Doesn't matter. All of the things you listed as reasons why a corporation can't be stolen from apply to those groups too. Therefore, you must either claim that they also can't be stolen from (which still leaves you with the burden of showing that those reasons apply since you still haven't done that), or concede that those properties don't make it impossible for a corporation to be stolen from.
I see you failed Logic 200.
I got an A in that.
You can't prove a superset from a subset.
If A is True then A + B may be True or may be False.
I said nothing about any of those other groups, just the legal fictions not mentioned in the Constitution but which precede them, which are called Corporations.
If you wish to steal from these other groups, have at it.
Many people may not realize that many vets drink alcohol to get longer periods of REM sleep, so playing Pub Quiz may not be good for you, but if it also involves drinking alcohol, the negative effects (flashbacks) may be outweighed by the positive effects (more sleep).
The best solution, of course, is to play the version of Tetris in Monty Python's computer game based on King Arthur, where you fill a pit with decomposing plague-ridden corpses.
This is both funny and will usually lead to the consumption of alcohol.
Mind you, creatine is cheaper than alcohol and has fewer side effects and gives you longer sleep periods, so maybe playing Tetris while having creatine may be the optimal solution.
The contract with Aunt Milly is to deliver a good she ordered.
Not fulfilling that contract requires her up-front informed and clear consent.
Otherwise I could order pizzas and you could ask the pizza guy to just give you the cash - which would result in a lawsuit on my part for non-fulfillment of the contract where I paid by credit card for the pizza to be delivered.
But Aunt Milly had the reasonable expectation - since she is not a high-priced lawyer or tech geek - that what she ordered would be delivered as she expected it to be.
Excuses or other side issues don't change that fatal flaw. Consumer law is about the protection of uninformed consumers from bad dealings that impact what they perceive the contract to be, not what a highly technical analysis would have.
No, it's like when you buy a house from the same agent for both buyer and seller.
Even though the agent is acting under contract to both the buyer AND the seller, the force of law weighs upon the agent representing truly and faithfully the INTERESTS of the seller, not the buyer.
In purchases of consumer goods, it's the other way around - the purchaser (contractee) who initiates the transaction is deemed the true person that has rights that must be protected by the corporation dealing with them, and their uninformed expectation is what consumer law protects.
Not the recipient, even if another contractual obligation exists between them.
Which is why you have to fill out all those forms when you invest in risky assets - they have to PROVE that you are not just an investor, but an INFORMED and KNOWLEDGEABLE investor before they can let you agree to such deals.
No such test existed for Aunt Milly. Thus Amazon is HER agent and must preserve HER rights.
And therein lies the problem. Aunt Milly is the Customer and the Customer expects a contract to be completed as SHE understands it. Hence, consumer law treats her as having had her understanding of the contract as having more weight than that of the non-contractee intended recipient.
If I order a gold coin and you send me a coin that has the word "GOLD" printed on it, you have just defrauded me as a consumer.
But if it's called the Super Customer Program or something like that, Aunt Milly - even with an "asterisk" or "link" would have the EXPECTATION as a consumer that what she ordered would be delivered.
The question is not what:
a. the corporation; or b. the lawyers; or c. a programmer
expect, it is what a typical consumer of her group (old white ladies who don't really get how computers work) expects.
That's the legal question that consumer laws provide protection FOR.
Again, under consumer laws in my state - which is the same state Amazon is in - a contract is made between a consumer (Aunt Milly) and the vendor.
The vendor's desire to "save money and time" still does not mean they have not breached the contract.
Aunt Milly is not expected to know there is a dumb part of the TOS that says they can defraud her so that her nephew gets GTA:Emerald City instead of the Annotated Doctor Suess she ORDERED for him.
Slashdot Mirror
If I state that cars are used in Iceland, this does not imply that spaceships are used in Iceland, even if that may - or may not - be the case.
Logic Fail. Go back to school.
Doesn't matter. All of the things you listed as reasons why a corporation can't be stolen from apply to those groups too. Therefore, you must either claim that they also can't be stolen from (which still leaves you with the burden of showing that those reasons apply since you still haven't done that), or concede that those properties don't make it impossible for a corporation to be stolen from.
I see you failed Logic 200.
I got an A in that.
You can't prove a superset from a subset.
If A is True then A + B may be True or may be False.
The courts say they can take away your constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable search while flying too.
Doesn't mean they're right.
I said nothing about any of those other groups, just the legal fictions not mentioned in the Constitution but which precede them, which are called Corporations.
If you wish to steal from these other groups, have at it.
No, a business owner is a person.
When in a DBA (Doing Business As) sole proprietorship, it is a literal person.
A person who has legal ramifications.
That's different.
That's theft.
They just let a CEO go free for defrauding stock holders by backdating his options grants - like I said, corporations aren't people.
You can't steal from corporations.
They aren't people.
They can't be drafted.
They can't be executed.
They never serve a day in jail.
Thus, stealing only occurs when you steal from people.
No matter what the Supreme Court says.
P.S.: Revert to the original patents and copyrights in the original Constitution if you want us to respect them.
No jury in this country would convict a parent of this kid from clocking the Gestapo agent ... um, TSA "agent" ... for such a pervy thing.
It's time to just refuse to give up our rights - this backscatter x-ray and search thing is the last straw.
And what gets me, as someone with counter-terrorism and demolitions/concealment experience is that it DOES NOT work in stopping terrorist attacks.
Four out of Five attempts to get items thru TSA screening - including this - succeed.
And you still are at more risk of terrorist attacks in your car than on a plane.
Resist and stand up for your Rights!
We are Americans, not Sheep!
All your Cloud is belong to mil side of China.
Got Root?
You're assuming they
a. don't have tens of thousands of Chinese mil hackers
b. didn't save a copy off to a log
c. didn't have months to use this to install rootkits on US and EU computers
d. weren't in an active trade war with the US, Thailand, Japan, and India.
But they are.
All your networks are belong to China now.
and they already embedded Red Chinese spy images in all your pics while that happened.
Got security?
Not while China's in the WTO.
Tell you what.
You end the pervy scans by child molesters and pervs hired by the TSA to "scan" "nude" images of little kids at airports and "pat them down" ....
And I'll let you tell me what my Free Speech rights to create any web site I want are.
Capiche?
They don't even have to leave Seattle - there are offices for Facebook, Google, Yahoo, etc all here.
Sometimes, it's best to stick to what you do best.
For Microsoft, that's:
a. hire lawyers; and
b. build apps for Apple.
that's where the profit has always been.
No, seriously.
Epic Fail.
A Zune on steroids.
It has gone to meet it's maker.
It is running at Ring Zero.
It is an ex-marketing ploy.
Many people may not realize that many vets drink alcohol to get longer periods of REM sleep, so playing Pub Quiz may not be good for you, but if it also involves drinking alcohol, the negative effects (flashbacks) may be outweighed by the positive effects (more sleep).
The best solution, of course, is to play the version of Tetris in Monty Python's computer game based on King Arthur, where you fill a pit with decomposing plague-ridden corpses.
This is both funny and will usually lead to the consumption of alcohol.
Mind you, creatine is cheaper than alcohol and has fewer side effects and gives you longer sleep periods, so maybe playing Tetris while having creatine may be the optimal solution.
Even if it won't be half as fun.
You can call them anything you want. A lot of Seattle area people participated in the UPS IPO.
Perception is nine-tenths of reality.
If Aunt Milly wanted to send you cash, she would have done so.
Now where the fracking Raindeer Jumper and say Thank You like your mum taught you!
So that explains why they held the annual meeting after the IPO in Seattle ...
The contract with Aunt Milly is to deliver a good she ordered.
Not fulfilling that contract requires her up-front informed and clear consent.
Otherwise I could order pizzas and you could ask the pizza guy to just give you the cash - which would result in a lawsuit on my part for non-fulfillment of the contract where I paid by credit card for the pizza to be delivered.
But Aunt Milly had the reasonable expectation - since she is not a high-priced lawyer or tech geek - that what she ordered would be delivered as she expected it to be.
Excuses or other side issues don't change that fatal flaw. Consumer law is about the protection of uninformed consumers from bad dealings that impact what they perceive the contract to be, not what a highly technical analysis would have.
No, it's like when you buy a house from the same agent for both buyer and seller.
Even though the agent is acting under contract to both the buyer AND the seller, the force of law weighs upon the agent representing truly and faithfully the INTERESTS of the seller, not the buyer.
In purchases of consumer goods, it's the other way around - the purchaser (contractee) who initiates the transaction is deemed the true person that has rights that must be protected by the corporation dealing with them, and their uninformed expectation is what consumer law protects.
Not the recipient, even if another contractual obligation exists between them.
Which is why you have to fill out all those forms when you invest in risky assets - they have to PROVE that you are not just an investor, but an INFORMED and KNOWLEDGEABLE investor before they can let you agree to such deals.
No such test existed for Aunt Milly. Thus Amazon is HER agent and must preserve HER rights.
Aunt Milly will never know.
And therein lies the problem. Aunt Milly is the Customer and the Customer expects a contract to be completed as SHE understands it. Hence, consumer law treats her as having had her understanding of the contract as having more weight than that of the non-contractee intended recipient.
If I order a gold coin and you send me a coin that has the word "GOLD" printed on it, you have just defrauded me as a consumer.
For that matter, Amazon maintains distrubution centers throughout the US, and more people use German shipping companies around here.
I participated in the UPS IPO. Legal "definitions" aren't relevant - MSFT is supposedly back east, but they're actually here.
But if it's called the Super Customer Program or something like that, Aunt Milly - even with an "asterisk" or "link" would have the EXPECTATION as a consumer that what she ordered would be delivered.
The question is not what:
a. the corporation; or
b. the lawyers; or
c. a programmer
expect, it is what a typical consumer of her group (old white ladies who don't really get how computers work) expects.
That's the legal question that consumer laws provide protection FOR.
Again, under consumer laws in my state - which is the same state Amazon is in - a contract is made between a consumer (Aunt Milly) and the vendor.
The vendor's desire to "save money and time" still does not mean they have not breached the contract.
Aunt Milly is not expected to know there is a dumb part of the TOS that says they can defraud her so that her nephew gets GTA:Emerald City instead of the Annotated Doctor Suess she ORDERED for him.
If I buy my son a Smurfs video game from Amazon and he has them deliver a GTA:Emerald City game they are going to be sued six ways to Sunday