The only court that can hear the appeal is the European Court of Justice. After that no further appeals are possible. A couple of years is a reasonable timescale.
presumably the whitelist is generated by an algorithm: would it be possible to break the algorithm given a sufficiently large sample of valid keys? Has this ever been done?
Presumably it would be easier just to get an insider to leak the algorithm - any idea if this has happened?
The measure of damages you describe, compensating for the harm done, applies to claims in tort rather than contract.
Contractual damages are generally on the basis of putting the injured party in the position they would have been in had the contract been fulfilled.
So if you bid $10m for a $100 item which the bidder purchased for $10, and you then pull out of the auction, in theory they could sue you for $9,999,990 (i.e. their lost profit of $10m - $10). In practice this would never happen, for a zillion different reasons.
he turns into one of those small money/rodent animals. There's a bunch of them near where the shapeshifter was, and if you attack the one that's the shapeshifter he morphs back.
"I can see legal problems in many jurisdictions for ISP's censoring the Internet."
what legal problems? what jurisdictions? Seems unlikely to me - if AOL's terms of service allow them to restrict access to certain websites then they can do so.
"not only are AOL a big spammer"
I get hundreds of spam each day; I've never had one from AOL. Is this really correct?
"most spam comes from their network"
oh come on - spam often contains a spoof AOL e-mail address, but the idea "most" spam actually *comes* from AOL is daft
"they encourage people to use their networks for spam, and they are funded by spammers."
The shares in small companies like these are mostly or all held by directors and venture capitalists. So liquidity (i.e. volume of trading) tends to be really small, making the quoted market cap is fairly meaningless.
I can't, however, see any way you can make an unjust enrichment claim. It's a requirement for such claims (in all jurisdictions I've come across) that one person is enriched at the expense of another. But the connection between your loss (bandwidth and time) and his profit is just too indirect for you to be able to claim that he is enriched at your expense.
I'd also be surprised if punitive damages are ever available in a claim for restitution for unjust enrichment - you ordinarily just recover to the extent of your loss and the other party's enrichment.
but it's nowhere near as stylish. It looks like a piece of consumer electronics rather than a fashion accessory. Like it or not, the iPod sells on aesthetics more than anything else.
The practice you described isn't really common at all - it's only used when an attorney or firm is so famed or so expert in a particular field that the client believes they could potentially swing the case. David Boies, for example. It's irrelevant to the likes of Storm and Hemingway.
I'm sorry you don't like being criticised. In my legal studies, we referred to this attitude as "childish".
yeah, that's really plausible - I can see Hard OCP would be terrified that the internationally famed firm of Storm and Hemingway might act against them.
Making false statements which have no legal basis to extort money from people is a criminal offence in many countries. Free speech is no more relevant to this than it is to blackmail.
Slashdot Mirror
analysts and accountants often pool "real" cash and certain types of short term securities together, and call it all "cash".
The only court that can hear the appeal is the European Court of Justice. After that no further appeals are possible. A couple of years is a reasonable timescale.
Why on earth did you get moderated "flamebait"?
The story has the MS spokesperson saying "Microsoft has not decided whether to extend its song portability to non-Windows Media devices."
If MS want to take on Apple, wouldn't it be insane for them not to offer MP3s as well? Why would they cripple the service by restricting it to WMVs?
it's because most geeks have no concept of style, or even an understanding that other people have a concept of style.
what if the server occasionally requests a few random pixels?
presumably the whitelist is generated by an algorithm: would it be possible to break the algorithm given a sufficiently large sample of valid keys? Has this ever been done?
Presumably it would be easier just to get an insider to leak the algorithm - any idea if this has happened?
The measure of damages you describe, compensating for the harm done, applies to claims in tort rather than contract.
Contractual damages are generally on the basis of putting the injured party in the position they would have been in had the contract been fulfilled.
So if you bid $10m for a $100 item which the bidder purchased for $10, and you then pull out of the auction, in theory they could sue you for $9,999,990 (i.e. their lost profit of $10m - $10). In practice this would never happen, for a zillion different reasons.
he turns into one of those small money/rodent animals. There's a bunch of them near where the shapeshifter was, and if you attack the one that's the shapeshifter he morphs back.
Is this a troll?
"I can see legal problems in many jurisdictions for ISP's censoring the Internet."
what legal problems? what jurisdictions? Seems unlikely to me - if AOL's terms of service allow them to restrict access to certain websites then they can do so.
"not only are AOL a big spammer"
I get hundreds of spam each day; I've never had one from AOL. Is this really correct?
"most spam comes from their network"
oh come on - spam often contains a spoof AOL e-mail address, but the idea "most" spam actually *comes* from AOL is daft
"they encourage people to use their networks for spam, and they are funded by spammers."
this is just tin foil hat time
I don't believe for one second the landings were faked, and all the arguments they were faked are scientifically illiterate.
but... how are the laser reflectors evidence for manned landings? Couldn't they have been placed by a robot?
The shares in small companies like these are mostly or all held by directors and venture capitalists. So liquidity (i.e. volume of trading) tends to be really small, making the quoted market cap is fairly meaningless.
has there ever been a game that's criticised by so many people, most of whom continue to play it?
I guess, thinking about some of the fan responses to Episodes I and II, there's something about Star Wars that shuts off peoples' criticial faculties.
Thus spake George Bush.
it may not be possible to adapt it to a real-time system.
don't challenge systems also force spammers to provide their real e-mail address? Isn't this an additional advantage?
Trespass to chattels is a definite runner.
I can't, however, see any way you can make an unjust enrichment claim. It's a requirement for such claims (in all jurisdictions I've come across) that one person is enriched at the expense of another. But the connection between your loss (bandwidth and time) and his profit is just too indirect for you to be able to claim that he is enriched at your expense.
I'd also be surprised if punitive damages are ever available in a claim for restitution for unjust enrichment - you ordinarily just recover to the extent of your loss and the other party's enrichment.
but it's nowhere near as stylish. It looks like a piece of consumer electronics rather than a fashion accessory. Like it or not, the iPod sells on aesthetics more than anything else.
The practice you described isn't really common at all - it's only used when an attorney or firm is so famed or so expert in a particular field that the client believes they could potentially swing the case. David Boies, for example. It's irrelevant to the likes of Storm and Hemingway.
I'm sorry you don't like being criticised. In my legal studies, we referred to this attitude as "childish".
I have no clue (a recomendation from someone? a contact there?), but your suggestion was just daft.
yeah, that's really plausible - I can see Hard OCP would be terrified that the internationally famed firm of Storm and Hemingway might act against them.
yes - pebbles under water
Making false statements which have no legal basis to extort money from people is a criminal offence in many countries. Free speech is no more relevant to this than it is to blackmail.
presumably it took you 20 minutes?
finally someone's discovered a use for a Tablet PC
Funny how plenty of people say the guy's statement is false, but nobody's actually provided a counter-example of an exploit before a patch.