Of course stealing comments is IP infringement. The damages would likely be less if the value of the IP is less but it is out and out theft nonetheless.
If they still have their comments, then they haven't been stolen. Why is so difficult to differentiate theft and infringement?
Face it. There is stolen code in Linux.
SCO has not reported their code missing, so it isn't stolen. There may or may not be infringing code in Linux. If even slashdotters can't see the difference, then there's little hope for the GP.
The goofs even have the nerve to ask for your email password. While I was there I sent them a bunch of bogus information. Waste some of their time, at least, and maybe help drown out any real data they might get.
wouldn't that be: "habré estado yendo a anticiparlo"?
Maybe so. I wrote that, but then thought the infinitive was right (in Spanish the infinitive is used for the non-immediate act.). It's not my first language. Also, in retrospect the original poster's idea was more complex than I realized, and what I wrote did not reflect what he was saying. So ignore the whole post:-)
It's insurance. Insurance is a losing bet. They make a profit on it. If they are making a profit, then it must be a loss for the buyers (as a group, of course).
The purpose of insurance is not to save money, it's to avoid disaster. That's why insurance on something like a house is a good idea - no because it won't cost you money, but rather so that you're not wiped out if your house burns down.
If you can stand the loss, you're better off in the long run not buying extended warranties. Yes, there will be times when something will break, and you'd have been better off having bought the insurance, but overall, you'll have more money in your pocket if you don't buy insurance on things you can stand (however painful) to lose.
his sounds a lot like they are trying to reuse the story
Almost all story plot ideas are reused. Movies, television, plays, whatever. The basic elements of what make good stories can be found over and over and over again. There are even standard formulas for stories. How many stories does this formula match?:
- Meet the Main Character (MC)
- MC has a problem.
- MC attempts a simple, straightforward, and reasonable solution.
- The first attempt fails, because of some new, unforseen information.
- MC attempts a more complicated solution to the now more complicated problem.
- The second attempt also fails, because the problem turns out to be much more complex than previously thought.
- MC attempts a third solution. This attempt is is very complicated, and involves great risk.
- As this attempt unfolds it encounters tremendous resistance, and seems doomed to failure.
- At the last moment, the MC snatches victory from the jaws of defeat.
- Finally, another character confirms that the problem is solved. This part is important, as it assures the audience that it is indeed over. This character is essentially the one who says "He's dead, Jim." Even though everybody knows he's dead, it still has to be said.
Many many stories fit this framework. And the three attempts is exactly the right number. Four is tedious, and two is unsatisfying.
Let's say there is no penalty for accidentally claiming that you own the copyright for something and demanding that someone take it down. If that's the case, can I send a note to the RIAA demanding they take down their website because I believe they're using a graphic I created?
Only if you pretend the word accidentally has no meaning.
It's not the amount of pay that determines whether or not a person takes pride in their work. Getting paid more than is expected will temporarily raise the level of effort, but soon the level of expectation rises to meet the pay, and the quality of the work regresses to its previous state.
Slashdot Mirror
If they still have their comments, then they haven't been stolen. Why is so difficult to differentiate theft and infringement?
Face it. There is stolen code in Linux.
SCO has not reported their code missing, so it isn't stolen. There may or may not be infringing code in Linux. If even slashdotters can't see the difference, then there's little hope for the GP.
And sure enough, there was his ass, just laying there on the floor.
The goofs even have the nerve to ask for your email password. While I was there I sent them a bunch of bogus information. Waste some of their time, at least, and maybe help drown out any real data they might get.
His point is it isn't really BASIC. The "point" you made is irrelevant. But you already knew that.
Quartz is not a theme.
Yeah OK. Do you have any idea how hot that is?
Wont means you're disposed, or likely, to do something. If I read your (insightful) post correctly, I take it you're hesitant to do so.
This is good news. The economy must be rebounding, because that's when silly announcements are all that's needed to boost stock prices.
What does 720p mean?
I'll bet they offered to sell you an extended warranty on the dung, though.
That depends on the line. If the slug is a three dollar favorite it's not a safe bet.
Please. The judge in this case accepted the email printout as evidence. It's a heck of a lot easier to make a reaslitic email than a video recording.
Have a few disreputable ones done so?
Oh, so that's why it works so well! Oh wait, I forgot. No written sarcasm.
Maybe so. I wrote that, but then thought the infinitive was right (in Spanish the infinitive is used for the non-immediate act.). It's not my first language. Also, in retrospect the original poster's idea was more complex than I realized, and what I wrote did not reflect what he was saying. So ignore the whole post :-)
It's insurance. Insurance is a losing bet. They make a profit on it. If they are making a profit, then it must be a loss for the buyers (as a group, of course).
The purpose of insurance is not to save money, it's to avoid disaster. That's why insurance on something like a house is a good idea - no because it won't cost you money, but rather so that you're not wiped out if your house burns down.
If you can stand the loss, you're better off in the long run not buying extended warranties. Yes, there will be times when something will break, and you'd have been better off having bought the insurance, but overall, you'll have more money in your pocket if you don't buy insurance on things you can stand (however painful) to lose.
Habré estado ir a anticiparlo.
YADNAL. You enter into contracts every day without signing anything. And you certainly don't need witnesses to make a contract.
Almost all story plot ideas are reused. Movies, television, plays, whatever. The basic elements of what make good stories can be found over and over and over again. There are even standard formulas for stories. How many stories does this formula match? :
- Meet the Main Character (MC)
- MC has a problem.
- MC attempts a simple, straightforward, and reasonable solution.
- The first attempt fails, because of some new, unforseen information.
- MC attempts a more complicated solution to the now more complicated problem.
- The second attempt also fails, because the problem turns out to be much more complex than previously thought.
- MC attempts a third solution. This attempt is is very complicated, and involves great risk.
- As this attempt unfolds it encounters tremendous resistance, and seems doomed to failure.
- At the last moment, the MC snatches victory from the jaws of defeat.
- Finally, another character confirms that the problem is solved. This part is important, as it assures the audience that it is indeed over. This character is essentially the one who says "He's dead, Jim." Even though everybody knows he's dead, it still has to be said.
Many many stories fit this framework. And the three attempts is exactly the right number. Four is tedious, and two is unsatisfying.
Only if you pretend the word accidentally has no meaning.
It's not the amount of pay that determines whether or not a person takes pride in their work. Getting paid more than is expected will temporarily raise the level of effort, but soon the level of expectation rises to meet the pay, and the quality of the work regresses to its previous state.
That's right. And now if you turn yourself into the police, then you'd be the police and you could arrest them.
No it's not, it a Straw Man (misstate the position, then attack that). Ad hominem would be if he said you're wrong because you're a moron.
Yeah. In fact Apple's already doing that.
If their business depends on nobody finding out about it, I'd say it's not much of a business.