there does not have to be a proven loss, according to both the quoted Statute and the Case Law. There only has to be a proven intent to obtain pecuniary advantage by deception, as is precisely what is happening here.
in old English law, prior to 2006 and as specified in the Fraud Act (1978?), obtaining or attempting to obtain pecuniary advantage, as here, by deception, as here, is fraud. In the Fraud Act it is defined as a summary offence - no question of intent. Did the fraud occur or did it not occur? If it did, then it did, end of story. Bend over, new fish.
oh, before you say it isn't fraud in this case, try reading up on Canadian law:
Section 380(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the general definition for fraud in Canada:
380. (1) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service,
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars; or (b) is guilty (i) of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or (ii) of an offence punishable on summary conviction, where the value of the subject-matter of the offence does not exceed five thousand dollars.
In addition to the penalties outlined above, the court can also issue a prohibition order under s. 380.2 (preventing a person from "seeking, obtaining or continuing any employment, or becoming or being a volunteer in any capacity, that involves having authority over the real property, money or valuable security of another person"). It can also make a restitution order under s. 380.3.
The Canadian courts have held that the offence consists of two distinct elements:
A prohibited act of deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means. In the absence of deceit or falsehood, the courts will look objectively for a "dishonest act"; and The deprivation must be caused by the prohibited act, and deprivation must relate to property, money, valuable security, or any service. The Supreme Court of Canada has held that deprivation is satisfied on proof of detriment, prejudice or risk of prejudice; it is not essential that there be actual loss. Deprivation of confidential information, in the nature of a trade secret or copyrighted material that has commercial value, has also been held to fall within the scope of the offence.
yeah I know, you've got the UVVA in the States since 2004, where pretty much any stage of fetal development grants Statutory rights as a conscious, organically independent member of the species. So far only 30 states have written it in though (AFAIK, Kentucky is the latest - they actually wrote it in two months before UVVA). It states that any "child in utero" is considered to be a legal victim if injured or killed during the commission of a federal crime of violence.
Here in England, though, the Offences Against The Person Act 1861 defines a person as an entity with rights and obligations under the Law. A fetus does have neither rights nor obligations in English Law, therefore it cannot be said that the intentional killing of a fetus is murder, since murder is the intentional killing of A PERSON.
Yes, it's a technical loophole, but that's the nature of Statute Law. It's finding and exploiting loopholes. Something the Family Division of the High Court takes great delight in doing.
(Re: the Pacchieri case, the High Court denied any preventative intervention in the abduction because at the time it made its order to remove the baby for selling onward, *their words*: "the baby had yet to take its first breath, therefore no person could speak for it.". The implication being, that until the baby takes its first breath of AIR, it is NOT A PERSON IN LAW. THEREFORE IT HAS NO RIGHTS AND NO PROTECTIONS. Further from that, in Re: D, the High Court denied an appeal against forced adoption on the grounds that (again, their words): "the child is too young to make her wishes and feelings known, and there is no opportunity to wait until the child is old enough to make her own decision about where she wants to live." So even once it has taken its first breath of air, the State can still decide that a child has NO RIGHT to decide its own destiny. If you want to get silly, in Haringey v Musa, the HC said that because the CHILDREN DID NOT SPEAK ENGLISH they could not be "granted rights under English Law because they could not hope to understand them"(!), therefore they would be abducted (under the guise of being adopted) and farmed out to separate families to be Anglicised. Sounds very Lebensborn. Himmler would be proud.)
Microsoft didn't invent the computer file system. Early as I can figure out, that was Lincoln Labs under US Government contract in 1958. That predates the very existence of Microsoft by nearly two decades.
rewriting application code so it'll run in a browser (a form of porting) is not historical preservation. I can't run this shit in an MS-DOS VM for the simple reason that it's rewritten to run in a Java sandbox. That is of no use to me. Nor should it be any use to anyone else with any sort of interest in preserving anything. A preserved application originally written for MS-DOS is one that I should be able to dump into my DOS VM and just fucking run it without having to do anything extraordinary to it like rewrite the code or sacrifice a fucking goat.
Here are some games & apps I have in my VM that I've not had to do ANYTHING to beyond simply dropping the game folder onto a virtual partition so the VM can actually read it:
Day Of The Tentacle The Need For Speed Albion Prisoner Of Ice Hexen: Beyond Heretic System Shock (CD Version, CD image is automatically loaded when you invoke the app) Archipelagos Warcraft Dungeons Of The Unforgiven Zzt Terminal Velocity Grand Theft Auto FractINT Lemmings Shooting Gallery Jason Jupiter Moraff's World Su-27 Flanker Command & Conquer 7th Guest (with CD enhancements, loads the same way as System Shock) USS Ticonderoga (just the enhanced demo, but still, 180MB for something that was at the time the biggest game on the planet in terms of the size of the codebase...) Magic Carpet (CD enhanced again)
Up to now I have 23 2GB partitions packed to the brim with DOS software lifted either from my archival CDs or from floppies that still worked or pulled off the dozen or so DOS hard drives I still have. Still crawling through old software collections I've had for nigh on 25 years, keeping what works and dropping those titles onto the VM, and writing them into the menu.
DOS offered a command interpreter. It also offered an interface (later known as an abstraction layer) between hardware and application software. Not to mention enhanced memory management, drive compression, a bundled programming interface, batch scripting...
Microsoft didn't invent nor did it spawn the shareware concept. That accolade goes squarely on the shoulders of Andrew Fluegelman and Jim Button who invented the method by accident. The name was decided by committee.
refer to historical text and realise, in the words of Mr. Radjak ("Starship Troopers", Heinlein), that naked force has ended more conflicts than any other course in history. If you want to argue against the point, speak to the elders of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You know, the ones whose arguments were ended in nuclear blasts.
When they do the press conferences with the photos of the victims spanning the wall behind them, look out for the photo of six year old Noah, who died at Sandy Hook two years ago, then died again in Pakistan last month. I bullshit you not, his picture was the one they used to remind everyone what an awful, awful thing happened where those two undercover Feds who were at the Boston marathon bombing just happened to be(!), then it was HELD IN THE LEFT HAND OF A BEREAVED PARENT OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL IN PAKISTAN DURING A PRESS CONFERENCE WHICH WAS ATTENDED BY THE BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION.
Sonething fishy is going on.
And I don't think actual nutters with guns have anything to do with it.
which has absolutely no scientific basis yet has been used to try and "cure" such illnesses as religious aberrance, homosexuality, psychopathy, narcissism, and more recently oppositional and defiant disorder, bipolar disorder, and a spanking new one called emotional incest; this is electroshock writ commercial.
You bring that shit anywhere near me, I'll fucking stab you in the heart with it.
I've got a Virtualbox setup with MS DOS and a stack of 2GB virtual drives packed chock full of full version games and apps, I've had to put a clock limiter on it because watching USS Ticonderoga scroll through at $stupid fps makes me dizzy.
doesn't make a difference really with spoken word, it's music recording you need something with a little more kick, which is when I break out the DAT recorder and the line filters.
Slashdot Mirror
it's either that or learn how to make lanyards for soaps...
there does not have to be a proven loss, according to both the quoted Statute and the Case Law. There only has to be a proven intent to obtain pecuniary advantage by deception, as is precisely what is happening here.
in old English law, prior to 2006 and as specified in the Fraud Act (1978?), obtaining or attempting to obtain pecuniary advantage, as here, by deception, as here, is fraud. In the Fraud Act it is defined as a summary offence - no question of intent. Did the fraud occur or did it not occur? If it did, then it did, end of story. Bend over, new fish.
better check the relevant jurisdiction.
Misrepresenting the Law then hiding behind it with malicious intent is most certainly FRAUD.
oh, before you say it isn't fraud in this case, try reading up on Canadian law:
Section 380(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the general definition for fraud in Canada:
380. (1) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service,
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars; or
(b) is guilty
(i) of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or
(ii) of an offence punishable on summary conviction,
where the value of the subject-matter of the offence does not exceed five thousand dollars.
In addition to the penalties outlined above, the court can also issue a prohibition order under s. 380.2 (preventing a person from "seeking, obtaining or continuing any employment, or becoming or being a volunteer in any capacity, that involves having authority over the real property, money or valuable security of another person"). It can also make a restitution order under s. 380.3.
The Canadian courts have held that the offence consists of two distinct elements:
A prohibited act of deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means. In the absence of deceit or falsehood, the courts will look objectively for a "dishonest act"; and
The deprivation must be caused by the prohibited act, and deprivation must relate to property, money, valuable security, or any service.
The Supreme Court of Canada has held that deprivation is satisfied on proof of detriment, prejudice or risk of prejudice; it is not essential that there be actual loss. Deprivation of confidential information, in the nature of a trade secret or copyrighted material that has commercial value, has also been held to fall within the scope of the offence.
did I say that??
and for good reason; because it puts them under PERSONAL LIABILITY: FRAUD.
Call it like it is, folks, deliberately misrepresenting the Law for gain is FRAUD.
yeah I know, you've got the UVVA in the States since 2004, where pretty much any stage of fetal development grants Statutory rights as a conscious, organically independent member of the species. So far only 30 states have written it in though (AFAIK, Kentucky is the latest - they actually wrote it in two months before UVVA). It states that any "child in utero" is considered to be a legal victim if injured or killed during the commission of a federal crime of violence.
Here in England, though, the Offences Against The Person Act 1861 defines a person as an entity with rights and obligations under the Law. A fetus does have neither rights nor obligations in English Law, therefore it cannot be said that the intentional killing of a fetus is murder, since murder is the intentional killing of A PERSON.
Yes, it's a technical loophole, but that's the nature of Statute Law. It's finding and exploiting loopholes. Something the Family Division of the High Court takes great delight in doing.
(Re: the Pacchieri case, the High Court denied any preventative intervention in the abduction because at the time it made its order to remove the baby for selling onward, *their words*: "the baby had yet to take its first breath, therefore no person could speak for it.". The implication being, that until the baby takes its first breath of AIR, it is NOT A PERSON IN LAW. THEREFORE IT HAS NO RIGHTS AND NO PROTECTIONS. Further from that, in Re: D, the High Court denied an appeal against forced adoption on the grounds that (again, their words): "the child is too young to make her wishes and feelings known, and there is no opportunity to wait until the child is old enough to make her own decision about where she wants to live." So even once it has taken its first breath of air, the State can still decide that a child has NO RIGHT to decide its own destiny. If you want to get silly, in Haringey v Musa, the HC said that because the CHILDREN DID NOT SPEAK ENGLISH they could not be "granted rights under English Law because they could not hope to understand them"(!), therefore they would be abducted (under the guise of being adopted) and farmed out to separate families to be Anglicised. Sounds very Lebensborn. Himmler would be proud.)
Fuck your Human Rights, they're not worth the paper they're printed on when the STATE can take them away as easily as it "grants" them.
MY RIGHTS are NOT yours to take and they're not mine to GIVE AWAY. UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
newsflash: it's not murder until the baby has taken its first breath.
At which point it ceases to be abortion since to take a breath the baby has to be outside the womb.
I would like a copy of that song that doesn't sound like it was recorded using a Radio Shack computer tape deck.
Microsoft didn't invent the computer file system. Early as I can figure out, that was Lincoln Labs under US Government contract in 1958. That predates the very existence of Microsoft by nearly two decades.
every library I've ever been in prohibits you from making a copy of an entire book using their copying facilities.
rewriting application code so it'll run in a browser (a form of porting) is not historical preservation. I can't run this shit in an MS-DOS VM for the simple reason that it's rewritten to run in a Java sandbox. That is of no use to me. Nor should it be any use to anyone else with any sort of interest in preserving anything. A preserved application originally written for MS-DOS is one that I should be able to dump into my DOS VM and just fucking run it without having to do anything extraordinary to it like rewrite the code or sacrifice a fucking goat.
Here are some games & apps I have in my VM that I've not had to do ANYTHING to beyond simply dropping the game folder onto a virtual partition so the VM can actually read it:
Day Of The Tentacle
The Need For Speed
Albion
Prisoner Of Ice
Hexen: Beyond Heretic
System Shock (CD Version, CD image is automatically loaded when you invoke the app)
Archipelagos
Warcraft
Dungeons Of The Unforgiven
Zzt
Terminal Velocity
Grand Theft Auto
FractINT
Lemmings
Shooting Gallery
Jason Jupiter
Moraff's World
Su-27 Flanker
Command & Conquer
7th Guest (with CD enhancements, loads the same way as System Shock)
USS Ticonderoga (just the enhanced demo, but still, 180MB for something that was at the time the biggest game on the planet in terms of the size of the codebase...)
Magic Carpet (CD enhanced again)
Up to now I have 23 2GB partitions packed to the brim with DOS software lifted either from my archival CDs or from floppies that still worked or pulled off the dozen or so DOS hard drives I still have. Still crawling through old software collections I've had for nigh on 25 years, keeping what works and dropping those titles onto the VM, and writing them into the menu.
several things:
DOS offered a command interpreter. It also offered an interface (later known as an abstraction layer) between hardware and application software. Not to mention enhanced memory management, drive compression, a bundled programming interface, batch scripting...
Microsoft didn't invent nor did it spawn the shareware concept. That accolade goes squarely on the shoulders of Andrew Fluegelman and Jim Button who invented the method by accident. The name was decided by committee.
You are a public servant. Your rights stop at your front door.
Sincerely,
The Public Who You SERVE.
refer to historical text and realise, in the words of Mr. Radjak ("Starship Troopers", Heinlein), that naked force has ended more conflicts than any other course in history. If you want to argue against the point, speak to the elders of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You know, the ones whose arguments were ended in nuclear blasts.
in a city of several MILLION, pretty fucking easily.
When they do the press conferences with the photos of the victims spanning the wall behind them, look out for the photo of six year old Noah, who died at Sandy Hook two years ago, then died again in Pakistan last month. I bullshit you not, his picture was the one they used to remind everyone what an awful, awful thing happened where those two undercover Feds who were at the Boston marathon bombing just happened to be(!), then it was HELD IN THE LEFT HAND OF A BEREAVED PARENT OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL IN PAKISTAN DURING A PRESS CONFERENCE WHICH WAS ATTENDED BY THE BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION.
Sonething fishy is going on.
And I don't think actual nutters with guns have anything to do with it.
which has absolutely no scientific basis yet has been used to try and "cure" such illnesses as religious aberrance, homosexuality, psychopathy, narcissism, and more recently oppositional and defiant disorder, bipolar disorder, and a spanking new one called emotional incest; this is electroshock writ commercial.
You bring that shit anywhere near me, I'll fucking stab you in the heart with it.
got that one on my PROPER DOS VM.
[almost] hear hear! I use a Virtualbox VM with MS DOS 6.22, works a treat..
I've got a Virtualbox setup with MS DOS and a stack of 2GB virtual drives packed chock full of full version games and apps, I've had to put a clock limiter on it because watching USS Ticonderoga scroll through at $stupid fps makes me dizzy.
doesn't make a difference really with spoken word, it's music recording you need something with a little more kick, which is when I break out the DAT recorder and the line filters.
oh, bazing. :) No, really? You'd have to be tone deaf to call anything that comes out of Bose gear "decent".