> I have to second this one. In an age where we > can't even get an accurate prediction of the local > weather 1 *day* in advance, we are trying to claim > we know what will happen on a global scale years > in advance.
That's like saying that because you can't predict in detail the motion of a bit of soap scum when you open the drain that you can't say that the tub is going to empty.
> Actually they only state under penalty of > perjury that that are *A* copyright holder.
A holder of a copyright on some portion of the subject material.
> Any claims of infringment, or that they have a > copyright on the posted material, can be > entirely bogus.
Making such a fraudulent claim can result in you being prosecuted for perjury.
> I can state that I am the copyright holder of my > own post. I can contact Slashdot and demand that > they take down YOUR post. Under the DMCA I am > free and clear, and it is a valid take-down > notice.
Nonsense.
On the other hand, if you _are_ a holder of a copyright on a work that Slashdot has posted without your permission and they take the work down upon receipt of your notice they _are_ free and clear. This would not be the case in the absence of the DMCA safe harbor provision.
In the absence of the DMCA safe harbor provision Ellison would not have had to send a takedown notice. He could have sued AOL for copyright infringement with no notice and won by merely proving that they posted his work. The RIAA would love it. Is that what you want?
> if you want to admit other evidence (such as > footprints etc.) you show photos (as an > illustration, not as the proof) of course, but > _always_ backed up by witnesses (fellow officers, > forensics guy) who could be called to testify > under oath.
Slashdot Mirror
> Freenet contains NO spyware or adware , it's Free
> Software!
But it requires the Sun JRE, which is proprietary bloatware.
> I have to second this one. In an age where we
> can't even get an accurate prediction of the local
> weather 1 *day* in advance, we are trying to claim
> we know what will happen on a global scale years
> in advance.
That's like saying that because you can't predict in detail the motion of a bit of soap scum when you open the drain that you can't say that the tub is going to empty.
I can't figure out what "theory" you are calling bullshit. Please elucidate.
He can't quit without the judge's permission. That permission will not be forthcoming unless SCO requests it.
The "wrist slap" was administered by the US Justice Dept, not the courts.
> IBM released these things under the GPL ... so
> what license did IBM really have from SCO to do
> this?
They had no need for one. "These things" are entirely of IBM's authorship.
Actually, Lehman was just one of the 1500 companies they sent threats to a while back. Red Hat just picked them as an example.
No, it makes it much worse. The GPL does not attempt to make anything you add to a GPL'd work part of the original author's IP.
> IMO, they should have issued a cancel just to
> cover their ass, removed the messages from their
> own usenet servers...
The latter would have been quite sufficient to protect them under the DMCA safe harbor provision.
> Actually they only state under penalty of
> perjury that that are *A* copyright holder.
A holder of a copyright on some portion of the subject material.
> Any claims of infringment, or that they have a
> copyright on the posted material, can be
> entirely bogus.
Making such a fraudulent claim can result in you being prosecuted for perjury.
> I can state that I am the copyright holder of my
> own post. I can contact Slashdot and demand that
> they take down YOUR post. Under the DMCA I am
> free and clear, and it is a valid take-down
> notice.
Nonsense.
On the other hand, if you _are_ a holder of a copyright on a work that Slashdot has posted without your permission and they take the work down upon receipt of your notice they _are_ free and clear. This would not be the case in the absence of the DMCA safe harbor provision.
In the absence of the DMCA safe harbor provision Ellison would not have had to send a takedown notice. He could have sued AOL for copyright infringement with no notice and won by merely proving that they posted his work. The RIAA would love it. Is that what you want?
The tension in each spoke varies cyclically as the wheel turns. Just put a piezoelectric generator in series with each spoke.
What counts is the date the invention was reduced to practice, not the date of application.
> if you want to admit other evidence (such as
> footprints etc.) you show photos (as an
> illustration, not as the proof) of course, but
> _always_ backed up by witnesses (fellow officers,
> forensics guy) who could be called to testify
> under oath.
That's how it works in the US.
Titans perhaps, but industry? Doesn't that imply the production of useful goods or services?
> One example from my campus is the retiring of the
> newsgroup server...
Idiots.
I started with Unix System III, which had a single script. I now prefer sysvinit, however.
Your grandma can damn well _pay_ someone to secure her computer for her. If he screws up she can collect from him.
> 100% of the spam I get comes from America
How do you know? I hope you aren't relying on "From:" lines as evidence. Almost all spam has forged headers (often forged with my domain).
In any case, almost all of the spam I receive is illegal under existing US law.
> why does evry problem in life have to be solved by
> creating a free and open market?
Yeah, why don't we just pass a law against spam?
Oh, wait...
I hadn't thought of that. I guess the proposal isn't all bad after all.
Simple. "Legitimate" mailing lists would be Yahoo Groups. All others would be SOL.
> Since most spammers use invalid return addresses
...as I've seen with TMDA.
They _do_ use valid return addresses. Mine, for one.
>
Yes, I'm seeing more and more of that crap, along with the bogus bounces and "You have a virus" warnings.
It has a great deal to do with the money they would make by implementing the scheme in such a way as to force everyone to use their services.
> ...has anyone done a survey of "optimal" phone
> form factor?
Sure. AT&T did it way back in the first half of the last century. It's embodied in the 500D handset.