Since you took the time to copy and paste legal provisions, I thought you might as well know why MS probably has nothing to worry about.
1. As a general rule, you can't copyright an acronym. Trademark would be the applicable law. But...
2. There's no indication that MS (or anybody) plans to use "IPTV" as a trademark for a commercial service. Instead, it's a simple acronym for a type of technology, like "RAID". Furthermore...
3. Even if they were planning to trademark it, there's no indication that Iowa Public Television has already trademarked "IPTV."
On the backup server, a removable hard disk bay in one of the 5.25" bays, SATA, connected to an eSATA adapter in a PCI-X slot. Along with this, 10 bog-standard SATA drives mounted in enclosures designed to dock in the 5.25" bay. The eSATA adapter supports hot-swap, so swapping the drives is a simple unlock, swap, lock process. For software, I'm using Backup Exec. The catch is that when formatting the drives, Windows Server reserves mount points even when the drive is removed. So I created a folder on my local disk, and mounted each drive to a separate subdirectory, e.g., C:\BACKUP VOLUMES\BACKUP A, C:\BACKUP VOLUMES\BACKUP B, etc. Then you have to go into Backup Exec and add each mount point is a separate backup-to-folder device. Group all the devices and set the backup to use that device pool. That way, it will simply use whatever disk is inserted. The one snag was that Backup Exec doesn't automatically track which disks are mounted and update the device status, so you have to run a scheduled task to restart the Backup Exec services every night before the backup begins.
This scheme is fast, relatively easy to set up, fairly inexpensive, and the process for the end user is dead simple: Remove disk, insert disk, take disk offsite.
It doesn't matter if the source was originally infected or totally clean - if you Zune it, it gets DRM.
You are just one of countless others on here spreading this FUD about the Zune. The fact is the restrictions are entirely client-based. The MP3 that you send wirelessly is identical to the source file. No DRM or anything is "added" to the file.
You don't get it, do you? It doesn't matter who's to blame for that. The end user doesn't make decisions based on ideology. Almost nobody is going to forgive a product's deficiencies because it's not the manufacturer's fault - they'll just use another product.
Yay, it's the eugenics movement all over again. If a defective human is no different than a defective car, than you must logically either condone the annhiliation of men whom it is not cost-effective to cure or oppose the destruction cars that it is not cost-effective to fix. Folks, we already know how this story ends. Let's not tell it again.
it's not because I don't sing every chance I get the stars and stripes that I hate America.
No, it's more the likening us to primitives and baseless criticism that demostrates this.
I beg to differ ; I know the difference.
You don't demonstrate that by equating "not guilty" to "society says you didn't do."
it's retarded, fucked up, cruel, and illogical.
Blah, blah, blah. How so? It's still the only justice system in the world with an absolute right to a trial by jury.
you're only showing that the US system puts emphasis on the personnal revenge (of the victim) rather than social peace.
How so? How is my demonstrating that a judgment of "not guilty" in a criminal case does not logically imply non-liability in a civil case putting emphasis on "personal revenge?" Are you opposed to logic in justice?
And if we now look at your examples, then for case (1) why doesn't the State be liable for its failure ?
The state is liable for its failure. It cannot try the case again. You are proposing that other third parties also be liable for the state's failure. That is not fair; it would be a miscarriage of justice. Suppose that a manufacturer intentionally produces a defective product that hurts somebody, but that in a criminal trial, the state is unable to prove any crime occurred. Are you saying the injured customer should be barred from seeking civil damages from the manufacturer? I find that retarded, fucked up, cruel, and illogical.
(2), why would a jury be reluctant to convict a proven criminal, if not for lack of proof ?
There are many reasons. Perhaps the jury was precluded from seeing certain evidence. Perhaps they were dazzled and confused by the irrelevant rhetoric of the defense attorney. Perhaps they refuse to convict out of racial solidarity or bigotry. You seem to be assuming that every jury is omniscient and incapable of error. I find that laughable.
proves just that the system is flawed, giving 2 conflicting answers to a single question, thank you for the help.
Wrong again. "Is the defendant a criminal?" and "Is the defendant liable?" are two DIFFERENT questions.
I disagree with you. The "dumbed-down" environment is pretty much a solved problem. It is not difficult for even a newbie user to accomplish basic tasks in, e.g., Ubuntu. The real issue is that unlike Linux developers, average users don't give two shits about "software freedom" and are not going to tolerate excuses as to why this software doesn't run or that hardware device isn't supported. The users don't care whose fault it is that their hardware doesn't work. Either it does or it doesn't, and if it doesn't, they'll look elsewhere. They don't care why they can't play their games or run Microsoft Office. The only reality that matters to them is, they can't. So they'll look elsewhere.
How can you be held liable for something the society said you didn't do ?
There are a couple of very simple answers, though you seem more interested in hating on Americans than rational thinking. Your flawed premise is that a nonconviction is a judgment of innoncence, or the "society" saying that "you didn't do" something. It is nothing of the sort. It is merely a judgement that the evidence as presented was insufficient to obtain a conviction. But this could be caused by any number of reasons, only one of which is innocence. For example:
1. Incompetence by the prosecutor. 2. Recalcitrant jurors. 3. A different burden of proof. Remember that criminal convictions require proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" (i.e., near certainty.) Civil liability requires only proof "by a preponderance of the evidence" (i.e., more likely than not.)
What are you implying, that Microsoft traveled 150 years back in time to found Credit Suisse, including its $1,174,731,000,000 in assets, just to shill for Novell?
Hmmm...you're really dodging the OP's point though. HOW the evidence is obtained often goes directly to the question of credibility of the evidence. But we already have a method for challenging questionable evidence, and that is with testimony at trial. And I don't think anybody would dispute that improper evidence gathering should be admissible at a trial to undermine the credibility of the evidence thereby collected. But the question you are dodging is about evidence that is totally credible, but cannot be used because it was improperly collected. If the evidence gatherers make mistakes or commit wrongdoing, it is sensible to punish the evidence gatherers. But only in the United States does the law reward the criminal for the mistakes or wrongdoing of others. Clearly, the rationale is that rewarding the criminal punishes the evidence gatherers to the extent that the evidence gatherers really want the criminal to be convicted - but why is this the only legitimate remedy? Is there really nothing else that can deter evidence gatherer? You don't provide a good answer.
The glaring technical problem is that you can't auto dial with an acoustic coupler because the computer obviously has no mechanism for pressing down the hookswitch on the damn phone to hang up between calls.
Well now, hang on there, chief. Recall that in answer to the question, "doesn't that cost a lot of money?" he replied "There's ways around that." Clearly, he was blue-boxing. Now, correct me if I recall wrongly, but when you're blue boxing, you don't actually have to ATH1 - instead, you broadcast a 2600 Hz tone so that the trunk line appears "dead", then stop the tone and transmit the routing digits for the remote telco office now listening to the trunk line. Coincidentally enough, broadcasting a 2600 Hz tone and routing digits could be done with an accoustic coupler. Maybe the directors knew a little more than you give them credit for?
You have to do this on Windows too, you know. Even though you can see the menu of another application, when you try to click on it the first time it focuses the app rather than accessing the menu.
Did you actually try this before you posted that "fact?" Unless the app was specifically designed to capture the focus click (e.g., MS Office and Visual Studio, for reasons unknown), it will focus the window AND drop the menu with one click. That's the standard default behavior.
That's not unique to East Germany or even unusual at all. Many if not most US metropolitan centers have pervasive steam heat services provided by nearby electrical/steam co-generation facilities, and many of those even provide chilled water made by enormous steam-powered chillers as well. A lot of universities are set up the same way.
I wouldn't be surprised if major datacenter operators eventually construct small, site-local nuclear reactor facilities that can provide both electricity and cooling capacity with high reliability.
The last I checked, we had a finite water supply and had found neither a way to synthesize it or a nearby celestial body containing any extra.
What are you talking about? Hydrogen + Oxygen = Water. Water synthesis! And both hydrogen and oxygen are readily available in our own solar system.
Slashdot Mirror
WHOOSH!
But the Death Star would almost certainly use Imperial units, would it not?
Since you took the time to copy and paste legal provisions, I thought you might as well know why MS probably has nothing to worry about.
1. As a general rule, you can't copyright an acronym. Trademark would be the applicable law. But...
2. There's no indication that MS (or anybody) plans to use "IPTV" as a trademark for a commercial service. Instead, it's a simple acronym for a type of technology, like "RAID". Furthermore...
3. Even if they were planning to trademark it, there's no indication that Iowa Public Television has already trademarked "IPTV."
Here's a setup I'm using which works fairly well:
On the backup server, a removable hard disk bay in one of the 5.25" bays, SATA, connected to an eSATA adapter in a PCI-X slot. Along with this, 10 bog-standard SATA drives mounted in enclosures designed to dock in the 5.25" bay. The eSATA adapter supports hot-swap, so swapping the drives is a simple unlock, swap, lock process. For software, I'm using Backup Exec. The catch is that when formatting the drives, Windows Server reserves mount points even when the drive is removed. So I created a folder on my local disk, and mounted each drive to a separate subdirectory, e.g., C:\BACKUP VOLUMES\BACKUP A, C:\BACKUP VOLUMES\BACKUP B, etc. Then you have to go into Backup Exec and add each mount point is a separate backup-to-folder device. Group all the devices and set the backup to use that device pool. That way, it will simply use whatever disk is inserted. The one snag was that Backup Exec doesn't automatically track which disks are mounted and update the device status, so you have to run a scheduled task to restart the Backup Exec services every night before the backup begins.
This scheme is fast, relatively easy to set up, fairly inexpensive, and the process for the end user is dead simple: Remove disk, insert disk, take disk offsite.
You are just one of countless others on here spreading this FUD about the Zune. The fact is the restrictions are entirely client-based. The MP3 that you send wirelessly is identical to the source file. No DRM or anything is "added" to the file.
You forgot SimStapler!
And who do we have to blame for that?
You don't get it, do you? It doesn't matter who's to blame for that. The end user doesn't make decisions based on ideology. Almost nobody is going to forgive a product's deficiencies because it's not the manufacturer's fault - they'll just use another product.
What about system databases? What about swap?
Maybe, but the real challenge will be to read them before Sandy Berger stuffs them in his pants and "misplaces" them.
Yay, it's the eugenics movement all over again. If a defective human is no different than a defective car, than you must logically either condone the annhiliation of men whom it is not cost-effective to cure or oppose the destruction cars that it is not cost-effective to fix. Folks, we already know how this story ends. Let's not tell it again.
it's not because I don't sing every chance I get the stars and stripes that I hate America.
No, it's more the likening us to primitives and baseless criticism that demostrates this.
I beg to differ ; I know the difference.
You don't demonstrate that by equating "not guilty" to "society says you didn't do."
it's retarded, fucked up, cruel, and illogical.
Blah, blah, blah. How so? It's still the only justice system in the world with an absolute right to a trial by jury.
you're only showing that the US system puts emphasis on the personnal revenge (of the victim) rather than social peace.
How so? How is my demonstrating that a judgment of "not guilty" in a criminal case does not logically imply non-liability in a civil case putting emphasis on "personal revenge?" Are you opposed to logic in justice?
And if we now look at your examples, then for case (1) why doesn't the State be liable for its failure ?
The state is liable for its failure. It cannot try the case again. You are proposing that other third parties also be liable for the state's failure. That is not fair; it would be a miscarriage of justice. Suppose that a manufacturer intentionally produces a defective product that hurts somebody, but that in a criminal trial, the state is unable to prove any crime occurred. Are you saying the injured customer should be barred from seeking civil damages from the manufacturer? I find that retarded, fucked up, cruel, and illogical.
(2), why would a jury be reluctant to convict a proven criminal, if not for lack of proof ?
There are many reasons. Perhaps the jury was precluded from seeing certain evidence. Perhaps they were dazzled and confused by the irrelevant rhetoric of the defense attorney. Perhaps they refuse to convict out of racial solidarity or bigotry. You seem to be assuming that every jury is omniscient and incapable of error. I find that laughable.
proves just that the system is flawed, giving 2 conflicting answers to a single question, thank you for the help.
Wrong again. "Is the defendant a criminal?" and "Is the defendant liable?" are two DIFFERENT questions.
I disagree with you. The "dumbed-down" environment is pretty much a solved problem. It is not difficult for even a newbie user to accomplish basic tasks in, e.g., Ubuntu. The real issue is that unlike Linux developers, average users don't give two shits about "software freedom" and are not going to tolerate excuses as to why this software doesn't run or that hardware device isn't supported. The users don't care whose fault it is that their hardware doesn't work. Either it does or it doesn't, and if it doesn't, they'll look elsewhere. They don't care why they can't play their games or run Microsoft Office. The only reality that matters to them is, they can't. So they'll look elsewhere.
How can you be held liable for something the society said you didn't do ?
There are a couple of very simple answers, though you seem more interested in hating on Americans than rational thinking. Your flawed premise is that a nonconviction is a judgment of innoncence, or the "society" saying that "you didn't do" something. It is nothing of the sort. It is merely a judgement that the evidence as presented was insufficient to obtain a conviction. But this could be caused by any number of reasons, only one of which is innocence. For example:
1. Incompetence by the prosecutor.
2. Recalcitrant jurors.
3. A different burden of proof. Remember that criminal convictions require proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" (i.e., near certainty.) Civil liability requires only proof "by a preponderance of the evidence" (i.e., more likely than not.)
Would it be a better justice system if all the best lawyers were eliminated, so that they were all the same low quality and low price?
What are you implying, that Microsoft traveled 150 years back in time to found Credit Suisse, including its $1,174,731,000,000 in assets, just to shill for Novell?
Hmmm...you're really dodging the OP's point though. HOW the evidence is obtained often goes directly to the question of credibility of the evidence. But we already have a method for challenging questionable evidence, and that is with testimony at trial. And I don't think anybody would dispute that improper evidence gathering should be admissible at a trial to undermine the credibility of the evidence thereby collected. But the question you are dodging is about evidence that is totally credible, but cannot be used because it was improperly collected. If the evidence gatherers make mistakes or commit wrongdoing, it is sensible to punish the evidence gatherers. But only in the United States does the law reward the criminal for the mistakes or wrongdoing of others. Clearly, the rationale is that rewarding the criminal punishes the evidence gatherers to the extent that the evidence gatherers really want the criminal to be convicted - but why is this the only legitimate remedy? Is there really nothing else that can deter evidence gatherer? You don't provide a good answer.
The glaring technical problem is that you can't auto dial with an acoustic coupler because the computer obviously has no mechanism for pressing down the hookswitch on the damn phone to hang up between calls.
Well now, hang on there, chief. Recall that in answer to the question, "doesn't that cost a lot of money?" he replied "There's ways around that." Clearly, he was blue-boxing. Now, correct me if I recall wrongly, but when you're blue boxing, you don't actually have to ATH1 - instead, you broadcast a 2600 Hz tone so that the trunk line appears "dead", then stop the tone and transmit the routing digits for the remote telco office now listening to the trunk line. Coincidentally enough, broadcasting a 2600 Hz tone and routing digits could be done with an accoustic coupler. Maybe the directors knew a little more than you give them credit for?
Rules of grammar FTW!
If he had meant "former" modify "funny," it would be an adverb, "formerly". It's not, so it can't, and it doesn't.
Does that include a compiler?
The .NET SDK has always included a free command-line based compiler.
I figure it is meant for Visual Studio. How many $100 bills is that again?
Zero.
Did you actually try this before you posted that "fact?" Unless the app was specifically designed to capture the focus click (e.g., MS Office and Visual Studio, for reasons unknown), it will focus the window AND drop the menu with one click. That's the standard default behavior.
Tell me about it, damn slow drivers always getting in my way.
I wouldn't be surprised if major datacenter operators eventually construct small, site-local nuclear reactor facilities that can provide both electricity and cooling capacity with high reliability.
TFA is not about search results, it's about AD PLACEMENT.
The last I checked, we had a finite water supply and had found neither a way to synthesize it or a nearby celestial body containing any extra. What are you talking about? Hydrogen + Oxygen = Water. Water synthesis! And both hydrogen and oxygen are readily available in our own solar system.
I disagree. Occam's razor says it's psychosomatic. Do not ever underestimate peoples' ability to will themselves to be sick.