FERPA is a law that products student records. FERPA:: Student Records == HIPPA:: Medical Records.
Joinder rules are what let a party join, whether the plaintiff or defendant, be named together in a single lawsuit. What these law students are doing is accussing the RIAA of misjoinder:
misjoinder n. the inclusion of parties (plaintiffs or defendants) or causes of action (legal claims) in a single lawsuit contrary to statute. Reasons for a court ruling that there is misjoinder include: a) the parties do not have the same rights to a judgment; b) they have conflicting interests; c) the situations in each claim (cause of action) are different or contradictory; or d) the defendants are not involved (even slightly) in the same transaction. In a criminal prosecution the most common cause for misjoinder is that the defendants were involved in different alleged crimes, or the charges are based on different transactions.
The 3rd one is pretty obvious and means what it says.
Rule 11 is just the part of the Federal Rules for Civil Procedure that lets parties seek sanctions against a party in a lawsuit, usually for some type of misconduct.
So be careful what you ask for. Per-bps payments are great... For the ISP. No kidding. Just ask CompuServe ca. the mid-to-late 1980s. There were separate usage rates for 1200 BPS, 2400 BPS and 9600 BPS service. Then again, they billed per-minute for connect time.
Just to help you think about it --- corporations are nothing more than groups of individual citizens. A group of citizens has as much Constitutionally-granted rights and freedoms as an individual citizen.
Yes, gentle reader, it's annual "Slashdot is a useless pile of crap" day. 'cept that they don't seem to be doing the normal April Fool's junk...at least not yet. Weird.
Yeah, let's check with a law dictionary on that one:
n. filing a lawsuit with the knowledge that it has no legal basis, with its purpose to bother, annoy, embarrass and cause legal expenses to the defendant. Vexatious litigation includes continuing a lawsuit after discovery of the facts shows it has absolutely no merit. Upon judgment for the defendant, he/she has the right to file a suit for "malicious prosecution" against the original vexatious plaintiff. Moreover, most states allow a judge to penalize with sanctions a plaintiff and his/her attorney for filing or continuing a "frivolous" legal action (money award to the defendant for the trouble and/or attorney fees). In other words, it has to be shown the the RIAA's lawsuit 1) has no legal basis and 2) that the RIAA and its laywers knew it had no legal basis and sued only to "bother, annoy, embarass and cause legal expenses to the defendant."
Thing is, some of the cases the RIAA has filed do have legal basis (these are the ones you don't hear about in the media and are settled out of court quickly), and while some of the most egregious examples might approach might approach vexatious litigation, I doubt you'll find a judge to agree that all of them do.
Who cares? They are abusing the court system and as such should have their suing everyone privileges revoked. Yeah, you're right. Who cares about the Constitution? Just a silly document.
Oh, BTW, the boys over here tell me you've been found to be abusing your First Amendment priveleges. Guards: Arrest this man for treason!
Really? How about the fact that the Australian government forces a certain percentage of telecom company profits to go to projects supporting rural areas, and that they probably don't have that in the US? Yes, we actually do, but it's more in the form of a tax that sometimes gets passed on directly to subscribers and sometimes not. It's called the Universal Service Fund. All telcos, including VOIP providers like Vonage, must pay into this fund.
seeks to stop the RIAA from 'continuing to engage in criminal investigation of private American citizens. Like it or not, there's probably a few Constitutional considerations here. Although, what they should be doing is suing in individual states, where it's usually illegal to practice private criminal investigations without a license.
You don't know me. Sure I do. You're BadAnalogyGuy.
You don't know whether it is really me writing this or someone pretending to be me. Mmmm...it's you. Just a guess though.
You don't know how many "me"s there are behind this nickname. 42?
You don't know how many other accounts I have that pretend to be someone besides me. 6
Which me is the real me? You!
Which you is the real you? Me!
Which way to Kathmandu? That way! ===>
Would you, could you in a car? From afar? Or with a jar?
Eat them, eat them! Here they are. Mmmmmm...burgers from a bar?
Creating, inventing, okay whatever. Point is that ARPANET was created in July of 1969, coincidentally about 1 month after Gore graduated from Harvard and well before he ever was elected to a seat in the House (1977).
But people still perpetuate the nonsense that Gore claimed he invented the Internet. But he did claim to have invented in the Internet. It's just that later he clarified his misstatement and spoke about his real accomplishment, which was to provide the funding for the transition from the old Internet infrastructure, centered around NSFNet and Milnet to the new consumer- and ebusiness-centric Internet infrastructure centered around commercial networks. Which is very laudable, but the oringal misstatement is so obviously humorous that it gets repeated. I even repeat, tongue-fully-in-cheeck, now and then.
As for the SBVT thing, I didn't actually pay attention, because, IMHO, John Kerry's military service record was really irrelevant to his presidential candidacy. If something that happened that long ago really mattered, many U.S. presidents, including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush would never have been elected. (Reagan once did porn, Clinton smoked pot and dodged the draft, Bush snorted coke).
What I really meant about 'rolling out' was 'mainstreamed'. 3G was really new 4 years ago, but now I think almost every phone product line sold by Sprint, for example, offers several EVDO ('SprintSpeed') compatible models.
Yeah, I knew that, but I figure American audiences usually relate better to stories out of American history as opposed to Roman history, but it is a good example when you consider that the Framers modeled American government after those of Rome and Greece.
Because the iPhone was a flop outside North America. And you'll see a lot of comments from Apple fanboi's defending Apple all the way, but here's the truth, uncensored. (Go ahead, mod me down, fanboi trolls) what a lot of North American (like myself) readers don't seem to understand is that while we just got 3G services and phones rolled out within the last 2 years by the likes of Sprint, Verizon, etc., here in the States, abroad, they've had 3G for quite sometime and are completely spoiled by it. In the EU, any smartphone that's not 3G is immediately destined for failure, especially since they're already rolling out '3.5G' and '4G' in Europe, while we think 3G is the newest thing, Europe is already moving on.
That's not the fault of the First Amendment or of the U.S. political process. That's the partially the fault of the media's sensationalism and everybody's short attention spans. But there is press coverage when baseless allegations are proved false and, IMHO, the ultimate responsibility lies on the voters -- if you're not paying attention, maybe you shouldn't vote. *shrug*
No, I think you're just getting older. Read about the U.S. presidential election in 1828 between John Q. Adams and Andrew Jackson. They really brought out the mudslinging: Jackson's marriage got attacked while Adams was accused releasing an American servant girl to the Czar of Russia to appease his sexual appetite.
The thing is that bitter mudslinging is good for the process in some ways -- the First Amendment allows us to talk trash about the political candidates and some might be true, some not, but in the end, the real truth usually surfaces.
Branding == Reputation. Not quite. Reputation is one component of branding, yes. There's also qualities such as name or brand recognition (do consumers recognize your brand when they see it?), and brand association (what attributes to consumers associate with your brand?) and brand differentiation (how is your brand different from your competitors brands in the eyes of the consumer?)
People don't always necessarily go for quality. If that were the case, McDonald's and a bunch of other businesses that turn out what are essentially low-quality, cheap or just plain mediocre products would be out of business.
Some people want a brand because it represents an attitude -- like I'm different. Think of Apple's Think Different campaign. People bought Macs just to be different -- they didn't care about features in the OS or available software, they just wanted a different kind of computer.
In the end the average Joe Sixpack buys what he finds familiar. He doesn't make buying decisions based on facts or critical thinking or anything related to clear, precise, logical thought. Kinda scary when you think about it.
And the question here is -- why is it this way? Who is benefitting from keeping us behind. As always, the answer is to follow the money. Surprise! It's the telcos and the cable companies, both of which would find 1Gbs running into everyone's house to be detrminental to their bottom line and even better -- they don't have to pay anything to upgrade our infrastructure! That means they get to put EVEN MORE of the exhorbitant prices they charge us in their pockets! w00t.
Nationalize the communications infrastructure and put AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and ALL OF 'EM right outta business. Screw those greedy corporate mofo bastards!
What I meant by the term 'poor-man's' is that OOo certainly won't -- nor should it -- match the complete functionality of Adobe's Acrobat Pro. It will be sufficient for most purposes, but those needing a more complete tool will still seek out and purchase Adobe's product.
Slashdot Mirror
FERPA is a law that products student records. FERPA
Joinder rules are what let a party join, whether the plaintiff or defendant, be named together in a single lawsuit. What these law students are doing is accussing the RIAA of misjoinder: The 3rd one is pretty obvious and means what it says.
Rule 11 is just the part of the Federal Rules for Civil Procedure that lets parties seek sanctions against a party in a lawsuit, usually for some type of misconduct.
Perhaps the April Fool's joke is no April Fool's articles.
w3m
that is all. thanks.
Yeah, someone, I think it was probably JWZ himself, set us up the bomb.
Just to help you think about it --- corporations are nothing more than groups of individual citizens. A group of citizens has as much Constitutionally-granted rights and freedoms as an individual citizen.
Uh, try again.
Freedom of speech, the press, etc., all apply to corporations as well as individual citizens.
Thing is, some of the cases the RIAA has filed do have legal basis (these are the ones you don't hear about in the media and are settled out of court quickly), and while some of the most egregious examples might approach might approach vexatious litigation, I doubt you'll find a judge to agree that all of them do.
Oh, BTW, the boys over here tell me you've been found to be abusing your First Amendment priveleges. Guards: Arrest this man for treason!
Creating, inventing, okay whatever. Point is that ARPANET was created in July of 1969, coincidentally about 1 month after Gore graduated from Harvard and well before he ever was elected to a seat in the House (1977).
As for the SBVT thing, I didn't actually pay attention, because, IMHO, John Kerry's military service record was really irrelevant to his presidential candidacy. If something that happened that long ago really mattered, many U.S. presidents, including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush would never have been elected. (Reagan once did porn, Clinton smoked pot and dodged the draft, Bush snorted coke).
What I really meant about 'rolling out' was 'mainstreamed'. 3G was really new 4 years ago, but now I think almost every phone product line sold by Sprint, for example, offers several EVDO ('SprintSpeed') compatible models.
Yeah, I knew that, but I figure American audiences usually relate better to stories out of American history as opposed to Roman history, but it is a good example when you consider that the Framers modeled American government after those of Rome and Greece.
That's not the fault of the First Amendment or of the U.S. political process. That's the partially the fault of the media's sensationalism and everybody's short attention spans. But there is press coverage when baseless allegations are proved false and, IMHO, the ultimate responsibility lies on the voters -- if you're not paying attention, maybe you shouldn't vote. *shrug*
No, I think you're just getting older. Read about the U.S. presidential election in 1828 between John Q. Adams and Andrew Jackson. They really brought out the mudslinging: Jackson's marriage got attacked while Adams was accused releasing an American servant girl to the Czar of Russia to appease his sexual appetite.
The thing is that bitter mudslinging is good for the process in some ways -- the First Amendment allows us to talk trash about the political candidates and some might be true, some not, but in the end, the real truth usually surfaces.
No. YOU did it. Just look at your name. Anonymous Coward. That says it all!
People don't always necessarily go for quality. If that were the case, McDonald's and a bunch of other businesses that turn out what are essentially low-quality, cheap or just plain mediocre products would be out of business.
Some people want a brand because it represents an attitude -- like I'm different. Think of Apple's Think Different campaign. People bought Macs just to be different -- they didn't care about features in the OS or available software, they just wanted a different kind of computer.
In the end the average Joe Sixpack buys what he finds familiar. He doesn't make buying decisions based on facts or critical thinking or anything related to clear, precise, logical thought. Kinda scary when you think about it.
And the question here is -- why is it this way? Who is benefitting from keeping us behind. As always, the answer is to follow the money. Surprise! It's the telcos and the cable companies, both of which would find 1Gbs running into everyone's house to be detrminental to their bottom line and even better -- they don't have to pay anything to upgrade our infrastructure! That means they get to put EVEN MORE of the exhorbitant prices they charge us in their pockets! w00t.
Nationalize the communications infrastructure and put AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and ALL OF 'EM right outta business. Screw those greedy corporate mofo bastards!
What I meant by the term 'poor-man's' is that OOo certainly won't -- nor should it -- match the complete functionality of Adobe's Acrobat Pro. It will be sufficient for most purposes, but those needing a more complete tool will still seek out and purchase Adobe's product.