ah yes the bizarre world of US civil courts - the original idea of civil suits was to recover damagaes for an actual loss - then some wiseguy thought up things like triple damages and statutory damages and so on.
I'm still trying to figure out why the judge didn't get mad and toss the napster suit after all BMG one of the plaintiffs owns Napster the defendent - which is almost exactly like suing yourself.
ISS: NASA admits it doesn't have a handle on the costs here, not the least due to the fact that their accounting sucks rotten eggs.
It couldn't have anything to do with the fact the contractors working on parts for NASA don't have a clue / and or a milking NASA for every penny. e.g. BOEING a major contractor to the government / NASA for aerospace work openly admits that they don't know how much it costs to make one of their flagship products (the 747).
The government is always trying to put more NASA work in the hands of private contractors so who should we blame for the cost overruns ???
Our ability to deny the existance of echelon went out the window when politicians started demanding more use of echelon to gather inteligence in the wake of sept 11.
There were rumnblings a year or so ago that all the county code TLD's were going to switch to one of the alternate root providers because ICANN suddenly wanted to charge them mega $$$ for their TLD. It may still happen if ICAN don't get their act together so don't write off the alternate DNS providers (some of which have been around for years).
The difference is that when radio was getting started in the music playing business congress decided that it was a promotion tool for the record industry and exempted radio from paying royalties to the record labels.
However now that the record industry has it's lobbying worked out congress suddenly realised that internet radio is really about stealing from the record industry instead of promotion.
You forget the RIAA lobbying to be released from liability for damage caused (by them deliberately) to people's computer systems when the terrorism bill was passing through congress. Even though their amendment was defeated they said they already had the legal right to do this from other statutes passed by congress.
I was thinking about this argument - it depends on whether sending an email to an address can really be likened to a trespass against real property. If there is no trespass there is no issue of consent. This also looks like selective enforcement of their right - in real property trepass you have to enforce your right or lose it - how many unwanted emails have been received without action by intel ? If they routinely permit such trespass by others it weakens their right in this case.
An interesting point. Another issue too is the fact that intel chose to connect their email server to the public internet which they have no right or ability to control. Is it possible to commit trespass against an email server which is connected to a public network, the express purpose of which is to exchange traffic with other users of that network ? Sure I can see that attempts to cause damage to your server could be regarded as trespass because it goes beyond the intended use of both the internet and servers connected to it. It could be very dangerous if sending a simple email after being told not to is a punishable. Imagine if all complaints depts at companies had to do is tell you to stop complaining or they'll sue you. Spam is a different matter because sending spam is against most of the AUP's people obtain internet service under - maybe it's time to have a new Internet-wide AUP which addresses points such as this. I'm not advocating a return to the old days of no commercial usage but I think a single policy for all users makes a certain amount of sense.
The difference is that the Linux kernel is a work in progress the various patches and changes are released as they are developed - It's a collaborative development effort.
On the other hand IE is developed behind closed doors at Microsoft which claims to do all it's quality control and testing in house before it's software is released - Indeed microsoft claims this as a reason to use Microsoft Software rather than Linux.
It seems to me that this order is wrong for at least two reasons:
A) Discovery in a case is normally limited to parties turning over information to each other that is in their posession - not being ordered to go out and collect new information and then turn it over.
B) It's already been ruled illegal to spy on your wifes internet surfing habits - yet suddenly the movie industry is allowed to spy on your viewing habits - I don't think so !
With any luck this ruling will be overturned very soon.
The license is an agreement between you and the publisher - the contract between you and the retailer is for the sale of the shrink wrapped box which is a sale of goods under UCC.
The terms of the EULA have no effect on your contract with the retailer as they are not a party to the EULA.
Unfortunately in the case of the windows tax you probably have to return the whole PC because you bought it as a single item.
However you are entitled to return opened software (for a refund) if it doesn't meet your requirements - this right is provided by the Uniform Commercial Code - The reasoning is that you can't examine the software in the store so you are granted a reasonable period to examine the software at home.
The RIAA members agreed to a settlement with the FTC and essentially admitted bribing stores not to reduce prices on CD's. If the store would sell the CD for full price only the record industry would repay them by paying for advertising for that store.
and all you have to do is convince said judge / jury that you probably did have a license - seeing as most business / universities etc. have to keep records and accounts it wouldn't be too hard to produce invoices to prove they probably bought the licenses.
Re:Once money changes hands, the contract is final
on
Worst Buy
·
· Score: 2
The money changing hands is actually part of the performance of the contract - the contract is fully formed at the point where best buys website confirms acceptance of your order.
Re:The way telephone sales and support works
on
Worst Buy
·
· Score: 2
*WRONG*!!! You're calling employees of a contracted customer service provider. These people are sitting in a tiny cubicle in a call center in Phoenix, Arizona or Gary, Indiana and provide sales and customer service for several different companies. They are provided with scripts and access to the advertising copy and price database for each company they're supporting. If you ask them a question about a price on the advertising copy, guess what they do -- they read it right off the web site right back at you! At least, until somebody notices that hey, we're getting a lot of inquiries about this product, it's time to push this inquiry upstream to actual Best Buy employees.
Not WRONG - they may not be employees of best buy but are agents of best buy and therefore in law they are speaking for the company.
And when a price says $129 (and implies you're saving $200) it looks less like a typo - if the math didn't add up it'd be more believable.
Re:If true best buy did break the law.
on
Worst Buy
·
· Score: 2
There were of course "no rain checks available"
Re:If true best buy did break the law.
on
Worst Buy
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I've seen the bait and switch there before - I had an ad in my hand which showed a particular product at a large discount. Guess what - no product... not even a spot on the shelf for it... the next day after the 1 day sale the product in question was on the shelf without a discount. When I asked about it I was told "We just had a delivery". However they declined to show me the paperwork showing they weren't in stock the previous day.
Slashdot Mirror
is it just me who read this wrong the first time ???
ah yes the bizarre world of US civil courts - the original idea of civil suits was to recover damagaes for an actual loss - then some wiseguy thought up things like triple damages and statutory damages and so on.
The British court order you are talking about is not a search warrant but merely a court order requiring a person to allow entry to obtain evidence.
As it is only a civil court order the only remedy for refusal to comply is contempt of court procedings. Entry may not be forced under such an order.
That was my first though too :-)
I'm still trying to figure out why the judge didn't get mad and toss the napster suit after all BMG one of the plaintiffs owns Napster the defendent - which is almost exactly like suing yourself.
ISS: NASA admits it doesn't have a handle on the costs here, not the least due to the fact that their accounting sucks rotten eggs.
It couldn't have anything to do with the fact the contractors working on parts for NASA don't have a clue / and or a milking NASA for every penny. e.g. BOEING a major contractor to the government / NASA for aerospace work openly admits that they don't know how much it costs to make one of their flagship products (the 747).
The government is always trying to put more NASA work in the hands of private contractors so who should we blame for the cost overruns ???
Our ability to deny the existance of echelon went out the window when politicians started demanding more use of echelon to gather inteligence in the wake of sept 11.
There were rumnblings a year or so ago that all the county code TLD's were going to switch to one of the alternate root providers because ICANN suddenly wanted to charge them mega $$$ for their TLD. It may still happen if ICAN don't get their act together so don't write off the alternate DNS providers (some of which have been around for years).
Yeah they could line up next to the cigarette companies and hand out windows free to kids.
Seriously I think there are antitrust issues with giving away your product for free in order to destroy your competition.
The difference is that when radio was getting started in the music playing business congress decided that it was a promotion tool for the record industry and exempted radio from paying royalties to the record labels.
However now that the record industry has it's lobbying worked out congress suddenly realised that internet radio is really about stealing from the record industry instead of promotion.
You forget the RIAA lobbying to be released from liability for damage caused (by them deliberately) to people's computer systems when the terrorism bill was passing through congress. Even though their amendment was defeated they said they already had the legal right to do this from other statutes passed by congress.
I was thinking about this argument - it depends on whether sending an email to an address can really be likened to a trespass against real property. If there is no trespass there is no issue of consent. This also looks like selective enforcement of their right - in real property trepass you have to enforce your right or lose it - how many unwanted emails have been received without action by intel ? If they routinely permit such trespass by others it weakens their right in this case.
An interesting point. Another issue too is the fact that intel chose to connect their email server to the public internet which they have no right or ability to control. Is it possible to commit trespass against an email server which is connected to a public network, the express purpose of which is to exchange traffic with other users of that network ? Sure I can see that attempts to cause damage to your server could be regarded as trespass because it goes beyond the intended use of both the internet and servers connected to it. It could be very dangerous if sending a simple email after being told not to is a punishable. Imagine if all complaints depts at companies had to do is tell you to stop complaining or they'll sue you. Spam is a different matter because sending spam is against most of the AUP's people obtain internet service under - maybe it's time to have a new Internet-wide AUP which addresses points such as this. I'm not advocating a return to the old days of no commercial usage but I think a single policy for all users makes a certain amount of sense.
The difference is that the Linux kernel is a work in progress the various patches and changes are released as they are developed - It's a collaborative development effort.
On the other hand IE is developed behind closed doors at Microsoft which claims to do all it's quality control and testing in house before it's software is released - Indeed microsoft claims this as a reason to use Microsoft Software rather than Linux.
when did that happen then ? - last thing I'd heard was that we were still going through the pre-trial motions.
The songs are generally owned by whoever wrote them - the record label owns the rights in the recording they made and not the song itself.
It seems to me that this order is wrong for at least two reasons :
A) Discovery in a case is normally limited to parties turning over information to each other that is in their posession - not being ordered to go out and collect new information and then turn it over.
B) It's already been ruled illegal to spy on your wifes internet surfing habits - yet suddenly the movie industry is allowed to spy on your viewing habits - I don't think so !
With any luck this ruling will be overturned very soon.
The license is an agreement between you and the publisher - the contract between you and the retailer is for the sale of the shrink wrapped box which is a sale of goods under UCC.
The terms of the EULA have no effect on your contract with the retailer as they are not a party to the EULA.
Unfortunately in the case of the windows tax you probably have to return the whole PC because you bought it as a single item.
However you are entitled to return opened software (for a refund) if it doesn't meet your requirements - this right is provided by the Uniform Commercial Code - The reasoning is that you can't examine the software in the store so you are granted a reasonable period to examine the software at home.
The RIAA members agreed to a settlement with the FTC and essentially admitted bribing stores not to reduce prices on CD's. If the store would sell the CD for full price only the record industry would repay them by paying for advertising for that store.
and all you have to do is convince said judge / jury that you probably did have a license - seeing as most business / universities etc. have to keep records and accounts it wouldn't be too hard to produce invoices to prove they probably bought the licenses.
The money changing hands is actually part of the performance of the contract - the contract is fully formed at the point where best buys website confirms acceptance of your order.
*WRONG*!!! You're calling employees of a contracted customer service provider. These people are sitting in a tiny cubicle in a call center in Phoenix, Arizona or Gary, Indiana and provide sales and customer service for several different companies. They are provided with scripts and access to the advertising copy and price database for each company they're supporting. If you ask them a question about a price on the advertising copy, guess what they do -- they read it right off the web site right back at you! At least, until somebody notices that hey, we're getting a lot of inquiries about this product, it's time to push this inquiry upstream to actual Best Buy employees.
Not WRONG - they may not be employees of best buy but are agents of best buy and therefore in law they are speaking for the company.
And when a price says $129 (and implies you're saving $200) it looks less like a typo - if the math didn't add up it'd be more believable.
There were of course "no rain checks available"
I've seen the bait and switch there before - I had an ad in my hand which showed a particular product at a large discount. Guess what - no product ... not even a spot on the shelf for it... the next day after the 1 day sale the product in question was on the shelf without a discount. When I asked about it I was told "We just had a delivery". However they declined to show me the paperwork showing they weren't in stock the previous day.