How in blazes does a *retroactive* copyright extension encourage the creation of the work? Has everybody in power forgotten the whole frapping point of copyright??
Those are MP3-only (not lossless), and they don't appear to be anything close to public domain. I don't see any mention of a license. Registration is required, and I believe redistribution is verboten.
Exactly correct. If anything along those lines should be illegal, it would be BEING PASSED on the right. If you're being passed on the right, move to the right!
Thanks! Tier 1 was the problem. After eventually being escalated, the next tier understood immediately.
The winning point with Tier 1, as they tried to say that their policy was to not offer a refund, was that _I_ didn't make up the refund offer, it was _their_ offer! And in fact it was the first thing that popped up when I turned on the machine.
So you're making others pay in sweat in order to finance your lifestyle? You're living on the dole, and that makes you happy? Well done, sir. You are a HUGE part of the problem, but as long as YOU'RE happy, that makes everything okay.
I bought it from Newegg, but I don't think that matters. When I first fired up the machine, it presented me with 50 pages of legalese, which said I could either accept all that crap or get a refund from the manufacturer (Acer). All my arguing was done with Acer directly.
That was the WinXP OEM agreement; I understand some of the newer Windowses may not have that "loophole".
Exactly. I've used the ~$200 Acer AspireRevo as a frontend. Full HD and everything. Even got a Windows refund! (Well, technically it's still being processed, but they've agreed I'm supposed to get one.)
Hey, live by the patent, die by the patent. You could always just not patent, not put the number, etc, but you want the force of the US government behind you. Well, then, you need to obey the rules. This is but one cost of that force, and it's still small compared to the cost to society.
Right. But this is a particularly egregious mistake. It's not a typo or getting a definition slightly wrong. Swapping a verb for a preposition simply means that the writer has no clue how the English language works, and I really don't know how such a person can live day-to-day.
"Malfeasance" was obviously not meant in the strict dictionary sense; it's in the sense of anything stupid that Slashdot is posting to be scared of and/or laugh about.
You lose, sorry; you can quit moving the goalposts now.
Slashdot Mirror
That assumes equal weight of the cars, doesn't it? If one of this hits an original Hummer, there's going to be a winner and a loser.
Sure, but that's the problem with rules and regulations. Every time you write a law, and entire slew of assumptions get coded in.
What you describe may well be perfectly safe, but that doesn't mean the law still doesn't require airbags, for example.
Good point. I posed this question in the comments, and after some brief discussion, the project leader agreed to CC0, which is public domain.
Where does it say that? On their site it says the are a "repository for copyright-free (public domain) music".
How in blazes does a *retroactive* copyright extension encourage the creation of the work? Has everybody in power forgotten the whole frapping point of copyright??
Those are MP3-only (not lossless), and they don't appear to be anything close to public domain. I don't see any mention of a license. Registration is required, and I believe redistribution is verboten.
The thing is that the comments on that site offer Facebook Connect, so you can log in with your Facebook login in order to comment.
In these people's defense (well, somewhat) they did click on something with a Facebook logo.
Are these the people who Google for "facebook login" and then proceed to assume that whatever they find is Facebook? The comments here are pure gold.
Exactly correct. If anything along those lines should be illegal, it would be BEING PASSED on the right. If you're being passed on the right, move to the right!
It's the scientists in their ivory towers who use the socialist utopian metric scheme. Engineers use real units.
The link points directly to an error page. I mean, it actually points to securityerrorpageredirect.jsp!
Thanks! Tier 1 was the problem. After eventually being escalated, the next tier understood immediately.
The winning point with Tier 1, as they tried to say that their policy was to not offer a refund, was that _I_ didn't make up the refund offer, it was _their_ offer! And in fact it was the first thing that popped up when I turned on the machine.
So you're making others pay in sweat in order to finance your lifestyle? You're living on the dole, and that makes you happy? Well done, sir. You are a HUGE part of the problem, but as long as YOU'RE happy, that makes everything okay.
I bought it from Newegg, but I don't think that matters. When I first fired up the machine, it presented me with 50 pages of legalese, which said I could either accept all that crap or get a refund from the manufacturer (Acer). All my arguing was done with Acer directly.
That was the WinXP OEM agreement; I understand some of the newer Windowses may not have that "loophole".
False.
I think that should work. As long as the versions of MythTV are close enough. Check Marillat's Debian multimedia repository.
Exactly. I've used the ~$200 Acer AspireRevo as a frontend. Full HD and everything. Even got a Windows refund! (Well, technically it's still being processed, but they've agreed I'm supposed to get one.)
Exactly. If a company wants the full force of the US government defending their monopoly, then they have to play by the rules.
Don't like it? Well don't get a patent. The cost of complying is small compared to the cost to society of your patent existing.
Hey, live by the patent, die by the patent. You could always just not patent, not put the number, etc, but you want the force of the US government behind you. Well, then, you need to obey the rules. This is but one cost of that force, and it's still small compared to the cost to society.
Right. But this is a particularly egregious mistake. It's not a typo or getting a definition slightly wrong. Swapping a verb for a preposition simply means that the writer has no clue how the English language works, and I really don't know how such a person can live day-to-day.
You've created a unique combination of errors in your sentence. I am baffled as to what's going on in your head.
It's not a threshold! It's just a milestone.
You first, then.
"Malfeasance" was obviously not meant in the strict dictionary sense; it's in the sense of anything stupid that Slashdot is posting to be scared of and/or laugh about.
You lose, sorry; you can quit moving the goalposts now.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/05/05/1734238/Bill-Would-Declare-Your-Blog-a-Weapon
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/12/22/1738232/Florida-Congressman-Wants-Blogging-Critic-Fined-Jailed
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/08/12/30/1955229/Oregon-Governor-Proposes-Vehicle-Mileage-Tax
http://games.slashdot.org/story/09/01/12/2255224/Congressman-Wants-Health-Warnings-On-Video-Games