I've been having to fight off hundreds of malware attacks as a result of the company owning the IP range 220.127.116.11/16. Can I get a court to let me take over that range of IP numbers so as to put a stop to the malware?
What this story seems to tell me is that Tomas Macaulay was correct in the prediction he made in 1841 The whole speech is worth reading, but the very last paragragh perfectly describes what this study has discovered.
On which side indeed should the public sympathy be when the question is whether some book as popular as Robinson Crusoe, or the Pilgrim's Progress, shall be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great-grandson of a bookseller who, a hundred years before, drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the author when in great distress?
here's hoping the court expands that removal process to cover ALL watchlists. Otherwise someone will be on the no-fly list because they're on another terrorist watch list. They can get removed from the no-fly list any time, but since they can't get off that other watchlist, they get put right back on the no-fly list.
The Authors name being on the cover or somewhere on/in the work should be good enough for that.
An elderly author writes a novel. Knowing he is not likely to live long enough to benefit from the term of copyright, he sells the rights to Company A. At some time after the death of the author, Company A goes bankrupt. Company B picks up the rights as part of the bankruptcy auction.
At some point after all this, you decide to make a movie of the book. Knowing only the name of the author, how would you figure out who to license the rights from?
A big part of the reason for the registration process is so that it becomes very easy to track down copyright holders. the lack of a registration process is what has created the whole 'orphan works' problem.
What about companies like Cisco? The NSA intercepted routers after they left the factory and added spyware to them without the company being aware that it had happened. Given that sort of activity, no equipment manufactured in the USA can be considered safe. In fact, even equipment that was merely shipped through the United States should be considered suspect until proven otherwise.
That would depend on how that line is handled in the story. Is it something said by the protagonist? Is it said by another character? If so, does the protagonist approve or disapprove of the remark?
As it happens, I have the book, so I looked it up. The entire issue is dealt with in 145 words. That's about half a page in a 250 page book. It's not erotic, or even suggestive. Its dealt with as "This is a fact, live with it" and then the story line moves on. The protagonist is a starting high school student. By that point in their lives, pretty much every teenager has experimented with masturbation, and any parent that thinks they are keeping their kids from learning about it is living in a dream world. A dream world that has a very good chance of turning into a nightmare for the kids.
Here's a couple of other bits of information on this story. - The police raided his home, and seized computer equipment, but apparently did not arrest him at that time. - He was told to 'voluntarily' show up at the police station or else the police would very publicly humiliate him by arresting him in the middle of his exams. - When he did show up at the police station, his lawyer was not permitted to see his client for six hours.
Thi s case has enough irregularities that I would not trust anything the police say unless there is some supporting evidence. It sure looks to me like the authorities are getting desperate to convict a 'dangerous hacker' to distract attention from the fact that there was a major security flaw in the government's computer systems.