Except that any disclosure to a 3rd party, even by accident (the sole exception being if the 3rd party gained the knowledge through criminal action), makes the contents and knowledge gained public wrt that 3rd party.
So don't count on them for keeping trade secrets, for example, private.
The must also be making the summary lie, like usual.
Even the article that repeats the claim that "Zapping the brain with magnets makes it IMPOSSIBLE to lie, claim scientists" in the headline also lies. The actual body, in both articles, says only that there was more of a tendency afterward, and that could be explained by poor controls - the people were asked to do the test twice, and there was a very small group size (16 people).
If there's a 1 in 21 trillion chance that an individual will be hit, and there are 7 billion people, then the odds of someone, somewhere, getting hit are 21,000,000,000,000/7,000,000,000 or 1 in 3,000.
Of course, seeing as people tend to clump together, the most likely scenario, IF someone gets hit, is that multiple people get hit - so that is also ~ 1 in 3,000.
This matches pretty well with the actual odds in the article:
There is a 1-in-3,200 chance that a person somewhere on Earth could be hit by falling satellite debris, but the odds of the UARS spacecraft re-entering over a populated area are extremely remote, NASA officials said.
A 300-pound piece of flaming satellite debris traveling at supersonic speeds is going to do more than hurt a little.
Johnson said that, on average, a spacecraft as large as UARS falls back to Earth about once a year. In 2010, a total of 400 pieces of satellites or spent rockets fell back to Earth, though most pieces either burned up during re-entry, fell into the ocean or fell over unpopulated areas, he added.
So, given that this happens every year, the odds of someone, somewhere getting hit during your lifetime are actually much better - if you only live to 50, they become 1 in 64.
No, they can't. A publisher sent me an unsolicited book, based on a mailing list that I would be a likely sucker. I kept the book, tossed out the invoice. Legally, the book is mine, and I have no legal obligation to either pay for it or return it.
Your netflix example is silly - you have an agreement to lease the DVDs with them.
Sending it to a mistaken address is a different story as well.
But sending unsolicited material to the RIGHT recipient transfers ownership, plain and simple.
1. Enable catch-all email accounts on all domains you own
2....
3. PROFIT!
20 gigs sounds like a lot, but since these were corporations, you can expect that a lot of them were huge Microsoft Word attachments with one-liners like "Peter: Remember to complete your TPS report by Friday." and equally vacuous Powerpoint slide decks. And people trying to email DVDs. And pr0n - lots of pr0n, if it was government employees.
The boilerplate has no legal force. First, it's like someone sending you unsolicited snail mail - anyone who sends you, say, an unsolicited book by snailmail can't then send you a demand to pay for it - it's already yours.
Additionally, boilerplate "contracts", even ones you agree to, are governed by different laws than regular contracts (search for "contract of adhesion" or "standard form contract").
I think the real problem is that the whole world (with a few stupid exceptions) really, REALLY misses the "good ole U. S. of A." Sure, we weren't aware of a lot of the ugliness that was going on behind the scenes, but there was a sense of vision and "we're all in this together."
It's sort of like Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End" - we've lost our innocence. The world is uglier - or maybe it's only just that we now have the tools to see how ugly it really is. And "greed is good" has won. Example - how many times have you seen people say that companies have a legal obligation to maximize profits, when there's no such law on the books in the U.S., because they assume that's how things should be?
The bank bail-outs are just another step along the line... the money spent on them could have paid off every under-water mortgage in the US at the time, stabilized the market, and avoided the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies. It's a shame.
Women's pants aren't necessarily made of the same heavy stretch-resistant material as your jeans, nor are they cut the same. It's entirely possible, considering both that the new "enhanced" procedures, can involve making you "assume the position" and using the front of the hand instead of the back, as well as using more force.
The above article is interesting, but it's the collection of video newsclips partway down that are pretty damning. The government needs to look at how other countries deal with this, and buy a clue.
While rape is probably too strong a word to use here from an objective standpoint, someone describing it that way in a blog is fully justified.
A stranger unexpectedly and without your consent sticks their finger inside you, not once, not twice, but 4 times - that's sexual assault, more specifically, rape. Rape in the US includes forced vaginal, anal, or oral penetration.
There's no conceivable reason that a pat-down should result in vaginal penetration. What's next - a return to chastity belts to keep the TSA at bay?
Consumer protection laws are pretty uniform across Canada. It's not like we have all that many different provinces to begin with... and when one province makes an advance in the law, frequently other provinces use that as model legislation when updating their laws. This process of harmonization also works when the Feds pass a regulation that is intended to be applled across the country but allows for individual provinces to pass "substantially similar" or "at least as effective" laws within their own civil framework if they will have the same effect, so you'll see federal privacy legislation (PIPEDA) and you'll also see provincial legislation that is pretty much the same.
Criminal laws, on the other hand, are uniform across the country - criminal law is a federal-only jurisdiction. Drunk driving, for example, is a criminal offense in all provinces and territories, convictions always result in a criminal record and may also carry jail time.
However, individual differences in provinces are irrelevant in this case - trademarks are governed by federal legislation. Domain names are considered by Canadian courts to be property, not a license, and individuals can use the small claims court system to exercise their property rights.
No, I'm just pointing out that you made a false assumption - that US law was some sort of canonical reference point or universal frame of reference when it's not. BTW: Here's your answer. Enjoy:-)
Consider that 25% of all homes don't have a land-line, so faxing stuff to or from them is out, even if their all-in-one has fax capabilities.
Faxes are dying. The government and the banks accept PDFs for lots of things nowadays, and creating and emailing a pdf is a lot easier.
By email:
1. Type up document
2. Paste image of your signature (previously scanned in) into document if it requires a signature
3. Select "email as PDF from the File menu"
(Note that you can also set a password on the document, send it in color, attach color photos with great resolution, as well as videos and sound - important things faxes can't do)
By fax:
1. Type up document
2. Print document
3. Sign document if it requires a signature
4. Fax document
5. File or recycle printed document
6. Wonder whatever happened to the cost savings of the "paperless office".
The U.S. represents less than 5% of the worlds' population:-) Here, small claims allows businesses of 5 people or less to use the simpler small claims system (and as you pointed out, even in the US, some states let businesses file in the small claims system).
The registrar handling the xxx TLD registrations has committed to handling infringers and squatters - if they don't, they stand to lose it (and their hoped-for cash cow) to someone else. So, in most cases, an email should be sufficient to start the ball rolling, as well as establishing that the original owner of a trademark has not given tacit permission to use the name.
Or they can go the way Second Life did - give a free license to the infringing site on condition that it makes it clear that the trademark owner is in no way connected. Win-win for everyone.
I don't see what all the excitement is about. Now I'll admit I am biased - I don't see pr0n as something to get excited about - to me, this is about as interesting (and as useless) as having a.hockey or.teaparty TLD. All the content will still be duplicated in the main TLDs because nobody is going to "leave any potential eyeballs on the table", so none of the content will "move over". It "solved" absolutely nothing except "how can we come up with another scam for a small group of people to squeeze more money out of the Internet with rent-seeking behavior?"
Where I am, businesses of 5 people or less are allowed to use the small-claims courts. Also, equitable relieve IS a legal remedy, just not a statutory one.
Then again, I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot - after all, if someone wants to register one of my domain names but in the.xxx TLD, what would I care? Let them waste their money if I own the com, org, and.net TLDs (or even just the canonical.com one).
The whole.xxx TLD was a stupid idea. It serves no fundamental purpose except to make money for the registrar. It's not like it's going to suddenly stop x-rated content on any other TLD or secondary level domains.
Not sure about the legality of this but a few years ago I worked for Videotron which is one of the two major tv/internet/phone providers in Quebec. They will NOT rent you a cable modem without getting your social insurance number. You can decline but they also can decline to rent you the device.
They rented me mine without it. And no, they cannot decline if you refuse. You just have to know AND assert your rights.
it certainly is not possible for them to handle and objections to a C&D, or refusal to C&D without obtaining a lawyer.
Bullcrap. The UDNDRP can be done without a lawyer. Additionally, ICANN recognizes judgments from courts - including small claims courts. Just get a judgement from one of them for less than $100.
Just get the.com,.org, and.net, and ignore the rest. It's not like you'll get.edu,.mil,.gov or.arpa (the other 4 original TLDs), and the country-specific ones are worth less in terms of "where to go first" than having the canonical "Big Three."
They're certainly free to leave. Nothing requires them to stay - and eventually (within the next decade or two) it won't matter because the network (and the various clients + their ability to exchange data) will have enough smarts that search will be dead (as will "social media" in general).
To the extent that ALL Internet companies like Facebook (with their "Like" button) are illegally tracking people from site to site, they're just going to create more pushback. Eventually, contrary to Google's Eric Schmidt, people WILL get fed up and create alternatives, and be willing to pay a (very nominal, very micro-payment) fee for ensuring their own privacy and an ad-free experience.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that any disclosure to a 3rd party, even by accident (the sole exception being if the 3rd party gained the knowledge through criminal action), makes the contents and knowledge gained public wrt that 3rd party.
So don't count on them for keeping trade secrets, for example, private.
The must also be making the summary lie, like usual.
Even the article that repeats the claim that "Zapping the brain with magnets makes it IMPOSSIBLE to lie, claim scientists" in the headline also lies. The actual body, in both articles, says only that there was more of a tendency afterward, and that could be explained by poor controls - the people were asked to do the test twice, and there was a very small group size (16 people).
If there's a 1 in 21 trillion chance that an individual will be hit, and there are 7 billion people, then the odds of someone, somewhere, getting hit are 21,000,000,000,000/7,000,000,000 or 1 in 3,000.
Of course, seeing as people tend to clump together, the most likely scenario, IF someone gets hit, is that multiple people get hit - so that is also ~ 1 in 3,000.
This matches pretty well with the actual odds in the article:
A 300-pound piece of flaming satellite debris traveling at supersonic speeds is going to do more than hurt a little.
So, given that this happens every year, the odds of someone, somewhere getting hit during your lifetime are actually much better - if you only live to 50, they become 1 in 64.
Also, it's already happened that someone has been hit, even though the woman wasn't hurt, so the odds may be higher than "theory" alone predicts.
Your netflix example is silly - you have an agreement to lease the DVDs with them.
Sending it to a mistaken address is a different story as well.
But sending unsolicited material to the RIGHT recipient transfers ownership, plain and simple.
1. Enable catch-all email accounts on all domains you own ...
2.
3. PROFIT!
20 gigs sounds like a lot, but since these were corporations, you can expect that a lot of them were huge Microsoft Word attachments with one-liners like "Peter: Remember to complete your TPS report by Friday." and equally vacuous Powerpoint slide decks. And people trying to email DVDs. And pr0n - lots of pr0n, if it was government employees.
The boilerplate has no legal force. First, it's like someone sending you unsolicited snail mail - anyone who sends you, say, an unsolicited book by snailmail can't then send you a demand to pay for it - it's already yours.
Additionally, boilerplate "contracts", even ones you agree to, are governed by different laws than regular contracts (search for "contract of adhesion" or "standard form contract").
Whie-hat trolling for educating, informing, challenging dumb ideas and sacred cows, and sometimes a bit of fun.
Like crossword puzzles, it helps keep the grey matter from deteriorating and occasionally provides insights.
I think the real problem is that the whole world (with a few stupid exceptions) really, REALLY misses the "good ole U. S. of A." Sure, we weren't aware of a lot of the ugliness that was going on behind the scenes, but there was a sense of vision and "we're all in this together."
It's sort of like Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End" - we've lost our innocence. The world is uglier - or maybe it's only just that we now have the tools to see how ugly it really is. And "greed is good" has won. Example - how many times have you seen people say that companies have a legal obligation to maximize profits, when there's no such law on the books in the U.S., because they assume that's how things should be?
The bank bail-outs are just another step along the line ... the money spent on them could have paid off every under-water mortgage in the US at the time, stabilized the market, and avoided the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies. It's a shame.
Women's pants aren't necessarily made of the same heavy stretch-resistant material as your jeans, nor are they cut the same. It's entirely possible, considering both that the new "enhanced" procedures, can involve making you "assume the position" and using the front of the hand instead of the back, as well as using more force.
http://thetruthwins.com/archives/tsa-horror-stories-that-are-almost-too-shocking-to-believe
The above article is interesting, but it's the collection of video newsclips partway down that are pretty damning. The government needs to look at how other countries deal with this, and buy a clue.
2001? The .arpa TLD was introduced in 1985.
The original TLDs were com, org, net, gov, edu, mil, and - wait for it - arpa.
So even in the beginning, not all TLDs were TLAs.
A stranger unexpectedly and without your consent sticks their finger inside you, not once, not twice, but 4 times - that's sexual assault, more specifically, rape. Rape in the US includes forced vaginal, anal, or oral penetration.
There's no conceivable reason that a pat-down should result in vaginal penetration. What's next - a return to chastity belts to keep the TSA at bay?
It can come in handy on Tuesdays :-) (see my profile)
Consumer protection laws are pretty uniform across Canada. It's not like we have all that many different provinces to begin with ... and when one province makes an advance in the law, frequently other provinces use that as model legislation when updating their laws. This process of harmonization also works when the Feds pass a regulation that is intended to be applled across the country but allows for individual provinces to pass "substantially similar" or "at least as effective" laws within their own civil framework if they will have the same effect, so you'll see federal privacy legislation (PIPEDA) and you'll also see provincial legislation that is pretty much the same.
Criminal laws, on the other hand, are uniform across the country - criminal law is a federal-only jurisdiction. Drunk driving, for example, is a criminal offense in all provinces and territories, convictions always result in a criminal record and may also carry jail time.
However, individual differences in provinces are irrelevant in this case - trademarks are governed by federal legislation. Domain names are considered by Canadian courts to be property, not a license, and individuals can use the small claims court system to exercise their property rights.
No, I'm just pointing out that you made a false assumption - that US law was some sort of canonical reference point or universal frame of reference when it's not. BTW: Here's your answer. Enjoy :-)
Also, all faxes can be faked.
Consider that 25% of all homes don't have a land-line, so faxing stuff to or from them is out, even if their all-in-one has fax capabilities.
Faxes are dying. The government and the banks accept PDFs for lots of things nowadays, and creating and emailing a pdf is a lot easier.
By email:
1. Type up document
2. Paste image of your signature (previously scanned in) into document if it requires a signature
3. Select "email as PDF from the File menu"
(Note that you can also set a password on the document, send it in color, attach color photos with great resolution, as well as videos and sound - important things faxes can't do)
By fax:
1. Type up document
2. Print document
3. Sign document if it requires a signature
4. Fax document
5. File or recycle printed document
6. Wonder whatever happened to the cost savings of the "paperless office".
The U.S. represents less than 5% of the worlds' population :-) Here, small claims allows businesses of 5 people or less to use the simpler small claims system (and as you pointed out, even in the US, some states let businesses file in the small claims system).
The registrar handling the xxx TLD registrations has committed to handling infringers and squatters - if they don't, they stand to lose it (and their hoped-for cash cow) to someone else. So, in most cases, an email should be sufficient to start the ball rolling, as well as establishing that the original owner of a trademark has not given tacit permission to use the name.
Or they can go the way Second Life did - give a free license to the infringing site on condition that it makes it clear that the trademark owner is in no way connected. Win-win for everyone.
I don't see what all the excitement is about. Now I'll admit I am biased - I don't see pr0n as something to get excited about - to me, this is about as interesting (and as useless) as having a .hockey or .teaparty TLD. All the content will still be duplicated in the main TLDs because nobody is going to "leave any potential eyeballs on the table", so none of the content will "move over". It "solved" absolutely nothing except "how can we come up with another scam for a small group of people to squeeze more money out of the Internet with rent-seeking behavior?"
Where I am, businesses of 5 people or less are allowed to use the small-claims courts. Also, equitable relieve IS a legal remedy, just not a statutory one.
Then again, I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot - after all, if someone wants to register one of my domain names but in the .xxx TLD, what would I care? Let them waste their money if I own the com, org, and .net TLDs (or even just the canonical .com one).
The whole .xxx TLD was a stupid idea. It serves no fundamental purpose except to make money for the registrar. It's not like it's going to suddenly stop x-rated content on any other TLD or secondary level domains.
They rented me mine without it. And no, they cannot decline if you refuse. You just have to know AND assert your rights.
A C & D letter can be sent for the cost of the postage - the form is available on the net.
You can protect the tradmark by sending them a C & D. No need to fall for this extortion scam.
Just get the .com, .org, and .net, and ignore the rest. It's not like you'll get .edu, .mil, .gov or .arpa (the other 4 original TLDs), and the country-specific ones are worth less in terms of "where to go first" than having the canonical "Big Three."
They're certainly free to leave. Nothing requires them to stay - and eventually (within the next decade or two) it won't matter because the network (and the various clients + their ability to exchange data) will have enough smarts that search will be dead (as will "social media" in general).
To the extent that ALL Internet companies like Facebook (with their "Like" button) are illegally tracking people from site to site, they're just going to create more pushback. Eventually, contrary to Google's Eric Schmidt, people WILL get fed up and create alternatives, and be willing to pay a (very nominal, very micro-payment) fee for ensuring their own privacy and an ad-free experience.