Safe haven? good thing that you said relatively, we weren't massacred there constantly as we were in 'enlightened' Europe, but that's it. And very recently is a blatant lie, the Damascus Blood Libel occurred in 1840, 163 years ago.
Yes, Jews only fled the Arab world after the formation of the state of Israel in 1948, because of widespread and unbearable persecution, but that is also very much because of the fact that the option (the state of Israel) didn't exist before that (many Jews couldn't even free Nazi Germany, because no country would accept them).
Arab terrorism against Jews started long before the state of Israel formed in 1948, the Hebron massacre occurred in 1929, any kind of occupation couldn't start before the six-day war in 1967, but the PLO was formed in 1964, with the expressed aim of total obliteration of Israel.
The rest of your comment does not even justify a response.
It covers specifically these kinds of cases, and the hospital clearly didn't place the necessary safeguards, as far as I understand the law, '"We'll have to live with this risk on a daily basis," Ryba said' is simply not good enough.
If they can't do the necessary changes, they can always go to the court, and either win (likely considering Apple's position) or delay the case forever (and 1M$/day fine until the final decision is not likely here). Anyway, it's not like the anti-trust authority did this on its own accord, they are doing it to avoid a court case against it from the user group, not wanting to dirty its hands for MS.
The user group OTOH, didn't have a lot of other options in court, they couldn't go against Apple for giving up on Israel, that is not a monopoly decision (and with a 0% market share here, Apple is not one), they can only go against MS. I hope that ignoring the monopoly was a mistake made by the previous anti-trust administrator, which the current one is not going to repeat.
I hope you are wrong about the licenses, but my experience causes me to agree that this is likely.
That would have been my first reaction too, the lock -in is just too great for a full switch to be realistic, but Israel do have a superb legal system (and an at least reasonable anti-trust system, which I believe will step in too soon), this is apparently a reaction to suit broght in Israel's high court for justice (AKA, the Israeli supreme court when dealing with a special kind of cases against the government, AKA Bagatz), against the anti-trust and purchasing authorities (the accountant general).
This is apparntly (according to Israeli press in net.nana.co.il) part of the country's position before the court and can not be changed without a very good reason.
Anyway, there is more, the accountant general said (outside the court) that the licensing agreements are problematic, especially the bundling, and would only be partially renewed for a reduced price (You are right there), without bundling (e.g. they want some licenses with only word for a fraction of the price of office, because it is only a fraction of office), and that no upgrade will come anytime soon. They also consider switching to OpenOffice and Mozilla.
It seems that part of the answer to the court was that the country will distribute hebrew versions Linux and OpenOffice to facilitate citzen contact to the government.
The American government do have a strong inluence here, and I don't think the army will switch, at least for that reason.
At my university (The Technion - Israel's institute of technology) many lectures were taped, the tape library had players where you could adjust the speed. I had to do that to escape the boredom of many lectures, eventually using 2x by default.
On of the obvious ways to scale-up Gnutella was caching of search results, this would mean that even without framing there could be responses which are already irrelevant because the IP address was since reassigned, this could potentially produce the same effect. Without actually successfully starting the download, there is no way to know if the response is correct. Additionally, the original Gnutella protocol does not provide checksums, so even a correct response could point to the wrong file.
You are the lawyer among us, so I am almost forced to agree with you here, almost, but not quite. I agree with your second comment, but I either don't understand your first comment, or one of us is very wrong.
As far as I can tell, to get protection (i.e. to make infringement illegal) in a country, the patent has to be registered in that country (either directly or through a mechanism like PCT), it may be originally registered elsewhere, but have to be registered there within a year.
If the patent is not (or as result of ban on software patents - cannot) registered in the EU, use of the patented method is perfectly legal in the EU (as was the case several times in the past AFAIR).
Would you really like the NCSA or Netscape to have a 20 year monopoly on displaying images with text or on hyperlinks ?!?
Yes, I prefer IE to exist, as long as I can also have lynx and opera and konquerer.
Competition, even agains MS lets the better products surface instead of getting us stuck with patent protected monopoly, inferior products.
Your gun manufacturer analogy is right on the money, patents can be used defensibly as can guns, but are essentially a destructive tool.
Plus, EU software patents can only harm EU competiveness, EU companies could always register their software patents in the US while ignoring US software patents in the EU. Now US companies will rush to register their patents in the EU.
Patents may have a place, but today's systems are really out of control.
That's why it is a probability, consider for example that they have to make one more observation, and that it has a 90% to say it will not hit earth, and 10% chance to worsen the chances ten fold to 1:90,000: Then the 1:900,000 is already taking both results into account. Most likely (90%) the chances will be slimmer (here 1:infinity), but it might get bigger.
There is a 1:900,000 chance that the probability will eventually get to be 1:1 (100%), and a 899,999:900,000 that it will be 0%, that's what a 1:900,000 probability means.
Are you sure about that? IANAL, but the law states "A ''derivative work'' is a work based upon one or more preexisting works", as far as I understand, if it contains portions of the original, only the delta is a deriviative work.
A patch is all delta, and I think that means it is all a deriviative work. Otherwise the GPL could be easiliy circumvented by patching with proprietery code.
HUGE market, one of the fastest growing markets in the world (Especially the technology side of it), low competition (so many products do not fit in there for many reasons).
They are not selling to the people in the country, but to those in the cities, and there you got both a upper class, and growth.
I agree wholeheartedly. There are a lot of laws which are not activly enforced, but their existance in the books sets a social standard.
Moreover, a law which is not enforced by itself is useful when the authorities catch them for something else which is hard to prove (in the case of spam, probably fraud, misuse of other people's computers) or have jurisdiction problems. And it helps civil litigation too (I don't know if the US have a civil criminal litigation procedure, but it helps either way).
When I worked on Y2K, we considered the possibility of incorrect dates (many systems, especially embedded ones, don't really use the date, only a periodic interrupt or time deltas, but utilize a clock with a date setting to issue them - no one sets those dates). If such a system has a Y2K bug - it could strike anytime.
"If you're using KaAaA today, you're getting, in my view, a crappy quality song -- not what the artist did in the studio, not what they wanted you to hear, not their finest work" - Rosen
Yeah, but that's what you get when you buy a CD too, a much too loud abomination of what the artist recorded.
Not necessarily, these seem like the patents titles (e.g. 'a method and system for ordering and downloading resources from computerized repositories') and not the claims.
Titles are usually overly borad, but have no legal imlications, in a patent, only the valid claims have legal imlications and they are usually much narrower.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, Jews only fled the Arab world after the formation of the state of Israel in 1948, because of widespread and unbearable persecution, but that is also very much because of the fact that the option (the state of Israel) didn't exist before that (many Jews couldn't even free Nazi Germany, because no country would accept them).
Arab terrorism against Jews started long before the state of Israel formed in 1948, the Hebron massacre occurred in 1929, any kind of occupation couldn't start before the six-day war in 1967, but the PLO was formed in 1964, with the expressed aim of total obliteration of Israel.
The rest of your comment does not even justify a response.
That's the The U.S. House of Representatives seach engine anyway.
It covers specifically these kinds of cases, and the hospital clearly didn't place the necessary safeguards, as far as I understand the law, '"We'll have to live with this risk on a daily basis," Ryba said' is simply not good enough.
The user group OTOH, didn't have a lot of other options in court, they couldn't go against Apple for giving up on Israel, that is not a monopoly decision (and with a 0% market share here, Apple is not one), they can only go against MS. I hope that ignoring the monopoly was a mistake made by the previous anti-trust administrator, which the current one is not going to repeat.
I hope you are wrong about the licenses, but my experience causes me to agree that this is likely.
This is apparntly (according to Israeli press in net.nana.co.il) part of the country's position before the court and can not be changed without a very good reason.
Anyway, there is more, the accountant general said (outside the court) that the licensing agreements are problematic, especially the bundling, and would only be partially renewed for a reduced price (You are right there), without bundling (e.g. they want some licenses with only word for a fraction of the price of office, because it is only a fraction of office), and that no upgrade will come anytime soon. They also consider switching to OpenOffice and Mozilla.
It seems that part of the answer to the court was that the country will distribute hebrew versions Linux and OpenOffice to facilitate citzen contact to the government.
The American government do have a strong inluence here, and I don't think the army will switch, at least for that reason.
At my university (The Technion - Israel's institute of technology) many lectures were taped, the tape library had players where you could adjust the speed. I had to do that to escape the boredom of many lectures, eventually using 2x by default.
On of the obvious ways to scale-up Gnutella was caching of search results, this would mean that even without framing there could be responses which are already irrelevant because the IP address was since reassigned, this could potentially produce the same effect. Without actually successfully starting the download, there is no way to know if the response is correct. Additionally, the original Gnutella protocol does not provide checksums, so even a correct response could point to the wrong file.
According to 'Parkinson's Law' by C. Northcote Parkinson, in chapter 6 'plans and plants', this marks the start of the decline of the company, lets hope it's a counter example.
As far as I can tell, to get protection (i.e. to make infringement illegal) in a country, the patent has to be registered in that country (either directly or through a mechanism like PCT), it may be originally registered elsewhere, but have to be registered there within a year.
If the patent is not (or as result of ban on software patents - cannot) registered in the EU, use of the patented method is perfectly legal in the EU (as was the case several times in the past AFAIR).
See for example http://www.uwyo.edu/rpc/articleShortTreatise.pdf
Yes, I prefer IE to exist, as long as I can also have lynx and opera and konquerer.
Competition, even agains MS lets the better products surface instead of getting us stuck with patent protected monopoly, inferior products.
Your gun manufacturer analogy is right on the money, patents can be used defensibly as can guns, but are essentially a destructive tool.
Plus, EU software patents can only harm EU competiveness, EU companies could always register their software patents in the US while ignoring US software patents in the EU. Now US companies will rush to register their patents in the EU.
Patents may have a place, but today's systems are really out of control.
When you are immortal - the stakes are just too high to take a gamble on the rest of your life.
Then the 1:900,000 is already taking both results into account. Most likely (90%) the chances will be slimmer (here 1:infinity), but it might get bigger.
There is a 1:900,000 chance that the probability will eventually get to be 1:1 (100%), and a 899,999:900,000 that it will be 0%, that's what a 1:900,000 probability means.
A patch is all delta, and I think that means it is all a deriviative work. Otherwise the GPL could be easiliy circumvented by patching with proprietery code.
They are not selling to the people in the country, but to those in the cities, and there you got both a upper class, and growth.
I'm pretty sure a patch counts as a deriviative work, you can create it, but not distribute it.
This is bad security design for sure, but means no open source anyway, period.
If it really is in Jenin, the PA is responsible for law enforcement according to the intrim oslo accords.
Except for the occasional anti-terrorist raids, the Palestinian Authority has absolute power there.
Moreover, a law which is not enforced by itself is useful when the authorities catch them for something else which is hard to prove (in the case of spam, probably fraud, misuse of other people's computers) or have jurisdiction problems. And it helps civil litigation too (I don't know if the US have a civil criminal litigation procedure, but it helps either way).
The indutsry base their planning and research funding on this law (i.e. 'we must not lag behind moore law!' -PHB), there is no wonder it still holds.
When I worked on Y2K, we considered the possibility of incorrect dates (many systems, especially embedded ones, don't really use the date, only a periodic interrupt or time deltas, but utilize a clock with a date setting to issue them - no one sets those dates). If such a system has a Y2K bug - it could strike anytime.
If the north pole melts, earth absorbs more heat (at least in the northern summer), speeding up warming.
Yeah, but that's what you get when you buy a CD too, a much too loud abomination of what the artist recorded.
Titles are usually overly borad, but have no legal imlications, in a patent, only the valid claims have legal imlications and they are usually much narrower.
P.S. IANAL...
It was filed abroad (sweden?) as PCT first, probably before MI was founded, this is common practice for inventors: i.e.
After reading the independent claims I don't think squid is effected as a cache, unless the cache is distributed.
I don't see anything here I didn't already saw in the MPEG-4 specifications years ago.