...is not "Should the first sale doctrine apply to imported books". It is "Does the first sale doctrine apply to imported books". I think that we can all agree that it should, but the Court will have to try to figure out whether or not the Congress intended that it should. To do this they will (among other things) inquire into the legislative history of the copyright statute.
> Half the spam that makes it through my filters is > DKIM-signed.
Same here, and half of that is signed by Yahoo. I'm seriously considering telling Spamassassin to increase the spam score of DKIM-signed messages, not decrease it.
Mr. Martin is not on trial. He's dead. Mr. Zimmerman is on trial. If the prosecution could find any "Tweets" or FaceBook postings of his that they could use against him the court would permit it.
And any paper that doesn't want to be indexed can tell Google "Pay us money or we'll block your spider." So why do the papers need laws requiring Google to pay them when they already have the means at hand to require payment themselves?
The UN is not (yet) a world government. There is a voluntary moratorium on geoengineering among the small number of governments that could afford to attempt such a thing, but that hardly qualifies as "UN regulations". In any case, small-scale experiments such as this, no matter how ill-conceived, are not going to have any global impact and so do not qualify as geoengineering.
If you read it you do. You cannot read it without downloading it. What you mean is that you do not create a local permanent copy of every email you read.
Or were you looking forward to having to explain why your database got cracked and leaked 2 million passwords or that tens of thousands of customer machines will have to be manually patched to repair the damage done by your last update?
Nothing. It is "first inventor to file". Under the present system if two inventors file for a patent on the same invention the one who invented first gets the patent: the order of filing is irrelevant (provided it was "timely" and the inventor "diligent"). Under the new system if two inventors file for a patent on the same invention the one who filed first gets the patent: the order of invention is irrelevant. Thus there will be no more lawsuits in which inventors strive to convince the court that they thought the widget up first and then worked diligently to reduce it to practice right up to the date they filed and therefor deserve the patent even though the other guy filed first. However, you still must be prepared to prove that you invented it independently.
Slashdot Mirror
...is not "Should the first sale doctrine apply to imported books". It is "Does the first sale doctrine apply to imported books". I think that we can all agree that it should, but the Court will have to try to figure out whether or not the Congress intended that it should. To do this they will (among other things) inquire into the legislative history of the copyright statute.
Does the door have be closable after it has been "opened"? If not, that concrete-wall-breaking tool could come in handy.
Ok...
> ...such as government ones."
ROFL.
Better yet, only give details to trusted sites. Don't tell the untrusted ones anything.
I thought you wanted fictional mathematics and was going to point you to arXiv.
So what? I can think of no reason I would want it, let alone need it.
> Half the spam that makes it through my filters is
> DKIM-signed.
Same here, and half of that is signed by Yahoo. I'm seriously considering telling Spamassassin to increase the spam score of DKIM-signed messages, not decrease it.
> This rejection means nothing.
It means quite a bit: an invalidated patent cannot be the basis for an injunction.
> You're their prime target.
Their prime target is the undecided voter. I'm definitely not that.
> Kinda like a Christian converting you.
The Christians I know believe in evangilizing by example. The occasional door-to-door missionary around here takes no for an answer.
If much of what they have on me was accurate they wouldn't waste their money calling me and sending me junk mail.
I wonder if they track who hangs up on their calls? I don't think they do: they keep calling me.
Mr. Martin is not on trial. He's dead. Mr. Zimmerman is on trial. If the prosecution could find any "Tweets" or FaceBook postings of his that they could use against him the court would permit it.
And any paper that doesn't want to be indexed can tell Google "Pay us money or we'll block your spider." So why do the papers need laws requiring Google to pay them when they already have the means at hand to require payment themselves?
Conveniently vague, isn't it? I'm sure it would never be abused, though.
We can only hope.
Why complain if Microsoft wants to shoot itself in the head?
...is not going to damage your mental health. If you are watching the clock you don't belong in grad school. Go learn to weld.
The UN is not (yet) a world government. There is a voluntary moratorium on geoengineering among the small number of governments that could afford to attempt such a thing, but that hardly qualifies as "UN regulations". In any case, small-scale experiments such as this, no matter how ill-conceived, are not going to have any global impact and so do not qualify as geoengineering.
n/t
....why the hell this is any of the government's business at all.
With no legs?
If you read it you do. You cannot read it without downloading it. What you mean is that you do not create a local permanent copy of every email you read.
...the $50,000 come from "corporations". A thousand $50 contributions would suffice. Don't you take donations at all? Where do you get your funds?
Or were you looking forward to having to explain why your database got cracked and leaked 2 million passwords or that tens of thousands of customer machines will have to be manually patched to repair the damage done by your last update?
Nothing. It is "first inventor to file". Under the present system if two inventors file for a patent on the same invention the one who invented first gets the patent: the order of filing is irrelevant (provided it was "timely" and the inventor "diligent"). Under the new system if two inventors file for a patent on the same invention the one who filed first gets the patent: the order of invention is irrelevant. Thus there will be no more lawsuits in which inventors strive to convince the court that they thought the widget up first and then worked diligently to reduce it to practice right up to the date they filed and therefor deserve the patent even though the other guy filed first. However, you still must be prepared to prove that you invented it independently.
Of course, it is already quite imaginative.
That electronic computers were huge "electronic brains" used by goverment and a few big companies.