Fuck off, troll. There's a huge fucking difference between filtering videos, and giving a media company unilateral rights to take down whatever the fuck they want.
So you oppose efforts to tax the rich more (a cost to them) and give more benefits to the poorer (health care, whatever) because that would be manipulating the public policy for the profit of the poor?
Wow. Did you sprain yourself with that stretch you had to make? Seriously, your "points" are not even trying to hide their bullshit now.
The problem is, XYZ corp is lumping in MY PROFITS with their donation, to something that I might not even support. This is vastly different than the day to day operations of the business. Those actions they take on behalf of the company. Political donations they do on behalf of the shareholders, which is very wrong.
Not every college/university offers every course of study, however. The school in my hometown offered no engineering courses. Thus, I had to move across the state.
Our libraries would typically have the books, but only a couple copies at most. Meaning that if everyone in the class tried that, not everyone would get time with the book.
Don't forget the international edition. I bought several books that were the paperback, international edition of the book. Exact same content, and loads cheaper.
And as for living, sorry, but if you're having trouble affording to live, do what I did, go to a school close enough to your parents house, and live with your parents
And those who don't live close to a school offering their chosen field of study?
Because everyone lives close enough to schools with every possible major of study, right? I totally didn't have to go to school across the state to get my engineering degree. It was all in my head that the school in my hometown didn't offer anything like that.
Even that's not going to help in these situations. I would imagine the Oracle representative, when faced with the conclusion that the project wasn't going to work was of the mindset, "I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further."
At the same time, if I have an agreement that says I will pay you $X, and you will deliver Y product by Z date, then you damned well better do it, and not extort me for even more money when you slip the date. If anything, it should be cheaper now, as Oracle broke the contract.
The court is not the one that collects judgement. However, it should be possible to go down to the Sheriff's office with such a judgement, and then go to the company's offices and start loading up on shit.
Because we believe in no taxation without representation. Corporations get taxed, so they get a say in politics. They're not allowed to vote, so all they can do is lobby and donate. I take it from your post that you believe in taxation without representation?
That is bat shit retarded. Are you trying to claim that the people who run the corporations can't donate? That they wouldn't have their company's interests at heart when they do so?
Actually, no. There is a perfectly sensible alternative: Not allowing Corporations to donate, as they are not natural persons. Doing that in no way strips anyone of their right to individually donate.
If that's the case, then why can't those people donate individually? Furthermore, as the shareholder of a corporation, why was I not asked which candidates I would like the company to support?
It's not stripping ANYONES rights to not allow non-natural persons to donate to political causes.
No, there is question as to whether the Megaupload video (which was the one in the clip) was owned by UMG. And until such time that the question is answered satisfactorily, they should not be able to get any other videos with those clips taken down.
Slashdot Mirror
I still can very well blame UMG for exercising that power. Yes, Google deserves quite a bit of blame. But UMG should also be scorned just as hard.
Fuck off, troll. There's a huge fucking difference between filtering videos, and giving a media company unilateral rights to take down whatever the fuck they want.
they claim that they believe that you can make money without doing evil.
Apparently they've decided that it's not worth the trouble, though.
So wait, we're not supposed to hold them to the standard and the promise they made long ago?
And fuck that "infinite lawsuits" bullshit. There was absolutely no fucking reason for any shit like this.
And again, I find it cute that you somehow think the Republican candidates are "not harmful" or the "lesser of two evils".
So you oppose efforts to tax the rich more (a cost to them) and give more benefits to the poorer (health care, whatever) because that would be manipulating the public policy for the profit of the poor?
Wow. Did you sprain yourself with that stretch you had to make? Seriously, your "points" are not even trying to hide their bullshit now.
The problem is, XYZ corp is lumping in MY PROFITS with their donation, to something that I might not even support. This is vastly different than the day to day operations of the business. Those actions they take on behalf of the company. Political donations they do on behalf of the shareholders, which is very wrong.
They might be, but it would be tricky.
Not every college/university offers every course of study, however. The school in my hometown offered no engineering courses. Thus, I had to move across the state.
Our libraries would typically have the books, but only a couple copies at most. Meaning that if everyone in the class tried that, not everyone would get time with the book.
Don't forget the international edition. I bought several books that were the paperback, international edition of the book. Exact same content, and loads cheaper.
And as for living, sorry, but if you're having trouble affording to live, do what I did, go to a school close enough to your parents house, and live with your parents
And those who don't live close to a school offering their chosen field of study?
Because everyone lives close enough to schools with every possible major of study, right? I totally didn't have to go to school across the state to get my engineering degree. It was all in my head that the school in my hometown didn't offer anything like that.
Besides, if you want to look at outrageous salaries, the place to start is the football and/or basketball coaches.
Which are usually paid for by the athletic department, which usually gets it's money from football and men's basketball ticket sales/tv rights.
Even that's not going to help in these situations. I would imagine the Oracle representative, when faced with the conclusion that the project wasn't going to work was of the mindset, "I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further."
Sadly, I've seen software sold with half truths and bald-faced lies before. Why it hasn't led more of them into court, I will never understand.
The sellers generally have deeper pockets and more lawyers.
At the same time, if I have an agreement that says I will pay you $X, and you will deliver Y product by Z date, then you damned well better do it, and not extort me for even more money when you slip the date. If anything, it should be cheaper now, as Oracle broke the contract.
but since in this case Universal really does own the copyright
Post evidence, or shut the fuck up.
The court is not the one that collects judgement. However, it should be possible to go down to the Sheriff's office with such a judgement, and then go to the company's offices and start loading up on shit.
Because we believe in no taxation without representation. Corporations get taxed, so they get a say in politics. They're not allowed to vote, so all they can do is lobby and donate. I take it from your post that you believe in taxation without representation?
That is bat shit retarded. Are you trying to claim that the people who run the corporations can't donate? That they wouldn't have their company's interests at heart when they do so?
Actually, no. There is a perfectly sensible alternative: Not allowing Corporations to donate, as they are not natural persons. Doing that in no way strips anyone of their right to individually donate.
If that's the case, then why can't those people donate individually? Furthermore, as the shareholder of a corporation, why was I not asked which candidates I would like the company to support?
It's not stripping ANYONES rights to not allow non-natural persons to donate to political causes.
Yes, but "we" allowed it by not making our representatives in Congress pass a law specifically forbidding it
Actually, there was. Which is why the question got before the Supreme Court.
No, there is question as to whether the Megaupload video (which was the one in the clip) was owned by UMG. And until such time that the question is answered satisfactorily, they should not be able to get any other videos with those clips taken down.
Technically they did commit perjury. Now all we have to do is get someone to prosecute it. Shouldn't be that hard, right?