IANAL: It probably has to do with contract law more than anything else. Basically it would prevent people from being charged more than an advertised price, it would prevent confusion and charge backs. Offering a cash discount make sense as well.
In the past I have tried to ask for a cash discount on a large purchases and then vendor refuses so I pay with the card and let them take 3-5% less money anyways. It seems that even vendors do not understand how credit cards work as well sometimes.
If a 5% surchage is added to a credit card purchse: Customer sees sign for $100 DVD player Customer pays with a credit card and pays no attention to price charged Customer gets statement and sees that his $100 DVD player was actually $105 Customer submitts ad to credit card company and initias a charge back
If a 5% cash discount is offered: Customer sees sign for $100 DVD player Customer pays with a credit card and pays no attention to price charged Customer gets statement and sees the charge $100 DVD player Customer is happy, credit card company is happy and the merchant is happy and there is no recourse for an incorrect credit card charge.
Yes, yes I do and here is why. If a case is hinging solely on the linking of a document to a printer then I say the case would not pass the reasonable doubt test. Do you know how the dot pattern is laid down? Is there an error rate? Is the detection rate 100%? Can it be faked? These are questions that would most likely be glossed over in a trial. This will give a false sense of trust in the evidence, if the dots match you must convict.
Think about EVERY SINGLE document you have printed and will print in your entire life, now would you like all of those linked back to you? Every waste company resources by printing something personal, write some radical text in college, print a damning e-mail? Once color laser printers become commonplace then we will have to worry. Remember, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin. Can you think of a single plausible case where this would make the a difference in the world enough so to be able to link a document to a printer?
I say the freedom of the printed word should not be compromised due to the method of delivery. Realistically anyone who is truly going to be adversely effected by this will work around it, dye-sublimation printers, inkjet, etc. To me this makes as much sense as putting a lo-jack device on every vehicle in the nation and tracking them all, if that was the case we could catch all the speeders, stolen cars, etc. this would be a good thing, right? If every phone conversation int he nation was recorded and could be obtained with a court order think of all the crime that could be solved/prevented. You have to ask yourself how many freedoms or how much anonymity you are willing to give up for how much protection. I think giving up the ability to print a document anonymously does not justify the ability to catch an occasional counterfeiter with no more evidence than a document and a printer.
I think many of you are missing the point here. This is NOT to be able to take a document and track it back to a specific printer, but rather to irrefutably link the document and the printer.
"They" will never find a counterfeit document and then look for the printer, they will find the printer and then link the documents printed as corroborating evidence. This will be used once a suspect is available and a with a search warrant present and the printer seized, now with the micro-dot encoded serial number they can prove that Document A was definitely printed on Xerox Model X3Y Serial number: sdf78s6d5sdf46s4df98 which resides in the office a Mr. John Q. Public. at 321 Main St. Spingfield, MA; this removes plausibly deniability from the case. No more will a printed document carry any form of anonymity, there will be no reasonable doubt if this is called into evidence at a trial, do you REALLY want an almost iron-clad evidence of every document printed to be available?
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL: It probably has to do with contract law more than anything else. Basically it would prevent people from being charged more than an advertised price, it would prevent confusion and charge backs. Offering a cash discount make sense as well.
In the past I have tried to ask for a cash discount on a large purchases and then vendor refuses so I pay with the card and let them take 3-5% less money anyways. It seems that even vendors do not understand how credit cards work as well sometimes.
If a 5% surchage is added to a credit card purchse:
Customer sees sign for $100 DVD player
Customer pays with a credit card and pays no attention to price charged
Customer gets statement and sees that his $100 DVD player was actually $105
Customer submitts ad to credit card company and initias a charge back
If a 5% cash discount is offered:
Customer sees sign for $100 DVD player
Customer pays with a credit card and pays no attention to price charged
Customer gets statement and sees the charge $100 DVD player
Customer is happy, credit card company is happy and the merchant is happy and there is no recourse for an incorrect credit card charge.
http://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=278 136
http://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=254 660
Yes, yes I do and here is why. If a case is hinging solely on the linking of a document to a printer then I say the case would not pass the reasonable doubt test. Do you know how the dot pattern is laid down? Is there an error rate? Is the detection rate 100%? Can it be faked? These are questions that would most likely be glossed over in a trial. This will give a false sense of trust in the evidence, if the dots match you must convict.
Think about EVERY SINGLE document you have printed and will print in your entire life, now would you like all of those linked back to you? Every waste company resources by printing something personal, write some radical text in college, print a damning e-mail? Once color laser printers become commonplace then we will have to worry. Remember, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin. Can you think of a single plausible case where this would make the a difference in the world enough so to be able to link a document to a printer?
I say the freedom of the printed word should not be compromised due to the method of delivery. Realistically anyone who is truly going to be adversely effected by this will work around it, dye-sublimation printers, inkjet, etc. To me this makes as much sense as putting a lo-jack device on every vehicle in the nation and tracking them all, if that was the case we could catch all the speeders, stolen cars, etc. this would be a good thing, right? If every phone conversation int he nation was recorded and could be obtained with a court order think of all the crime that could be solved/prevented. You have to ask yourself how many freedoms or how much anonymity you are willing to give up for how much protection. I think giving up the ability to print a document anonymously does not justify the ability to catch an occasional counterfeiter with no more evidence than a document and a printer.
I think many of you are missing the point here. This is NOT to be able to take a document and track it back to a specific printer, but rather to irrefutably link the document and the printer.
"They" will never find a counterfeit document and then look for the printer, they will find the printer and then link the documents printed as corroborating evidence. This will be used once a suspect is available and a with a search warrant present and the printer seized, now with the micro-dot encoded serial number they can prove that Document A was definitely printed on Xerox Model X3Y Serial number: sdf78s6d5sdf46s4df98 which resides in the office a Mr. John Q. Public. at 321 Main St. Spingfield, MA; this removes plausibly deniability from the case. No more will a printed document carry any form of anonymity, there will be no reasonable doubt if this is called into evidence at a trial, do you REALLY want an almost iron-clad evidence of every document printed to be available?