presumably they won't give away the stuff they sell on video etc. The BBC makes a fortune from its commercial arm and would be in serious financial difficulty if it couldn't rely on this income any longer. Unless, of course, it was allowed to advertise, and most Brits would think this to be a Bad Thing.
...is to have paper ballots counted manually by election officials and supervised by representatives of the candidates. Fraud is very difficult and the entire process is open.
I think I'll patent this idea before anybody else does.
strangely your view of the US Constitution isn't shared by the Supreme Court, which held in US v Miller that the Second Amendment provides for a collective and not an individual right of firearms ownership
(see http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?n avby=search&court=US&case=/us/307/174.html )
When you buy a CD you own the CD. You don't need a license to play it for your private use. You'd need a license to copy it (other than fair use, in the US at least) or to play it in public, but you don't have one.
Re:how long before the first twit...
on
Learning Robots
·
· Score: 1
you said "Galileo did have a run in with the church, but it had nothing to do with geocentrism". This is a preposterous claim.
Re:how long before the first twit...
on
Learning Robots
·
· Score: 1
aren't you the chap who believes Galileo got on just fine with the Catholic church? Seems you don't need much discrediting from me or anyone else.
how long before the first twit...
on
Learning Robots
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
...posts that this doesn't prove anything about evolution, and it's just part of the evil atheist conspiracy?
and why on earth do you get the idea I believe that "people should act against the wrongdoing of foreign governments instead of participating in the democratic process at home"? The word "instead" is pure invention.
Do you really think I am being an "ideolog" when I believe that widespread torture is wrong? that imprisonment without trial of people exercising their right to freedom of expression is wrong?
Those who think this is a wonderful example of a move away from Microsoft towards alternatives and/or open source are being staggeringly naive.
This is all about the ageing despots who run China trying to keep political and economic control over technological changes. Instead of restricting access to dangerous material at the server/network end (http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/09/02/0246224.shtm l?tid=153) it looks to me like they're trying to restrict and control at the client end. Think Palladium driven by politics rather than economics.
it's unlawful under the UK Data Protection Act unless they have your consent.
That's why the article refers to the subject having to be given a Data Protection Act warning at the start of the call - continuing with the call will deem to be consent. I'd be interested to see the warning - the unusual nature of the procedure means it would have to be rather detailed.
I'm an IP lawyer in one of the world's biggest and most evil law firms.
I can't remember ever seeing a patent infringement action in the US or the UK where the defendant *didn't* raise invalidity as a defence: it's arguably negligent of the defence attorney not to at least try this one on.
The most recent high profile tech example I can think of is British Telecom's stupid claim over hyperlinks, which was thrown out by a Federal Court due to invalidity
A google search for "patent invalid" finds zillions of other examples.
the defence laches is slightly more difficult to use than this. You need to show:
that the patent holder's delay was unreasonable and inexcusable (there is a presumption that 6 years is a sufficient delay for this purpose); and
The alleged infringer suffered materially prejudicial harm from the delay. For example, if the delay has meant that the claimed damages are significantly increased, then the doctrine of laches may prevent the plaintiff recovering that increase.
this is a very odd view of patent law. By far the most common way to defend against a patent infringement action is to claim that the patent is invalid, e.g. because there is prior art or because it is insufficiently novel.
abusing open proxies is certainly illegal (in the UK anyhow) but nobody seems to have the balls/ability/motivation to do anything about it.
This doesn't change the fact that launching a DDOS against a spammer is also illegal.
There is no doctrine of self defence for electronic attacks. If someone attacks you and you kill them in self defence, then you can plead self defence. If someone attacks your computer and you attack theirs in return, then you have no defence.
Slashdot Mirror
presumably they won't give away the stuff they sell on video etc. The BBC makes a fortune from its commercial arm and would be in serious financial difficulty if it couldn't rely on this income any longer. Unless, of course, it was allowed to advertise, and most Brits would think this to be a Bad Thing.
"spin based Blair dictatorship"? Sense of proportion, much?
...is to have paper ballots counted manually by election officials and supervised by representatives of the candidates. Fraud is very difficult and the entire process is open.
I think I'll patent this idea before anybody else does.
so what? the idea that individual gun ownership is a fundamental right is very strange.
strangely your view of the US Constitution isn't shared by the Supreme Court, which held in US v Miller that the Second Amendment provides for a collective and not an individual right of firearms ownership
n avby=search&court=US&case=/us/307/174.html )
(see http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?
this is plain wrong.
When you buy a CD you own the CD. You don't need a license to play it for your private use. You'd need a license to copy it (other than fair use, in the US at least) or to play it in public, but you don't have one.
you said "Galileo did have a run in with the church, but it had nothing to do with geocentrism". This is a preposterous claim.
aren't you the chap who believes Galileo got on just fine with the Catholic church? Seems you don't need much discrediting from me or anyone else.
...posts that this doesn't prove anything about evolution, and it's just part of the evil atheist conspiracy?
You seem to be assuming I'm American - I'm not.
and why on earth do you get the idea I believe that "people should act against the wrongdoing of foreign governments instead of participating in the democratic process at home"? The word "instead" is pure invention.
Do you really think I am being an "ideolog" when I believe that widespread torture is wrong? that imprisonment without trial of people exercising their right to freedom of expression is wrong?
Pur-lease.
The Chinese people have far more to fear from their government than they do from Microsoft. I question your sense of priorities.
Those who think this is a wonderful example of a move away from Microsoft towards alternatives and/or open source are being staggeringly naive.
m l?tid=153) it looks to me like they're trying to restrict and control at the client end. Think Palladium driven by politics rather than economics.
This is all about the ageing despots who run China trying to keep political and economic control over technological changes. Instead of restricting access to dangerous material at the server/network end (http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/02/09/02/0246224.sht
This is getting silly - consumers aren't even close to adopting 802.11a and b in serious numbers.
It's more important to have consistent standards that work and that everbody understands than to get additional speed that few people will need.
...that Sony have finally conceded that "Memory Sticks" are a hopeless piece of proprietary crap and have included a Compact Flash slot.
I guess I'll survive
was the server running NT?
it's unlawful under the UK Data Protection Act unless they have your consent.
That's why the article refers to the subject having to be given a Data Protection Act warning at the start of the call - continuing with the call will deem to be consent. I'd be interested to see the warning - the unusual nature of the procedure means it would have to be rather detailed.
hint: the story of Noah cannot be read as a science textbook. St Augustine worked this out 1,500 years ago - you're rather late to the party.
I'm an IP lawyer in one of the world's biggest and most evil law firms.
I can't remember ever seeing a patent infringement action in the US or the UK where the defendant *didn't* raise invalidity as a defence: it's arguably negligent of the defence attorney not to at least try this one on.
The most recent high profile tech example I can think of is British Telecom's stupid claim over hyperlinks, which was thrown out by a Federal Court due to invalidity
A google search for "patent invalid" finds zillions of other examples.
I believe it would be contrary to the constitutional right to trial by jury (but I Am Not An American Lawyer)
the defence laches is slightly more difficult to use than this. You need to show:
that the patent holder's delay was unreasonable and inexcusable (there is a presumption that 6 years is a sufficient delay for this purpose); and
The alleged infringer suffered materially prejudicial harm from the delay. For example, if the delay has meant that the claimed damages are significantly increased, then the doctrine of laches may prevent the plaintiff recovering that increase.
this is a very odd view of patent law. By far the most common way to defend against a patent infringement action is to claim that the patent is invalid, e.g. because there is prior art or because it is insufficiently novel.
in theory the company could then sue SCO for misrepresentation
in practice, SCO will have gone bust by this point, and a claim against it will be worthless
abusing open proxies is certainly illegal (in the UK anyhow) but nobody seems to have the balls/ability/motivation to do anything about it.
This doesn't change the fact that launching a DDOS against a spammer is also illegal.
There is no doctrine of self defence for electronic attacks. If someone attacks you and you kill them in self defence, then you can plead self defence. If someone attacks your computer and you attack theirs in return, then you have no defence.