What police force was involved? What evidence of illegal activity were they looking for? What probable cause did they present to the judge for a search warrent?
Most copyright infringements are civil cases, and warrents and police involvement not legally possible. There is some Federal criminal copyright infringements (commercial copiers), but they'd have to convince the Feds (FBI or USSS?) of the case.
... or form over function! Fiction is intended for entertainment, form is everything. Any ideas "borrowed" from elsewhere will be exposed and discussed in such criticism as the work attracts. But are entirely secondary to the presentation.
Non-fiction is intented for enlightenment. Form is entirely secondary, the ideas/content/plot is primary. The origin/web of those ideas must be preserved.
Plagiarism is essentially quoting without [proper] attribution. Passing [especially] words and [sometimes] ideas off as one's own. It is perfectly acceptable, and usually highly desireable to include others' work with attribution into a new synthesis or even a survey.
The author knows this full well (even if he can't express it), as shown by the very extensive citations!
A device might well be developed. I fully expect it will get banned in the US -- the FCC will do so at the request of the Department of Homeland Security. DHS will be worried about unspecified "possible security exploits."
Why? Do you think they care about paying 50 k$? No way. What they might worry about is other judges picking up on the interpretation of costs being equiptably determined.
The RIAA's tactics are very simple: they want to scare people into compliance with their business model by threatening them with onerous litigation. The money won is insignificant to them. Paying the occasional set of costs is likewise insignificant.
The only thing that will stop them is if some appelate Court rules that their drift-net technique is insufficient grounds to advance a case and upholds summary dismissal. So they don't appeal!
Oh, I see -- the cash payment is viewed as a deposit. This seems a violation of common-law sale, particularly the doctrine of first sale. What happens if the purchaser resells the software without installing it? How could a subsequent buyer get a refund?
This seems like sophistry since there are lots of fairly convenient mechanisms to get consent. Things like product activation or updates. Of course they have marketting negatives, but then so are the EULAs which ought not be hidden. From UCITA on, publishers have been trying to tilt the playing field so their onerous terms become irrefutable.
BoA relies upon persistant cookies to determine whether to send the sitekey image. If you don't have that cookie (clear or other machine), you have to enter your passwd to get the sitekey. Rather rediculous, but they don't want to be trolled for keys.
I'm really not sure about the logic behind ProCD: a return (most stores won't accept open software) does not nullify the contract, it just mitigates the losses on breech. The money has been paid, and the buyer travelled. Kloeck seems on much solider ground.
But lawyers are advocates, and clients make opinions. At least publicly stated ones. The money against the BSA is very diffuse since big/medium.biz always signs full contracts. Only the little guy has to deal with EULAs.
I don't believe this question has been fully litigated yet. It's fairly basic -- when did the transaction consummate and what were the terms on notice? In the case of OTC software, it's a simple retail sale, and absent very explicit and obvious terms on the outside of the package, any extra inside or via click-wrap is simply overreaching after the transaction has been consummated.
OTOH, the typical web click-wrap done before payment might well be valid. Ditto for free downloads.
Everything the OP knows may be exactly as stated. But what iff... the Sales Mgr just lost a big account to the hiring company, and one of their selling points was they now had staff experienced with the buyers ops?
Even if hire.co didn't entice the employee away, they might have hired with the competitive prospect.
IANAL, but Texas is a "Right to Work" state and even a non-compete would have to pass reasonableness tests. They can sue, but won't win.
More interesting is why a Sales Mgr (of all people) would threaten you. Just sue! What good is the threat? They're not trying to get you to stay. Are they trying to threaten other employees indirectly? I strongly suspect that will backfire.
It's probably frustration talking, but mgmt doesn't appear to possess self-control and this is a very bad sign for those you left behind. Mgrs might be touchier than usual because things are going worse than they let on.
If someone wants to find a roadblock, there are many you can pick from, especially if you're not interested in workarounds.
MS-Exchange is just one such. It can be configured to serve out POP3 and hence be accessible to many tools. It can also be configured to serve out only it's proprietary protocols, which one must not expect anyone else to understand.
Personally, I've been using Linux for 12 years, the last 5 exclusively (at home). I've also used it heavily at work, but there are apps it won't run. No big deal. I have always had at leat two machines in my office. Or you could go with VMware.
Security means different things to different people. Paramount is the threat being defended against. Often, one angle can be secured only at the cost of another. Data destruction [authorized users not being able to decode data] is a frequently overlooked risk.
Two (or more) factor security sounds good, but is designed for independant control of the factors.
A USB flashdrive can be cloned and really can't claim independant control.
Agreed on the difficulty/undesireablity of legislation: it almost always has unexpected and unintended consequences are people adapt.
A law is advocated to stop behaviour some people see as undesireable. The perpetrators have no such opinion. Whatever impels them to do the undesireable act continues to operate, and they just find a way around.
On net neutrality, in a competitive market, premium services will result in lower prices for bulk services. What do I care about 2000 ms latency when I'm downloading ISOs? I just increase RWIN.
Breaking a forerunner of "net neutrality" is how the Internet got it's international costs so low. Going from channel-switched [voice] to packet-switched [data].
Agreed. The main question is the timeline for benefits. The ability to delay gratification.
The recognition of others as posessing independant choice you'd best consider. Kids are an obvious example in both senses.
Even Ayn Rand ["The Virtue of Selfishness"} said "The better the mind, the longer the range [of planning]".
Predators [noncooperators]mot certainly exist. In a balanced cycle with their prey.
Oh, those VTs! I don't know any available way. Nor any way beween hardware Xterms. I meant "Virtual Terminals" as provided under Linux/*BSD at the consoleby Alt-F# (or Ctl-Alt-F# under X). One of those can certainly be open to another machine via ssh, telnet or rlogin.
OTOH, it shouldn't be that hard to modify `gpm` to also work as an inetd daemon, and move the cursor to a totally different system when pushed at the edge of the screen. You'd have to configure which screen was to the right, top, etc.
Be careful of laws: the actual targets always turn out different from the intended targets. People adapt, and sometimes with a gain over 1.
The law you think will impede XOM will also affect Greenpeace, Sierra Klub, FoE, PETA, et al. No-one can hire "for specific urging" anonymously. Not even grandma in KS or her Kiwanas.
Meanwhile, XOM can support Rush Limberger or the NRA on a general basis anonymously. Which is probably how they prefer to do it. Focus pierces anonymity.
I've never had the slightest problem with GPM cut'n'pasting between VTs (X not running). Just select (Highlight) in one VT, switch to anOther with the usual Alt-F# and paste.
If you insist on trying this with X running (which steals the mouse), then you'll have to read the manpage for GPM rather carefully. It may be possible with some combination like shift-click.
Actually, in the case of Rupert, I see even less problem: He runs newspapers which have done exactly that (paying & publishing pundits) for centuries! And nor do I make any distinction based on political views or donor size.
As for the bill, it probably needs "urge specific action" wording to have a hope of surviving constitutional challenge. That would catch lobbyists-for-hire, but not bloggers who are paid to write generally in support of [say] the tobacco industry. The payment is _not_ to urge one specific action, but to advocate for a whole series whose precise content is unknown at the time of payment.
Slashdot Mirror
No species lasts forever. They usually overspecialize into extinction.
What police force was involved? What evidence of illegal activity were they looking for? What probable cause did they present to the judge for a search warrent?
Most copyright infringements are civil cases, and warrents and police involvement not legally possible. There is some Federal criminal copyright infringements (commercial copiers), but they'd have to convince the Feds (FBI or USSS?) of the case.
Non-fiction is intented for enlightenment. Form is entirely secondary, the ideas/content/plot is primary. The origin/web of those ideas must be preserved.
The author knows this full well (even if he can't express it), as shown by the very extensive citations!
The only thing that will stop them is if some appelate Court rules that their drift-net technique is insufficient grounds to advance a case and upholds summary dismissal. So they don't appeal!
This seems like sophistry since there are lots of fairly convenient mechanisms to get consent. Things like product activation or updates. Of course they have marketting negatives, but then so are the EULAs which ought not be hidden. From UCITA on, publishers have been trying to tilt the playing field so their onerous terms become irrefutable.
But lawyers are advocates, and clients make opinions. At least publicly stated ones. The money against the BSA is very diffuse since big/medium.biz always signs full contracts. Only the little guy has to deal with EULAs.
OTOH, the typical web click-wrap done before payment might well be valid. Ditto for free downloads.
Even if hire.co didn't entice the employee away, they might have hired with the competitive prospect.
More interesting is why a Sales Mgr (of all people) would threaten you. Just sue! What good is the threat? They're not trying to get you to stay. Are they trying to threaten other employees indirectly? I strongly suspect that will backfire.
It's probably frustration talking, but mgmt doesn't appear to possess self-control and this is a very bad sign for those you left behind. Mgrs might be touchier than usual because things are going worse than they let on.
MS-Exchange is just one such. It can be configured to serve out POP3 and hence be accessible to many tools. It can also be configured to serve out only it's proprietary protocols, which one must not expect anyone else to understand.
Personally, I've been using Linux for 12 years, the last 5 exclusively (at home). I've also used it heavily at work, but there are apps it won't run. No big deal. I have always had at leat two machines in my office. Or you could go with VMware.
Two (or more) factor security sounds good, but is designed for independant control of the factors. A USB flashdrive can be cloned and really can't claim independant control.
A law is advocated to stop behaviour some people see as undesireable. The perpetrators have no such opinion. Whatever impels them to do the undesireable act continues to operate, and they just find a way around.
On net neutrality, in a competitive market, premium services will result in lower prices for bulk services. What do I care about 2000 ms latency when I'm downloading ISOs? I just increase RWIN.
Breaking a forerunner of "net neutrality" is how the Internet got it's international costs so low. Going from channel-switched [voice] to packet-switched [data].
Even Ayn Rand ["The Virtue of Selfishness"} said "The better the mind, the longer the range [of planning]".
Predators [noncooperators]mot certainly exist. In a balanced cycle with their prey.
OTOH, it shouldn't be that hard to modify `gpm` to also work as an inetd daemon, and move the cursor to a totally different system when pushed at the edge of the screen. You'd have to configure which screen was to the right, top, etc.
The law you think will impede XOM will also affect Greenpeace, Sierra Klub, FoE, PETA, et al. No-one can hire "for specific urging" anonymously. Not even grandma in KS or her Kiwanas.
Meanwhile, XOM can support Rush Limberger or the NRA on a general basis anonymously. Which is probably how they prefer to do it. Focus pierces anonymity.
If you insist on trying this with X running (which steals the mouse), then you'll have to read the manpage for GPM rather carefully. It may be possible with some combination like shift-click.
As for the bill, it probably needs "urge specific action" wording to have a hope of surviving constitutional challenge. That would catch lobbyists-for-hire, but not bloggers who are paid to write generally in support of [say] the tobacco industry. The payment is _not_ to urge one specific action, but to advocate for a whole series whose precise content is unknown at the time of payment.
ROTFLMAO! You disparage anonymity while posting AC!