The challenge is for you to talk to someone who understands the law and not post to a message board asking people to defend the Fifth Amendment. Thus this exercise is a complete waste of time.
You can't be held in contempt for not answering the court's question if you invoke the Fifth Amendment. You should stop and consult a legal scholar. They would be able to answer your questions.
*Sigh* still trying to bate people aren't we? Your above statements are filled with errors. Answering "no" does not mean you proved anything. They might want you to produce evidence for your innocence. The fact that you did not grasp that simple concept leads us to believe you are either stupid or just want to argue with people. I'm going with the later.
Actually you are demanding proof. Again if you are truly searching for an answer then you should consult a lawyer. The fact that you made a post on Slashdot, and not consulted a lawyer, tell us you are not truly interesting in learning about the Fifth Amendment but more interested in being argumentative.
Your failure to conceive of a situation for the value of the Fifth Amendment is yours and yours alone. More importantly if you are truly want to understand the Fifth Amendment, you should consult a lawyer.
No worse than your scenarios. It's actually quite simple to find the answer. The fact that you don't want to take the time and do the research leads me to the conclusion that you are not truly not interested in the answer but rather want to be argumentative.
"If the accused were forced to produce evidence that they did not commit an act, innocent people would be forced to prove a negative. Proving a negative is usually far more difficult, if not impossible to do. Anyone without an alibi would be convicted. No one could afford to spend even one minute alone in that kind of world. The right to remain silent preserves a functioning system of justice and a functioning society."
And none of what you said has anything to do with his argument. Why not comment on the point and not the person. Or do you prefer to ride Google's dick....
The only thing they proved is there's a sucker born every minute. It has not helped the field of quantum computing. In fact it set it back because now people are going to distrust something that's called a quantum computer.
LMOL ummm no, business makes a cost benefit analysis decision. What's the cost of going to trial versus settling? In many cases, patent trolls set the price below the cost of a trial, so businesses settle. It's all about numbers. Few companies make principled stands. Principles are great but often don't generate revenue.
What is needed is patent reform. Make it harder for a company to bring frivolous lawsuits. Make them show you the infringement, not simply say, you infringe because we have a million patents.
I'd also make the patent troll produce something from that patent - shit or get off the pot. If you are not using the patent, then you have no right in retaining it or using it against someone.
Slashdot Mirror
Failure - not consulting a legal scholar.
The challenge is for you to talk to someone who understands the law and not post to a message board asking people to defend the Fifth Amendment. Thus this exercise is a complete waste of time.
You can't be held in contempt for not answering the court's question if you invoke the Fifth Amendment. You should stop and consult a legal scholar. They would be able to answer your questions.
Because you haven't bothered to talk to a lawyer or legal scholar. The fault is yours. We are not here to serve your ignorance.
*Sigh* still trying to bate people aren't we? Your above statements are filled with errors. Answering "no" does not mean you proved anything. They might want you to produce evidence for your innocence. The fact that you did not grasp that simple concept leads us to believe you are either stupid or just want to argue with people. I'm going with the later.
Actually you are demanding proof. Again if you are truly searching for an answer then you should consult a lawyer. The fact that you made a post on Slashdot, and not consulted a lawyer, tell us you are not truly interesting in learning about the Fifth Amendment but more interested in being argumentative.
Your failure to conceive of a situation for the value of the Fifth Amendment is yours and yours alone. More importantly if you are truly want to understand the Fifth Amendment, you should consult a lawyer.
No worse than your scenarios. It's actually quite simple to find the answer. The fact that you don't want to take the time and do the research leads me to the conclusion that you are not truly not interested in the answer but rather want to be argumentative.
*Sigh* people really need to do research.
"If the accused were forced to produce evidence that they did not commit an act, innocent people would be forced to prove a negative. Proving a negative is usually far more difficult, if not impossible to do. Anyone without an alibi would be convicted. No one could afford to spend even one minute alone in that kind of world. The right to remain silent preserves a functioning system of justice and a functioning society."
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/rounds4.1.1.html
That's the point.
Yeah I guess Apple and Google aren't big corporations...hippie.
Yeah that will work out well for you....it's not like anything bad can happen there....*eye roll*
THANK YOU! Another way of putting it, too many cooks in the kitchen.
No Windows 8 does not work great as several articles have pointed out. People who have actually used it have pointed out the flaws and short comings.
But feel free to think the problem is people don't know how to get to the desktop....moron.
No it's not. Another Microsoft shill.
Sales figures say otherwise.
Somebody works for Microsoft.
and trolls post blather in order to protect Google....
And none of what you said has anything to do with his argument. Why not comment on the point and not the person. Or do you prefer to ride Google's dick....
Because you read the article and the book.....
The only thing they proved is there's a sucker born every minute. It has not helped the field of quantum computing. In fact it set it back because now people are going to distrust something that's called a quantum computer.
As long as your are not charging for the price of a "quantum" computer.
Way to far up Otellini ass. Was there some bad PR that prompted to him to write this turd encrusted, brown nosing article....
LMOL ummm no, business makes a cost benefit analysis decision. What's the cost of going to trial versus settling? In many cases, patent trolls set the price below the cost of a trial, so businesses settle. It's all about numbers. Few companies make principled stands. Principles are great but often don't generate revenue.
What is needed is patent reform. Make it harder for a company to bring frivolous lawsuits. Make them show you the infringement, not simply say, you infringe because we have a million patents.
I'd also make the patent troll produce something from that patent - shit or get off the pot. If you are not using the patent, then you have no right in retaining it or using it against someone.
Kind of hard to feel dirty when your a Microsoft supporter....FYI violating the terms of agreement is illegal.
Wait...Microsoft is a competitor?