If you hadn't noticed, Sharpes original victory was tossed out by the Supreme Court. The law was upheld with some minor reworking and clarity (as little as possible). The law always had an artistic merit defense. It was simply emphasized.
Nobody can use the Sharpe case as an example where the Charter dismantled an oppressive law. On the contrary, works of the imagination, drawings, writings etc, are still illegal under the law, and can result in harrassment, charges and convictions. The question becomes one of whether or not the work is defensible as artwork.
A Charter that allows people to be arrested for drawings or writings is worthless.
But, anyway, to return to the point - Fundamental Justice - Can you think of a better definition than the one I laid out? Frankly, there is nothing fundamental about it. It's voodoo.
Fundamental Justice is the state of Justice as it exists, the body of Law and the decisions based in it and prior decisions taken as a whole. Basically, it's a meaningless term. Judges will rule as they see fit, given the body of law, like they always have. Therefore, the consitution is a meaningless peice of paper. It rests not on principles, but on whatever the justice system is at the moment. If we're going after drug users this decade, then Fundamental Justice will dictate that drug users are punished severely, and restricted. If we're going after paedophiles, then Fundamental Justice dictates that they will be punished and restricted. And so on. So, if it's time to go after hackers, Fundamental Justice dictates that they are to be punished and restricted. The Canadian Constitution will not protect anybody under the gun.
It isn't in the rendering engine, but in the way the program manages it's windows. Whenever I'm on somebody elses computer using IE or Mozilla and I type ctrl-n I have to wait for a second or two before the window appears and I can type/paste the URL. It's especially noticable on older computers and laptops. Opera does not have this slow down, which means I can open windows instantly and get on with browsing.
I don't use the other browsers at all so, as far as speed is concerned, that's where I notice it most.
The ISP isn't stopping it's customers from obtaining content, on the contrary, it's protecting their ability to access content. What it is stopping is a threatening organization, stopping it from accessing their clients and disrupting their network. The ISP should have no trouble retaining Common Carrier as they do this all the time with regular hackers and spammers.
_khl
Slashdot Mirror
It's not exactly GNU--it has a different kernel (that is, Linux). Distinguishing GNU/Linux from GNU is useful.
khl
Nobody can use the Sharpe case as an example where the Charter dismantled an oppressive law. On the contrary, works of the imagination, drawings, writings etc, are still illegal under the law, and can result in harrassment, charges and convictions. The question becomes one of whether or not the work is defensible as artwork.
A Charter that allows people to be arrested for drawings or writings is worthless.
But, anyway, to return to the point - Fundamental Justice - Can you think of a better definition than the one I laid out? Frankly, there is nothing fundamental about it. It's voodoo.
_khl
_khl
75 times more reason to use OGG! _khl
I don't use the other browsers at all so, as far as speed is concerned, that's where I notice it most.
_khl
The ISP isn't stopping it's customers from obtaining content, on the contrary, it's protecting their ability to access content. What it is stopping is a threatening organization, stopping it from accessing their clients and disrupting their network. The ISP should have no trouble retaining Common Carrier as they do this all the time with regular hackers and spammers. _khl