because he's fucking spammy in the way he asks. I am NOT interested in his funky hosts file manager, I'm using a tool that does what I WANT IT TO DO. I have 8GB of memory and two cores in this system, you really think I give a flying fuck at something that's using less than 1% of the total available resources?? Oh, lemme guess, APK, you're saving up to be Jewish?
It saddens me that the once-beautiful language has been superceded by "txtspk" and "emojis". If and when that shit makes it to vocalised language I will remove my own vocal cords with a chainsaw.
software licences are obtained under the terms of contract set in the EULA, among which: the licence is usable on a single machine (usually) or in the case of a volume licence, a certain number of machines on a single or group of specific sites. This does not extend to a State employee using a volume licence at home.
in a sane world (yeah right) work done on the public purse becomes public property.
Lexis have been contracted - on the public purse - to publish the Georgia legislation.
Ergo, the work is public property.
If Lexis then decided to annotate the work and publish it as the single, definitive edition, that's their problem, and not something they can claim on copyright because simply put, it was paid for on the public purse ergo it is PUBLIC PROPERTY.
They MIGHT have a claim IF they can show RIGHT NOW (and I haven't seen it) a prominent link to an UNANNOTATED EDITION.
(yes, I've laboured the point a bit but it is vital to understand that misappropriation of public funds for private gain is a common law offence covered under FRAUD).
Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, 206.01: The United States Copyright Office considers "edicts of government," such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents, not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are federal, state, or local as well as to those of foreign governments
The United States Copyright Office considers "edicts of government," such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents, not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are federal, state, or local as well as to those of foreign governments. (Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, 206.01)
False: from the exact same page (the very next paragraph, in fact) that you linked:
The United States Copyright Office considers "edicts of government," such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents, not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are federal, state, or local as well as to those of foreign governments.
Ergo, the ONE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE EDITION OF THE STATE LAWS OF GEORGIA is NOT eligible for copyright protection!
or Janis Ian who was sued by her record company (sounds familiar, coughcoughGeorgeMichaelcoughcough) for refusing to record another album until her cut of the physical album proceeds was renegotiated along with her contract, both in her favour as opposed to the label taking the meat and her having to pay the entire production cost for the fucking discs out of her five percent.
I've done some deep searching and cannot locate an unannotated version of the Georgia code. Apparently the Lexis edition 2 is the "official" and definitive version.
I don't think, considering the material, the State even has standing to litigate. Lexis might, assuming they can prove authorship of the annotations. But the STATE?? I hope this gets taken all the way to SCOTUS.
Of course, you do need wget (search for wget using your preferred search engine; most Linux distributions have this installed by default, the GNU Project has also ported it for Windows as wgetwin32). The above string will recursively download the entire site. I don't know about the US Code but the England and Wales Statute Law Database runs some 15,000 primary Statutes and over a hundred thousand secondary instruments to over a million pages, chewing its way through more than 28GB of just text. Triple again that for the Britain and Ireland Legal Information Institute database which is (most of) the case Law. Mostly text, but a good few images in there as well.
I have access to the UK's (that's four States - England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - not to mention parish and Church) Statute rolls and case law libraries, updated weekly, on my netbook. It all takes up almost the entire 160GB hard drive that's not given to search tools and the OS.
None of that data cost me a bean aside from the bandwidth to download it.
hmmm... well, my humble opinion is, and several high court judges agree with me, that anyone who operates under colour of the law (to take the prime example of a police officer) should be expected to be able to quote it from memory.
Any that are not able to do this under direct interrogation by members of the public whom those public servants expect to obey the law, are liable to prosecution themselves under relevant fraud statute (Fraud Act 2006, section 2 paragraph 1 "Fraud by false representation", and section 3 "Fraud by failing to disclose information", section 4 "Fraud by abuse of position", in the case of England and Wales, which carries a conviction on indictment penalty of up to ten years imprisonment).
Oh, the joys of watching a cop absolutely shit himself when I throw that at him when one basically orders me to not carry my bicycle through a PUBLIC right of way and I challenge him to quote me chapter and verse.
Offences Against The Person Act 1861 (England and Wales) makes no distinction between the perpetrator of a murder and the victim. Ergo, taken with amendments, the statute on suicide (murder) carries with it a penalty on conviction of life imprisonment. I'm pretty sure anywhere else that has a murder statute on the books takes similar wording and enjoys the same weird logic.
Some jurisdictions have fairly recently introduced SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statutes that impose summary penalties on offenders - where a single judge and no jury can make a finding and impose the maximum penalty.
I have an AMD APU under the hood here, if Microsoft manage to override my preference for manufacturer reference drivers over their DX Certified crap and fuck my machine up in the process of rendering my 7 Home Premium licence useless for reinstalling 7HP, I'll be making the immediate and permanent switch to an alternative kernel.
I mean really, only Microsoft could manage to fuck up what is essentially a toaster as far as me, an end user, is concerned.
Slashdot Mirror
because it's copypasta spam.
Thank you, come again. Or better yet, don't.
because he's fucking spammy in the way he asks. I am NOT interested in his funky hosts file manager, I'm using a tool that does what I WANT IT TO DO. I have 8GB of memory and two cores in this system, you really think I give a flying fuck at something that's using less than 1% of the total available resources?? Oh, lemme guess, APK, you're saving up to be Jewish?
Too soon?
no, it's guggle-foo (like "foot" but without the "T").
I started a thread several hours ago, it's still running.
...for some measure of "English". o.0
It saddens me that the once-beautiful language has been superceded by "txtspk" and "emojis". If and when that shit makes it to vocalised language I will remove my own vocal cords with a chainsaw.
...come on, guys, fire up wget and let's hammer the shit out of that site before they take the code offline.
software licences are obtained under the terms of contract set in the EULA, among which: the licence is usable on a single machine (usually) or in the case of a volume licence, a certain number of machines on a single or group of specific sites. This does not extend to a State employee using a volume licence at home.
in a sane world (yeah right) work done on the public purse becomes public property.
Lexis have been contracted - on the public purse - to publish the Georgia legislation.
Ergo, the work is public property.
If Lexis then decided to annotate the work and publish it as the single, definitive edition, that's their problem, and not something they can claim on copyright because simply put, it was paid for on the public purse ergo it is PUBLIC PROPERTY.
They MIGHT have a claim IF they can show RIGHT NOW (and I haven't seen it) a prominent link to an UNANNOTATED EDITION.
(yes, I've laboured the point a bit but it is vital to understand that misappropriation of public funds for private gain is a common law offence covered under FRAUD).
I'd've thought the Georgia judiciary would prefer Merriam-Webster, it being an American English dictionary an' all...
Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, 206.01: The United States Copyright Office considers "edicts of government," such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents, not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are federal, state, or local as well as to those of foreign governments
there is a maxim that goes "Justice must be seen, to be done."
What this means, practically speaking, is that ALL court cases are matters of public record, with VERY FEW and VERY SPECIFIC exceptions.
There is stink about this in the UK at the moment with in camera public family cases being used by the State to steal children.
The only supporters of the status quo are those who stand to profit by it. And paedophiles.
The United States Copyright Office considers "edicts of government," such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents, not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are federal, state, or local as well as to those of foreign governments. (Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, 206.01)
False: from the exact same page (the very next paragraph, in fact) that you linked:
The United States Copyright Office considers "edicts of government," such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents, not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are federal, state, or local as well as to those of foreign governments.
Ergo, the ONE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE EDITION OF THE STATE LAWS OF GEORGIA is NOT eligible for copyright protection!
Thank you, come again.
or Janis Ian who was sued by her record company (sounds familiar, coughcoughGeorgeMichaelcoughcough) for refusing to record another album until her cut of the physical album proceeds was renegotiated along with her contract, both in her favour as opposed to the label taking the meat and her having to pay the entire production cost for the fucking discs out of her five percent.
I've done some deep searching and cannot locate an unannotated version of the Georgia code. Apparently the Lexis edition 2 is the "official" and definitive version.
Fuck me.
they're being sued by the State and not Lexis?
I don't think, considering the material, the State even has standing to litigate. Lexis might, assuming they can prove authorship of the annotations. But the STATE?? I hope this gets taken all the way to SCOTUS.
wget -r http://www.lexisnexis.com/hott...
wget -r http://www.lexisnexis.com/
Of course, you do need wget (search for wget using your preferred search engine; most Linux distributions have this installed by default, the GNU Project has also ported it for Windows as wgetwin32). The above string will recursively download the entire site. I don't know about the US Code but the England and Wales Statute Law Database runs some 15,000 primary Statutes and over a hundred thousand secondary instruments to over a million pages, chewing its way through more than 28GB of just text. Triple again that for the Britain and Ireland Legal Information Institute database which is (most of) the case Law. Mostly text, but a good few images in there as well.
I've found wget to be very useful in such situations.
I have access to the UK's (that's four States - England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - not to mention parish and Church) Statute rolls and case law libraries, updated weekly, on my netbook. It all takes up almost the entire 160GB hard drive that's not given to search tools and the OS.
None of that data cost me a bean aside from the bandwidth to download it.
you should familiarise yourself with modern usage. It refers to the bullying tactics employed by police officers to force compliance.
hmmm... well, my humble opinion is, and several high court judges agree with me, that anyone who operates under colour of the law (to take the prime example of a police officer) should be expected to be able to quote it from memory.
Any that are not able to do this under direct interrogation by members of the public whom those public servants expect to obey the law, are liable to prosecution themselves under relevant fraud statute (Fraud Act 2006, section 2 paragraph 1 "Fraud by false representation", and section 3 "Fraud by failing to disclose information", section 4 "Fraud by abuse of position", in the case of England and Wales, which carries a conviction on indictment penalty of up to ten years imprisonment).
Oh, the joys of watching a cop absolutely shit himself when I throw that at him when one basically orders me to not carry my bicycle through a PUBLIC right of way and I challenge him to quote me chapter and verse.
suicide is murder.
Offences Against The Person Act 1861 (England and Wales) makes no distinction between the perpetrator of a murder and the victim. Ergo, taken with amendments, the statute on suicide (murder) carries with it a penalty on conviction of life imprisonment. I'm pretty sure anywhere else that has a murder statute on the books takes similar wording and enjoys the same weird logic.
yes it is, and it's an offence at common law.
Some jurisdictions have fairly recently introduced SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statutes that impose summary penalties on offenders - where a single judge and no jury can make a finding and impose the maximum penalty.
I have an AMD APU under the hood here, if Microsoft manage to override my preference for manufacturer reference drivers over their DX Certified crap and fuck my machine up in the process of rendering my 7 Home Premium licence useless for reinstalling 7HP, I'll be making the immediate and permanent switch to an alternative kernel.
I mean really, only Microsoft could manage to fuck up what is essentially a toaster as far as me, an end user, is concerned.