The bottom line though is... If your child got a hold of GTA3 and later proved to be the type of person to think that shooting at passing cars was an acceptable thing to do for fun, then should the victim sue the game producer for the actions of your child. It's absurd.
At 16 these little assholes are not clueless sponges that just repeat what they see on TV. They are sociopaths that have no ability to empathize with the people they are spraying random bullets at. They are not pets, they are fully reasoning humans with some hormone issues and no life experience yet. The victim is in fact looking to collect money from someone. The blame simply can't be laid anywhere but at the 16 year old sociopath's feet.
I get tired of this "blame the game", "blame the parent", "blame the TV", "blame anyone who can pay a judgment", crap. I have seen children with the best of parents turn out as the wildest most out-of-control asses I've ever seen. I have seen kids from parents that sucked, manage to overcome and be great people.
Parents are not magic. They are one influence among millions. They are a strong influence but still only an *influence*. I'm sorry but if my neighbors child hauls off and kills my wife. I certainly would not entertain the notion that "the TV made him do it". I hold him morally responsible, and his parents financially responsible (because it has to be them). How do you make the leap that because he watched drag-racing on TV and went tearing down a residential street killing a pedestrian that it must be the drag-racing show's fault?
BTW: It sounds like you are doing all you can to make a good person out of your child. I wish there were more who took the time to *try*.
Except that the basic cost is 8 to 10K to take it to Federal Court, that's if you win. Loose (or get out-motioned) and it could be astronomical. I'm sorry but individually the letters might have merrit but when you take a "threaten everyone and let god sort 'em out" stance with no reguard to the financial harm to innocent people there is something wrong with that. 10K to DTV may be easy to sneer at, but to someone who works for $60,000 a year, the cost to defend an unverified law-rape is pretty staggering.
The comment that It's just a few innocent people here and there is outrageous to me. One or two people forced into paying $3500 with no evidence they actually stole anything is unacceptable. If that's what the legal system allows for then it does need an awfully big overhaul.
I don't see why more people can't see that. It's not that companies don't have a right to do that. However I don't want to hear any whinning when laid off people are no longer buying:
Lavish Home Theaters,
Expensive Cars,
$300 operating systems,
$500 office suites,
Houses,
GAP clothes,
Nike Shoes,
DVD players,
Etc...
I don't know what the net effect of all this will be, but it seems a lot of un (under) employed people in an economy with inflated prices can't be good for anyone. I think it will ripple up. Over time PHBs are going to start feeling it too when companies can't sell these high dollar items here anymore.
Drafting laws to stop will likely only make companies jump ship entirely. There is not much you can do but let it run it's course. It will reach an equilibrium and we'll all suffer for some time for it.
Can it be that the entire population of a nation can be considered so inept as to be unable to seperate the fictional city of the movie, from the temporal nation of Israel? That is what is staggering. The level of balls it takes for government to tell a population, "you are too simple minded to see this". It's equally staggering to see a population that generally accepts that notion.
So unless the system stifels 100% of all inovation and noone advances at all, we can always say... "but look how far we have come". All hail our great system! It's almost the exact opposite of the "I have a rock that keeps tigers away" argument.
The thing is even you can think of the non-internet version of this practiced LONG before this patent. We have nearly all been to an auction of some kind. MAny of us have been in the situation of asking, "how much would it take for me to walk out with that right now", and not had to go through the whole auction process to aquire something. I've been to many private auctions where a talk with the owner has produced just such a deal.
What is pissing people off is that for some reason, when the internet and a computer is involved, something that has been done for untold years by everyone in the 'real' world becomes a new invention in the 'virtual' world. This is flushing our economy down the drain. Companies that risked and sweat and become successful using a common idea on the net become pray for ticks that slowly suck the life out them with patents for, yes, I say obvoius methods of business.
I suuport patents when someone has in fact created something new. I however think they have now been twisted to far for the notion of creation and invention. They no longer reward advancement and creativity, they suck it dry. IP warehouses staffed by nothing more than patent lawyers are making a business out of robbing companies through litigation. Some, in my opinion stupid, rulings have in fact now made it government supported robbery.
"That MercExchange are assholes for making lawsuits their business plan goes without saying. That lawyers are assholes for screwing over society for their own financial gain has to be said."
MercExchange is a lawyer. So the client is a slimeball lawyer. Most of these IP warehouse companies are just that. Lawyers who do nothing but patent every process under the sun, then find out who they can tack a suit onto.
But i'm not infantry, nor are most other gun owners I know. I'm a network admin, and a sometimes target shooter. So yes, I guess a tank/grenade launcher/machine gun might intimidate me.
Actually, it's both. Without effective weapons the best you can hope for is a long drawn-out conflict of harrasement. Good tactics can keep you alive and fighting, but you will probably not defeat the enemy outright. On the other hand, Good equipment and no training will get you killed in short order.
To the poster just above you. How many of the 80 million will be willing to fight. Of those how many have the training to do so? How many will stay in the fight once families and friends are dead. Many nations have built armies that became perfectly willing to oppress thier own people to remain in a position of power and good grace. If you depend on the good will of people who's living (freedom from jail) depends on following orders given, then you are deluding yourself.
Or do you want to actually outlaw rocks, or even your own fists?
No. Nor do I want guns to be outlawed. Given they have the purpose of sport, self defense, and food gathering among others. Just the same as knives, baseball bats, rocks, sticks, or fists.
Oh..., but that's right. People who enjoy the sporting side of firearms are 'American morons' but people who beat each other with fists, feet, and sticks in a ring are 'sportsmen'. Boxers and martial arts experts and such.
If faced with creeping tyranny, wouldn't you want to be armed, just in case?
Yes. However, the day an M1A1 rolls into town to put down any uprising, I'm sure I'll feel less than effective with my two shotguns and.40 Semiauto. Hell, most folks don't have the arms to defeat a police SWAT team, much less the Army/National Guard.
Even if it never comes to that, any attempt to remove government officals by force will label you a terrorist. After which you will be jailed, tortured, and later executed. Allowing you to own guns these days is largely appeasement. You have very little chance of fighting off a determined gov through ownership of civilian weapons. I still am happy with the killing people who try to kill me part though.
Well, I for one feel better now. Terrorist Infomation Awareness is much better that Total Information Awareness. Since they promise to only use it on bad people then there is no reason to not trust them! This just puts my heart at ease.
Slashdot Mirror
The bottom line though is... If your child got a hold of GTA3 and later proved to be the type of person to think that shooting at passing cars was an acceptable thing to do for fun, then should the victim sue the game producer for the actions of your child. It's absurd.
At 16 these little assholes are not clueless sponges that just repeat what they see on TV. They are sociopaths that have no ability to empathize with the people they are spraying random bullets at. They are not pets, they are fully reasoning humans with some hormone issues and no life experience yet. The victim is in fact looking to collect money from someone. The blame simply can't be laid anywhere but at the 16 year old sociopath's feet.
I get tired of this "blame the game", "blame the parent", "blame the TV", "blame anyone who can pay a judgment", crap. I have seen children with the best of parents turn out as the wildest most out-of-control asses I've ever seen. I have seen kids from parents that sucked, manage to overcome and be great people.
Parents are not magic. They are one influence among millions. They are a strong influence but still only an *influence*. I'm sorry but if my neighbors child hauls off and kills my wife. I certainly would not entertain the notion that "the TV made him do it". I hold him morally responsible, and his parents financially responsible (because it has to be them). How do you make the leap that because he watched drag-racing on TV and went tearing down a residential street killing a pedestrian that it must be the drag-racing show's fault?
BTW: It sounds like you are doing all you can to make a good person out of your child. I wish there were more who took the time to *try*.
Except that the basic cost is 8 to 10K to take it to Federal Court, that's if you win. Loose (or get out-motioned) and it could be astronomical. I'm sorry but individually the letters might have merrit but when you take a "threaten everyone and let god sort 'em out" stance with no reguard to the financial harm to innocent people there is something wrong with that. 10K to DTV may be easy to sneer at, but to someone who works for $60,000 a year, the cost to defend an unverified law-rape is pretty staggering.
The comment that It's just a few innocent people here and there is outrageous to me. One or two people forced into paying $3500 with no evidence they actually stole anything is unacceptable. If that's what the legal system allows for then it does need an awfully big overhaul.
Please for god's sake find another analogy. Please, we beg you, don't use "fire" anymore. It doesn't apply to every situation.
Yes,
I don't see why more people can't see that. It's not that companies don't have a right to do that. However I don't want to hear any whinning when laid off people are no longer buying: Lavish Home Theaters, Expensive Cars, $300 operating systems, $500 office suites, Houses, GAP clothes, Nike Shoes, DVD players, Etc... I don't know what the net effect of all this will be, but it seems a lot of un (under) employed people in an economy with inflated prices can't be good for anyone. I think it will ripple up. Over time PHBs are going to start feeling it too when companies can't sell these high dollar items here anymore.
Drafting laws to stop will likely only make companies jump ship entirely. There is not much you can do but let it run it's course. It will reach an equilibrium and we'll all suffer for some time for it.
Can it be that the entire population of a nation can be considered so inept as to be unable to seperate the fictional city of the movie, from the temporal nation of Israel? That is what is staggering. The level of balls it takes for government to tell a population, "you are too simple minded to see this". It's equally staggering to see a population that generally accepts that notion.
So unless the system stifels 100% of all inovation and noone advances at all, we can always say... "but look how far we have come". All hail our great system! It's almost the exact opposite of the "I have a rock that keeps tigers away" argument.
The thing is even you can think of the non-internet version of this practiced LONG before this patent. We have nearly all been to an auction of some kind. MAny of us have been in the situation of asking, "how much would it take for me to walk out with that right now", and not had to go through the whole auction process to aquire something. I've been to many private auctions where a talk with the owner has produced just such a deal.
What is pissing people off is that for some reason, when the internet and a computer is involved, something that has been done for untold years by everyone in the 'real' world becomes a new invention in the 'virtual' world. This is flushing our economy down the drain. Companies that risked and sweat and become successful using a common idea on the net become pray for ticks that slowly suck the life out them with patents for, yes, I say obvoius methods of business.
I suuport patents when someone has in fact created something new. I however think they have now been twisted to far for the notion of creation and invention. They no longer reward advancement and creativity, they suck it dry. IP warehouses staffed by nothing more than patent lawyers are making a business out of robbing companies through litigation. Some, in my opinion stupid, rulings have in fact now made it government supported robbery.
You need to read over your research material again I think. You have the situation a little reversed based on the wording in that document.
But i'm not infantry, nor are most other gun owners I know. I'm a network admin, and a sometimes target shooter. So yes, I guess a tank/grenade launcher/machine gun might intimidate me.
Actually, it's both. Without effective weapons the best you can hope for is a long drawn-out conflict of harrasement. Good tactics can keep you alive and fighting, but you will probably not defeat the enemy outright. On the other hand, Good equipment and no training will get you killed in short order.
To the poster just above you. How many of the 80 million will be willing to fight. Of those how many have the training to do so? How many will stay in the fight once families and friends are dead. Many nations have built armies that became perfectly willing to oppress thier own people to remain in a position of power and good grace. If you depend on the good will of people who's living (freedom from jail) depends on following orders given, then you are deluding yourself.
Oh..., but that's right. People who enjoy the sporting side of firearms are 'American morons' but people who beat each other with fists, feet, and sticks in a ring are 'sportsmen'. Boxers and martial arts experts and such.
Even if it never comes to that, any attempt to remove government officals by force will label you a terrorist. After which you will be jailed, tortured, and later executed. Allowing you to own guns these days is largely appeasement. You have very little chance of fighting off a determined gov through ownership of civilian weapons. I still am happy with the killing people who try to kill me part though.
Well, I for one feel better now. Terrorist Infomation Awareness is much better that Total Information Awareness. Since they promise to only use it on bad people then there is no reason to not trust them! This just puts my heart at ease.