Kills 2 birds with one stone, shows the (evil) power of ISDS, and might make Spain rethink BOTH the new IP law and accepting any ISDS provisions in treaties.
As I understand it, the senate intelligence committee has the legal authority in it's own right to declassify the report. Technically it's only a courtesy, not a requirement, that the White House and CIA are getting a chance to vet and redact the report.
Therefore the committee could formerly, officially and legally release the full unredacted report let alone just the summary.
Therefor the retailer will get a pattern of spending, because customer 56*39(1 purchased a tooth-brush on Monday at the supermarket. On Tuesday they purchased some condoms at the supermarket. on Wednesday they purchased some flowers at the florist who's owned by the same company that owns the supermarket, later that same day they purchased a super vibrating extreme speed dildo at the sex shop chain also owned by the same parent company. The following Monday they went back to the sex shop seeking a refund of the defective dildo, which required them to provide their name, address and telephone number as well as 'waving' the NFC device over the sensor to authorise the refund to Apple Pay.
Now mega-corp AllKnowingMart knows who customer 56*39(1 is and can link all of their purchases to that person.
The token itself should also be encrypted (using a different key each time) so that the retailer can't build up a database of purchases.
that if you do what the patent says, then you are logically "infringing" on the patent,
This is what I don't understand.
If a patent is not valid, it is not a patent. It is a document describing something, it is not a patent. Therefore you can't be "doing what the patent says" because there is no patent. You can be doing what the document describes, but that document is not a patent. It might be a FORMER patent.
A patent is (blatantly copied from USPTO)
a property right granted by the Government of the United States of America to an inventor “to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the United States or importing the invention into the United States” for a limited time...
If a patent is invalid, then there is no property grant, therefore there is no patent, therefore it is not possible to infringe.
Never leave the vehicle in a place where there might be cameras (servo's etc), and wear a hat/hoodie to keep your face hidden while the driver stops for fuel in those places.
Always leave the vehicle and catch a new ride in places un-surveiled.
Don't stay with the 1 ride for more than a few hours.
IANAL, however if malice can include "a deliberate attempt to harm the professional reputation of a party in an effort to get them dismissed by their employer" then surely this would qualify?
A lawyer retained by a defendant is accused of criminal acts of bribery by the plaintiff with no basis in law (i.e. the bribery laws don't apply at all as the target of the bribery is not covered by the bribery laws - they are not a public official nor were they a member of the legislature at the time of the actions).
I auto-report ALL his comments now (ar;dr) *because* of all his many, many PREVIOUS trollish comments.
This is bad behaviour and in some ways supports antidirts position.
Each and every comment should either be: 1) read; 2) ignored.
And only in the case of 1 should a determination be made whether to 'report' the comment or not.
While most of antidirts comments are trollish personal attacks, a few, a very few, are valid, insightful comments.
A good, insightful post is still a good, insightful post even if made by a crack-pot reactionary loon who I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire on the footpath in front of me while I had a full bladder and was desperately trying to find a toilet to take a piss in.
Just to be devil's advocate here, and not saying this is likely, BUT could it be a case of not corruption, but one of the many methods Intelligence Agencies use to hide intelligence-related expenses for (legitimate) clandestine funding?
For example, maybe these are actually fronts for NSA/CIA operations and ways of funneling payments to agents/spies/operations?
Sure, these people may not be that far removed from the NSA, but it could just be the start of a long chain to hide US Government funding of clandestine operations.
If I want to make a startup and sell it to Google or Microsoft or Apple or whoever, I'll do whatever's necessary (and within the law) to make it an attractive purchase for one of those giants. If it means lock-in, then you bet your ass I'll implement lock-in.
Once that company's sold (if it does) and the non-compete has expired, and I'm rich enough to not care about 'making' any more money, I'll contribute anything I can to the open standards open-source equivalent.
But I also think some of it may be due to the oft-promoted confusion vis'a'vis plagiarism and copyright.
In my university days it was often cited that if you copied more than 10% of a work into an assignment then it was plagiarism.
This then became twisted to mean that any copying of more than 10% was ALSO copyright infringement, and ANY copying less than 10% WASN'T copyright infringement.
The confusion still frequently persists today. Therefore the judge may not even have been aware of why they chose the arbitrary 10%, but it probably 'felt' right to them and their subconscious because that's the benchmark for plagiarism.
The appeals court overturned some of the reasoning used by the district court judge. It made no decision on whether or not the materials (or any specific material) was or was not in breach of copyright. It merely overturned the district court judges ruling and told them to try again. It did not say the district court judge couldn't reach the same conclusion again, just that they had to use different reasoning.
And if the parents can provide evidence that THEY TRIED and were rebuffed by Facebook, then they'd be golden.
They can produce said evidence, yes? You know, maybe even a single email to Facebook support outlining the situation and asking for the removal, with Facebook's reply to go get knotted?
Or perhaps even better, they can produce evidence they instructed their child (the owner of the account) to go and delete the account, but he refused? That would also probably help them out. Because at least they tried.
The judge should only have held that the parents were liable if it was proven criminal behaviour or PROVEN upon balance tortuous behaviour that caused and CONTINUES to cause significant harm.
But that is what's happened isn't it? This wasn't a sentencing hearing or a guilty verdict by the judge. The judge has allowed the case to go forward for a jury to make that determination.
On the post: FBI Holds Secret Meeting To Scare Congress Into Backdooring Phone Encryption
Re: Re: Re: Re: One word: child pornography
It can give them a guide on where to look for other evidence, who they should be interviewing and so on.
On the post: Wisconsin Town Sends In The BearCat Tank To Collect Civil Fine From Seventy-Year-Old
Re:
On the post: Spain Passes Copyright Law; Demands Payment For Snippets And Linking To Infringing Content
Re: Re: Investor state dispute resolution
Hoisted by their own petard.
Kills 2 birds with one stone, shows the (evil) power of ISDS, and might make Spain rethink BOTH the new IP law and accepting any ISDS provisions in treaties.
On the post: Magistrate Judge Not Impressed By Roca Labs' Legal Arguments: Recommends Against An Injunction
Re: Re: They're Advertising for New Counsel
Still not much for a lawyer.
On the post: Stupid WiFi Hotspot Name Gets American Airlines Flight Grounded
Re:
On the post: 12 Nobel Peace Prize Winners Ask Nobel Peace Prize Winning President Obama To Release CIA Torture Report
Re: Re: Re: Release it all
As I understand it, the senate intelligence committee has the legal authority in it's own right to declassify the report. Technically it's only a courtesy, not a requirement, that the White House and CIA are getting a chance to vet and redact the report.
Therefore the committee could formerly, officially and legally release the full unredacted report let alone just the summary.
On the post: Payment Wars: How Merchants And Carriers Are Trying To Block Payment Systems They Can't Track
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The token is not 1-time, (at least according to that article linked by that douche a dozen times http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/10/20/how-apple-designed-apple-pay-to-avoid-the-pitfalls-of- traditional-payment-systems).
Therefor the retailer will get a pattern of spending, because customer 56*39(1 purchased a tooth-brush on Monday at the supermarket. On Tuesday they purchased some condoms at the supermarket. on Wednesday they purchased some flowers at the florist who's owned by the same company that owns the supermarket, later that same day they purchased a super vibrating extreme speed dildo at the sex shop chain also owned by the same parent company. The following Monday they went back to the sex shop seeking a refund of the defective dildo, which required them to provide their name, address and telephone number as well as 'waving' the NFC device over the sensor to authorise the refund to Apple Pay.
Now mega-corp AllKnowingMart knows who customer 56*39(1 is and can link all of their purchases to that person.
The token itself should also be encrypted (using a different key each time) so that the retailer can't build up a database of purchases.
On the post: US Solicitor General, Don Verrilli, Tells Supreme Court That Of Course You Can Infringe On An Invalid Patent
Re: Lawyers
This is what I don't understand.
If a patent is not valid, it is not a patent. It is a document describing something, it is not a patent. Therefore you can't be "doing what the patent says" because there is no patent. You can be doing what the document describes, but that document is not a patent. It might be a FORMER patent.
A patent is (blatantly copied from USPTO)
If a patent is invalid, then there is no property grant, therefore there is no patent, therefore it is not possible to infringe.
On the post: Guidelines On Who Might Be Suspicious: Too Nervous? Too Calm? Blending In? Standing Out? It's All Suspicious
Re:
Never leave the vehicle in a place where there might be cameras (servo's etc), and wear a hat/hoodie to keep your face hidden while the driver stops for fuel in those places.
Always leave the vehicle and catch a new ride in places un-surveiled.
Don't stay with the 1 ride for more than a few hours.
On the post: Roca Labs Story Gets More Bizarre: Senator Threatens Bogus Defamation Lawsuit, While Nevada Quickly Rejects Bogus Bribery Charge
Re: Re: Re: Bribery
A lawyer retained by a defendant is accused of criminal acts of bribery by the plaintiff with no basis in law (i.e. the bribery laws don't apply at all as the target of the bribery is not covered by the bribery laws - they are not a public official nor were they a member of the legislature at the time of the actions).
Sounds like malice to me...
On the post: Complete Failure: Chicago's Speed Camera Traps Fail To Bring In The Revenue Mayor Emanuel Counted Upon
Re: Re: Re:
GPS is merely a location system, all GPS can tell you is your location.
On the post: Copyright Maximalists And Lobbyists Insist 'Criminal Elements' Are A Part Of The Copyright Reform Effort [Updated]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Each and every comment should either be:
1) read;
2) ignored.
And only in the case of 1 should a determination be made whether to 'report' the comment or not.
While most of antidirts comments are trollish personal attacks, a few, a very few, are valid, insightful comments.
A good, insightful post is still a good, insightful post even if made by a crack-pot reactionary loon who I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire on the footpath in front of me while I had a full bladder and was desperately trying to find a toilet to take a piss in.
On the post: High-Level NSA Official Tied To Husband's Private Signals Intelligence Business, Has A Second Business That Owns A Plane
For example, maybe these are actually fronts for NSA/CIA operations and ways of funneling payments to agents/spies/operations?
Sure, these people may not be that far removed from the NSA, but it could just be the start of a long chain to hide US Government funding of clandestine operations.
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Portable Standing Desks
Re: knees!
I'm pretty sure that just standing in one place without moving for 8 hours is just as bad as sitting in one place without moving for 8 hours.
Mix it up, stand for while, sit for a while.
On the post: Innovation Works Better, Faster With Openness, Not Lock-In
If I want to make money I will
Once that company's sold (if it does) and the non-compete has expired, and I'm rich enough to not care about 'making' any more money, I'll contribute anything I can to the open standards open-source equivalent.
On the post: Appeals Court Overturns Important Fair Use Win Concerning University 'E-Reserves' -- But Potentially For Good Reasons
Re: Re:
But I also think some of it may be due to the oft-promoted confusion vis'a'vis plagiarism and copyright.
In my university days it was often cited that if you copied more than 10% of a work into an assignment then it was plagiarism.
This then became twisted to mean that any copying of more than 10% was ALSO copyright infringement, and ANY copying less than 10% WASN'T copyright infringement.
The confusion still frequently persists today. Therefore the judge may not even have been aware of why they chose the arbitrary 10%, but it probably 'felt' right to them and their subconscious because that's the benchmark for plagiarism.
On the post: Appeals Court Overturns Important Fair Use Win Concerning University 'E-Reserves' -- But Potentially For Good Reasons
Re: Re: This is GREAT!
The appeals court overturned some of the reasoning used by the district court judge. It made no decision on whether or not the materials (or any specific material) was or was not in breach of copyright. It merely overturned the district court judges ruling and told them to try again. It did not say the district court judge couldn't reach the same conclusion again, just that they had to use different reasoning.
On the post: Dangerous Rulings: Georgia Court Says Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook
Re: Re: A Point of Dispute
They can produce said evidence, yes? You know, maybe even a single email to Facebook support outlining the situation and asking for the removal, with Facebook's reply to go get knotted?
Or perhaps even better, they can produce evidence they instructed their child (the owner of the account) to go and delete the account, but he refused? That would also probably help them out. Because at least they tried.
On the post: Dangerous Rulings: Georgia Court Says Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook
Re: Re: Re: Defamation
But that is what's happened isn't it? This wasn't a sentencing hearing or a guilty verdict by the judge. The judge has allowed the case to go forward for a jury to make that determination.
On the post: Dangerous Rulings: Georgia Court Says Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook
Re: Re:
err no, that is NOT what they are being (potentially) punished for.
They are being punished for what happened AFTER they had been notified.
AFTER they were notified they took insufficient actions to prevent ongoing harm.
Next >>