Visit the IRS's website. They list a number of places which offer free tax preparation. Sometimes there are restrictions depending on your state of residence or your level of income, but many are free without restrictions. You'll be able to E-File and get your refund direct deposited to your bank account. You'll probably still have to pony up for filing state income taxes though.
I've been using TurboTax on the web through taxfreedom.com for years without complaint.
P.S. Some of these services are only free if you visit their site through the irs.gov link!
The contract would allow providers to demand a fee for the service of obtaining and providing a license to recoup their expense in this matter. But only content providers or downloaders being sued have any incentive to actually ask for a license. So it could still be free for the vast majority of people.
The providers wouldn't be granting licenses any more than a retail store grants licenses. They are accepting responsibility to purchase the licenses from the content providers should the downloaders' right to use the content come into question.
In practice, you only actually need to have a license if the content owners questions your right to have said content. There is plenty of precedent supporting that. This just takes the further step of passing that legal obligation on to the content provider with the provision that there is no way of proving exactly how many licenses ( if any ) the provider must procure.
The only way of forcing the issue is for providers to go after downloaders, identities which under this system could be difficult to identify.
The beauty of the system is that it could be a perfectly legitimate business model for P2P. But enforcement would be extremely expensive for content providers.
Just to highlight an important point, in this system neither downloaders or uploaders are doing anything illegal. The providers have entered into contract to provide legal licenses for the content they distribute. The downloaders have the same expectation of legality that they have when they purchase shrink-wrapped software at retail.
How could the MPAA get a subpoena for information they don't have any right to(the records of who downloaded what from whom) when there is no illegal activity going on?
Make full and verifyable disclosure of identity a condition of participation in the network and set up a system for downloaders to keep detailed records of who provides each file they download. Write up a binding contract under which the people who collectively provide file(s) are responsible for providing license(s) for the people who download files holding them in trust or else purchasing them on demand.
In this system downloaders, having taken legal precautions can presume to have a legal license to the software they download. The provider(s) can reasonably claim that they will purchase and/or provide a license on demand for one of the people who have downloaded a file. If the MPAA goes after providers, the only evidence they have is that they provided a file to them, which they presumably have a license for. They can go after the downloader for not having a license, after which they would presumably contact the provider, who would then have to purchase a license, but they have no record of who downloaded the files, only the downloader does.
ISP monitoring could circumvent this, but the MPAA, etc. can't do this yet.
Any flaws?
BTW, I think compulsary licensing is the only really effective legal solution.
Pocket PC Magazine publishes the results of their annual software competition. Among the nominations for best game this year, I really enjoy Bust'em, a complex breakout style game. The GameBox games ( Classics, Gems, and Solitaire ) are also a particularly good value at $10. Finally, don't forget to download Nethack for PPC
Slashdot Mirror
Visit the IRS's website. They list a number of places which offer free tax preparation. Sometimes there are restrictions depending on your state of residence or your level of income, but many are free without restrictions. You'll be able to E-File and get your refund direct deposited to your bank account. You'll probably still have to pony up for filing state income taxes though.
I've been using TurboTax on the web through taxfreedom.com for years without complaint.
P.S. Some of these services are only free if you visit their site through the irs.gov link!
The contract would allow providers to demand a fee for the service of obtaining and providing a license to recoup their expense in this matter. But only content providers or downloaders being sued have any incentive to actually ask for a license. So it could still be free for the vast majority of people.
The providers wouldn't be granting licenses any more than a retail store grants licenses. They are accepting responsibility to purchase the licenses from the content providers should the downloaders' right to use the content come into question.
In practice, you only actually need to have a license if the content owners questions your right to have said content. There is plenty of precedent supporting that. This just takes the further step of passing that legal obligation on to the content provider with the provision that there is no way of proving exactly how many licenses ( if any ) the provider must procure.
The only way of forcing the issue is for providers to go after downloaders, identities which under this system could be difficult to identify.
The beauty of the system is that it could be a perfectly legitimate business model for P2P. But enforcement would be extremely expensive for content providers.
Just to highlight an important point, in this system neither downloaders or uploaders are doing anything illegal. The providers have entered into contract to provide legal licenses for the content they distribute. The downloaders have the same expectation of legality that they have when they purchase shrink-wrapped software at retail.
How could the MPAA get a subpoena for information they don't have any right to(the records of who downloaded what from whom) when there is no illegal activity going on?
End to end encryption could prevent even ISP monitoring.
I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.
Make full and verifyable disclosure of identity a condition of participation in the network and set up a system for downloaders to keep detailed records of who provides each file they download. Write up a binding contract under which the people who collectively provide file(s) are responsible for providing license(s) for the people who download files holding them in trust or else purchasing them on demand.
In this system downloaders, having taken legal precautions can presume to have a legal license to the software they download. The provider(s) can reasonably claim that they will purchase and/or provide a license on demand for one of the people who have downloaded a file. If the MPAA goes after providers, the only evidence they have is that they provided a file to them, which they presumably have a license for. They can go after the downloader for not having a license, after which they would presumably contact the provider, who would then have to purchase a license, but they have no record of who downloaded the files, only the downloader does.
ISP monitoring could circumvent this, but the MPAA, etc. can't do this yet.
Any flaws?
BTW, I think compulsary licensing is the only really effective legal solution.
Jeremy.
Pocket PC Magazine publishes the results of their annual software competition. Among the nominations for best game this year, I really enjoy Bust'em, a complex breakout style game. The GameBox games ( Classics, Gems, and Solitaire ) are also a particularly good value at $10. Finally, don't forget to download Nethack for PPC