I'm in that block, and I voted, so thank you very much for my part. I appreciate your characterization.
I think the best part of the reason why young people do not vote is that no one really presents them with anything attractive to vote FOR.
I'm 25 right now, still possibly draft-aged. Who should I have voted for? Both candidates deny wanting a draft, but the policies they were planning to enact might have made their desires moot. Why should I vote for that?
How about social security? What are the chances that I won't be taxed into oblivion to support the system? Yes, I know Bush had some privatization proposals. How about a real, honest and complete evaluation of that mess, from either side of the aisle?
Show me a candidate who doesn't treat my generation as meat for the grinder, or as a tax base to fund his generation's retirement, and maybe more will listen. I'm not saying that you have to propose giving me free money. I understand that these things are complicated, and that i'll have to pay for them, either in money or in blood. But at least don't lie to me about what they'll cost me, and show me that you appreciate the sacrifice you're asking me to make.
Otherwise, it's YOUR country, not mine.
Re:Now if hackers could just learn to hack the gov
on
Good Bad Attitude
·
· Score: 1
A very insightful commentary on the common law - a very organic body of law that has been developing since the foundation of the country (and before, if you count our jurisprudential ties to England). The analogy to open-source is very apt, since common law judges often rely on what other common law judges have done (effective and ineffective) to guide their own decision.
Yes, IAILS.
To add to the parent, if you delegate the authority to click "yes" to the monkey, the principles of agency will attribute all of the monkeys actions that you either (1) directly authorized or (2) third parties reasonably believes you authorized based on your representations (like holding the monkey out as your acceptance agent) to you as the principal. Bottom line, if you delegate authority to accept agreements to your agent, you will be bound to those agreements as if you had signed them yourself.
Actually, the court has said that there are outer limits to the things Congress may regulate under the Commerce Clause. See United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549.
You are obviously not either a lawyer or law student. Before making moronic statements about what you believe about the law, you might try actually checking to see what it is.
First, some definitions, from Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edition.
Theft: The unlawful taking and removing of another's personal property with the intent of depriving the true owner of it; larceny.
Infringement: An act that interferes with one of the exclusive rights of a patent, copyright or trademark owner.
Your analysis of the Jaguar example is correct. The Jaguar is (at the moment) the personal property of another person, and you do not have permission to take it. Also, by taking it, you deprive the true owner of it. So yes, you can steal it. Notice, please, that the definition of infringement does not include this element.
Your analysis of the GPL code example is completely flawed. Using GPL code without attribution does not deprive the true owner of the code, and therefore is not theft. Because you have made a copy without permission or outside the terms of the license granted to you, you have interfered with the rights of the copyright holder, and thus have committed copyright infringement. The same argument holds true for downloading movies or music.
Before spouting off your own irrelevant views and beliefs, try checking up on what the actual laws are. You might come off as less of an idiot.
Yes, I am a law student, and yes, I study intellectual property law.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm in that block, and I voted, so thank you very much for my part. I appreciate your characterization. I think the best part of the reason why young people do not vote is that no one really presents them with anything attractive to vote FOR. I'm 25 right now, still possibly draft-aged. Who should I have voted for? Both candidates deny wanting a draft, but the policies they were planning to enact might have made their desires moot. Why should I vote for that? How about social security? What are the chances that I won't be taxed into oblivion to support the system? Yes, I know Bush had some privatization proposals. How about a real, honest and complete evaluation of that mess, from either side of the aisle? Show me a candidate who doesn't treat my generation as meat for the grinder, or as a tax base to fund his generation's retirement, and maybe more will listen. I'm not saying that you have to propose giving me free money. I understand that these things are complicated, and that i'll have to pay for them, either in money or in blood. But at least don't lie to me about what they'll cost me, and show me that you appreciate the sacrifice you're asking me to make. Otherwise, it's YOUR country, not mine.
A very insightful commentary on the common law - a very organic body of law that has been developing since the foundation of the country (and before, if you count our jurisprudential ties to England). The analogy to open-source is very apt, since common law judges often rely on what other common law judges have done (effective and ineffective) to guide their own decision. Yes, IAILS.
To add to the parent, if you delegate the authority to click "yes" to the monkey, the principles of agency will attribute all of the monkeys actions that you either (1) directly authorized or (2) third parties reasonably believes you authorized based on your representations (like holding the monkey out as your acceptance agent) to you as the principal. Bottom line, if you delegate authority to accept agreements to your agent, you will be bound to those agreements as if you had signed them yourself.
That's naught how you spell Nottingham, you insensitive clod!
Actually, the court has said that there are outer limits to the things Congress may regulate under the Commerce Clause. See United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549.
First, some definitions, from Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edition.
Theft: The unlawful taking and removing of another's personal property with the intent of depriving the true owner of it; larceny.
Infringement: An act that interferes with one of the exclusive rights of a patent, copyright or trademark owner.
Your analysis of the Jaguar example is correct. The Jaguar is (at the moment) the personal property of another person, and you do not have permission to take it. Also, by taking it, you deprive the true owner of it. So yes, you can steal it. Notice, please, that the definition of infringement does not include this element.
Your analysis of the GPL code example is completely flawed. Using GPL code without attribution does not deprive the true owner of the code, and therefore is not theft. Because you have made a copy without permission or outside the terms of the license granted to you, you have interfered with the rights of the copyright holder, and thus have committed copyright infringement. The same argument holds true for downloading movies or music.
Before spouting off your own irrelevant views and beliefs, try checking up on what the actual laws are. You might come off as less of an idiot.
Yes, I am a law student, and yes, I study intellectual property law.