Even in this case, the DMCA doesn't apply. It's only if you subvert the technology for the purposes of violating copyright. If you use a program to, say, watch DVDs that you own on an operating system with no DVD player, then you aren't violating the DMCA because you aren't violating copyright.
Functionally, it may indeed be similar to TopText.
However, last I checked the shipping configuration of Toptext did not *modify* the content of the page being shown, it simply added links to certain locations. A trivial configuration change was required if the desired behavior was to place links to sites in the page.
The rational given for that was that to do so was to modify the *content* of the page being displayed, and TopText did not wish to be in the position of violating the copyright restrictions on viewed pages.
This may have changed since I was last on the TopText site reading about it.
TopText is clearly 'you' modifying content for personal use. It does one thing, that's obvious, it's editing stuff in instead of out- pretty clear cut.
JunkBuster is NOT clearly 'you' modifying content for your own use. Not unless it's YOU that is specifying all those ads to remove.
My take on it is this: if you want to hack your copy of Mozilla so that every ad for 'Kodak' doesn't show up, I think you're a loony and go right ahead. That way, every time you don't see an ad for 'Kodak' where an ad is supposed to be, you will think, "There's that ad that I removed", and no problem there.
If you let a _third_ _party_ come up with what to remove, I object. Write your own remove algorithm! I'll happily let _you_ remove the revenue of a web page and decide how I should support the content, even if you're insane, but what gives you the right to turn this over to some third party? They're not you! If you don't want to read the ads they remove, how about you go SITES WITH NO ADS? Why on earth do you feel that your opinion matters on what THEY do to my content? You're free to edit what you like yourself, or have Mozilla omit all instances of the word 'the', because this is all your personal interaction with the content. You are the user, it is what you are reading, you can do what the hell you want. Your freedom does not necessarily extend to being entitled to sublicense that off, to shrug and say "Here, I'm reading this page. I know you didn't pay this site, but take some ads out that I might think are irrelevant. Surprise me!"
If you don't want to read their ads that damn badly, how about you go to sites with no ads? What gives THEM property rights over my little web homestead?
It's even worse if you're clueless and have no idea I didn't actively choose to have no ads. I'm assuming you are firmly aware I didn't choose to have no ads and I _still_ consider it necessary for my site to remain up. If you're an idiot and think I decided to put content up for free with no ads, the situation is incomparably worse. But of course nobody is ever a luser, or ever encounters a lack of ads on a strange website and concludes it's the site author's doing:P
This is a 150,000% fine negotiated down to a 1,000% fine. (or 1,500x down to 10x) How does the BSA get to levy fines so out of proportion to actual damages?
The purpose of a fine isn't to recoup actual damages, it's to deter people from taking the risk. There is a subway stop in Toronto that has two ways of accessing the train track: one through the legal system of paying $2 and going through the turnstyles and another by going in where the bus pulls into the station (a bus rider doesn't have to pay to access the subway). The fine, if you are caught, for using the second is $500. That's (coincidentally) 150x the cost of going in the legal way.
Basically, you then have to look at it like this: if you feel you can cheat the subway system 150 times, then the economics say you should go into the bus area. I personally think that trying this 150 times will almost definitely get you caught once, so it isn't worth it.
If the fine was $2, then I might as well try it, because the worst thing that can happen is they catch me and I pay the normal amount. This would cause them to have to have a gaurd posted there 24/7, which costs them money.
As for your examples, I really don't see anything wrong with fining a corporation who doesn't meet OSHA or union requirements for overtime much more (yes, even 150x more) than the amount they were supposed to pay out if the act was done either willfully (they decided to take a chance and not pay it) or through serious neglect (they never bothered to ensure correct payments through random self auditing and had no intention of checking). Not paying a consultant on time can seriously effect a lot. Right now I am buying a house and if my employer decides to skip a payment between now and closing, I will definitely not get the morgage.
Um, no. Calculus is "the branch of mathematics that deals with limits and the differentiation and integration of functions of one or more variables" or "the combined mathematics of differential calculus and integral calculus". To say that predicate calculus is a kind of calculus because it has the word "calculus" in it, is the same kind of logic that says "oral sex" is a kind of sex. English allows for such nominal compounds to be unrelated in definition.
I don't understand why she has no real option to change jobs. I see she doesn't have a degree, but if she has more than 3 years experience and 2 a 2-year post-secondary certificate, she can qualify for a TN. Even if she doesn't, under the new rules she can transfer her H1B to another company without the waiting period. Here is website I found invaluable when dealing with my TN1. I suspect their H1-B section is just as good.
But ultimately, you fire him because he was insubordinent in documenting his work. That's a far cry from the story by the original poster where the manager was saying they should fire him simply because they rely on him.
Incidentally, since I don't thik I'll post again in this thread: no one is irreplacable. It's an important think to know and understand
What is the maximum size of a VARCAR2 variable in PL/SQL?
No wonder you have troubles finding good people. You are looking for the kind of people who feel they need to memorize the kind of minutia they ask on certification tests. Then it seems that these are the only people you interview, failing to see if they can do actual tasks.
The main SQL question I ask follows:
You have two tables: table A and table B. Table A has three columns: customer_id, item_id, quantity. Table B has two columns: item_id and price. Item_id in table A is foreign keyed to table B. Table A holds orders by a customer for a certain number of a particular item. Table B holds the price in dollars of each item. What is the total amount in dollars of all the orders belonging to customer "3".
I leave details out on purpose (like that the foreign key is to the first column in table B, which is a primary key) to see how well the applicant can understand the problem. They can have paper or whatever.
The majority of candidates that do get the answer (yes a lot don't, including one who claimed to be a certified oracle programmer (by Oracle)) will say the anser is "select price*quantity from A,B where a.item_id=b.item_id and customer_id = 3" which is wrong, but even then I don't consider the error enough to say they have out and out failed the interview.
The interview is made up of lots of questions that have degrees of correctness and a perfect score isn't required. In fact a B- total will likely get you hired.
Ever feel the heat coming of your engine? That's a hell of a lot hotter than your car will get just sitting in the sun.
Not to be pedantic, but this doens't make a whole lot of sense. The heat of the engine comes from wasted energy. I agree that a solar powered car wouldn't be able to be as wasteful as a combustion engine, but that really isn't a design goal.
I gradded in 1999 and you are definaitely right about Engineering and Math (which offers CS) being tops. I don't know about Physics. They started changing a bit: admitting a lot more people to qualify for certain federal funding, and cutting some classes from the Math core cirriculum. It's still tops, but it feels like we've lost some ground.
As others have said, it's okay to take back what is yours, but Radek could still be arrested and detained while the cops are sorting everything out. If you fail to prove the computer is yours, then he could end up convicted. Even in the best case, he ends up with an arrest on his record, which is still not a good thing.
bios password are easy to disable, so they are only good for preventing people who aren't going to steal the computer from accessing it (even then, they can disable it if they don't mind that you will notice it being disabled afterwards). The upshot is that is doesn't help here.
We know this is a windows box, because of the virus it contracted and that his friend's email address were still in the address book (as opposed to wiped when the theif saw linux). Even then, I don't see how drive encryption would prevent contracting a worm.
If the theif saw a login password they could not get by, they would just wipe and reinstall. Then there would be no way to track the theif.
This explanation doesn't fit well with the original posters comments.
This doesn't make any sense. If MS has stopped supporting it, I'm assuming they've stopped distributing it. If they've stopped distributing it, then still no one would get the source code. The GPL doesn't mean that the source must be made public, just that it must be made available to those you distribute to. So, MS stops distribution, GPLs it, and never has to give out a byte of source.
What security? Up until a few days ago, there wasn't a virus package that would detect SirCam. Do you expect him to update virus checkers on computers not in his possession? Presumably you don't mean security by disabling the ability to retrieve email, so then what do you mean?
Note: I do disable VBS files (by associating them with notepad) on my home WinME machine, but this isn't common practice. I do it because many people use my home machine. Disabiling VBS files like this isn't considered "security enablement" in the sense of updating patches and locking down ports.
That's the way the law works here in the states too, but you still have to consider that the person using it bought the computer and didn't know it was stolen. In the Radek situation, to them, a big Eastern block guy is coming over and demanding them to give the computer. This can get Radek in a lot of trouble. In the case where the cops are involved, you'll get it back legally.
Plus, you'll probably need the cops involved anyways, to get the location of the person in possession of the computer.
Brought the heros to his/her secret mountain lair to kill them personally rather than letting a henchman do it at great distance
This is a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation. If you order your henchmen to do it, they will certainly screw it up, and, depending on the movie rating, will be severely injured to killed.
At least if you have your henchment bring the hero(es) to the secret lair, you don't have to pay out as much disability or have as high employee life insurance. This is why usually contractors are brought in, not because they really are the badest killers from the four corners of the earth, but because by going corp-to-corp, you won't impact your premiums when they are killed. Plus it keeps employee morale up.
A large number of software copyright violations are not found by audits, but by ex-employees. This won't get every company that does this, but it can get a surprising amount.
The unethical developer woould put it in on purpose in case they were let go under poor terms.
Slashdot Mirror
Even in this case, the DMCA doesn't apply. It's only if you subvert the technology for the purposes of violating copyright. If you use a program to, say, watch DVDs that you own on an operating system with no DVD player, then you aren't violating the DMCA because you aren't violating copyright.
However, last I checked the shipping configuration of Toptext did not *modify* the content of the page being shown, it simply added links to certain locations. A trivial configuration change was required if the desired behavior was to place links to sites in the page.
The rational given for that was that to do so was to modify the *content* of the page being displayed, and TopText did not wish to be in the position of violating the copyright restrictions on viewed pages.
This may have changed since I was last on the TopText site reading about it.
JunkBuster is NOT clearly 'you' modifying content for your own use. Not unless it's YOU that is specifying all those ads to remove.
My take on it is this: if you want to hack your copy of Mozilla so that every ad for 'Kodak' doesn't show up, I think you're a loony and go right ahead. That way, every time you don't see an ad for 'Kodak' where an ad is supposed to be, you will think, "There's that ad that I removed", and no problem there.
If you let a _third_ _party_ come up with what to remove, I object. Write your own remove algorithm! I'll happily let _you_ remove the revenue of a web page and decide how I should support the content, even if you're insane, but what gives you the right to turn this over to some third party? They're not you! If you don't want to read the ads they remove, how about you go SITES WITH NO ADS? Why on earth do you feel that your opinion matters on what THEY do to my content? You're free to edit what you like yourself, or have Mozilla omit all instances of the word 'the', because this is all your personal interaction with the content. You are the user, it is what you are reading, you can do what the hell you want. Your freedom does not necessarily extend to being entitled to sublicense that off, to shrug and say "Here, I'm reading this page. I know you didn't pay this site, but take some ads out that I might think are irrelevant. Surprise me!"
If you don't want to read their ads that damn badly, how about you go to sites with no ads? What gives THEM property rights over my little web homestead?
It's even worse if you're clueless and have no idea I didn't actively choose to have no ads. I'm assuming you are firmly aware I didn't choose to have no ads and I _still_ consider it necessary for my site to remain up. If you're an idiot and think I decided to put content up for free with no ads, the situation is incomparably worse. But of course nobody is ever a luser, or ever encounters a lack of ads on a strange website and concludes it's the site author's doing :P
The purpose of a fine isn't to recoup actual damages, it's to deter people from taking the risk. There is a subway stop in Toronto that has two ways of accessing the train track: one through the legal system of paying $2 and going through the turnstyles and another by going in where the bus pulls into the station (a bus rider doesn't have to pay to access the subway). The fine, if you are caught, for using the second is $500. That's (coincidentally) 150x the cost of going in the legal way.
Basically, you then have to look at it like this: if you feel you can cheat the subway system 150 times, then the economics say you should go into the bus area. I personally think that trying this 150 times will almost definitely get you caught once, so it isn't worth it.
If the fine was $2, then I might as well try it, because the worst thing that can happen is they catch me and I pay the normal amount. This would cause them to have to have a gaurd posted there 24/7, which costs them money.
As for your examples, I really don't see anything wrong with fining a corporation who doesn't meet OSHA or union requirements for overtime much more (yes, even 150x more) than the amount they were supposed to pay out if the act was done either willfully (they decided to take a chance and not pay it) or through serious neglect (they never bothered to ensure correct payments through random self auditing and had no intention of checking). Not paying a consultant on time can seriously effect a lot. Right now I am buying a house and if my employer decides to skip a payment between now and closing, I will definitely not get the morgage.
Her Passport(TM) identity... DELETED!
Um, no. Calculus is "the branch of mathematics that deals with limits and the differentiation and integration of functions of one or more variables" or "the combined mathematics of differential calculus and integral calculus". To say that predicate calculus is a kind of calculus because it has the word "calculus" in it, is the same kind of logic that says "oral sex" is a kind of sex. English allows for such nominal compounds to be unrelated in definition.
Just another Canuck in the states (Florida)
Ugh. If you call $65,000/yr next to nothing, then your post makes sense. That's almost twice the national average.
Incidentally, since I don't thik I'll post again in this thread: no one is irreplacable. It's an important think to know and understand
Amen! I'm only 24 and even I have realize that. I kringe at my co-workers who kibtz all day long and then complain about deadlines.
No wonder you have troubles finding good people. You are looking for the kind of people who feel they need to memorize the kind of minutia they ask on certification tests. Then it seems that these are the only people you interview, failing to see if they can do actual tasks.
The main SQL question I ask follows: You have two tables: table A and table B. Table A has three columns: customer_id, item_id, quantity. Table B has two columns: item_id and price. Item_id in table A is foreign keyed to table B. Table A holds orders by a customer for a certain number of a particular item. Table B holds the price in dollars of each item. What is the total amount in dollars of all the orders belonging to customer "3".
I leave details out on purpose (like that the foreign key is to the first column in table B, which is a primary key) to see how well the applicant can understand the problem. They can have paper or whatever.
The majority of candidates that do get the answer (yes a lot don't, including one who claimed to be a certified oracle programmer (by Oracle)) will say the anser is "select price*quantity from A,B where a.item_id=b.item_id and customer_id = 3" which is wrong, but even then I don't consider the error enough to say they have out and out failed the interview.
The interview is made up of lots of questions that have degrees of correctness and a perfect score isn't required. In fact a B- total will likely get you hired.
Not to be pedantic, but this doens't make a whole lot of sense. The heat of the engine comes from wasted energy. I agree that a solar powered car wouldn't be able to be as wasteful as a combustion engine, but that really isn't a design goal.
But I may have old timers.
Not to be pedantic, but a spell checker wouldn't have helped there :)
As others have said, it's okay to take back what is yours, but Radek could still be arrested and detained while the cops are sorting everything out. If you fail to prove the computer is yours, then he could end up convicted. Even in the best case, he ends up with an arrest on his record, which is still not a good thing.
bios password are easy to disable, so they are only good for preventing people who aren't going to steal the computer from accessing it (even then, they can disable it if they don't mind that you will notice it being disabled afterwards). The upshot is that is doesn't help here.
We know this is a windows box, because of the virus it contracted and that his friend's email address were still in the address book (as opposed to wiped when the theif saw linux). Even then, I don't see how drive encryption would prevent contracting a worm.
If the theif saw a login password they could not get by, they would just wipe and reinstall. Then there would be no way to track the theif.
This explanation doesn't fit well with the original posters comments.
This doesn't make any sense. If MS has stopped supporting it, I'm assuming they've stopped distributing it. If they've stopped distributing it, then still no one would get the source code. The GPL doesn't mean that the source must be made public, just that it must be made available to those you distribute to. So, MS stops distribution, GPLs it, and never has to give out a byte of source.
Note: I do disable VBS files (by associating them with notepad) on my home WinME machine, but this isn't common practice. I do it because many people use my home machine. Disabiling VBS files like this isn't considered "security enablement" in the sense of updating patches and locking down ports.
That's the way the law works here in the states too, but you still have to consider that the person using it bought the computer and didn't know it was stolen. In the Radek situation, to them, a big Eastern block guy is coming over and demanding them to give the computer. This can get Radek in a lot of trouble. In the case where the cops are involved, you'll get it back legally.
Plus, you'll probably need the cops involved anyways, to get the location of the person in possession of the computer.
This is a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation. If you order your henchmen to do it, they will certainly screw it up, and, depending on the movie rating, will be severely injured to killed.
At least if you have your henchment bring the hero(es) to the secret lair, you don't have to pay out as much disability or have as high employee life insurance. This is why usually contractors are brought in, not because they really are the badest killers from the four corners of the earth, but because by going corp-to-corp, you won't impact your premiums when they are killed. Plus it keeps employee morale up.
Yours contains a meta-mistake, in that there is no mistake.
This is an Urban Legend.
I've got 26. Definitely unique IPs as shown by .*$//g" | sort -u | wc -l
grep default.ida apache_access.log | sed "s/
Anybody heard of the priest who walks around East L.A., wading in and out of gang shoot-outs, but nobody will touch him?
Nope, never heard of him. References?
disgruntled employees
A large number of software copyright violations are not found by audits, but by ex-employees. This won't get every company that does this, but it can get a surprising amount.
The unethical developer woould put it in on purpose in case they were let go under poor terms.