This is off topic, but you are wrong about pharma research. Most of it is done at universities by students and professors who then licenses it to the pharma company for a cut of the profits. This is a flawed analogy for Bill to use as well: almost all universities (in the US at least) benefit from public subsidies, wether it be tax breaks, Pell grants for students or land grants when the university was built.
Another flaw with private pharma research is different companies will not co-operate. See the history of the 'AIDS cocktail' and how India had to ignore patents so they could make one pill with all three meds combined. This was better for the patients.
What a pile of tripe! The richest man in the world, who has built the biggest illegal monopoly in human history, is complaining about FOSS. He can go fuck himself with a fist punched up his ass.
This is all so much BS! Any existing warrants before law expired are still valid for a year.
And remember, these are not like normal warrants, these warrants cover the entire group being surveiled as opposed to specific phone numbers.
Anything new they want has to go through the FISA court for a rubber stamp. Say system in place 2 years ago and prior.
This law is to cover up the fact the bush crime family put blanket tapping uin place BEFORE the 9/11 attacks. Thats right, thgis had nothing to do with "terrorism" when it was set up. If there is a trial date and places will come out.
Pursuant to Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), namely, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Act, you are hereby notified that certain potential copyright infringing materials are currently hosted by you in your capacity as an online service provider ("OSP"). This letter serves as written notification of claimed infringement.
As required by 512(c)(3)(A)(i-vi) of the DMCA, the following information is provided concerning the claimed infringement:
(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. This signature appears below.
(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.
(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material.
Hence, it is my contention that my rights under the DMCA are being violated by the continued presence of this article, and although the article itself is not hosted on your server, it is linked to in such a fashion that it is represented to be part of your website.
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above a allegedly infringing is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
I swear, under penalty of heck, that the information in the notification is accurate in that I am the copyright owner, in that the image, though belonging to another source is of me, thereby giving me certain copyright rights, and I believe that this matter is actionable under the provisions of the DMCA.
The DMCA further provides that the OSP shall fall within the safe harbor provisions of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Act only if it complies with this notification procedure. Specifically, the Act states that upon obtaining knowledge or awareness of the copyright infringement, the OSP must act expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material. See 512(c)(1)(A)(2), (c)(1)(C).
Having now received such knowledge or awareness by way of this notice, such expeditious action is hereby requested.
Even large ISPs have to scrape for every penny -- at least the ones that have operated for more than a few years in the black. Joe six pack also shops for dedicated servers mostly by price.
Sp every dollar counts and even the $200 price ISPs pay makes LAMP more attractive. There is steady demand for windows web servers. But the market notices the extra cost.
Slashdot Mirror
This is off topic, but you are wrong about pharma research. Most of it is done at universities by students and professors who then licenses it to the pharma company for a cut of the profits.
This is a flawed analogy for Bill to use as well: almost all universities (in the US at least) benefit from public subsidies, wether it be tax breaks, Pell grants for students or land grants when the university was built.
Another flaw with private pharma research is different companies will not co-operate. See the history of the 'AIDS cocktail' and how India had to ignore patents so they could make one pill with all three meds combined. This was better for the patients.
What a pile of tripe! The richest man in the world, who has built the biggest illegal monopoly in human history, is complaining about FOSS. He can go fuck himself with a fist punched up his ass.
This is all so much BS! Any existing warrants before law expired are still valid for a year.
And remember, these are not like normal warrants, these warrants cover the entire group being surveiled as opposed to specific phone numbers.
Anything new they want has to go through the FISA court for a rubber stamp. Say system in place 2 years ago and prior.
This law is to cover up the fact the bush crime family put blanket tapping uin place BEFORE the 9/11 attacks. Thats right, thgis had nothing to do with "terrorism" when it was set up. If there is a trial date and places will come out.
*DING DING DING*
you win a prize taniwha
MICHELE SCHWINEHUNTZ INTERWEBS
Our Case Number: MCDM-2008-997
To Whom it May Concern:
Pursuant to Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), namely, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Act, you are hereby notified that certain potential copyright infringing materials are currently hosted by you in your capacity as an online service provider ("OSP"). This letter serves as written notification of claimed infringement.
As required by 512(c)(3)(A)(i-vi) of the DMCA, the following information is provided concerning the claimed infringement:
(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. This signature appears below.
(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.
(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/14/1913224
Hence, it is my contention that my rights under the DMCA are being violated by the continued presence of this article, and although the article itself is not hosted on your server, it is linked to in such a fashion that it is represented to be part of your website.
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above a
allegedly infringing is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
I swear, under penalty of heck, that the information in the notification is
accurate in that I am the copyright owner, in that the image, though belonging to
another source is of me, thereby giving me certain copyright rights, and I believe
that this matter is actionable under the provisions of the DMCA.
The DMCA further provides that the OSP shall fall within the safe harbor provisions of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Act only if it complies with this notification procedure. Specifically, the Act states that upon obtaining knowledge or awareness of the copyright infringement, the OSP must act expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material. See 512(c)(1)(A)(2), (c)(1)(C).
Having now received such knowledge or awareness by way of this notice, such expeditious action is hereby requested.
Sincerely,
MICHELE SCHWINEHUNTZ
SOLAR CHIPS LLBEEN
He is a minor elf god or something, so no.
Impressive, you used a computer to buy a linux computer (assuming you got it off their website).
The harm of the MS monopoly is that Joe sixpack can't get linux at the corner store.
Even large ISPs have to scrape for every penny -- at least the ones that have operated for more than a few years in the black. Joe six pack also shops for dedicated servers mostly by price.
Sp every dollar counts and even the $200 price ISPs pay makes LAMP more attractive. There is steady demand for windows web servers. But the market notices the extra cost.
schweet!