This is really wrong. The crime didn't take place on American soil. If someone is going to be tried under a foreign country's court, they should have the right to vote for the laws that he or she is being tried under.
For software only, perhaps the copyright should be limited to 10 years. If a company believes that expiration would cause harm, they could go to a judge, at their own expense for court costs, and request an extension of 5 years. Would this be better?
For the purpose of software only, what about limiting copyright for a period of no more than seven years? Allow a company to milk the product for all it is worth, then allow the intellectual property to be public domain. Maybe seven years is too short. Perhaps ten years is better.
How many of us use Windows 98 anymore still? How many think it should become public domain next year?
It disturbs me that this politician is being quoted as saying that Iran is dead-set on developing a nuclear weapon when there is absolutely no proof that is happening. That would be like saying that Iraq had weapons of mass destructions.
Children do have the same rights as adults. To treat them any differently would be wrong.
It really depends what the MySpace page is. Is it an impersonation of the other person, in the sense that it is claming to be the other person in an attempt to defame him or her? I think that could be a matter for the courts, but I don't know which specific law is being broken, but it would be a civil (lawsuit) issue nonetheless. Libel is not legal.
If the judicial system cannot take action against someone, why should the school? Action as in suspension or expulsion.
Posting lewd pictures of someone. Defaming someone by posting false information about them. Posting on one's message board that one is going to take a baseball bat to their head next time you see them.
All of these I believe are legal issues, and if it is a legal issue, I see no reason why a school cannot get involved. In my opinion, I would prefer a school to take the following steps.
Suspend the student, but permit the student to continue doing the work necessary for classes. If charges are pressed, wait until the trial is over before expelling the student. If charges are not pressed, then assume that it is not a serious issue. Allow mediation between the parents and students as an alternative option, where they work out their differences, with both sides agreeing to whatever results in the mediation.
Bullying is a loosely defined term, kind of like terrorism. With creativity, it can pretty much be applied to anything.
Focusing just on cyber-bullying, let us consider the following.
If a student says that he wishes another student were dead, that he hates the other person, but doesn't "threaten" the student in any way, I don't think the school should act.
However, if a student says he is going to beat another student up, saying that he is going to blow up his house or another violent act, then yes, the school should act.
If a student is posting libelous material on a site about another student, then the school should act because libel is not justified.
Posing as another student, by creating fake profiles, would justify the school in acting because it probably defames the student (libelous).
What I'm concerned about is whether a student will receive due process for a "wrongful" action, rather than just for a moral action.
Religious (and possibly private) schools, if outlined in their school rules, can impose restrictions based on immorality if they so choose. However, for other schools (e.g. public), if it is not illegal, and if it is not harmful to the learning process, no harm, no foul.
In the event of bullying, sure, the parents and students need to sit down and work this issue out with someone from the school moderating it. However, to go as far as suspending or expelling a student would be unfair without some sort of due process, whatever that may be, to prove that the student is violating another student's rights.
In any event, if someone is suspended from school, for non-violation of the rules (basically, the school simply didn't like the actions of the student, and it was not illegal), the school risks a lawsuit.
Most importantly, I think I need mroe details about what Ontario is proposing before I jump (posting) in next time.
This sounds harsh, but I would suggest contacting the police and pressing charges. I don't care if someone is a juvenile, this type of stuff doesn't need to be tolerated and needs to be dealt with.
Not sure about Canadian law, but here's my view on this matter.
Can a school legally (or morally) get away with punishing a student for an action committed outside of school grounds if the action isn't illegal in the first place? Wouldn't it be better to seek legal action and then the school take action based on whether there is a conviction or not?
Has anyone ever heard of a restraining order up there in Canada?
Scroll down to page nine. (It's page 11 out of 36 in my PDF viewer.)
Also, on a different note, factor in that Washington state lacks a personal income tax. We have a B&O tax, which is a rate on gross revenue of certain types of revenue.
Maybe this would be a better idea with which to start.
Break up the budget into sections. Assign each section a taxation method. Let voters decide on the rates. The below is the best I can find on the Internet, currently, for a general idea of the sections.
K-12 Education: Sales tax.
Higher Education and General Budget: Income tax.
Social and Health Services: Payroll tax.
Department of Justice: Corporate business tax.
Transportation, Parks, and the like: Property tax.
With Michigan having an income tax, I'm kind of curious about something. Are you a resident of Michigan or another state? If I'm not mistaken, someone who is attending college in one state but has residence in another state (legally speaking) can avoid paying the income tax in that state they're going to college in (but they'd owe tax in the former state if their former state has income tax to begin with, I think). Don't ask me to cite sources, I cannot remember (provided I have this correct).
In reply to something else (not the parent poster), I have this to say...
The federal government is a problem for tax revenue in a lot of states. The federal government heavily taxes and wastes a lot of that money on "defense" related things. This leaves less money for the states and the things they need to accomplish.
Here is what they should consider doing in Michigan. Break up the budget into specific categories, such as education, health care, etc. Then assign specific taxation methods to each one. Let the voters decide on the rates, therefore allowing the voters decide on balancing the budget.
Local-only property taxes. State-only sales taxes. Local and state income taxes.
I don't live in Michigan, so I don't know if this would work, but here is my idea.
Implementing local sales taxes might create problems since the system is not set up to deal with that. However, what they can do is, if not already, create additional state sales tax rates.
Certain businesses would have a higher sales tax rate depending on the type of business.
Perhaps superstores (like Wal-Mart) be subject to an addition 1 cent/dollar sales tax. Prices are low enough already, so this wouldn't be a big deal.
Restaurants would be subject to an addition 0.5 cent/dollar sales tax.
Restaurant deliveries would be subject to an addition 0.7 cent/dollar sales tax (on top of the above).
Etc.
Re:It all depends on how you define plagiarism.
on
Is The Term Paper Dead?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Never mind. I don't think I turned what I said into a paper. I did find what I wrote about though. To summarize it though, and I don't claim the following as my own ideas for obvious reason...
There is a grey area with plagiarism. The grey area involves the concept of borrowing ideas. We're bombarded with information on television and other media, whether such information is public knowledge enough brings with it the issue of whether it's cheating to use the information without citing the source because it has been mushed into our minds so much.
Slashdot Mirror
This is really wrong. The crime didn't take place on American soil. If someone is going to be tried under a foreign country's court, they should have the right to vote for the laws that he or she is being tried under.
For software only, perhaps the copyright should be limited to 10 years. If a company believes that expiration would cause harm, they could go to a judge, at their own expense for court costs, and request an extension of 5 years. Would this be better?
Let me change my idea.
What about letting copyrights expire on software that is no longer being sold? I don't know if abandonware is the correct term.
For the purpose of software only, what about limiting copyright for a period of no more than seven years? Allow a company to milk the product for all it is worth, then allow the intellectual property to be public domain. Maybe seven years is too short. Perhaps ten years is better.
How many of us use Windows 98 anymore still? How many think it should become public domain next year?
Government regulations and meddling created the problem. What we need is a sliding scale system and allowing medical institutions to be tax-exempt.
Let us assume he does get released because there is no "law" against what he did. Could they charge him with intellectual property theft?
Although, there are approximately 6 billion living people who could potentially prove you wrong by not dying. We won't know until it happens.
Let me get this straight. Vitamin D deficiency can be caused by a lack of sunlight, yet sun exposure can cause (skin) cancer.
So much for our parents telling us not to eat dirt as kids.
It disturbs me that this politician is being quoted as saying that Iran is dead-set on developing a nuclear weapon when there is absolutely no proof that is happening. That would be like saying that Iraq had weapons of mass destructions.
Children do have the same rights as adults. To treat them any differently would be wrong.
It really depends what the MySpace page is. Is it an impersonation of the other person, in the sense that it is claming to be the other person in an attempt to defame him or her? I think that could be a matter for the courts, but I don't know which specific law is being broken, but it would be a civil (lawsuit) issue nonetheless. Libel is not legal.
If the judicial system cannot take action against someone, why should the school? Action as in suspension or expulsion.
Posting lewd pictures of someone.
Defaming someone by posting false information about them.
Posting on one's message board that one is going to take a baseball bat to their head next time you see them.
All of these I believe are legal issues, and if it is a legal issue, I see no reason why a school cannot get involved. In my opinion, I would prefer a school to take the following steps.
Suspend the student, but permit the student to continue doing the work necessary for classes.
If charges are pressed, wait until the trial is over before expelling the student.
If charges are not pressed, then assume that it is not a serious issue.
Allow mediation between the parents and students as an alternative option, where they work out their differences, with both sides agreeing to whatever results in the mediation.
Bullying is a loosely defined term, kind of like terrorism. With creativity, it can pretty much be applied to anything.
Focusing just on cyber-bullying, let us consider the following.
If a student says that he wishes another student were dead, that he hates the other person, but doesn't "threaten" the student in any way, I don't think the school should act.
However, if a student says he is going to beat another student up, saying that he is going to blow up his house or another violent act, then yes, the school should act.
If a student is posting libelous material on a site about another student, then the school should act because libel is not justified.
Posing as another student, by creating fake profiles, would justify the school in acting because it probably defames the student (libelous).
What I'm concerned about is whether a student will receive due process for a "wrongful" action, rather than just for a moral action.
Religious (and possibly private) schools, if outlined in their school rules, can impose restrictions based on immorality if they so choose. However, for other schools (e.g. public), if it is not illegal, and if it is not harmful to the learning process, no harm, no foul.
In the event of bullying, sure, the parents and students need to sit down and work this issue out with someone from the school moderating it. However, to go as far as suspending or expelling a student would be unfair without some sort of due process, whatever that may be, to prove that the student is violating another student's rights.
In any event, if someone is suspended from school, for non-violation of the rules (basically, the school simply didn't like the actions of the student, and it was not illegal), the school risks a lawsuit.
Most importantly, I think I need mroe details about what Ontario is proposing before I jump (posting) in next time.
This sounds harsh, but I would suggest contacting the police and pressing charges. I don't care if someone is a juvenile, this type of stuff doesn't need to be tolerated and needs to be dealt with.
Not sure about Canadian law, but here's my view on this matter.
Can a school legally (or morally) get away with punishing a student for an action committed outside of school grounds if the action isn't illegal in the first place? Wouldn't it be better to seek legal action and then the school take action based on whether there is a conviction or not?
Has anyone ever heard of a restraining order up there in Canada?
Found this information.
r ant.pdf
http://dor.wa.gov/docs/pubs/industSpecific/Restau
Scroll down to page nine. (It's page 11 out of 36 in my PDF viewer.)
Also, on a different note, factor in that Washington state lacks a personal income tax. We have a B&O tax, which is a rate on gross revenue of certain types of revenue.
Some of the localities in Washington state I believe charge a small extra sales tax at restaurants if I understand the tax code.
Maybe this would be a better idea with which to start.
Break up the budget into sections. Assign each section a taxation method. Let voters decide on the rates. The below is the best I can find on the Internet, currently, for a general idea of the sections.
K-12 Education: Sales tax.
Higher Education and General Budget: Income tax.
Social and Health Services: Payroll tax.
Department of Justice: Corporate business tax.
Transportation, Parks, and the like: Property tax.
With Michigan having an income tax, I'm kind of curious about something. Are you a resident of Michigan or another state? If I'm not mistaken, someone who is attending college in one state but has residence in another state (legally speaking) can avoid paying the income tax in that state they're going to college in (but they'd owe tax in the former state if their former state has income tax to begin with, I think). Don't ask me to cite sources, I cannot remember (provided I have this correct).
In reply to something else (not the parent poster), I have this to say...
The federal government is a problem for tax revenue in a lot of states. The federal government heavily taxes and wastes a lot of that money on "defense" related things. This leaves less money for the states and the things they need to accomplish.
Here is what they should consider doing in Michigan. Break up the budget into specific categories, such as education, health care, etc. Then assign specific taxation methods to each one. Let the voters decide on the rates, therefore allowing the voters decide on balancing the budget.
I think you misunderstand.
Where I live, we have a variable sales tax on the type of business in some localities, if I understand my state's tax system.
The prices at superstores are low enough that a 1 cent/dollar sales tax increase is still going to be significantly cheaper than the non-superstores.
Fast food needs to be looked upon as a luxury. If someone cannot afford it, just cook at home or buy premade food at grocery stores.
Common knowledge can be in a grey area sometimes. It really depends on the situation.
Let me see if I understand Michigan.
Local-only property taxes.
State-only sales taxes.
Local and state income taxes.
I don't live in Michigan, so I don't know if this would work, but here is my idea.
Implementing local sales taxes might create problems since the system is not set up to deal with that. However, what they can do is, if not already, create additional state sales tax rates.
Certain businesses would have a higher sales tax rate depending on the type of business.
Perhaps superstores (like Wal-Mart) be subject to an addition 1 cent/dollar sales tax. Prices are low enough already, so this wouldn't be a big deal.
Restaurants would be subject to an addition 0.5 cent/dollar sales tax.
Restaurant deliveries would be subject to an addition 0.7 cent/dollar sales tax (on top of the above).
Etc.
Never mind. I don't think I turned what I said into a paper. I did find what I wrote about though. To summarize it though, and I don't claim the following as my own ideas for obvious reason...
There is a grey area with plagiarism. The grey area involves the concept of borrowing ideas. We're bombarded with information on television and other media, whether such information is public knowledge enough brings with it the issue of whether it's cheating to use the information without citing the source because it has been mushed into our minds so much.
Now, only if I can find the paper about plagiarism I wrote about in my English 101 class. Back in a while, looking.