In the US, swimsuit calendars on the inside of personal storage lockers have been grounds for sexual harassment suits. In light of that, someone walking behind you while you're 'porning' during break would certainly count also.
Remember these rules aren't there to be prudish, they're there to save the companies ass when someone takes them to court.
If it were mine, I wouldn't even consider '95, but it's not my laptop & I can't wait until I learn to code my own drivers to fix the problem. I'll work with the conflicts & see what's up, but if it takes more than 3-4 days of actually working on it....well, we do what we need to.
Note that I'm not dissing the driver support in Linux either. This is a laptop that stopped selling in 1997, so it's very outdated - Compaq Armada something. I was actually happy to find the driver supported as recently as it was.
Actually, I'm in the middle of doing a laptop for someone. The problem is the built in sound. The driver I need was pulled from the driver set 4 updates ago*. Right now I am having library conflicts trying to compile the driver from the old source code. Since I don't do drivers, or C, I am having a wee bit of a problem. Fortunately the owner is willing to wait - otherwise this would be back to Win95.
*at work now, but IIRC it's an ES-186* driver I need & the driver bundle only carries the ES-188* drivers. Doing a Ubuntu install & everything but the sound went smooth.
Wasn't trying to be snippy. I agree, I don't believe there is a law on the books about nipples on broadcast TV, just FCC regulations. However for practical intents & purposes, it's law.
To the original argument, if this law regarding adding identification & a contact number are unconstitutional, then so are all of the ones that specifically require that the identity of the funder of political ads be on the ad.
Hmm, Fine point, why don't you go argue with the FCC about that one.
You might just have about as much luck as trying to argue with the IRS that there is no statute requiring individuals to pay income tax - corperations yes, but not individuals. There is a crapload of tax-code, but no statute which specifically authorizes the IRS to collect income tax from individuals.
No, free speech doesn't remove telecommunications restrictions. You can't say fuck or show nipples on broadcast TV just because it's part of a political ad. Nor can you send faxes to fax machines. Spam is somehow fair game though... they don't have to include an opt out for future messages.
Hmm, "Vote the strict FSM ticket this year... for a preview of life under the FSM party, here's a tour of the afterlife's stripper factory..."
Given the time involved, this doesn't sound like free money to me. For me, in terms of opportunity cost, this would be a serious money loser.
Hmm,
1-2 hrs to find agent
2 hrs to order & fill out paperwork
8 hrs in court
$500/12=$41.66/hr -- that's a lot better than what I make now. If they make multiple calls you can hit them all at the same time - so it goes up fast. I know that when I get a call for red cross blood drives or a political spam, 3 minutes later my wife gets one.
Wow, this guy has far too much time on his hands. I can understand the desire to sue annoying telemarketers and politicians of an opposing part, but your own candidate or... nonprofit organizations?
Read the essay again, you only get to sue non-profits if they don't
Identify who they are at the beginning of the call
give a return phone number
That's not a real high hurdle to avoid being sued. "Hello, this is Non-Profit-From-Hell. We would just like a moment of your time... Thank you, for further information, please call 1-888-3825-033." That's it. Insert whatever else you want for '...' and you can't be sued.
On the other hand, I've had problems with a credit card company where they called 6 times a day & never left a company name.... it's nice to know I can sue them for every call.... 6/day X 6days a week = $3600/wk = 14.4K/mth ---- I can stop working & just let them keep calling.
Uhhh... OK. So while we're at it, let's get rid of copyright law, patent law, and restrictions on identity theft. Based on your logic, I should legally be able to dress up like George Bush, talk like George Bush, and try to pursuade others to do my bidding... as long as I tell them my name is George C. Bush. Or, I should be able open a company called Wallmart with their same colors, logos, products, bad jingle music, etc., right?
Um, you can Dress like GWB, Talk like GWB, and try to persuade people to do your bidding (as though you were George W Bush), as long as you don't tell them you are GWB. If you are George Bush (any variation thereof), then you can do everything but say you are the president of the US. Even there there is a huge series of loopholes - parody, hyperbole, etc. Which would allow you to be legally covered if anyone complained.
Now the Wallmart issue is different since that falls under trademark.
I prefer the rescue mode of my FC5 install disk. hmm,
mkdir/recovery
mount -t ntfs/dev/hd**/recovery
cd/recovery
It's how I pulled my wife's music off of the 2nd partition of her D drive --- XP could find the 1st partition, but not the 2nd one after an upgrade from 2K to XP.
I'm trying to find the group that had a live CD with a networked HD copy program [ala Ghost] on it.... that I could use at work.
The algorythm seems to look for things in the same family. I blew out an AGP port on an XP box. I know the only problem was the AGP slot, because the card worked in another PC and I could VNC into the box. I popped in an S3Virge card w/ 8MB ram & XP freaked. I also know other people that have changed from Nvidia to Nvidia cards with no issues, and others swapping from Nvidia to ATI & watched it die.
My gut instinct is that the 'algorythm' looks at the mfg & type codes of the PCI/AGP firmware & not the details. MB & chips it complains about evertime I've had to do something with them
Depends, if you signed on for a homeowners agreement, then they can take you to court - up to and enforcing a clause in your deed causing you to be evicted & your house resold.
Of course, with my 130+ yr old colonial, it's a bit looser, but I still have rules to follow - no new construction within 25' of the property line etc.... however. They still havn't decided if something clearly labeled in the deed as a drainage ditch can be maintained if it drains something they've declared a wetland....
The line 'controled by software to...' doesn't make a software patent. It properly describes a device/invention. Describing an algorythm or programic concept and declaring it an 'invention' makes it a software patent.
The original case that started the software patent issue was a rubber company that embedded a series of sensors in the mold to monitor the curing process. All the data was dumped into a computer which popped the part out at the optimum time. Other than the use of the computer to monitor & control the timing, there was nothing novel about the patent. Rubber companies had been using a few sensors & human intervention for years to do the same thing.
Note that in this case, the whole device was patented, not the software code or the concepts of using a computer to do the monitoring.
That's like saying "you cut out the x rated portions of your movie to get an R rating, but we don't care - if the consumers get the cuttings off the floor & tape them back in, they can see them."
I'm sorry, I would walk into court with a sealed copy of the game, a PC & hand them to the plantif's attourney & say, "OK, show me this content we misrepresented. Oh, you can't do it, then how did we misrepresent what we sold? The game, as sold, was valid for it's initial rating."
release a video game with sexually explicit content. They released a video game that can be patched to include sexually explicit content.
Big difference. The ESRB rating on the games is accurate for the game as shipped. There is nothing more explicit than gaining health for having hookers crawl into your car. Hot Coffee is a MOD - ie, you have to modify the game to see it. This whole suit is about people being up in arms about the game being changed after the sale. I never saw the issue.
You buy the game
you install the game
you patch the game with a non-take-two patch
you get to see pixle boobies.
If you skip step 3, you get a game that meets the ESRB rating the game was given initially. I really don't see how Take-Two can be held responsible for the actions of their customers. If I sell something that's UL/CSA rated, and you do a Tim Allen on it - I'm not responsible when it burns your house down. Same principles apply.
By trying to be a common carrier - ie they make no pre-determination on the content they accept & distribute - they are exempted from a lot of the laws reguarding assisting copyright infringement. The cavieat is that in order to comply with the rest of the rules, they have to have & use a plan to remove infringing material when they are notified about it.
If a copyright holder come to them & says "Hey bubba0001 is displaying crap of the week and it's infringing on my copyright, please remove it." UTube is only responsible to remove bubba0001's copy of crap of the week, they don't have to go filter every copy out of the system.
As long as they don't censor the material coming in, they get common carrier, as long as they respond to requests to remove - they get DMCA protection. The question comes - when someone makes a parody (permissible fair use in the US) and the copyright owner requests it be taken down - what happens?
Having worked for a company that makes a lot of substrates for these UL tags -----
They are usually a joke. The average tag is an adhesive backed vinyl with a clear polypro laminate to provide scratch protection. There is NO other verification method used on these labels.
The hologram labels are different. The hologram substrate itself has between 12 - 24 security features embedded into the hologram. They include:
Frequency specific holograms
Angle specific holograms
Quarter codes
By combining these, customs can tell pretty much at a glance if the hologram is authentic or not.
Even so, they still trash cargo by the boatload every year that made it through the initial inspections.
Since the entire purpose of the article is to compare the freedom of the press in both open societies and 3rd world dictatorships, does that make the entire article disingenuous or uninformed?
The choices I made for examples were chosen because they were directly on point of the previous poster saying he could shout 'Fuck Bush' all he wanted & he wouldn't get arrested. The truth is he shouldn't be arrested, but that doesn't mean he won't be. The whole point is that the lack of certainty of won't be has a noticible effect on free speach/freedom of the press which has been noted & commented on by SCOTUS.
If you examine the article, you'll see that it's not only ranking the countries just on the legal aspects of being a reporter, but also the real aspects such as requiring police protection after writing an unpopular article. Given a few of the diatribes I have heard comming from Congress in the last 4 years reguarding how it borders on treasonous to 'publicly undermine faith' [read "question"] in the presidents decisions in times of war, I would have to say that even if we haven't lost ground on the legal standings in the chart - we have lost ground in the social standings.
As for protesting, yes, if you stay so far away & hold signs & chant buzwords, you'll be fine. Walk up to the fence & yell "fuck Bush" and you'll get a trip downtown & an appointment with the judge for distrubing the peace - of course that's also likely to happen pretty much anywhere else too, reguardless of who's name you yell.
The US steets are marked out with a solid white line on the outer borders - usually with dotted white lines to seperate lanes going in the same direction. A yellow line goes down the center:
1 row dots -> ok to cross the center & pass in either direction
1 row dotted, 1 row solid -> OK to cross the center & pass if your side is dotted
double solid -> no crossing the center to pass in either direction.
Obviously crossing into the oncoming traffic lane should only be done with no actual oncomming traffic.
The point is that to perform your job, you are sometimes required to do things that other people are prohibited from doing. The privelidges granted are only done in terms of that job. A reporter can't refuse to answer all the questions of a court - and nobody is asking them to be exempt. They are asking that they not be asked as a matter of course to develop sources to provide the public with needed information, then betray the confidentiality of those sources when it's convienent for the govt.
In terms of police, I know there is one cop in a town near me who delights in pulling over state cops who go speeding through her town. So the theory is that police only have a waiver for traffic issues when it is required for their jobs - ie, on the job & responding to a call. Of course it's gennerally asking the fox to guard the henhouse, but that's the implimentation, not the rules.
Slashdot Mirror
In the US, swimsuit calendars on the inside of personal storage lockers have been grounds for sexual harassment suits. In light of that, someone walking behind you while you're 'porning' during break would certainly count also.
Remember these rules aren't there to be prudish, they're there to save the companies ass when someone takes them to court.
If it were mine, I wouldn't even consider '95, but it's not my laptop & I can't wait until I learn to code my own drivers to fix the problem. I'll work with the conflicts & see what's up, but if it takes more than 3-4 days of actually working on it....well, we do what we need to.
Note that I'm not dissing the driver support in Linux either. This is a laptop that stopped selling in 1997, so it's very outdated - Compaq Armada something. I was actually happy to find the driver supported as recently as it was.
Actually, I'm in the middle of doing a laptop for someone. The problem is the built in sound. The driver I need was pulled from the driver set 4 updates ago*. Right now I am having library conflicts trying to compile the driver from the old source code. Since I don't do drivers, or C, I am having a wee bit of a problem. Fortunately the owner is willing to wait - otherwise this would be back to Win95.
*at work now, but IIRC it's an ES-186* driver I need & the driver bundle only carries the ES-188* drivers. Doing a Ubuntu install & everything but the sound went smooth.
Wasn't trying to be snippy. I agree, I don't believe there is a law on the books about nipples on broadcast TV, just FCC regulations. However for practical intents & purposes, it's law.
To the original argument, if this law regarding adding identification & a contact number are unconstitutional, then so are all of the ones that specifically require that the identity of the funder of political ads be on the ad.
Hmm, Fine point, why don't you go argue with the FCC about that one.
You might just have about as much luck as trying to argue with the IRS that there is no statute requiring individuals to pay income tax - corperations yes, but not individuals. There is a crapload of tax-code, but no statute which specifically authorizes the IRS to collect income tax from individuals.
No, free speech doesn't remove telecommunications restrictions. You can't say fuck or show nipples on broadcast TV just because it's part of a political ad. Nor can you send faxes to fax machines. Spam is somehow fair game though... they don't have to include an opt out for future messages.
Hmm, "Vote the strict FSM ticket this year... for a preview of life under the FSM party, here's a tour of the afterlife's stripper factory..."
- 1-2 hrs to find agent
- 2 hrs to order & fill out paperwork
- 8 hrs in court
$500/12=$41.66/hr -- that's a lot better than what I make now. If they make multiple calls you can hit them all at the same time - so it goes up fast. I know that when I get a call for red cross blood drives or a political spam, 3 minutes later my wife gets one.- Identify who they are at the beginning of the call
- give a return phone number
That's not a real high hurdle to avoid being sued. "Hello, this is Non-Profit-From-Hell. We would just like a moment of your timeOn the other hand, I've had problems with a credit card company where they called 6 times a day & never left a company name .... it's nice to know I can sue them for every call .... 6/day X 6days a week = $3600/wk = 14.4K/mth ---- I can stop working & just let them keep calling.
Um, you can Dress like GWB, Talk like GWB, and try to persuade people to do your bidding (as though you were George W Bush), as long as you don't tell them you are GWB. If you are George Bush (any variation thereof), then you can do everything but say you are the president of the US. Even there there is a huge series of loopholes - parody, hyperbole, etc. Which would allow you to be legally covered if anyone complained.
Now the Wallmart issue is different since that falls under trademark.
LOL, I'm a bit more rural - IIRC I have a hair under 2 acres ... but even so, my back steps are way into that 25' zone.
I think the one I had seen earlier was the feyrer.de group. But the Gentoo live cd looks certainly doable also. :)
Thanks
- mkdir
/recovery
- mount -t ntfs
/dev/hd** /recovery
- cd
/recovery
It's how I pulled my wife's music off of the 2nd partition of her D drive --- XP could find the 1st partition, but not the 2nd one after an upgrade from 2K to XP.I'm trying to find the group that had a live CD with a networked HD copy program [ala Ghost] on it.... that I could use at work.
The algorythm seems to look for things in the same family. I blew out an AGP port on an XP box. I know the only problem was the AGP slot, because the card worked in another PC and I could VNC into the box. I popped in an S3Virge card w/ 8MB ram & XP freaked. I also know other people that have changed from Nvidia to Nvidia cards with no issues, and others swapping from Nvidia to ATI & watched it die.
My gut instinct is that the 'algorythm' looks at the mfg & type codes of the PCI/AGP firmware & not the details. MB & chips it complains about evertime I've had to do something with them
Depends, if you signed on for a homeowners agreement, then they can take you to court - up to and enforcing a clause in your deed causing you to be evicted & your house resold.
Of course, with my 130+ yr old colonial, it's a bit looser, but I still have rules to follow - no new construction within 25' of the property line etc.... however. They still havn't decided if something clearly labeled in the deed as a drainage ditch can be maintained if it drains something they've declared a wetland....
The line 'controled by software to ...' doesn't make a software patent. It properly describes a device/invention. Describing an algorythm or programic concept and declaring it an 'invention' makes it a software patent.
The original case that started the software patent issue was a rubber company that embedded a series of sensors in the mold to monitor the curing process. All the data was dumped into a computer which popped the part out at the optimum time. Other than the use of the computer to monitor & control the timing, there was nothing novel about the patent. Rubber companies had been using a few sensors & human intervention for years to do the same thing.
Note that in this case, the whole device was patented, not the software code or the concepts of using a computer to do the monitoring.
no text
Shrug FC6 ran it fine - of course I took the extra 30 seconds to drop the Flash9 beta into my system.
That's like saying "you cut out the x rated portions of your movie to get an R rating, but we don't care - if the consumers get the cuttings off the floor & tape them back in, they can see them."
I'm sorry, I would walk into court with a sealed copy of the game, a PC & hand them to the plantif's attourney & say, "OK, show me this content we misrepresented. Oh, you can't do it, then how did we misrepresent what we sold? The game, as sold, was valid for it's initial rating."
Big difference. The ESRB rating on the games is accurate for the game as shipped. There is nothing more explicit than gaining health for having hookers crawl into your car. Hot Coffee is a MOD - ie, you have to modify the game to see it. This whole suit is about people being up in arms about the game being changed after the sale. I never saw the issue.
By trying to be a common carrier - ie they make no pre-determination on the content they accept & distribute - they are exempted from a lot of the laws reguarding assisting copyright infringement. The cavieat is that in order to comply with the rest of the rules, they have to have & use a plan to remove infringing material when they are notified about it.
If a copyright holder come to them & says "Hey bubba0001 is displaying crap of the week and it's infringing on my copyright, please remove it." UTube is only responsible to remove bubba0001's copy of crap of the week, they don't have to go filter every copy out of the system.
As long as they don't censor the material coming in, they get common carrier, as long as they respond to requests to remove - they get DMCA protection. The question comes - when someone makes a parody (permissible fair use in the US) and the copyright owner requests it be taken down - what happens?
The GP stated linux would not be released under GPL, he should have said GPLv3 as Linux is already under v2.
Just a quick clarification
They are usually a joke. The average tag is an adhesive backed vinyl with a clear polypro laminate to provide scratch protection. There is NO other verification method used on these labels.
The hologram labels are different. The hologram substrate itself has between 12 - 24 security features embedded into the hologram. They include:
- Frequency specific holograms
- Angle specific holograms
- Quarter codes
By combining these, customs can tell pretty much at a glance if the hologram is authentic or not.Even so, they still trash cargo by the boatload every year that made it through the initial inspections.
Since the entire purpose of the article is to compare the freedom of the press in both open societies and 3rd world dictatorships, does that make the entire article disingenuous or uninformed?
The choices I made for examples were chosen because they were directly on point of the previous poster saying he could shout 'Fuck Bush' all he wanted & he wouldn't get arrested. The truth is he shouldn't be arrested, but that doesn't mean he won't be. The whole point is that the lack of certainty of won't be has a noticible effect on free speach/freedom of the press which has been noted & commented on by SCOTUS.
If you examine the article, you'll see that it's not only ranking the countries just on the legal aspects of being a reporter, but also the real aspects such as requiring police protection after writing an unpopular article. Given a few of the diatribes I have heard comming from Congress in the last 4 years reguarding how it borders on treasonous to 'publicly undermine faith' [read "question"] in the presidents decisions in times of war, I would have to say that even if we haven't lost ground on the legal standings in the chart - we have lost ground in the social standings.
As for protesting, yes, if you stay so far away & hold signs & chant buzwords, you'll be fine. Walk up to the fence & yell "fuck Bush" and you'll get a trip downtown & an appointment with the judge for distrubing the peace - of course that's also likely to happen pretty much anywhere else too, reguardless of who's name you yell.
- 1 row dots -> ok to cross the center & pass in either direction
- 1 row dotted, 1 row solid -> OK to cross the center & pass if your side is dotted
- double solid -> no crossing the center to pass in either direction.
Obviously crossing into the oncoming traffic lane should only be done with no actual oncomming traffic.The point is that to perform your job, you are sometimes required to do things that other people are prohibited from doing. The privelidges granted are only done in terms of that job. A reporter can't refuse to answer all the questions of a court - and nobody is asking them to be exempt. They are asking that they not be asked as a matter of course to develop sources to provide the public with needed information, then betray the confidentiality of those sources when it's convienent for the govt.
In terms of police, I know there is one cop in a town near me who delights in pulling over state cops who go speeding through her town. So the theory is that police only have a waiver for traffic issues when it is required for their jobs - ie, on the job & responding to a call. Of course it's gennerally asking the fox to guard the henhouse, but that's the implimentation, not the rules.