If a U.S. court can get jurisdiction over the spammer (for example, if the spammer lives in the state where the court sits, or the spammer is served with process in the state where the court sits) then yes, you may sue him in a U.S. court even if you are not a U.S. citizen. Whether you are willing to do so for $500 is up to you.
The previous poster is incorrect -- this is not an issue of standing. You have been injured, so you have standing. The issue here is jurisdiction, which should not be a problem.
Do you have pointers to the lawyers' arguments? As a law student who has studied copyright I find this assertion literally increadible. I have never heard anyone suggest that an author cannot put his work in the public domain. Believe me, it would take any judge about a microsecond to read such an exception into the copyright act. What possible reason could there be for not doing so?
I should have been more specific in my first post. I don't think that flipper and friends have much to worry about in the way of being hit by supercavitating torpedoes. However, the IIRC the initial story mentioned that supercavitation might have applications for boats and subs. Those (especially superfast boats) would pose a significant hazard for whales. Heck, the whales have trouble getting out of the way of supertankers! Imagine a supercavitating cutter running them down.
That said, you are probably correct about the biggest supercavitation threat being from noise.
From a New England Aquarium naturalist on a recent whale watch.;-) Saw two of the right wales (mother and calf) during the trip. (Also some very cool humpback breaching, but that is another story). Incidentally, according to the naturalist, there are about 300 north Atlantic right whales at present, and the current calving season was very successful (~25 calves IIRC).
The aforesaid naturalist also indicated "the government" is implementing plan to reduce whale boat collisions at various points on the east coast. A significant portion of the plan is posting "whale spotters" on the bows of Navy vessles to watch out for "logging" (resting/sleeping) whales at the surface. More information about such a planhere. Information about right whales killed by boats, as well as documentation of my "leading documented cause of death claim can be found here. Of course, the documented part is important -- boat strikes are probably overreported relative to other causes of right whale fatalities.
Noise pollution isn't the only problem. What about these things actually smacking into whales? The leading documented cause of death among Right Whales is being struck by boats . . .
A couple of observations (IANAL but I am a law student, FWIW).
With the possible exception of item #1 (and the obvious exception of item #4), I don't think that your proposal would realize much of a change from our present system. (Unless by "right" you don't mean "legal right" but rather mean "ability" which would make certain copy protection/recordging protection schemes illegal.
I'm afraid that you won't get much mileage out of the "immediately, retroactively, and for all time" language of item #4. Congress can, despite this language, simply repeal this staute later. (Indeed, attempts to keep Congress from doing this may involve [obscure] Constitutional problems). Realistically, the only way to get a semi-permanant item #4 is to pass a Constitutional amendment or get the Supreme Sourt to read a guarentee of fair use into the copyright clause of the Constitution. Given that the tremendous difficulty of amending the Constitution, your best bet is a fair use friendly Supreme Court.
I think that there is some risk in having Congress codify fair use, rather than leaving it up to the courts, for two reasons. First, of course, is that unlike Congress, the courts are (relatively) independent and are not likely to be bought by interest groups. Second, leaving fair use in the common law has the virtue of allwing the courts to "find" new exceptions in the future if things seem to get out of hand. Codifying fair use risks freezing the law -- courts may assume that "statute X is an exhaustive list of fair uses. Therefore, putative fair use Y, which isn't on the list, can't be fair use."
The upshot: if you really want greater protection for consumer fair use rights, make sure that your Congressmen "encourages" fair use friendly Supreme Court justice nominations!
1) Pick up phone
2) Call friend/enemy/PHB/random person
3) Talk about doing lots of illegal stuff. Blowing up federal installations works well if you think you're being "tapped" by the FBI. Talk sticking up the local doughnut shop is a good bet if you're worried about the local fuzz.
4) Wait. If the police break down your door and arrest you, you know that you've been wiretapped. If not, then you're home free.
Yes, I imagine that allowing wholesale copying of music would violate the Bern convention. This would be Bad News for Denmark, because the Bern convention covers a whole lot more than just music. Software, books, movies . . . However, based on prior posts, it looks like the new law just implements a fare use system, which almost certainly doesn't violate Bern.
Sony would probably have a hard time enforcing a license for software that they do not own and to which they do not have a (valid) license. So, modification of the GPL is probably unnecessary.
To pile on: a private entity such as a grocery store cannot violate your civil rights. Only the government can do that.
Why exactly do you think that the store has to notify you before they file a trespassing charge against you? Can you cite any state statutes or judicial opinions? Is this really the law in all 50 states (remember, torts/crimes like trespass are state law and vary widely between states).
It probably is copyright infringment to listen to music and write down the tabs, just as it is copyright infringment for someone listen to a play or a movie, take down what the actors say, and publish their own script. (IANAL but I am a law student).
This post should not be mistaken for legal advice.
A semantic point: you don't have to violate a criminal law to loose a lawsuit, but you have to violate some law to do so. The challenge here is to figure out which one. (I can think of several possible candidates, even if they were "just listening.")
Um, aren't you only supposed to open your hard drive in a clean room? IIRC (and I might not) the "vent" in most modern hard drives contains a barrier. I wonder how long a "modded" disk will operate with dust and humidity inside the box.
Assuming that the above is a serious post and not a troll . ..
Big governments and corporations don't have much trouble sending secret messages now. Quantum crypto is going to change this how? When was the last time you heard about Joe citizen intercepting and decrypting a secret transmission from the NSA?
Won't that break lots of mail clients that use standard "unix" mail boxes? IIRC, these clients us a newline followed by a From (no colon) line to signify a message boundary. Pine comes to mind. . .
Quoting from the article:"The patients selected for the trial must be suffering from a chronic, progressive heart disease expected to result in death within 30 days. The goal of the experimental trials with the artificial heart, said Lederman, is to "double the life span of these patients," to 60 days."
Why would this be great? No way you'd get decent imaging with a wall sized speaker (heck you might not get stereo at all), and it would undoubtably suck up a lot of power. Plus, it would offer no volume advantages -- normal speakers can play earsplittingly loud.
Slashdot Mirror
The previous poster is incorrect -- this is not an issue of standing. You have been injured, so you have standing. The issue here is jurisdiction, which should not be a problem.
IANAL
As always: IANAL
That said, you are probably correct about the biggest supercavitation threat being from noise.
The aforesaid naturalist also indicated "the government" is implementing plan to reduce whale boat collisions at various points on the east coast. A significant portion of the plan is posting "whale spotters" on the bows of Navy vessles to watch out for "logging" (resting/sleeping) whales at the surface. More information about such a planhere. Information about right whales killed by boats, as well as documentation of my "leading documented cause of death claim can be found here. Of course, the documented part is important -- boat strikes are probably overreported relative to other causes of right whale fatalities.
Noise pollution isn't the only problem. What about these things actually smacking into whales? The leading documented cause of death among Right Whales is being struck by boats . . .
- With the possible exception of item #1 (and the obvious exception of item #4), I don't think that your proposal would realize much of a change from our present system. (Unless by "right" you don't mean "legal right" but rather mean "ability" which would make certain copy protection/recordging protection schemes illegal.
- I'm afraid that you won't get much mileage out of the "immediately, retroactively, and for all time" language of item #4. Congress can, despite this language, simply repeal this staute later. (Indeed, attempts to keep Congress from doing this may involve [obscure] Constitutional problems). Realistically, the only way to get a semi-permanant item #4 is to pass a Constitutional amendment or get the Supreme Sourt to read a guarentee of fair use into the copyright clause of the Constitution. Given that the tremendous difficulty of amending the Constitution, your best bet is a fair use friendly Supreme Court.
- I think that there is some risk in having Congress codify fair use, rather than leaving it up to the courts, for two reasons. First, of course, is that unlike Congress, the courts are (relatively) independent and are not likely to be bought by interest groups. Second, leaving fair use in the common law has the virtue of allwing the courts to "find" new exceptions in the future if things seem to get out of hand. Codifying fair use risks freezing the law -- courts may assume that "statute X is an exhaustive list of fair uses. Therefore, putative fair use Y, which isn't on the list, can't be fair use."
The upshot: if you really want greater protection for consumer fair use rights, make sure that your Congressmen "encourages" fair use friendly Supreme Court justice nominations!1) Pick up phone
2) Call friend/enemy/PHB/random person
3) Talk about doing lots of illegal stuff. Blowing up federal installations works well if you think you're being "tapped" by the FBI. Talk sticking up the local doughnut shop is a good bet if you're worried about the local fuzz.
4) Wait. If the police break down your door and arrest you, you know that you've been wiretapped. If not, then you're home free.
IANAL
BUT IANAL
Prior art might be a problem. Heck, we can just use your /. post.
Why exactly do you think that the store has to notify you before they file a trespassing charge against you? Can you cite any state statutes or judicial opinions? Is this really the law in all 50 states (remember, torts/crimes like trespass are state law and vary widely between states).
make that "vapor barrier" I shouldn't post with such low blood caffeine levels.
This post should not be mistaken for legal advice.
A semantic point: you don't have to violate a criminal law to loose a lawsuit, but you have to violate some law to do so. The challenge here is to figure out which one. (I can think of several possible candidates, even if they were "just listening.")
Um, aren't you only supposed to open your hard drive in a clean room? IIRC (and I might not) the "vent" in most modern hard drives contains a barrier. I wonder how long a "modded" disk will operate with dust and humidity inside the box.
Big governments and corporations don't have much trouble sending secret messages now. Quantum crypto is going to change this how? When was the last time you heard about Joe citizen intercepting and decrypting a secret transmission from the NSA?
Won't that break lots of mail clients that use standard "unix" mail boxes? IIRC, these clients us a newline followed by a From (no colon) line to signify a message boundary. Pine comes to mind. . .
Quoting from the article:"The patients selected for the trial must be suffering from a chronic, progressive heart disease expected to result in death within 30 days. The goal of the experimental trials with the artificial heart, said Lederman, is to "double the life span of these patients," to 60 days."
Why would this be great? No way you'd get decent imaging with a wall sized speaker (heck you might not get stereo at all), and it would undoubtably suck up a lot of power. Plus, it would offer no volume advantages -- normal speakers can play earsplittingly loud.