No. It should happen like this: you're arrested because you match the description of a burglar or other criminal they're looking for (although whether merely wearing a suit of the same colour should be counted as "matching the description" is debatable, too); you're brought before a judge within 24 hours, who will issue a formal arrest warrant, and you will be given time to consult with your lawyer. Your background will be checked, and *if* there is no easy reason why you must be innocent (such as having attended a conference in another town at the time the crime in question happened!), *then* a search warrant for your home can be issued by a *judge*.
Rubbish. Copyright infringement is not theft, so stop labelling it that way. Yes, both activities are illegal, but they're not the *same*, and blurring the meaning of words isn't gonna do any good. You don't run around and proclaim that (real) theft is murder, either, do you? So please keep the following in mind:
copyright infringement = violation of a copyright owner's rights when your actions weren't covered by fair use. theft = taking away of a physical, tangible object from another person. piracy = sailing the seven seas, stopping other ships, boarding them, stealing the cargo (see "theft" above), and quite possibly killing the crew.
That being said, who says that "most" of the customers commit copyright infringement, anyway? Do you have any actual numbers to back up that claim, or did you just pull some figures out of your ass after reading too much Slashdot?
No - the best solution is to find out exactly why people are rioting (certainly it can't be just because they're not happy with their situation - many are, but almost noone riots), and then do something about it.
And besides, I'm not sure about you, but if I heard that my government is shooting and killing people instead of - say - trying to incapacitate them and arrest them so they can receive a trial, then I'd be more than upset, too. And while I wouldn't resort to violence myself, I surely would demonstrate.
Contrary to what you may think, the government is not always right, and does not always have the right to do whatever it wants to. Just look at how our own nation was founded, and you'll see a good example of that.
Roman Polanski was not convicted; he left the USA after he learned that the plea bargain that had been struck was not going to be upheld by the judge. And since he's a French citizen, France will not extradite him to the USA (which I think is understandable - would the USA extradite a US citizen to France?).
Of course, that doesn't explain why he wasn't arrested and tried in France. But at least let's stick to the facts, OK? Everyone deserves to be treated fairly, even an alleged child abuser (although whether a 13-year old can still be considered a "child" is unclear to me; "teen abuser" would probably be a more appropriate term. But of course, that doesn't evoke the same images of five-year olds being abused.)
You're free to purchase paper copies of Britannica or Brockhaus or so and send those to Africa instead - I don't think anyone will complain if you do.:)
It's supposed to act as a deterrent - not just in this case, but also as a warning to all other schools in the country that might have similar rules. Essentially, it says "freedom of speech *is* an important thing, and you can't just arbitrarily deny your students this freedom - and if you try, you'll get a real punishment for it, something that actually hurts as opposed to just the metaphorical slap on the wrist".
Better yet - hand them several, possibly hundreds of, folders full of empty paper. That way, they'll at least have to spend some time making sure that it actually *is* all empty.:)
Then it should be a Linux/*BSD worm, and even that would still be misleading at best, as PHP is what's the problem here. Yes, it's PHP on specific platforms only, but the hole is in PHP, not Linux or *BSD, so it *should* be called a "PHP worm affecting Linux/*BSD platforms", or something similar.
Well, in order to make sure that the software company has your name, credit card number and everything on file, of course, so that when they're sued and have to surrender their customer data, you can expect a visit from the men in black soon...
(Just to make sure, that was ironic, of course. In reality, I have no idea why anyone would pay for such a service, either, *especially* if they're going to use it for copyright infringement purposes (which I do not advocate)).
Yeah.:) I just looked it up again; it seems that he talked about evolution in October 1996, and while he seems to have rejected the wholly naturalistic approach which rules out the involvement of dog, he also seems to have said that evolution as a concept is not fundamentally incompatible with the bible and catholic belief.
Well, actually... even John Paul II made it known a several years (or even decades, if memory serves me right) ago that evolution was (as far as he could tell) correct and that it did not contradict catholic dogma. So this is not even really news, even though the current pope is even more conservative than JP was (who'd have thought this was possible...)
For that matter, if they really wanted to honour someone who's responsible for the Internet as we know it today, then Tim Berners-Lee would also have deserved one. But of course, Tim's a European, and we can't give awards to those pesky foreigners, now can we?
Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't exactly make me more inclined towards Yahoo. Quite the opposite - if I have the choice between a vendor who keeps on patting himself on the back and bragging about how great they are and one who actually focuses on making a good product, I'll always chose the latter. I just can't stand that kind of "w3 43r l33t!!!111" attitude.
And FWIW, it sure seems to me that Google does have the superior product, too. But of course, I may be biased (heck, I *definitely* am), so if you're not sure yourself, do give both a try. I think you'll come to the same conclusion that I've come to, though.
Debian etc. have historically rejected KDE because Qt used to not meet Debian's Free Software Guidelines etc. Those days are long over, of course, but the animosity towards KDE seems to have remained.
As for Novell... hard to say. But it's worth noting that many core KDE developers are from Germany, and SuSE is (was), too; Gnome, on the other hand, is pretty much a US development, and Novell is also a US company. Coincidence? Maybe, but I wouldn't be surprised if these things did play a role, in both cases...
The problem with that approach is that asking for people's permission is much like requiring them to click "accept" on an EULA. Most will simply sign documents required for certain things like obtaining credit cards without reading them in great detail; and even those who do would still be forced to accept these terms if they want a credit card, for example.
Choice is only choice if there really *is* a choice. What I'd like to see would be a "privacy seal of quality", so to speak - awarded by an independent non-profit organisation which'd hold the trademarks to the seal and who'd make sure that those who use it actually take privacy concerns seriously. Of course, the guidelines for that would have to be written in a clear and unambiguous way so that you could actually take the thing seriously, too; a privacy equivalent of the CAN-SPAM act would obviously do no good.
But once such a seal would exist, it would at least be easier for consumers to choose between different vendors/stores/... and factor in privacy concerns into their decision by taking into account whether the seal was awarded or not.
Here's another two: OPT-IN. Nobody's forced to participate here, and in fact, you're not even in by default, so there really should be no privacy problems.
Yes, because guns are going to be so much of a help against a government which has things like tanks, atom bombs etc. at their disposal - not to mention well-trained and -equipped soldiers.
Slashdot Mirror
No. It should happen like this: you're arrested because you match the description of a burglar or other criminal they're looking for (although whether merely wearing a suit of the same colour should be counted as "matching the description" is debatable, too); you're brought before a judge within 24 hours, who will issue a formal arrest warrant, and you will be given time to consult with your lawyer. Your background will be checked, and *if* there is no easy reason why you must be innocent (such as having attended a conference in another town at the time the crime in question happened!), *then* a search warrant for your home can be issued by a *judge*.
In Soviet Russia, SAP badmouthes YOU! Oh, wait...
Rubbish. Copyright infringement is not theft, so stop labelling it that way. Yes, both activities are illegal, but they're not the *same*, and blurring the meaning of words isn't gonna do any good. You don't run around and proclaim that (real) theft is murder, either, do you? So please keep the following in mind:
copyright infringement = violation of a copyright owner's rights when your actions weren't covered by fair use.
theft = taking away of a physical, tangible object from another person.
piracy = sailing the seven seas, stopping other ships, boarding them, stealing the cargo (see "theft" above), and quite possibly killing the crew.
That being said, who says that "most" of the customers commit copyright infringement, anyway? Do you have any actual numbers to back up that claim, or did you just pull some figures out of your ass after reading too much Slashdot?
No - the best solution is to find out exactly why people are rioting (certainly it can't be just because they're not happy with their situation - many are, but almost noone riots), and then do something about it.
And besides, I'm not sure about you, but if I heard that my government is shooting and killing people instead of - say - trying to incapacitate them and arrest them so they can receive a trial, then I'd be more than upset, too. And while I wouldn't resort to violence myself, I surely would demonstrate.
Contrary to what you may think, the government is not always right, and does not always have the right to do whatever it wants to. Just look at how our own nation was founded, and you'll see a good example of that.
Roman Polanski was not convicted; he left the USA after he learned that the plea bargain that had been struck was not going to be upheld by the judge. And since he's a French citizen, France will not extradite him to the USA (which I think is understandable - would the USA extradite a US citizen to France?).
Of course, that doesn't explain why he wasn't arrested and tried in France. But at least let's stick to the facts, OK? Everyone deserves to be treated fairly, even an alleged child abuser (although whether a 13-year old can still be considered a "child" is unclear to me; "teen abuser" would probably be a more appropriate term. But of course, that doesn't evoke the same images of five-year olds being abused.)
You're free to purchase paper copies of Britannica or Brockhaus or so and send those to Africa instead - I don't think anyone will complain if you do. :)
RTFA. It quite clearly states that the source will be released later this year after the participants have been consulted.
It's supposed to act as a deterrent - not just in this case, but also as a warning to all other schools in the country that might have similar rules. Essentially, it says "freedom of speech *is* an important thing, and you can't just arbitrarily deny your students this freedom - and if you try, you'll get a real punishment for it, something that actually hurts as opposed to just the metaphorical slap on the wrist".
Better yet - hand them several, possibly hundreds of, folders full of empty paper. That way, they'll at least have to spend some time making sure that it actually *is* all empty. :)
Here's the gist of it: http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167665&cid= 13978914
That's just an urban legend.
Then it should be a Linux/*BSD worm, and even that would still be misleading at best, as PHP is what's the problem here. Yes, it's PHP on specific platforms only, but the hole is in PHP, not Linux or *BSD, so it *should* be called a "PHP worm affecting Linux/*BSD platforms", or something similar.
Well, in order to make sure that the software company has your name, credit card number and everything on file, of course, so that when they're sued and have to surrender their customer data, you can expect a visit from the men in black soon...
(Just to make sure, that was ironic, of course. In reality, I have no idea why anyone would pay for such a service, either, *especially* if they're going to use it for copyright infringement purposes (which I do not advocate)).
Yeah. :) I just looked it up again; it seems that he talked about evolution in October 1996, and while he seems to have rejected the wholly naturalistic approach which rules out the involvement of dog, he also seems to have said that evolution as a concept is not fundamentally incompatible with the bible and catholic belief.
Well, actually... even John Paul II made it known a several years (or even decades, if memory serves me right) ago that evolution was (as far as he could tell) correct and that it did not contradict catholic dogma. So this is not even really news, even though the current pope is even more conservative than JP was (who'd have thought this was possible...)
Very well said.
For that matter, if they really wanted to honour someone who's responsible for the Internet as we know it today, then Tim Berners-Lee would also have deserved one. But of course, Tim's a European, and we can't give awards to those pesky foreigners, now can we?
No fighting took place in the USA during World War 2, either, though - at least not in the mainland.
Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't exactly make me more inclined towards Yahoo. Quite the opposite - if I have the choice between a vendor who keeps on patting himself on the back and bragging about how great they are and one who actually focuses on making a good product, I'll always chose the latter. I just can't stand that kind of "w3 43r l33t!!!111" attitude.
And FWIW, it sure seems to me that Google does have the superior product, too. But of course, I may be biased (heck, I *definitely* am), so if you're not sure yourself, do give both a try. I think you'll come to the same conclusion that I've come to, though.
I think the phrase you're looking for is "Iä! Iä! Shub-NigGoogle!"
Debian etc. have historically rejected KDE because Qt used to not meet Debian's Free Software Guidelines etc. Those days are long over, of course, but the animosity towards KDE seems to have remained.
As for Novell... hard to say. But it's worth noting that many core KDE developers are from Germany, and SuSE is (was), too; Gnome, on the other hand, is pretty much a US development, and Novell is also a US company. Coincidence? Maybe, but I wouldn't be surprised if these things did play a role, in both cases...
The problem with that approach is that asking for people's permission is much like requiring them to click "accept" on an EULA. Most will simply sign documents required for certain things like obtaining credit cards without reading them in great detail; and even those who do would still be forced to accept these terms if they want a credit card, for example.
Choice is only choice if there really *is* a choice. What I'd like to see would be a "privacy seal of quality", so to speak - awarded by an independent non-profit organisation which'd hold the trademarks to the seal and who'd make sure that those who use it actually take privacy concerns seriously. Of course, the guidelines for that would have to be written in a clear and unambiguous way so that you could actually take the thing seriously, too; a privacy equivalent of the CAN-SPAM act would obviously do no good.
But once such a seal would exist, it would at least be easier for consumers to choose between different vendors/stores/... and factor in privacy concerns into their decision by taking into account whether the seal was awarded or not.
Here's another two: OPT-IN. Nobody's forced to participate here, and in fact, you're not even in by default, so there really should be no privacy problems.
Ah, OK - thanks for the info. :)
Yes, because guns are going to be so much of a help against a government which has things like tanks, atom bombs etc. at their disposal - not to mention well-trained and -equipped soldiers.
That should be:
Der Himmel nicht die Erd' umgeht
Wie die Gelehrten meynen
Ein jeder ist seines Wurms gewiss
Copernicus des seinen.
Your translation's correct, though.