I suspect the attachment mechanism is patented to avoid just that. But in any case what would be the point? If I wanted to use cheap blades I wouldn't bother keeping the Mach 3 handle.
Though it does have an "ergonomic handle" featuring "knurled elastomeric crescents." otherwise known as knobbly rubber grips on the handle. And you can't beat knurled elastomeric crescents when you want a quick effective shave.
Watch how quickly 'Disturbing a Retail Display' becomes a offence under the DCMA as an attempt to subvert the use of manufacturers electronic device.
Once you take it out of the display you better buy it or you have some explaining to do at the checkout to the nice security man.
At least it might stop those freeloaders who take food and give it to their kids to shut them up while they are shopping. There would be a higher payback and less false positives if they just arrested anyone with children who are seen eating or drinking inside the store.
There are like X varieties and they are are all about same price per quanity (+-20%). That is a monopoly...
No, that's competition.
It would only be monopoly ( or industry wide price fixing ) if all the shaving cream manufacturers got together and decided that prices should be $x+or-20%. Given that soap ina can can be manufacturered anywhere by any number of companies it would be difficult to see them all getting together and setting prices that they could trust all to honour.
If your pricing information is correct, all the current prices prove is that consumers won't pay more than a 20% premium for whatever added special softening or smoothing or smelling ingredients one manuf might put in their can over the base grade chinese foamy soap in a can. Which sounds about right.p
I don't feel so bad about calling people stupid anymore since I saw that research that showed that stupid people are often so stupid that they don't realize they are stupid so we are doing them a favour by alerting them to their stupidity.
Of course you may be one of the few stupid people who are aware of their stupidity. These people are OK to call stupid because unfortunately they are too stupid to do anything effective about it.
so don't you think my enjoyment of the third movie would be heightened if I can have the previous one fresh in my mind when I see it?
Not nearly as much as it would if you spent half as much money on decent drugs then hired the three movies when they are all out.
Actually I find it difficult to tell if you have a question about the existence of IP theft or of the need for IP tehft area in DOJ.
Wouldn't the vast majority of cases be handled with the correlated "hacking" or other forms of breaking and entering to steal the property in question
The short answer to that question seems to be the phrase in the DOJ post . This surely covers areas where no hacking etc necessarily took place. CD bootleggfers just rip and burn on a massive scale. Same with T-shirt of fashion bootleggers. No hacking, just copying.
what it takes for the government to actually get involved in IP theft/infringement.
Short answer here is that goverment gets involved in cases where they see a need for something to be just plain not done. In civil cases there may be a requirement to show damage. Goverment gets involved if they think the action should be illegal in itself. Damage may be relevant to the penalty but not generally to the legality of the act itself.
The only reason why it would be persecuted is if it has value in the marketplace, however
The only value of a thing is what you can sell it for. Cost is irrelevant to value except to tell me how much I need to sell it for at a minimum to make a profit. If I create something that no one wants then it has no value. The only value it has to me is how much you want to pay for it. So if you copy something without paying, I obviously lose the opportunity to sell the item to you. I have lost value because I can't now sell you the item. What diference does it make if I still have or have not the thing in question.
Do you complain if the Goverment is required to pay you for taking away some of your quite enjoyment rights when a trainline is run alongside your property. Probably not. I assume this is the case in the USA. In Australia its based on the Constitutional prohibition of state acquisition of property without fair compensation.
Do you complain if stock manipulators rob you of value in shares that you continue to own even if they are now unsellable. Probably yes. This has no basis in the constitution that I know of and is surely a case where contract law could take care of any damage.
OK so copyright and other IP maybe created rights to some extent or at least given enhanced value by the exclusivity associated with them under legislation. But once they are given that value it should be open to any owner to protect that value within the law.
what makes it criminal as opposed to civil?IANAL but as I see it a starting point is it's criminal if the state can penalize you with jail. It's administrative if state penalties are basically fines (though non-payment of fines can be a criminal offence). It's civil if another person can have you penailzed.
The state generally becomes involved if there are public policy issues strong enough to warrant their intervention. This is obviously subject to much political pressure but if the state can get involved in the regulation of commerce then it can choose points at which activities of a particular type constitute so grave an abuse that criminal penalties are imposed. See stock manipulation above.
The problem with much of the IP stuff is that criminal level penalties were meant to be imposed on heavy duty criminals (like the CD bootleggers out of Ukraine or Queens). But the technology now allows ordinary people to do what HDC's only could have done when the laws were passed ie massively copy cd's and movies. From our (ordinary people) POV the penalties are outrageous. From the POV of producers the losses are the same to them if 100,000 ordinary people copy one cd each or 1 HDC copies 1 cd 100,000 times. And the current laws are the only ones they have. The best alternatives offered by the ordinary people are liquidation a difficult thing for any entity to accept.
And the law makers are stuffed because they can't come up with a better solution. Well actually they are stuffed because they are corrupt arseholes but thats a whole 'nother story.
It not totally clear from your post if you understand concepts such as opportunity cost or accept that such a thing exists. Without that then any discussion on Intellectual Property is a waste of time. This is the case with many/. posters.
By dilluting the value of the IP at hand, it allows the public generaly easier access to that IPThat's just saying 'I don't want to pay that much for it'. Drugs is one thing but seriously how is that relevant to music. If you can't afford it you can't have it. If that's the case for 'things' why is it any different for IP.
is it actually effective to do so?
People willfully break a law because they want to do something that happens to be illegal. I believe that they weigh up the risk with the reward in any decision like this. Crimes that are committed and justified with "everyone else is doing it' generally have attached the unspoken disclaimer 'and they aren't
innocent victom forced to drink the same by a killer who had to resort to that method because he didn't have a gun.
I can't say I've seen this one happen all that often in Australia where as you know handguns are hard to come by.
You do not deny that the killing sprees would still occur. So what would we hope to achieve by banning guns?
Obviously less killing sprees. And presumably less victims per spree. One thing that the lack of gun access has done is to drop the suicide rate among young men.
For all the statistics that pro gun writers offer I cannot help thinking that in Australia disgruntled workers are almost 100% unlkikely to go home get a gun and return to work to kill a few people before killing themselves. I honestly can't remember when this occured the last time in Australia. It seems to happen often in the USA. If it's not something to do with the availability of guns then it must be cultural. I'm not sure that makes the US look good either.
I have written them letter after letter detailing why I will gladly drive 10 miles to avoid their store that is less than 1/2 mile from my house.
And they haven't changed yet. Will they never learn.
But shouldn't you be riding your bike to the other shops. Though that does expose you to the dangers of traffic from the significantly larger number of people driving 10 miles from around the (a) organic food stores, (b) farmers markets, (c) co-ops, (d) gardens. to shop at the privacy invading supermarkets.
First I thought black box testing was testing specifically without knowledge of the internals of the system ie. you provide input after independently calculating the answer and then see if the output is the same as your expected answer. If you do it enough times and the answers are the same as your calcs then you can rely on the black box.
Second, you may have missed the bit in the standard warranty and EULA that says the vendor accepts no responsibility if the software doesn't do what they say it will do let alone what you expect. Whether they stand up in court or not the vendor probably sees more l;oss in pirates than in claims for faulty software.
If the discrimination is really bad, the consumers will take care of it
You have a thing or two to learn about powerlessness.
I must treat serial killers and rapists just as I would my best friends.
No I think you have to give them a place to live and a job and let them marry your sister or at least use her when they feel like it. That's so obviously the end result of banning discrimination based on skin colour. I don't know why I didn't see that.
In my experience in various parts of the state, there is no kind of racial tension or hatred anywhere
Even allowing for truly hyperbolic hyperbole if you honestly think Mississippi is filled with white-loving black people, you've got another think coming.
No, not a troll. A bad joke maybe or lying is the wrong word. Mistaken might be better. I don't think Telstra sell lists to spammers either. I think if you get mail on an unused account it's either because you have in fact used it somewhere and forgotten (mistake) or its a dictionary attack ( reasonable explanation)
A spammer who gets a seemingly legitimate address and doesn't make use of it for some reason. I don't think that could ever happen.
there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for it.
Unless you just got your adsl account my money is on the former.
I'm still getting junk mail addressed to an onaustralia account that I got when compuserve closed down and which i assumed had died when I left telstra for 6 months. No they still forward it to me.
Bigpond is the ISP arm of Telstra, our national telco. There have been problems with open relays for a long time. And so blocks of their addresses are continually getting stuck on block lists.
Telstra is the national carrier and does most connectivity esp overseas and so has most of the Australian ip numbers allocated to it. You gota figure if Australia is the source of a problem it will be a telstra problem.
You have a list of all the other receivers in the header. So why don't you send an email to all of them asking if they are receiving a lot more unsolicited email recently. Forward the one you got as an example. I'm sure they will be pleased to hear from you.
I agree that there are barriers to effective use of the patent system by many 'small' inventors and it has major problems with software. But the system wasn't necessarily designed to benefit them only. Without the system any large company can copy anothers inventions etc without fear.
I suspect the majority of patents are used properly and the system is generally working. Though I suspect it is getting a bit unwieldy as it grows.
This is terrible. I don't want Wal-Mart to know what brand of lacy bras and frilly knickers I wear when I go shopping. Do I have to shop for everything mail order now.
Perhaps if i just wear someone else's pants. Stealing their eye seems a little extreme.
As i understand it Tuvalu did reasonably well out of.tv though I'm happy to be shown otherwise. An article today in The Australian talks about.la from Laos but hasn't any details on hoiw well Laos is going to do out of LA. business.
Slashdot Mirror
Though it does have an "ergonomic handle" featuring "knurled elastomeric crescents." otherwise known as knobbly rubber grips on the handle. And you can't beat knurled elastomeric crescents when you want a quick effective shave.
Once you take it out of the display you better buy it or you have some explaining to do at the checkout to the nice security man.
At least it might stop those freeloaders who take food and give it to their kids to shut them up while they are shopping. There would be a higher payback and less false positives if they just arrested anyone with children who are seen eating or drinking inside the store.
What the hell did you expect.
There are like X varieties and they are are all about same price per quanity (+-20%). That is a monopoly...
No, that's competition.
It would only be monopoly ( or industry wide price fixing ) if all the shaving cream manufacturers got together and decided that prices should be $x+or-20%. Given that soap ina can can be manufacturered anywhere by any number of companies it would be difficult to see them all getting together and setting prices that they could trust all to honour.
If your pricing information is correct, all the current prices prove is that consumers won't pay more than a 20% premium for whatever added special softening or smoothing or smelling ingredients one manuf might put in their can over the base grade chinese foamy soap in a can. Which sounds about right.p
At our house we seemed to have been committed to entertainment-less media by the networks.
Of course you may be one of the few stupid people who are aware of their stupidity. These people are OK to call stupid because unfortunately they are too stupid to do anything effective about it.
so don't you think my enjoyment of the third movie would be heightened if I can have the previous one fresh in my mind when I see it?
Not nearly as much as it would if you spent half as much money on decent drugs then hired the three movies when they are all out.
Wouldn't the vast majority of cases be handled with the correlated "hacking" or other forms of breaking and entering to steal the property in question
The short answer to that question seems to be the phrase in the DOJ post . This surely covers areas where no hacking etc necessarily took place. CD bootleggfers just rip and burn on a massive scale. Same with T-shirt of fashion bootleggers. No hacking, just copying.
what it takes for the government to actually get involved in IP theft/infringement.
Short answer here is that goverment gets involved in cases where they see a need for something to be just plain not done. In civil cases there may be a requirement to show damage. Goverment gets involved if they think the action should be illegal in itself. Damage may be relevant to the penalty but not generally to the legality of the act itself.
The only value of a thing is what you can sell it for. Cost is irrelevant to value except to tell me how much I need to sell it for at a minimum to make a profit. If I create something that no one wants then it has no value. The only value it has to me is how much you want to pay for it. So if you copy something without paying, I obviously lose the opportunity to sell the item to you. I have lost value because I can't now sell you the item. What diference does it make if I still have or have not the thing in question.
Do you complain if the Goverment is required to pay you for taking away some of your quite enjoyment rights when a trainline is run alongside your property. Probably not. I assume this is the case in the USA. In Australia its based on the Constitutional prohibition of state acquisition of property without fair compensation.
Do you complain if stock manipulators rob you of value in shares that you continue to own even if they are now unsellable. Probably yes. This has no basis in the constitution that I know of and is surely a case where contract law could take care of any damage.
OK so copyright and other IP maybe created rights to some extent or at least given enhanced value by the exclusivity associated with them under legislation. But once they are given that value it should be open to any owner to protect that value within the law.
what makes it criminal as opposed to civil?IANAL but as I see it a starting point is it's criminal if the state can penalize you with jail. It's administrative if state penalties are basically fines (though non-payment of fines can be a criminal offence). It's civil if another person can have you penailzed.
The state generally becomes involved if there are public policy issues strong enough to warrant their intervention. This is obviously subject to much political pressure but if the state can get involved in the regulation of commerce then it can choose points at which activities of a particular type constitute so grave an abuse that criminal penalties are imposed. See stock manipulation above.
The problem with much of the IP stuff is that criminal level penalties were meant to be imposed on heavy duty criminals (like the CD bootleggers out of Ukraine or Queens). But the technology now allows ordinary people to do what HDC's only could have done when the laws were passed ie massively copy cd's and movies. From our (ordinary people) POV the penalties are outrageous. From the POV of producers the losses are the same to them if 100,000 ordinary people copy one cd each or 1 HDC copies 1 cd 100,000 times. And the current laws are the only ones they have. The best alternatives offered by the ordinary people are liquidation a difficult thing for any entity to accept.
And the law makers are stuffed because they can't come up with a better solution. Well actually they are stuffed because they are corrupt arseholes but thats a whole 'nother story.
It not totally clear from your post if you understand concepts such as opportunity cost or accept that such a thing exists. Without that then any discussion on Intellectual Property is a waste of time. This is the case with many /. posters.
By dilluting the value of the IP at hand, it allows the public generaly easier access to that IPThat's just saying 'I don't want to pay that much for it'. Drugs is one thing but seriously how is that relevant to music. If you can't afford it you can't have it. If that's the case for 'things' why is it any different for IP.
is it actually effective to do so?
People willfully break a law because they want to do something that happens to be illegal. I believe that they weigh up the risk with the reward in any decision like this. Crimes that are committed and justified with "everyone else is doing it' generally have attached the unspoken disclaimer 'and they aren't
I can't say I've seen this one happen all that often in Australia where as you know handguns are hard to come by.
You do not deny that the killing sprees would still occur. So what would we hope to achieve by banning guns?
Obviously less killing sprees. And presumably less victims per spree. One thing that the lack of gun access has done is to drop the suicide rate among young men.
For all the statistics that pro gun writers offer I cannot help thinking that in Australia disgruntled workers are almost 100% unlkikely to go home get a gun and return to work to kill a few people before killing themselves. I honestly can't remember when this occured the last time in Australia. It seems to happen often in the USA. If it's not something to do with the availability of guns then it must be cultural. I'm not sure that makes the US look good either.
And they haven't changed yet. Will they never learn.
But shouldn't you be riding your bike to the other shops. Though that does expose you to the dangers of traffic from the significantly larger number of people driving 10 miles from around the (a) organic food stores, (b) farmers markets, (c) co-ops, (d) gardens. to shop at the privacy invading supermarkets.
Second, you may have missed the bit in the standard warranty and EULA that says the vendor accepts no responsibility if the software doesn't do what they say it will do let alone what you expect. Whether they stand up in court or not the vendor probably sees more l;oss in pirates than in claims for faulty software.
You have a thing or two to learn about powerlessness.
I must treat serial killers and rapists just as I would my best friends.
No I think you have to give them a place to live and a job and let them marry your sister or at least use her when they feel like it. That's so obviously the end result of banning discrimination based on skin colour. I don't know why I didn't see that.
In my experience in various parts of the state, there is no kind of racial tension or hatred anywhere
Even allowing for truly hyperbolic hyperbole if you honestly think Mississippi is filled with white-loving black people, you've got another think coming.
You can stop whacking yourself now.
intentionally single out individual groups and refuse service to them if they want to.What, like the sign in the front door of saying "No blacks"
Do they still have those in Mississippi. I'm surprised.
They work hard for their 'free' money. Probably put up with more shit in their day than you do to get enough to eat and find somewhere to sleep.
To annoy people like you. They're good aren't they. Worth every cent I pay.
Are you an orphan or did you get kicked out of home.
And even better, it all goes into your Terrorist Information Awareness profile when you go looking for a job or buy airline tickets.
A spammer who gets a seemingly legitimate address and doesn't make use of it for some reason. I don't think that could ever happen.
Or
there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for it.
Unless you just got your adsl account my money is on the former.
I'm still getting junk mail addressed to an onaustralia account that I got when compuserve closed down and which i assumed had died when I left telstra for 6 months. No they still forward it to me.
Telstra is the national carrier and does most connectivity esp overseas and so has most of the Australian ip numbers allocated to it. You gota figure if Australia is the source of a problem it will be a telstra problem.
Maybe you can offer to sell them a filter.
Oh, i see you have already done that. twice.
make that three , no four times
Umm, what's this one about penises say.
Why would I want to shrink my penis?
I suspect the majority of patents are used properly and the system is generally working. Though I suspect it is getting a bit unwieldy as it grows.
And is there any significance if the poster uses as super huge or ultra little as their humourous qualifier.
Or better still if they use hemoroid creme as their example purchase.
You can get extra, extra small condoms? Geez, if I'd known that maybe I wouldn't have so many kids.
Perhaps if i just wear someone else's pants. Stealing their eye seems a little extreme.
As i understand it Tuvalu did reasonably well out of .tv though I'm happy to be shown otherwise. An article today in The Australian talks about .la from Laos but hasn't any details on hoiw well Laos is going to do out of LA. business.