I know someone recently published "statistics" about the rate of comments over time from a slashdot story breaking. They drop off dramatically after like 12 hours or so. So if you miss a story, backslashes are your chance to get in the fray without your voice being relegated to page 3.
In other words, if the RIAA, MPAA, etc... goes after consumers with lawsuit and the consumer is found clear of any violation, they get legal fees paid, compensation for the trouble of the litigation, and punitive damages.
That's already how it is -- in theory. In practice, most people the RIAA/MPAA are going after do not have the resources or time to go to court to win, much less twice that to file their own lawsuit to get back legal fees and damages.
What can really come though from him keeping them in court after they drop it?
Everything. If he wins, it sets precedent. Remember that everyone so far has simply paid the MPAA a settlement rather than go to court. If Hogan can get a judge to say "ip adresses and a bittorrent log is not enough evidence to prove your claim," everyone else who gets a letter can get a cheap lawyer to easily argue that point.
But after they drop it how can this information be requested?
I don't know if Hogan would be able to demand that information in a counter-suit -- the burden is on him to prove point. Like risk, the defense has a +1 cloak of advantage.
Your first two paragaphs make perfect sense. I knew it had to be a miswording.
I have to take exception to your claim that "I have yet to hear any reasonable objections". There is a very big difference between your example and this law.
Deceiving old women out of their money is illegal because it is against fraud laws. In essence, you are prohibited from cheating people, which most people realize is a directly harmful act.
Now they want to make using certain words on websites illegal in and of themselves, because they may lead to a crime. If some guy's website has a frontpage offering a "disney newsletter" for sale and it turns out to be a porn subscription, that's already illegal.
I could never beat Goro in the original Mortal Kombat without taking advantage of a bug (wait until I was winning, then do endless chain-punches which made him wait without doing anything and win by decision). Shang Tsung was no cakewalk, but certainly easier.
Oh yeah, the story and visuals were phenomenal. I wish someone would release a hack with a gameplay/eq system like 7.
When is an RPG not an RPG? When you get 4 weapons for the whole game and no armor. No output for my kleptomanic fantasies! I mean, what's the point of being the Hero of the World if you can't go into a random townperson's home and start rifling through their stuff for potions and money?
I see your point, but it all depends on the game, really. I just got into Diablo 2, and the skill/stat points are a one-time award. It's very possible to back yourself into a corner at the higher difficulties because you made poor choices early on, so this is the type of thing that I like to heavily research before starting. Final Fantasy has also grown notorious for including missable/screwup-able quests that I like to ask about before diving in.
Otherwise, I tend to subscribe to the "beat it once and all bets are all" involving looking up secrets and hidden areas.
Well, if you're referring to a hypothetical RPG, the answer is "you chose a story path that did not result in a hard final battle."
The way I would interpret your example is that if you wanted to, you could've rushed ahead and faced an extremely difficult final boss, but you took your time to play liesurely and get all the best spells and equipment. Some people like the former, some the latter. That's not poorly designed, it's choose-your-own-adventure.
There is nothing, seriously nothing, you can get from this show that you couldn't find with a simple trip to your local neighborhood Gamefaqs.com
What kind of blindingly obvious claim is this? "You can get more information from a website with thousands of users contributing information over 10 years in realtime compared to a half-hour television show." Lol, duh?
Both have their uses. I still subscribe to game mags, for example, because they provide a general overview of what's out/coming soon pretty pictures to boot. Once a buy a game, I head over to gamefaqs for in-depth strategy.
Democratic law is based on the principle that you don't make something illegal because you can't think of a good reason to do said action.
I see no logical reason to allow people to wear slippers and a clown suit when driving, should that therefore also entail 20 years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass-prison?
I don't get people who play with that monpoly as their sole goal. I know there's been equations on the most likely spots to land on after 1, 2, 3 (etc) hours of play. Due to where you start out from, the permutations on a pair of dice, and the "go to" cards, there's supposed to be a significantly smaller chance of anyone landing on those two properties.
Not to mention the footprint is 1/3 smaller than another monopoly.
Simply put, the Army and their suppliers are still reasonably loyal to the chain of command. (While Halliburton the company is making alot of money, Joe in accounting, not so much)
When and if the "war on terra" depletes their morale enough is the only time armed insurrection stands a real chance of success. To go on a geek tangent, one of the major reasons the Star Wars Rebellion defeated the Galactic Empire was due to the X-wing and Mon Calamari Cruiser engineers' defection.
The air marshals, whose identities are being concealed, told 7NEWS that they're required to submit at least one report a month. If they don't, there's no raise, no bonus, no awards and no special assignments.
If true, these people have just admitted they weren't subjecting innocent people to punishment because they'd lose their job otherwise and be unable to support their family -- an understandable, if still morally weak position. No, they did it because they wanted more money. Or a dental plan. Or a longer vacation. That's what's known as being stunning and embarassingly selfish.
At the risk of godwinning myself, what's that famous quote about the holocause that goes along the line of "there will always be number-crunchers behind the scenes eager to see if they can make the count even higher next time?"
While I do see your point, hehe, the subtle difference is that all things being equal, the court should side with the defendant in these cases because the RIAA usually does not have enough evidence. It is not a police force and has no power of search, interrogation, or arrest. All you have to do is stem the tide, as opposed do the real work yourself (as in your examples).
So if a cop pulls you over saying he can't read your plate, inform him that the law was designed to fight terrorists and you are clearly not brown or hauling unpacked fertilizer, so his attempt to scan for outstanding warrants/police bulletins is a violation of the spirit of the law. Tip your hat and wish him a good day before peeling out.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed
I know someone recently published "statistics" about the rate of comments over time from a slashdot story breaking. They drop off dramatically after like 12 hours or so. So if you miss a story, backslashes are your chance to get in the fray without your voice being relegated to page 3.
In other words, if the RIAA, MPAA, etc... goes after consumers with lawsuit and the consumer is found clear of any violation, they get legal fees paid, compensation for the trouble of the litigation, and punitive damages.
That's already how it is -- in theory. In practice, most people the RIAA/MPAA are going after do not have the resources or time to go to court to win, much less twice that to file their own lawsuit to get back legal fees and damages.
What can really come though from him keeping them in court after they drop it?
Everything. If he wins, it sets precedent. Remember that everyone so far has simply paid the MPAA a settlement rather than go to court. If Hogan can get a judge to say "ip adresses and a bittorrent log is not enough evidence to prove your claim," everyone else who gets a letter can get a cheap lawyer to easily argue that point.
But after they drop it how can this information be requested?
I don't know if Hogan would be able to demand that information in a counter-suit -- the burden is on him to prove point. Like risk, the defense has a +1 cloak of advantage.
One of the times I was happy to be proven wrong by Slashdot, since trying to defend yourself does look like a really bad idea.
:)
Unless there's really another alternative besides paying your protection money to the MPAA that doesn't involve fleeing the country
Your first two paragaphs make perfect sense. I knew it had to be a miswording.
I have to take exception to your claim that "I have yet to hear any reasonable objections". There is a very big difference between your example and this law.
Deceiving old women out of their money is illegal because it is against fraud laws. In essence, you are prohibited from cheating people, which most people realize is a directly harmful act.
Now they want to make using certain words on websites illegal in and of themselves, because they may lead to a crime. If some guy's website has a frontpage offering a "disney newsletter" for sale and it turns out to be a porn subscription, that's already illegal.
I could never beat Goro in the original Mortal Kombat without taking advantage of a bug (wait until I was winning, then do endless chain-punches which made him wait without doing anything and win by decision). Shang Tsung was no cakewalk, but certainly easier.
Oh yeah, the story and visuals were phenomenal. I wish someone would release a hack with a gameplay/eq system like 7.
When is an RPG not an RPG? When you get 4 weapons for the whole game and no armor. No output for my kleptomanic fantasies! I mean, what's the point of being the Hero of the World if you can't go into a random townperson's home and start rifling through their stuff for potions and money?
I see your point, but it all depends on the game, really. I just got into Diablo 2, and the skill/stat points are a one-time award. It's very possible to back yourself into a corner at the higher difficulties because you made poor choices early on, so this is the type of thing that I like to heavily research before starting. Final Fantasy has also grown notorious for including missable/screwup-able quests that I like to ask about before diving in.
Otherwise, I tend to subscribe to the "beat it once and all bets are all" involving looking up secrets and hidden areas.
Well, if you're referring to a hypothetical RPG, the answer is "you chose a story path that did not result in a hard final battle."
The way I would interpret your example is that if you wanted to, you could've rushed ahead and faced an extremely difficult final boss, but you took your time to play liesurely and get all the best spells and equipment. Some people like the former, some the latter. That's not poorly designed, it's choose-your-own-adventure.
Ah, I see you were also suckered into buying "Squaresoft Presents: Draw Forever VIII"
There is nothing, seriously nothing, you can get from this show that you couldn't find with a simple trip to your local neighborhood Gamefaqs.com
What kind of blindingly obvious claim is this? "You can get more information from a website with thousands of users contributing information over 10 years in realtime compared to a half-hour television show." Lol, duh?
Both have their uses. I still subscribe to game mags, for example, because they provide a general overview of what's out/coming soon pretty pictures to boot. Once a buy a game, I head over to gamefaqs for in-depth strategy.
This bill, though, does not ban any speech.
It only bans speech...
Your logical propositions are contradictory. Any further conclusion is invalid.
You forgot the part where, as a result, the kid immediately bursts into flame and starts blaspheming in tongues while drawing pentagrams on kittens.
Read the bible, it's in there.
Your proposal is doubleplus-good, citizen. We'll get right on it.
Democratic law is based on the principle that you don't make something illegal because you can't think of a good reason to do said action.
I see no logical reason to allow people to wear slippers and a clown suit when driving, should that therefore also entail 20 years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass-prison?
Why *anyone* should feel entitled to my eyes and attention in order to try and sell me on their crappy products really escapes me.
Isn't capitalism in essence, really, "you are entitled to the world as long as you can pull it off"
Argh, boardwalk sucks :)
I don't get people who play with that monpoly as their sole goal. I know there's been equations on the most likely spots to land on after 1, 2, 3 (etc) hours of play. Due to where you start out from, the permutations on a pair of dice, and the "go to" cards, there's supposed to be a significantly smaller chance of anyone landing on those two properties.
Not to mention the footprint is 1/3 smaller than another monopoly.
"I vas only following orders...", eh? I thought we already established that was not a valid defense of any action.
Very informative, thanks for cluing me in!
Simply put, the Army and their suppliers are still reasonably loyal to the chain of command. (While Halliburton the company is making alot of money, Joe in accounting, not so much)
When and if the "war on terra" depletes their morale enough is the only time armed insurrection stands a real chance of success. To go on a geek tangent, one of the major reasons the Star Wars Rebellion defeated the Galactic Empire was due to the X-wing and Mon Calamari Cruiser engineers' defection.
The air marshals, whose identities are being concealed, told 7NEWS that they're required to submit at least one report a month. If they don't, there's no raise, no bonus, no awards and no special assignments.
If true, these people have just admitted they weren't subjecting innocent people to punishment because they'd lose their job otherwise and be unable to support their family -- an understandable, if still morally weak position. No, they did it because they wanted more money. Or a dental plan. Or a longer vacation. That's what's known as being stunning and embarassingly selfish.
At the risk of godwinning myself, what's that famous quote about the holocause that goes along the line of "there will always be number-crunchers behind the scenes eager to see if they can make the count even higher next time?"
While I do see your point, hehe, the subtle difference is that all things being equal, the court should side with the defendant in these cases because the RIAA usually does not have enough evidence. It is not a police force and has no power of search, interrogation, or arrest. All you have to do is stem the tide, as opposed do the real work yourself (as in your examples).
So if a cop pulls you over saying he can't read your plate, inform him that the law was designed to fight terrorists and you are clearly not brown or hauling unpacked fertilizer, so his attempt to scan for outstanding warrants/police bulletins is a violation of the spirit of the law. Tip your hat and wish him a good day before peeling out.
Ah yes, but think of how many seasons the material could sustain Law and Order for!