Do you think a man with $10million sits down at a table and says OK, lets find some trendy thing to invest in, forget viable, forget getting our money back, just get us into the next happnin thang. Well maybe a couple of jerks, but as a general rule I don't think so.
So tell us, what are the rules do deciding how realistic a business is that has not existed before.
No cheating now. You can't use any success story from history. its gotta be new though it can be a new way of doing an old thing.
Noone would seriously expect to be able to call their hamburger store macdonalds and put up a big golden arch out the front and sell big macs and not expect macdonalds to ignore them for two reasons their investment in the name and their reputation when your burgers are making people ill (more than the real ones anyway)
why wouldn't they want to do the same in cyberspace. what good reason would you have for using the name in a domain unless you were trying to take advantage of the work they did. and I'll accept arguments from all the joe and joanne macdonalds out there and all the mr and mrs international business machines and joe pepsi the actor
but everyone else.. i don't think so.
but even i agree that macdonalds don't need macdonalds.pro or aero or non business related names and they should be available to other users.
I think if the use by another doesn't constitute holding out ie acting like the hamburger macdonalds, and there is little chance of users getting mixed up then they shouldn't just get it as of right.
The rego bodies have to make tough decisions like that. Thats why they get paid. not just to take names and cash cheques.
let anyone know what? that i have received an email? No, ht ecorrect grammer is"Dear Jim, I have received an email form Spam Co" No croime in that
Q2 Yes, of course they if you wrote "Do not forward this death threat to the police or any law enforcement authority or in any way allow another person to forward this death threat to the police or other law enforcement body" at the end of the death threat.
Of course you will go to jail for your death threat and they will be subject to the full force of you suing them in a civil court for infringing your coyright and I suspect the Judge will give you damages of ohhh 15c at least.
People seem to think there is some jail involved here. Its not even a criminal law. Except for a couple of sections dealing with false declarations the law only allows the copyright holder to sue you for your action. At best they will get loss of profits and if you are a big abuser some punitive damages but for email, whats the loss. There is no cause of action.
Understand. NO ONE WILL GO TO JAIL FOR FORWARDING EMAIL.
I get very confused. I was sure one of our american friends told us that we have a nazi government. now its communist. lordy my head is starting to hurt.
I wish i could have just one thought like them, then i wouldn't have to think so much and i could just be sure.
How come a thoughtless rant like this one which displays no understanding of local culture or governmnet systems and basically says we should overthrow our government because the writer doesn't understand it get a score of 2. I'll have to save it and insert my favourite rant subject in the appropriate places and use it over and over again to bild up my points. Then again
Lee, we have a federal election coming in a few months and a lot of people think the current gov will not be re-elected. And funnily enough it will be because the government will be made to answer to the people on a matter of tax reform. I don't think the Copyright Act will feature prominently in the campaign
Maybe if they refuse to leave ofice you and your friends can give us some tips on how to overthrow a government (without guns of course because they took all ours away from us, though I don't think I have known anyone who actually owned a gun since I lived in a farming town 30 years ago) but until then...
BTW I'm sure I speak for all Australians when I say that we are also glad your parents didn't move to Australia before you were born.
Well actually YOU are wrong.
The Act effectively leaves it to common practice to determine whether a person has breached copyright by giving another person a copy of an email. Unless the writer explicitly states any limitations to use and if commom practice would include copying of the work to others then such copying would not constitute infringement of the copyright. That's what Sec 36 says at least
Lots of other situations would be covered by the fair use rules covering criticism or even reporting.
If you look hard enough you can find trouble in the most unlikely places. I personally think there's enough out there for us to worry about without making more up.
They can pick and choose their cases. Of course they bloody well can. If they have limited resources and unlimited cases they will obviously choose the ones they think they will win and will have the most effect of limiting lawbreaking by others.
50%, What? . Next time you are picked up for doing 70 in a 60 zone try that on on the nice policeman and see how up your arse he throws the book.
The Act doesn't prohibit the use or importation of mod chips except for commercial use. A user can still import and install a mod chip. Technically the OS dealer has broken the law but jurisdiction omnly extends to the border so noone is going to get hurt. An Australian cant import to sell though.
The law specifically allows backups, reverse engineering, interoperability, security testing.
The law doesn't allow removal of digital rights management info on a program or music etc and before anyone says "how will they know' the short answer is they won't but they won't care unless you transfer the unmarked copy to another person.
This of course is of no concern to those who believe that copyright is an anethma and IP does not actually exist. But to others, the law is wide but seems to be targeted at commercial level operations.
And why wouldn't it. If you want to stop something make it more expensive.
In a capitalist system you just gotta have better PR. And a little luck. And ruthless determination to succeed at all costs. And the ability to lie without blinking to customers, suppliers, courts, associates and staff and when caught, the hide to wonder why it matters.
Oh, and a product that is slightly less shitty than your competitors product. And this one is optional In fact there are times when it helps to not actually have a product.
Kyle is right but we hate bill because of what he is now not what he was or even how he got there. We hate him because he is an arsehole who suffers from such hubris that you wonder if he is even in this world at all sometimes.
I don't have the numbers on it but could probably find some but my understanding is that much of the scale economies in Telcos come from the admin side, esp billing. Even with computerized systems the admin costs of billing is high and there are definite economies to increasing the number of customers.
Economies of scale are only supposed to work across a defined range anyway so in your example , sure the economies may not be in hardware. But if the same billing system can handle 300,000 accounts a month that's better than 50,000.
And then you sell them more stuff. And make even more money.
Read your own post "They place America at the bottom, Did they use reverse alpha order or place US on a list of Importance"
US stupid. Your country is called United States of America in case you hadn't noticed and comes just before Venezula and just after Uganda in any alpha list.
Next time there is a drop box in an address form that defaults to USA try dropping it and you will see that even American sites have USA near the bottom of the list.
And you wonder why we get frustrated with americans.
Re:Better technologies out there
on
Solar Sails
·
· Score: 1
Yes, but of what possible use in slowing an interplanetary spacecraft is a material strip that girls use to hem dresses and stuff.
see what i mean about no understanding of the numbers involved in creation. and that's just the stars as they currently exist Why do you assume that life had to come into existance on any other planet at the same time it did on earth. couldn't it have come into existance on some planet in some part of the universe in the last 12 billion years or whatever or will do so somewhere in the next 12 billion or whatever.
or that it can only ever happen once on each of those planets. there have been how many major extinctions on earth three or more that could have eliminated life and it could have come back.
the surprising thing is more that we aren't crowded out already. Logically the fact that we exist when we should not means that we should not then be surprised that there are others when we find them.
Personally i believe in god as well, probably for different reasons. I figure that he can do whatever he wants and he doesn't have to tell me. But I never assume there is something he can't do.
first answer.- even if the formation looks just like a face and isn't quirky light and poor photography, do you ask that question about the faces you see in a cloud or a rock formation that looks just like a chicken or whatever. Humans have a poor appreciation on the time scales involved in existance and the saying nothing new under the sun pretty much covers it.
Um, let me think. 20 Chinese in a truck at Dover died trying to get into UK.
North-West Australia coast. We lose a boatload of 75 - 200 Middle Eastrn refugees every time there's a storm as they sail from Indonesia after escaping from the Middle East. And there are lots of storms
I'm sure there are many other countries.
I think though that they are dying to get out of wherever more than to get into UK, Austrtalia or US.
I presume you mean killing themselves by accident.
The major shortcoming of the analysis is that it runs forward on a strictly linear basis and doesn't accept that there might be a problem that simply stops us from doing something that we like to do. I'm not saying that either Napster or $20 petrol is one of those problems but if "Not everything is practical just because there is a need for it" is incorrect so is "If there is a need for it, something will be practical".
It is also possible that if the price of petrol went up to $20 people would start to reconsider the way they do things in total and change quite central things that rely on transport such as say, food. If brocolli goes up to $40 a lb the brocolli industry is dead.
It's an American thing I think to use petrol as an example and then concentrate on the cost of running a car to and from work. The biggest effect of increases in the cost of petrol are on other things than car running costs.
"If the demand is high we will find something to fulfil the need" falls down if we consider that the demand was created by Napster and if there is no Napster the next best thing may not be good enough to increase the demand again. Napster might have been the threshold product that created the market and without it we are back to warez sites and just plain swapping.
""The work that was done cost the company money, and someone else is trying to get away with not paying for the work that was done""
If thats what happened then yeah there might be a case for suing but while the idea might not be obvious to some its probably been independantly arrived at by different companies and it cost them money too. So there's not necessarily a theft of an idea or work done. I mean there's only so many ways you can do it I suspect.
My concern with patents is the fact the they are given for stuff that isn't all that inventive really, just good engineering (and I don't mean that in an anti-engineering way at all)
And lets not even start on the genome stuff. Onion had that one covered when they ran the Microsoft patents I and O headlines.
Try this analopgy.
You work for a living and commute to another town. One morning your car is taken by you kid for a joyride and thats the only way you can get to work so you just don't get paid that day.
Kid brings the car back after lunch but its oo late so you miss the whole day.
So you dont have $xx that you would have had if you made it to work.
Same as a virus to a business.
So if Loss is the wrong word - waddaya call it then.
Call it '**it happens" and so the headline story should should read "businesses around the world had $20biilion worth of **it happen to them last year because of computer virus"
Slashdot Mirror
No cheating now. You can't use any success story from history. its gotta be new though it can be a new way of doing an old thing.
guns just make it a little easier for more people to kill more people.
like napster. except of course napster doesn't kill people.
why wouldn't they want to do the same in cyberspace. what good reason would you have for using the name in a domain unless you were trying to take advantage of the work they did. and I'll accept arguments from all the joe and joanne macdonalds out there and all the mr and mrs international business machines and joe pepsi the actor
but everyone else.. i don't think so.
but even i agree that macdonalds don't need macdonalds.pro or aero or non business related names and they should be available to other users.
I think if the use by another doesn't constitute holding out ie acting like the hamburger macdonalds, and there is little chance of users getting mixed up then they shouldn't just get it as of right.
The rego bodies have to make tough decisions like that. Thats why they get paid. not just to take names and cash cheques.
not current owners, current trademark holders. So if microsoft applies it can get microsoft.pro and we can all sue them for lying.
Q2 Yes, of course they if you wrote "Do not forward this death threat to the police or any law enforcement authority or in any way allow another person to forward this death threat to the police or other law enforcement body" at the end of the death threat.
Of course you will go to jail for your death threat and they will be subject to the full force of you suing them in a civil court for infringing your coyright and I suspect the Judge will give you damages of ohhh 15c at least.
People seem to think there is some jail involved here. Its not even a criminal law. Except for a couple of sections dealing with false declarations the law only allows the copyright holder to sue you for your action. At best they will get loss of profits and if you are a big abuser some punitive damages but for email, whats the loss. There is no cause of action.
Understand. NO ONE WILL GO TO JAIL FOR FORWARDING EMAIL.
I wish i could have just one thought like them, then i wouldn't have to think so much and i could just be sure.
Lee, we have a federal election coming in a few months and a lot of people think the current gov will not be re-elected. And funnily enough it will be because the government will be made to answer to the people on a matter of tax reform. I don't think the Copyright Act will feature prominently in the campaign
Maybe if they refuse to leave ofice you and your friends can give us some tips on how to overthrow a government (without guns of course because they took all ours away from us, though I don't think I have known anyone who actually owned a gun since I lived in a farming town 30 years ago) but until then...
BTW I'm sure I speak for all Australians when I say that we are also glad your parents didn't move to Australia before you were born.
Lots of other situations would be covered by the fair use rules covering criticism or even reporting.
If you look hard enough you can find trouble in the most unlikely places. I personally think there's enough out there for us to worry about without making more up.
The last ones a trick question isn't it?
They can pick and choose their cases. Of course they bloody well can. If they have limited resources and unlimited cases they will obviously choose the ones they think they will win and will have the most effect of limiting lawbreaking by others.
50%, What? . Next time you are picked up for doing 70 in a 60 zone try that on on the nice policeman and see how up your arse he throws the book.
The law specifically allows backups, reverse engineering, interoperability, security testing.
The law doesn't allow removal of digital rights management info on a program or music etc and before anyone says "how will they know' the short answer is they won't but they won't care unless you transfer the unmarked copy to another person.
This of course is of no concern to those who believe that copyright is an anethma and IP does not actually exist. But to others, the law is wide but seems to be targeted at commercial level operations.
And why wouldn't it. If you want to stop something make it more expensive.
I thought thats why he's in deep shit with the DoJ, because he didn't listen to the US Government.
And coming from a non-US location I have to say that having a foreign company take over an industry isn't so bad really.
I mean you mustn't think so either. Otherwise you'd be complaining bitterly about how US companies go overseas and take over industries.
Oh, and a product that is slightly less shitty than your competitors product. And this one is optional In fact there are times when it helps to not actually have a product.
Kyle is right but we hate bill because of what he is now not what he was or even how he got there. We hate him because he is an arsehole who suffers from such hubris that you wonder if he is even in this world at all sometimes.
Economies of scale are only supposed to work across a defined range anyway so in your example , sure the economies may not be in hardware. But if the same billing system can handle 300,000 accounts a month that's better than 50,000.
And then you sell them more stuff. And make even more money.
Read your own post "They place America at the bottom, Did they use reverse alpha order or place US on a list of Importance"
US stupid. Your country is called United States of America in case you hadn't noticed and comes just before Venezula and just after Uganda in any alpha list.
Next time there is a drop box in an address form that defaults to USA try dropping it and you will see that even American sites have USA near the bottom of the list.
And you wonder why we get frustrated with americans.
Yes, but of what possible use in slowing an interplanetary spacecraft is a material strip that girls use to hem dresses and stuff.
or that it can only ever happen once on each of those planets. there have been how many major extinctions on earth three or more that could have eliminated life and it could have come back.
the surprising thing is more that we aren't crowded out already. Logically the fact that we exist when we should not means that we should not then be surprised that there are others when we find them.
Personally i believe in god as well, probably for different reasons. I figure that he can do whatever he wants and he doesn't have to tell me. But I never assume there is something he can't do.
having been very close to missing then altogether I pretty much treat every day like that now
i bet you're a lota fun at parties.
first answer.- even if the formation looks just like a face and isn't quirky light and poor photography, do you ask that question about the faces you see in a cloud or a rock formation that looks just like a chicken or whatever. Humans have a poor appreciation on the time scales involved in existance and the saying nothing new under the sun pretty much covers it.
second answer - dried riverbeds
and
why the hell he wants to buy me some mp3's with it.
North-West Australia coast. We lose a boatload of 75 - 200 Middle Eastrn refugees every time there's a storm as they sail from Indonesia after escaping from the Middle East. And there are lots of storms
I'm sure there are many other countries.
I think though that they are dying to get out of wherever more than to get into UK, Austrtalia or US.
I presume you mean killing themselves by accident.
It is also possible that if the price of petrol went up to $20 people would start to reconsider the way they do things in total and change quite central things that rely on transport such as say, food. If brocolli goes up to $40 a lb the brocolli industry is dead.
It's an American thing I think to use petrol as an example and then concentrate on the cost of running a car to and from work. The biggest effect of increases in the cost of petrol are on other things than car running costs.
"If the demand is high we will find something to fulfil the need" falls down if we consider that the demand was created by Napster and if there is no Napster the next best thing may not be good enough to increase the demand again. Napster might have been the threshold product that created the market and without it we are back to warez sites and just plain swapping.
If thats what happened then yeah there might be a case for suing but while the idea might not be obvious to some its probably been independantly arrived at by different companies and it cost them money too. So there's not necessarily a theft of an idea or work done. I mean there's only so many ways you can do it I suspect.
My concern with patents is the fact the they are given for stuff that isn't all that inventive really, just good engineering (and I don't mean that in an anti-engineering way at all)
And lets not even start on the genome stuff. Onion had that one covered when they ran the Microsoft patents I and O headlines.
Same as a virus to a business.
So if Loss is the wrong word - waddaya call it then.
Call it '**it happens" and so the headline story should should read "businesses around the world had $20biilion worth of **it happen to them last year because of computer virus"
I suspect He has his own special place for people who infringe His patents, copyright, trademarks and registered designs.
You'd wanna have your 'fair use' arguments real tight by then.