It's probably also illegal to retaliate against someone for what they said to their union representative and would certainly be compounded by the illegal wiretapping, so we're back to where we started.
Assuming that workplaces operate like a police state is a terrible place to start from and fostering that kind of attitude leads to it's acceptance. I certainly don't hide what I'm doing at work but neither do I expect to have my secure communications intercepted. There is mutual trust on both sides and I see no reason why this can't be the same across the board if the law is there to provide the framework.
So what if your employer has an SSL proxy installed and controls the certificate store on your workstation? How about screen capture software, keyloggers, etc.? Face it, if you control the computer then you have absolute power to snoop.
...you can use code released under GPLv3 to develop any kind of DRM technology you like. However, if you do this, section 3 says that the system will not count as an effective technological "protection" measure, which means that if someone breaks the DRM, he will be free to distribute his software too, unhindered by the DMCA and similar laws. As I read that, it means you can't sue someone if they break your DRM implementation. Seems fair to me.
You generally have to be an administrator to install applications. This should not come as a surprise.
Being charged for a supposed free trial sucks but I'm guessing that if you read the terms and conditions it would be in there. The credit card is standard practice to make sure they are not getting ripped off.
It sounds like a bad service but $1.94 is not exactly in the realm of the Nigerian scams.
The fact is, laws passed for the "common good" invariably end up harming those they were notionally intended to help and in fact end up greatly benefiting a very small group of people.
So that's a fact is it? I thought the point of laws is that they were for the common good. What about murder, rape and antitrust (hehe) laws?
Slashdot Mirror
It's probably also illegal to retaliate against someone for what they said to their union representative and would certainly be compounded by the illegal wiretapping, so we're back to where we started.
Assuming that workplaces operate like a police state is a terrible place to start from and fostering that kind of attitude leads to it's acceptance. I certainly don't hide what I'm doing at work but neither do I expect to have my secure communications intercepted. There is mutual trust on both sides and I see no reason why this can't be the same across the board if the law is there to provide the framework.
So what if your employer has an SSL proxy installed and controls the certificate store on your workstation? How about screen capture software, keyloggers, etc.? Face it, if you control the computer then you have absolute power to snoop.
...you can use code released under GPLv3 to develop any kind of DRM technology you like. However, if you do this, section 3 says that the system will not count as an effective technological "protection" measure, which means that if someone breaks the DRM, he will be free to distribute his software too, unhindered by the DMCA and similar laws. As I read that, it means you can't sue someone if they break your DRM implementation. Seems fair to me.You generally have to be an administrator to install applications. This should not come as a surprise.
Being charged for a supposed free trial sucks but I'm guessing that if you read the terms and conditions it would be in there. The credit card is standard practice to make sure they are not getting ripped off.
It sounds like a bad service but $1.94 is not exactly in the realm of the Nigerian scams.