Wireless network cards for desktops are never free. Access points are not generally free either, unless somehow bundled with the Internet service by the ISP. Maybe I am missing something.
I think you have a very good point about the ability of the recording to even exist. I would assume that at a private venue, the management has a right to prohibit recordings. Even without the explicit prohibition, whoever made the original recording clearly violated copyright law.
Where this gets complicated is when, despite the legalities, a recording does get made. The record dealer did not make the recording, so he cannot be in violation of copyright law as far as that goes. However, in theory, he (or his heirs!) should be able to hang on to the recording until copyright protection on that work ends, and then be able to copy it and sell it at that point.
Why should a recording of a live performance have any greater copyright protection than a pressed music CD? Under the current law, 1000 years from now, that recording of the live performance would still fall under protection, which is probably unconstitutional.
The reason it is (or at least was) illegal to record live performances, is because of copyright. I think you are getting too caught up in the "copy" part of copyright. A copy does not need to be of another recording - a recording of a live performance constitutes a copy, because you are copying the broadcast.
Perpetual protection is unconstitutional. Article 1, Clause 8, provides Congress with the power to "promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
I know something else you can do with your gmail invite.
Thank you, sir, for doing your little bit to slowly transform this great news forum into a place where people like you make half-witted attempts at humour in order to shamelessly promote some pyramid scam. Please take your gmail/Ponzi/ipod tease elsewhere.
Maybe if they had some of these new propulsion systems you speak of, they could take all people like you who are peddling stupid free ipod offers and ship them off Mars where maybe they could find Martians who are interested in Herbalife and Amway.
That does sound bitter. This is America, and your income is what you make it. Job sucks? Go work for yourself - IT is a field where you can do that. No clients? Slick up the hair and hit the streets. Don't be a passive, woe-is-me, no-one-is-giving-me-a-raise, helpless ninny.
I think that some direct marketing is necessary for a healthy economy. Try launching a legitimate, competitive, value-producing startup business without it. You sometimes need to get salesmen to hit the streets. If no one knows about your product or service, you are sunk, no matter how good it is.
The crux of the lawsuit is that the student was punished too late, to his detriment, and, arguably, the university's benefit. There is no question that whatever method was used to catch the plagiarism did produce an accurate result.
Moving out Dell, HP, IBM, Sony, Nintendo is joke. Those guys will not roll over. Look how successful MS was trying to squeeze into the Linksys/D-Link/Netgear crowd.
That works fine for your limited group of tech-savvy buddies, but the real world is different. I run my own business, and I am never going to ask a client to do this, and neither would anyone I know who runs a business. If a client cannot communicate with you - that could likely result in lost income. Downloading a key isburdonsome to do, and think about what message is sent to those clients who somehow get your email address (without key downloading instructions), try to send you an email, and are rejected. The message is "we do not trust you."
One aspect of a workable email system must not change: you should be able to give out your address and someone can use that single piece of information to contact you.
Slashdot Mirror
Wireless network cards for desktops are never free. Access points are not generally free either, unless somehow bundled with the Internet service by the ISP. Maybe I am missing something.
Where this gets complicated is when, despite the legalities, a recording does get made. The record dealer did not make the recording, so he cannot be in violation of copyright law as far as that goes. However, in theory, he (or his heirs!) should be able to hang on to the recording until copyright protection on that work ends, and then be able to copy it and sell it at that point.
Why should a recording of a live performance have any greater copyright protection than a pressed music CD? Under the current law, 1000 years from now, that recording of the live performance would still fall under protection, which is probably unconstitutional.
The reason it is (or at least was) illegal to record live performances, is because of copyright. I think you are getting too caught up in the "copy" part of copyright. A copy does not need to be of another recording - a recording of a live performance constitutes a copy, because you are copying the broadcast.
Perpetual protection is unconstitutional. Article 1, Clause 8, provides Congress with the power to "promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
solar-powered headlights?
Why watch TV at all? Just play with your damn free Dell PC all day, you pyramid-scheme-promoting hack.
Thank you, sir, for doing your little bit to slowly transform this great news forum into a place where people like you make half-witted attempts at humour in order to shamelessly promote some pyramid scam. Please take your gmail/Ponzi/ipod tease elsewhere.
Maybe if they had some of these new propulsion systems you speak of, they could take all people like you who are peddling stupid free ipod offers and ship them off Mars where maybe they could find Martians who are interested in Herbalife and Amway.
That does sound bitter. This is America, and your income is what you make it. Job sucks? Go work for yourself - IT is a field where you can do that. No clients? Slick up the hair and hit the streets. Don't be a passive, woe-is-me, no-one-is-giving-me-a-raise, helpless ninny.
No kidding! What kind of a scam is that?
Spammers are paying no heed to CAN-SPAM. I do not think they will honor patents either.
Maybe it's your signature.
Maybe he believes that by not claiming the award, he insures that the $1 million stays where it will do the most good.
Maybe I am missing something, but why would anyone be willing to sell their shares back at a fraction of what they would fetch on the open market?
Actually, you could mouse-over the links, and the destination would appear in the status bar, at the bottom of your browser.
You are describing a brute force attack, not a dictionary attack. Dictionary attacks only use words in a dictionary.
I think it reads $8 million the prior year.
Well they are both command line based, so they must be related.
The crux of the lawsuit is that the student was punished too late, to his detriment, and, arguably, the university's benefit. There is no question that whatever method was used to catch the plagiarism did produce an accurate result.
Er correction - that should be "no joke".
Moving out Dell, HP, IBM, Sony, Nintendo is joke. Those guys will not roll over. Look how successful MS was trying to squeeze into the Linksys/D-Link/Netgear crowd.
One aspect of a workable email system must not change: you should be able to give out your address and someone can use that single piece of information to contact you.
That is the best Soviet Russia post I have ever read.