In the US your library records are generally confidential and will only be disclosed in response to a lawfully issued subpoena. The American Library Association has promulgated specific privacy guidelines on this issue:
These rules were formulated in the 1950s in response to McCarthy era hysteria on "subversive" communist/socialist books. At that time certain governmental agencies were asking librarians to turn people in that were reading these materials without getting a court issued subpoena. How all this fairs in the modern era of the Patriot Act and the NSA is anyone's guess.
The big three Ivies, Harvard, Princeton and Yale, have unbelievably huge endowments. Harvard leads with $40 billion, and Yale and Princeton have about $20 billion endowments each. As a result, they can afford to offer very generous need based financial aid. In fact, the only financial aid available from the Ivies is need based. If the family makes under about $75K, the student gets a free ride; that's tuition, books and room & board. The financial aid awards go down on a graduated scale based on income and don't cut out until family income is in the $250K range. They appear to intentionally peg it so for a middle to upper middle class family the financial aid award is large enough to make going to the Ivy slightly more affordable than going to an in state public university.
Absolutely not true. Those kids made money, but not nearly as much as the Hollywood version of the movie "21" depicted. Their winnings certainly weren't large enough to fund a tech startup. For example, I know for a fact that Solidworks was initially funded by a venture capital group, not from the personal assets of the founder, Jon Hirschtick, a member of the MIT blackjack team.
That's not true. A technique called "fast track construction" was developed in the 1960s:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast-track_construction
For the last 25 years, pretty much any large construction project has utilized some form of fast track construction, i.e. the final plans for the entire project are not completed prior to construction commencing.
I imagine the purpose in keeping these communications confidential is to encourage frank discussion and the open exchange of information among scientists. Similarly, our society recognizes the privileged nature of communications between a doctor and patient and between an attorney and client for exactly the same reason. When a scientist's emails and preliminary results become routinely subject to subpoena for use in litigation by politically and/or financially motivated parties, this only discourages scientists from revealing and discussing preliminary results with his peers. Science suffers when open communication is chilled by the prospect of being dragged into court on every preliminary comment made by a scientist.
As a doctor, I really think of your medical record as mine
And as an attorney, I can tell you you are wrong; your patients' medical records belong to your patients, not you. Similarly, my client files belong to my clients, not me. How anyone could get through medical school or law school and not understand this is beyond me.
I think one factor that accounts for a doctor's or lawyer's reluctance to release their records to their clients or patients(and I've experienced both) is that free records access empowers the consumer to seek the opinion of another professional. Placing road blocks and hassles to free record access is also used as a client/patient retention mechanism.
Civil actions for copyright infringement have a 3 year statute of limitations under section 507(b) of the Copyright Act. However, uploading an illegal copy of a song to "the Cloud" would be a separate act of infringement and the statute of limitations would start to run from the date of upload. Under copyright law, each unauthorized "copying" is a separate infringement. Also, while the law is not settled, most jurisdictions adopt a "discovery rule" approach to determine when the statute should start running. Under the discovery rule, the statute starts running when the copyright owner knew or should have known that an infringement occurred.
No, because mac users come from all walks of life and most of them are grown up people living on their own instead of little trolls living in their mother's basements obsessed with anal rape and apple users.
Mr. Pot, I would like to introduce you to Mr. Kettle.
I live in Illinois, Chicago to be precise. Around here, we consider Wisconsin to be a tax haven somewhat like the Cayman Islands. All people can talk about is someday moving to Wisconsin to escape the Illinois/Cook County tax burden. And we consider your highways to be a dream compared to our Illinois roads. Walk a mile in my shoes. I don't know what you guys are complaining about.
I think you have to look at the underlying economic reality. The 4 year old is only the nominal defendant here - she probably has no assets and is judgment proof. The real defendant is her parent's umbrella insurance carrier; that's who is going to pay if the plaintiffs are successful and that's who is undoubtedly defending this lawsuit. The problem for the insurer is that senior citizens tend to be overrepresented in juries - they've got nothing better to do and most younger working people try to get out of jury duty.
It was "Dr. Tongue's House of Wax" and Count Floyd's Monster Chiller Theater(scary stuff) although only the Dr. Tongue skits featured 3d IIRC. During the skit Dr. Tongue's hunchback assistant, Bruno, played by Eugene Levy, would periodically take some object and thrust it back and forth into the camera.
This isn't a court proceeding. A General Assignment, i.e. an assignment for the benefit of creditors, is a private out of court transaction where the debtor assigns all his assets to an assignee that he has chosen who takes the property in trust for the benefit of all creditors. The assignee is charged with the responsibility of liquidating all of the debtors assets and distributing the proceeds to the creditors on a pro rata basis subject to whatever creditor priority laws may exist under state law, if any. A General Assignment is frequently done by those not wishing to have the independent scrutiny of a bankruptcy trustee or bankruptcy court.
At least in the US, governmental fines are just the beginning of a price fixing cartel's troubles. They are also subject to private civil class action lawsuits brought on behalf of consumers. In fact, most price fixing civil class action lawsuits are spinoffs of governmental FTC investigations in the US. For example, there are currently pending several private class action lawsuits for LCD price fixing and the recoveries there will be in addition to the hefty FTC fines already leveled against the members of the LCD cartel.
In the US, you can thank the American Library Association for standing up to this kind of nonsense. The ALA has consistently been on the forefront of the fight to insure access to information by all, whether those threats to access come from self righteous censors or greedy IP barons.
All that's true but guaranteed student loans are very different than ordinary loans in one important respect - they cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. That means that unlike other loans, the lender can go after a defaulting student loan recipient until the day they die(and even after death as a claim against the borrower's estate), even if the borrower files for bankruptcy protection.
The legal standard for a judge to overturn a jury verdict in a civil case is very high one. The record must demonstrate that, as a matter of law, no reasonable jury could arrive at that verdict given the evidence produced at trial. On appeal, great deference is usually given to the trial judge's findings of fact and discretionary rulings and reversible error will not be found unless the judge's actions are determined to be "clearly erroneous". That usual deference on appeal does not apply in cases where the the trial judge overturns a jury verdict. Here, the appellate panel will review the record "de novo" and will overturn the trial court if its actions are not clearly supported by the record. That may sound like a lot of legal mumbo jumbo but what it boils down to in practice is an appeals court is much more likely to reverse a trial court that has overturned a jury verdict. All the presumptions are in favor of the correctness of that verdict and on appeal, you have a pretty high burden to overcone that presumption.
First we had "I want to make money off this". But that made you sound like a money grubbing greedy bastard. To soften things up a bit, they came up with "I want to monetize this". And that apparently has morphed into "I want to monetarize this". Please stop making up words to cover up good old human greed.
Not true. The majority of Ch11 cases wind up either being converted into a CH7 or are ended by filing a liquidating plan under CH11, i.e. all the assets are sold off after which the business ceases. The reasons are pretty clear; a business winds up filing CH11 because they are in serious trouble. Most are not successful in finding a way out of their financial problems.
What is relatively rare is the appointment of a Trustee in a CH11 case which is invariably done over the objections of the debtor. It's an indication that the judge no longer has any confidence that the debtor's management is acting in the best interests of creditors. And that's usually prompted by some irrational or improper conduct by the debtor's management during the course of the bankruptcy proceedings. The appointment of a Trustee in a CH11 case is almost always a prelude to the conversion of the case to a CH7 or the liquidation of the debtor under CH11.
Especially when the largest industry group contributor, Lawyers/Law Firms, was only $426k and law firms are frequently proxies for the industry clients they serve. In addition, the largest single contributor to Sen Hatch's campaign, Xango LLC, a multilevel marketing outfit located in Utah, was only $46k. Given these facts, and all the soft money that never gets reported, $19k is more than enough to buy influence with a US senator.
According to the Second Circuit's opinion(yes, I did read it), this is not a transmission issue per se. The time shifted program was clearly transmitted within the meaning of the Copyright Act; that was not disputed. The issue is whether the that transmission was to the public as is required by the relevant provision of the Copyright Act at issue in this case. Considering the technology used by the defendant, the Court held that it was not a public transmission relying heavily on the fact that the program is recorded at the customer's direction and the customer's requested program is encoded on the server so only the customer's cable box can retrieve it. So the scenarios you spin would all seem permitted by this holding as there is no transmission to the public in any of them that I can see.
Slashdot Mirror
"There is nothing -wrong- with Windows 10 aside from the Privacy Policy."
And apart from that, how did you enjoy the play Mrs. Lincoln!!!!
In the US your library records are generally confidential and will only be disclosed in response to a lawfully issued subpoena. The American Library Association has promulgated specific privacy guidelines on this issue:
http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=otherpolicies&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=13084
These rules were formulated in the 1950s in response to McCarthy era hysteria on "subversive" communist/socialist books. At that time certain governmental agencies were asking librarians to turn people in that were reading these materials without getting a court issued subpoena. How all this fairs in the modern era of the Patriot Act and the NSA is anyone's guess.
The big three Ivies, Harvard, Princeton and Yale, have unbelievably huge endowments. Harvard leads with $40 billion, and Yale and Princeton have about $20 billion endowments each. As a result, they can afford to offer very generous need based financial aid. In fact, the only financial aid available from the Ivies is need based. If the family makes under about $75K, the student gets a free ride; that's tuition, books and room & board. The financial aid awards go down on a graduated scale based on income and don't cut out until family income is in the $250K range. They appear to intentionally peg it so for a middle to upper middle class family the financial aid award is large enough to make going to the Ivy slightly more affordable than going to an in state public university.
Absolutely not true. Those kids made money, but not nearly as much as the Hollywood version of the movie "21" depicted. Their winnings certainly weren't large enough to fund a tech startup. For example, I know for a fact that Solidworks was initially funded by a venture capital group, not from the personal assets of the founder, Jon Hirschtick, a member of the MIT blackjack team.
That's not true. A technique called "fast track construction" was developed in the 1960s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast-track_construction For the last 25 years, pretty much any large construction project has utilized some form of fast track construction, i.e. the final plans for the entire project are not completed prior to construction commencing.
On identical hardware, Asus sells Ubuntu laptops for $38 less than the Windows 8 laptops: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2012095/two-new-asus-laptops-offer-an-ubuntu-linux-option.html So why can't Dell? I think the obvious answer is that Asus is not nearly as beholden to Microsoft as Dell.
I imagine the purpose in keeping these communications confidential is to encourage frank discussion and the open exchange of information among scientists. Similarly, our society recognizes the privileged nature of communications between a doctor and patient and between an attorney and client for exactly the same reason. When a scientist's emails and preliminary results become routinely subject to subpoena for use in litigation by politically and/or financially motivated parties, this only discourages scientists from revealing and discussing preliminary results with his peers. Science suffers when open communication is chilled by the prospect of being dragged into court on every preliminary comment made by a scientist.
As a doctor, I really think of your medical record as mine
And as an attorney, I can tell you you are wrong; your patients' medical records belong to your patients, not you. Similarly, my client files belong to my clients, not me. How anyone could get through medical school or law school and not understand this is beyond me. I think one factor that accounts for a doctor's or lawyer's reluctance to release their records to their clients or patients(and I've experienced both) is that free records access empowers the consumer to seek the opinion of another professional. Placing road blocks and hassles to free record access is also used as a client/patient retention mechanism.
Civil actions for copyright infringement have a 3 year statute of limitations under section 507(b) of the Copyright Act. However, uploading an illegal copy of a song to "the Cloud" would be a separate act of infringement and the statute of limitations would start to run from the date of upload. Under copyright law, each unauthorized "copying" is a separate infringement. Also, while the law is not settled, most jurisdictions adopt a "discovery rule" approach to determine when the statute should start running. Under the discovery rule, the statute starts running when the copyright owner knew or should have known that an infringement occurred.
No, because mac users come from all walks of life and most of them are grown up people living on their own instead of little trolls living in their mother's basements obsessed with anal rape and apple users.
Mr. Pot, I would like to introduce you to Mr. Kettle.
Not the real reason. They are worried about the inmates getting boots of escapement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxF0vygnF2Y
I live in Illinois, Chicago to be precise. Around here, we consider Wisconsin to be a tax haven somewhat like the Cayman Islands. All people can talk about is someday moving to Wisconsin to escape the Illinois/Cook County tax burden. And we consider your highways to be a dream compared to our Illinois roads. Walk a mile in my shoes. I don't know what you guys are complaining about.
I think you have to look at the underlying economic reality. The 4 year old is only the nominal defendant here - she probably has no assets and is judgment proof. The real defendant is her parent's umbrella insurance carrier; that's who is going to pay if the plaintiffs are successful and that's who is undoubtedly defending this lawsuit. The problem for the insurer is that senior citizens tend to be overrepresented in juries - they've got nothing better to do and most younger working people try to get out of jury duty.
It was "Dr. Tongue's House of Wax" and Count Floyd's Monster Chiller Theater(scary stuff) although only the Dr. Tongue skits featured 3d IIRC. During the skit Dr. Tongue's hunchback assistant, Bruno, played by Eugene Levy, would periodically take some object and thrust it back and forth into the camera.
You can go back to ancient Greece(5th Century BC). Socrates was executed for corrupting the youth with his philosophy.
This isn't a court proceeding. A General Assignment, i.e. an assignment for the benefit of creditors, is a private out of court transaction where the debtor assigns all his assets to an assignee that he has chosen who takes the property in trust for the benefit of all creditors. The assignee is charged with the responsibility of liquidating all of the debtors assets and distributing the proceeds to the creditors on a pro rata basis subject to whatever creditor priority laws may exist under state law, if any. A General Assignment is frequently done by those not wishing to have the independent scrutiny of a bankruptcy trustee or bankruptcy court.
At least in the US, governmental fines are just the beginning of a price fixing cartel's troubles. They are also subject to private civil class action lawsuits brought on behalf of consumers. In fact, most price fixing civil class action lawsuits are spinoffs of governmental FTC investigations in the US. For example, there are currently pending several private class action lawsuits for LCD price fixing and the recoveries there will be in addition to the hefty FTC fines already leveled against the members of the LCD cartel.
In the US, you can thank the American Library Association for standing up to this kind of nonsense. The ALA has consistently been on the forefront of the fight to insure access to information by all, whether those threats to access come from self righteous censors or greedy IP barons.
All that's true but guaranteed student loans are very different than ordinary loans in one important respect - they cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. That means that unlike other loans, the lender can go after a defaulting student loan recipient until the day they die(and even after death as a claim against the borrower's estate), even if the borrower files for bankruptcy protection.
The legal standard for a judge to overturn a jury verdict in a civil case is very high one. The record must demonstrate that, as a matter of law, no reasonable jury could arrive at that verdict given the evidence produced at trial. On appeal, great deference is usually given to the trial judge's findings of fact and discretionary rulings and reversible error will not be found unless the judge's actions are determined to be "clearly erroneous". That usual deference on appeal does not apply in cases where the the trial judge overturns a jury verdict. Here, the appellate panel will review the record "de novo" and will overturn the trial court if its actions are not clearly supported by the record. That may sound like a lot of legal mumbo jumbo but what it boils down to in practice is an appeals court is much more likely to reverse a trial court that has overturned a jury verdict. All the presumptions are in favor of the correctness of that verdict and on appeal, you have a pretty high burden to overcone that presumption.
First we had "I want to make money off this". But that made you sound like a money grubbing greedy bastard. To soften things up a bit, they came up with "I want to monetize this". And that apparently has morphed into "I want to monetarize this". Please stop making up words to cover up good old human greed.
What is relatively rare is the appointment of a Trustee in a CH11 case which is invariably done over the objections of the debtor. It's an indication that the judge no longer has any confidence that the debtor's management is acting in the best interests of creditors. And that's usually prompted by some irrational or improper conduct by the debtor's management during the course of the bankruptcy proceedings. The appointment of a Trustee in a CH11 case is almost always a prelude to the conversion of the case to a CH7 or the liquidation of the debtor under CH11.
That he's a Cox shucker!!
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2010&cid=n00009869&type=I&mem=
Especially when the largest industry group contributor, Lawyers/Law Firms, was only $426k and law firms are frequently proxies for the industry clients they serve. In addition, the largest single contributor to Sen Hatch's campaign, Xango LLC, a multilevel marketing outfit located in Utah, was only $46k. Given these facts, and all the soft money that never gets reported, $19k is more than enough to buy influence with a US senator.
According to the Second Circuit's opinion(yes, I did read it), this is not a transmission issue per se. The time shifted program was clearly transmitted within the meaning of the Copyright Act; that was not disputed. The issue is whether the that transmission was to the public as is required by the relevant provision of the Copyright Act at issue in this case. Considering the technology used by the defendant, the Court held that it was not a public transmission relying heavily on the fact that the program is recorded at the customer's direction and the customer's requested program is encoded on the server so only the customer's cable box can retrieve it. So the scenarios you spin would all seem permitted by this holding as there is no transmission to the public in any of them that I can see.