot alter it's form substantially before selling it.
1. You buy a book ....
2. The book comes with a EULA as you have only received a physical copy, you have no license to use the accompanying text ("to read it")
3. Now do you see the error?
I take it you missed the part where, as his computer was incapable of displaying the EULA, he cannot agree to it?
The GPL _only_ covers distribution - it is not a license to use, it is a license that grants you rights to distribute you idd not have before.
Only at that point do you have to "agree" to it, and there is no requirement to obtain an "I agree...." as if you didnt agree you cannot distribute....
Except the only part they suggested he violated was "you must not work around technological limitations in the software"
HOwever.....express supports plug ins, and he wrote it using published APIs. That does not violate the limits of the program, as the program has not limited what you can do.
Still, nice try....
And if there are delays because of other games, surely it's not just Halo3.
From a PS3 standpoint there is Heavnly sword, WarHawk, Rachet & Clank & the possibility of Tekken 6
Not to mention that Skate & Assassin's Creed will be coming out on both systems in September too.
But once you get to september your entering Christmas present territory anyway, surely when you release in the last six months only effects your first week sales anyway. If people want both Halo 3 and GTAIV or any of the other games out at the end of the year, they will buy them. If not by the end of the year, then Jan next year once they christmas money to spend
Fawlty towers was 2 series actually....
:)
still have to agree, 12 episodes of perfection
Even if your costs cannot be justified as required to support your case?
In the UK both sides have a requirement to mitigate any losses incurred, which INCLUDES legal fees. For example, hiring 100 expert witnesses which do not really have a bearing on the case would get those costs removed as frivolous.
PLus, we have a great small claims court system - for up to £5k claims a filing fee of about £35 gets you a hearing in front of a magistrate. Costs are capped and in general no lawyers are involved - in fact a magistrate is likely to look ill on a company that brings a horde of lawyers to defend a case brought by a member of the public. As a result most companies settle - it costs them too much to want to go through it unless they are 100% sure they'll win.
You drive up to a car park, a machne issues a ticket and grants you access. This is a perfect example of a MACHINE being able to grant permission as it has been delegated authority to.
how is a DHCP server different?
Not necessarily - it would only be if they were doing business in that jurisdiction. Simply serving a web page does not normally carry that phrase.
IF they are accepting adverts then they would need to ensure it is legal for them to do so based upon where the person offering the ads was based*, however could advertise e.g. alcohol in a prohibited country.
*at least in the EU you are considered to be a party to the contract set in the EU and therefore under its jurisdiction by default.....
You've missed the point; every hypothesis has an H(0), the I am not true hypothesis.
Without evidence to support H(1): GOd exists, the default is H(0) - and at this point you have not proved the H(0) is correct, but simply you could not disprove it. THey are two entirely different concepts, which you dont appear to understand.
That is the inherent superiority of a scientific approach - once enough proof is found, you flip to H(1) and you can carry on. With religion there is not that approach - it is H(1) always, no matter the lack of evidence, because "I say so" is used.
I thought it was even less than that, around 3 seconds of actual footage - hence fair use (especially as it is criticism) should be trivial to show.
It seems like they erroneously issued DMCA takedown and, as such, are liable for damages. IA mostdefinatley NAL however!
Personally I see nothing wrong with making money through prostitution is not a shameing occupation. AS long as you have free choice about it and it is properly regulated, then I see no problem. But then I peronally believe sex between consenting parties is fine.
Finally, you made the classic straw man of suggesting because I liked ONE aspect therefore I must like it all. I agree Holland has problems, however it is a MUCH bettwer country to live in than the US. Much more free, in the ACTUAL versus religious rights idea of it....
Except it has nothing to do with this article or situation at all.
did you RTFA?
Situation: 65c per pill, same as Thailand, or we dont pay you ANYTHING by licensing it and getting it produced elsewhere.
HOw is that tricky?
You do realise how stuipid this is dont you?
You just get another coountry to produce it, under a compulsory license, and the drug company gets less money. The far more rational position for the drug company would have been to charge the same they did elsewhere.
youre an idiot if you think your crazy situation would work. Wait tiill WHO fuck over the drug companies themselves if they tried it....
wow, ignore the body of the post and attack the person. nice.
the US is known for using "abstinence" only, and not providing any barrier methods. that is plain stupid, and defies human nature.
the country with the highest abstinence age, lowest STI rate and highest public awareness is Holland. Sex education starts at 5, and teaches that sex is normal, fun but overall has to be SAFE. and it works. and your system doesnt
GUess you;ll just go down the toilet then.
How in hell can a number be a trade secret? The number does not represent anything else, it is strictly a number!
you cannot arbitrarily determine that a number (as it is) is a trade secret, that's crap...
AACS is an open, published standard. As noone outswide the US thinks that software patents are worth shit, then anyone can write their own AACS decryption scheme :)
Except that the contract with Soundexchange prohibits you from doing that - if you are a soundexchange member you cannot negotiate directly. ever.
If you can get them, try Hotel Chocolat - UK Company that has some really good chocolate houses producing for them. They get hold of really rare, interesting chocolate (single estate Iara, mmmmmM!) and are making a killing over here.
American chocolate makes Cadburys taste good. and Cadbury's is mainly dog faeces i believe....
(IMO, not expressed as fact, not to be taken seriously, someone have a life...)