How is it injustice? The person still gets punished and other people's cases come to trial more quickly. Would it be better to have people sit in jail for years waiting for their trial to come up? Maybe you should check your 6th amendment and see why settling cases out of court is a good thing.
He basically screwed around with the whole court system. Making a withdrawing pleas, coaching his family on what to say and notes they should write to the judge, making outrageous counter-claims, etc. Once he abandoned the plea they went after him for everything he had done. The 18 years is fair based on everything I read in that PDF.
There is already a huge backlog of cases and trying a case is a huge cost to society. Without plea agreements it could take decades for some of these cases to come to trial.
You can scan or copy any book you won as long as you don't distribute the scans or copies AND you retain possession of the original book. If you scan the book and then turn around and sell it you no longer have rights to the book and have to delete/destroy the scan or copies.
That's a pretty bold statement to make without presenting any evidence. How is it that you are so sure of their guilt while the FTC is just starting to look for evidence? What insider information do you have?
Why would anybody not on a Mac use Safari? Until I googled it I didn't even realize a PC version was available. Perhaps Chrome is popular because people like and respect Google? Personally I don't like Chrome and any ads I've seen haven't convinced me differently.
I'd also like to point out that the first thing you see when you search for web browser on google is an ad for IE9. Chrome is first on the ads on the right but in their regular search results it is 4th (if you don't count the news). I really don't see that as unfair product placement.
But Google isn't "packaging" anything. When I go to google.com I see a pretty empty page with a big search box in the middle. Sure there are links at the top but they are minimal. When I search for "email" google's email does come up at top but right after it are yahoo, hotmail, mail.com, a wikipedia link about email, and then AOL. On the ad supported sidebar mail.com is first and google is actually 4th.
When I search for maps I get google but then mapquest, yahoo, bing, etc.
So is the problem that google is first? I mean what company in their right mind doesn't link themselves first? And it probably isn't unreasonable to think that these products are used more because they are truly superior to their competitors.
I actually thought the Microsoft thing was ridiculous, too. IE didn't need an anti-trust suit to reduce its marketshare. Anybody could download a different browser and when better browser came out people did.
So can we next have a suit against NBC for unfairly putting commercials for their shows ahead of other networks? I realize that Google has become ubiquitous but there are other search engines. I don't see how it is unreasonable for Google to promote their own brand on their page.
Well if you haven't read the patent or even the article then why are you commenting? It's not just text - it can be images - and the process is handled through your cell phone. Patents are supposed to be very specific. They aren't patenting just turning text into an fancy font. It is the entire process that the photo will go through (including identifying where the sky is).
I think it would be obvious that the sample image wouldn't be the real product. You don't typically patent something after the fact. This thing probably isn't even in prototype at this point.
The bigger problem is that they used a copyrighted image without permission.
Why is it any more absurd than any other software patent? I actually think it would be a cool feature. I'm surprised there isn't something like it already in Photoshop. I'd imagine that those with a romantic view might take it to turn a photo of their gf's face and turn it into skywriting over a photo of himself.
The patent is for the system of how to add fake images that appear to look like skywriting to an existing images - both text and graphics. The idea is to take an existing photo or text and automatically modify it to look like skywriting. If there is no current application that does this then based on current standards that is a legit patent.
Mr. Franklin didn't invent electricity - he discovered it. You can't patent electricity anymore than you can patent water.
Either way, it looks to me like they were giving an example of how it would work. You don't have to have the system working in order to patent it. Their choice was just a poor one.
Protectionism never works. It's a global market and you can't go back now. If you want Johnny to not lose his job to Jhoni than he better learn some value added skills.
I don't typically defend Apple but how are they "anticompetative" in music players, phones or phone apps? I own nothing made by Apple and know many other people who are the same way. I can't imagine we are the only people in the country who are anti-Apple.
Having a majority of the market share (which they don't in phones anyway) doesn't make you anti-competitive.
Slashdot Mirror
If they were truly innocent they wouldn't take the plea. This guy was clearly not innocent.
Good luck on clearly defining victimless crimes and minor inconveniences.
How is it injustice? The person still gets punished and other people's cases come to trial more quickly. Would it be better to have people sit in jail for years waiting for their trial to come up? Maybe you should check your 6th amendment and see why settling cases out of court is a good thing.
He basically screwed around with the whole court system. Making a withdrawing pleas, coaching his family on what to say and notes they should write to the judge, making outrageous counter-claims, etc. Once he abandoned the plea they went after him for everything he had done. The 18 years is fair based on everything I read in that PDF.
If you read that whole pdf you would see that the evidence against him is overwhelming. He'd be better off claiming he had an evil twin.
There is already a huge backlog of cases and trying a case is a huge cost to society. Without plea agreements it could take decades for some of these cases to come to trial.
My point is that Windows 7 came out 2 years ago. I hardly would call that a few months ago.
Well if you are on a two year lag of upgrades then why are you even asking? Just wait until 2013 and then see if you want to upgrade.
He flies first class. They actually get to molest TSA agents instead in first class.
Well if you are cheating on your spouse then I am not sure that they are the only one with moral or ethical problems.
It's MoMath. They actually say it in the summary and links to their website. It's like MoMA.
You can scan or copy any book you won as long as you don't distribute the scans or copies AND you retain possession of the original book. If you scan the book and then turn around and sell it you no longer have rights to the book and have to delete/destroy the scan or copies.
That's a pretty bold statement to make without presenting any evidence. How is it that you are so sure of their guilt while the FTC is just starting to look for evidence? What insider information do you have?
Why would anybody not on a Mac use Safari? Until I googled it I didn't even realize a PC version was available. Perhaps Chrome is popular because people like and respect Google? Personally I don't like Chrome and any ads I've seen haven't convinced me differently.
I'd also like to point out that the first thing you see when you search for web browser on google is an ad for IE9. Chrome is first on the ads on the right but in their regular search results it is 4th (if you don't count the news). I really don't see that as unfair product placement.
But Google isn't "packaging" anything. When I go to google.com I see a pretty empty page with a big search box in the middle. Sure there are links at the top but they are minimal. When I search for "email" google's email does come up at top but right after it are yahoo, hotmail, mail.com, a wikipedia link about email, and then AOL. On the ad supported sidebar mail.com is first and google is actually 4th.
When I search for maps I get google but then mapquest, yahoo, bing, etc.
So is the problem that google is first? I mean what company in their right mind doesn't link themselves first? And it probably isn't unreasonable to think that these products are used more because they are truly superior to their competitors.
I actually thought the Microsoft thing was ridiculous, too. IE didn't need an anti-trust suit to reduce its marketshare. Anybody could download a different browser and when better browser came out people did.
So can we next have a suit against NBC for unfairly putting commercials for their shows ahead of other networks? I realize that Google has become ubiquitous but there are other search engines. I don't see how it is unreasonable for Google to promote their own brand on their page.
Well if you haven't read the patent or even the article then why are you commenting? It's not just text - it can be images - and the process is handled through your cell phone. Patents are supposed to be very specific. They aren't patenting just turning text into an fancy font. It is the entire process that the photo will go through (including identifying where the sky is).
I think it would be obvious that the sample image wouldn't be the real product. You don't typically patent something after the fact. This thing probably isn't even in prototype at this point.
The bigger problem is that they used a copyrighted image without permission.
Why is it any more absurd than any other software patent? I actually think it would be a cool feature. I'm surprised there isn't something like it already in Photoshop. I'd imagine that those with a romantic view might take it to turn a photo of their gf's face and turn it into skywriting over a photo of himself.
The patent is for the system of how to add fake images that appear to look like skywriting to an existing images - both text and graphics. The idea is to take an existing photo or text and automatically modify it to look like skywriting. If there is no current application that does this then based on current standards that is a legit patent.
Mr. Franklin didn't invent electricity - he discovered it. You can't patent electricity anymore than you can patent water.
Either way, it looks to me like they were giving an example of how it would work. You don't have to have the system working in order to patent it. Their choice was just a poor one.
So tell me how you "kill" offshoring? I'm curious what you magic antidote is to prevent companies from operating in a cost-efficient manner.
Protectionism never works. It's a global market and you can't go back now. If you want Johnny to not lose his job to Jhoni than he better learn some value added skills.
What does that have to do with anything? I can get the same exact apps pretty much for my droid without involving Apple at all.
I don't typically defend Apple but how are they "anticompetative" in music players, phones or phone apps? I own nothing made by Apple and know many other people who are the same way. I can't imagine we are the only people in the country who are anti-Apple.
Having a majority of the market share (which they don't in phones anyway) doesn't make you anti-competitive.