The question is not whether you are guilty or innocent of something (anything), the question is that when the Eye of Sauron gazes in your direction, whether you have enough money to mount a defence.
The question is not whether you are guilty or innocent of something (anything), the question is that when the Eye of Sauron gazes in your direction, whether you have enough money to mount a defence.
Sorry off topic but I had to share. I have just got my first IP threat.
My wife has a hobby making, among other things, baby's little booties which she sells locally.
Yesterday I got a phone call from some irate woman who was complaining that we were stealing her design. Specifically she sells design patterns and was accusing us of using one of her design patterns for 'commercial purposes' and to cease immediatly or she would sue us.
I pointed out two things.
1. The volume of sales achieved would probably not pay for an initial appointment with a lawyer, let alone cover the cost of a lawsuit.
2. If she did decide to sue us, we would produce photographs showing my wife as a little baby wearing identical booties made by her Grandmother, which would mean our design pre-dates her design by at least 40 years.
We ended the conversation with her still proclaiming that because her design was 'published', she owns the 'IP rights'. She just could not get that someone may have come up with same design independantly, let alone 40 years ago.
The ban is more due to prevent the use of smartphones to be the trigger for the explosive.
I have done a thought experiment to see how many different methods a smartphone could be configured as a trigger, and the list is long. For example
1. Using GPS, phone triggers when it gets to a specific location
2. Using the phone, it triggers when it recieves a call
3. Using internal giros/electronic compass phone triggers when phone is moved.
List goes on and on. Using Android, you could even build an app to choose a trigger or combination of triggers
You mean the TSA are not Gods who have been given absolute power over us mortals? But I thought they were all seeing and all knowing deities who punished any questioning of their devine status?
I know it's hard to imagine, but Anonymous Coward, for a moment, imagine having a Pizza delivered and as a "most valuable customer" you get a coupon for either a Theatre ticket deal or a "Still In The Theater" rental deal. Just choose which is the most convenient to you. With this new simultaneous release, this is very much possible!
You see, it is all about giving the customer choice.
As to the first half of your comment, did not understand what you were talking about. Can you rewrite into some semblance of loigic, or even English.
I know it's hard to imagine, but Anonymous Coward, for a moment, imagine having a Pizza delivered and as a "most valuable customer" you get a coupon for either a Theatre ticket deal or a "Still In The Theater" rental deal. Just choose which is the most convenient to you. With this new simultaneous release, this is very much possible!
You see, it is all about giving the customer choice.
As to the first half of your comment, did not understand what you were talking about. Can you rewrite into some semblance of loigic, or even English.
I had to register a death and read that the Government claims copyright on the Death Certificate.
Of course in order to tell anyone (Bank etc), they need sight of the Death Certificate, and the law requires they can prove they have seen the death certificate by.......taking a copy!
Wonder if all these Banks realise that by complying with the law they are breaking the law?
Phone shields are just about the worst way to protect yourself (even if there is a problem in the first place!). Using a phone shield reduces the recieved signal, which causes the phone to transmit at higher powers - a most idiotic way to try to reduce the amount of radiation. In fact I would go as far as calling these shields a scam.
I think that if a study of nearly 1/2 million users over a 20 year period was not able to find a correlation, the actual risk is so miniscule that it is just not worth worrying about.
Are they saying that another 20 year study is really required.....or are they touting for a 20 year meal ticket?
When asked whether or not Bebo would have the right to demand some of Bragg's money if the company had flopped"
Sorry but having read your article several times i still cannot understand your logic. The only thing I understood was that there was no response from Bragg 'cos that would have been mine too.
Your logic seems to be, if i give someone something for free and they make money on it, I cannot then ask for a cut because I did not also offer to bail them out with my own money if they did not make money on my free offering. Is that right? If so I still cannot understand the logic.
"Then there was the major publication that claimed that Techdirt was upset about Allen copying our blog post and that we had "suddenly discovered the power of copyright."
I saw this posting and the 'misunderstanding' of your blog (in inverted commas as anyone who actually read your blog could not actually have misunderstood your position but there you go). I tried to point out the error of their ways, but there was no way to comment on the article. Wonder if this was deliberate? We shall never know,
Simple economics. There are whole businesses out there who's business is built around selling overpriced products to suckers. It works because for evey ten people who see it for the scam that it is, there will be one person who will not - and the profit from that one person will be more that the profit made by the 9 who bought a reasonably priced item from somewhere else.
Similar princlple behind "50% off" sale merchants. Buy in a product and mark it up 400%. After a couple of months, mark it down as 50% off. Everyone likes a bargin right?
Thing is, all the suckers that bought it at full price gives the company a 300% margin, and all the suckers who bought it at a "50% off sale" will still be buying it at a 100% margin. There are companies who us this as their business model (most high street retailers for a start).
"Yes, but I don't believe that any lawyer would be stupid enough to try and get a website to C&D the simple use of the word"
I think that over the years that Monster Lawyers have provided ample proof they are that stupid.....but then again it is not that stupid.
The recipient of a C&D letter has two options
1. Fold and slink away. Result - Lawyers claim victory and get paid large fees
2. Stand up to them. Result - Lawyer gets paid large fees.
Probability that lawyer gets slammed with large fine for sending stupid C&D letter? - zero.
So it may look stupid to anyone with two brain cells, but the Lawyer is the one building up his pension pot!
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by peter.
America judicial system
The question is not whether you are guilty or innocent of something (anything), the question is that when the Eye of Sauron gazes in your direction, whether you have enough money to mount a defence.
America judicial system
The question is not whether you are guilty or innocent of something (anything), the question is that when the Eye of Sauron gazes in your direction, whether you have enough money to mount a defence.
Re: Reverse Streisand Effect
Agree. The publicity generated is worth many times more than any amount of strident denials.
If one of them is a minor..?.......good. Teach them and their parents about responsible use of technology. Its child abuse? Idiot.
My first IP takedown
Sorry off topic but I had to share. I have just got my first IP threat.
My wife has a hobby making, among other things, baby's little booties which she sells locally.
Yesterday I got a phone call from some irate woman who was complaining that we were stealing her design. Specifically she sells design patterns and was accusing us of using one of her design patterns for 'commercial purposes' and to cease immediatly or she would sue us.
I pointed out two things.
1. The volume of sales achieved would probably not pay for an initial appointment with a lawyer, let alone cover the cost of a lawsuit.
2. If she did decide to sue us, we would produce photographs showing my wife as a little baby wearing identical booties made by her Grandmother, which would mean our design pre-dates her design by at least 40 years.
We ended the conversation with her still proclaiming that because her design was 'published', she owns the 'IP rights'. She just could not get that someone may have come up with same design independantly, let alone 40 years ago.
Ho Hum.
Copyright on drinks
There can only be a finite combination of different ingredients.
If I wrote a programme that printed every possible combination, can I claim copyright for any new drink?
Re:
So you read the bit at the beginning that raised a verbal contract right?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or just laying off the red Bull and Coffee mixers.
To be fair
The ban is more due to prevent the use of smartphones to be the trigger for the explosive.
I have done a thought experiment to see how many different methods a smartphone could be configured as a trigger, and the list is long. For example
1. Using GPS, phone triggers when it gets to a specific location
2. Using the phone, it triggers when it recieves a call
3. Using internal giros/electronic compass phone triggers when phone is moved.
List goes on and on. Using Android, you could even build an app to choose a trigger or combination of triggers
Who knew?
You mean the TSA are not Gods who have been given absolute power over us mortals? But I thought they were all seeing and all knowing deities who punished any questioning of their devine status?
Well obviously they did.
Re: Why are you complaining?
I know it's hard to imagine, but Anonymous Coward, for a moment, imagine having a Pizza delivered and as a "most valuable customer" you get a coupon for either a Theatre ticket deal or a "Still In The Theater" rental deal. Just choose which is the most convenient to you. With this new simultaneous release, this is very much possible!
You see, it is all about giving the customer choice.
As to the first half of your comment, did not understand what you were talking about. Can you rewrite into some semblance of loigic, or even English.
Re: Why are you complaining?
I know it's hard to imagine, but Anonymous Coward, for a moment, imagine having a Pizza delivered and as a "most valuable customer" you get a coupon for either a Theatre ticket deal or a "Still In The Theater" rental deal. Just choose which is the most convenient to you. With this new simultaneous release, this is very much possible!
You see, it is all about giving the customer choice.
As to the first half of your comment, did not understand what you were talking about. Can you rewrite into some semblance of loigic, or even English.
just a bit of joined up government please
I had to register a death and read that the Government claims copyright on the Death Certificate.
Of course in order to tell anyone (Bank etc), they need sight of the Death Certificate, and the law requires they can prove they have seen the death certificate by.......taking a copy!
Wonder if all these Banks realise that by complying with the law they are breaking the law?
Re:
Phone shields are just about the worst way to protect yourself (even if there is a problem in the first place!). Using a phone shield reduces the recieved signal, which causes the phone to transmit at higher powers - a most idiotic way to try to reduce the amount of radiation. In fact I would go as far as calling these shields a scam.
Wait another 20 years?
There is already a 20 year study carried out in Denmark
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=06/12/07/223218
I think that if a study of nearly 1/2 million users over a 20 year period was not able to find a correlation, the actual risk is so miniscule that it is just not worth worrying about.
Are they saying that another 20 year study is really required.....or are they touting for a 20 year meal ticket?
health and safety
*Counterfeiting* can certainly be a threat to consumer health and safety.
Eh?
I know "counterfiting is terrorism" is a stretch and a half, but Health and Safety? Where is the evidence for that statement.
health and safety
*Counterfeiting* can certainly be a threat to consumer health and safety.
Eh?
I know "counterfiting is terrorism" is a stretch and a half, but Health and Safety? Where is the evidence for that statement.
Eh?
When asked whether or not Bebo would have the right to demand some of Bragg's money if the company had flopped"
Sorry but having read your article several times i still cannot understand your logic. The only thing I understood was that there was no response from Bragg 'cos that would have been mine too.
Your logic seems to be, if i give someone something for free and they make money on it, I cannot then ask for a cut because I did not also offer to bail them out with my own money if they did not make money on my free offering. Is that right? If so I still cannot understand the logic.
Please explain further
Corrections?
"Then there was the major publication that claimed that Techdirt was upset about Allen copying our blog post and that we had "suddenly discovered the power of copyright."
I saw this posting and the 'misunderstanding' of your blog (in inverted commas as anyone who actually read your blog could not actually have misunderstood your position but there you go). I tried to point out the error of their ways, but there was no way to comment on the article. Wonder if this was deliberate? We shall never know,
re: Monster's Future
"How can they hope to succeed?"
Simple economics. There are whole businesses out there who's business is built around selling overpriced products to suckers. It works because for evey ten people who see it for the scam that it is, there will be one person who will not - and the profit from that one person will be more that the profit made by the 9 who bought a reasonably priced item from somewhere else.
Similar princlple behind "50% off" sale merchants. Buy in a product and mark it up 400%. After a couple of months, mark it down as 50% off. Everyone likes a bargin right?
Thing is, all the suckers that bought it at full price gives the company a 300% margin, and all the suckers who bought it at a "50% off sale" will still be buying it at a 100% margin. There are companies who us this as their business model (most high street retailers for a start).
Re: Re:
"'Monster' is not a mark, it is a word"
"Yes, but I don't believe that any lawyer would be stupid enough to try and get a website to C&D the simple use of the word"
I think that over the years that Monster Lawyers have provided ample proof they are that stupid.....but then again it is not that stupid.
The recipient of a C&D letter has two options
1. Fold and slink away. Result - Lawyers claim victory and get paid large fees
2. Stand up to them. Result - Lawyer gets paid large fees.
Probability that lawyer gets slammed with large fine for sending stupid C&D letter? - zero.
So it may look stupid to anyone with two brain cells, but the Lawyer is the one building up his pension pot!