I was thinking this was a possibility the other day as well.
After running my own company I find it harder and harder to believe that actions aren't directed and guided with an underlying reason.
So, if he created a new life form would it be considered a derivative work of the quote?
Sometimes life is stranger than fiction.
theft is two parts legally. Taking and keeping you from it.
UK law (Theft Act of 1968): "A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it."
US Law, Federally it's just Larcency: "larceny is the trespassory taking (caption) and carrying away (asportation, removal) of the tangible personal property of another with the intent to deprive him or her of its possession permanently" (Source: Wikipedia)
While at the state levels in pretty much every state it's defined the same way with differences being what constitutes grand theft and petty theft.
Since me making a copy of something doesn't deprive them of possession, it's pretty difficult for me to "Steal" music.
I could of course go in and lobotomize the musicians so they can no longer play the music, destroy all other copies of the music and make a copy of myself, and that would very well fit the definition, and would be a good thing to do if it's Justin Beiber, no jury in the world would convict you.
I can't find where they have a trademark registered with the federal government.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4010:jgsb4d.1.1
I would find it funny if "The Real Estate Zebra" registred the trademark now and then told them they can shove off, if that would be legal.
http://www.thelonesgroup.com/press.asp
has the full text of the lawsuit at...
http://www.thelonesgroup.com/files/Lones_v_Rothamel.pdf
This is a simple case of "they rank higher in Google than us, baaaaaaaaaaaah".
Happy independence day Texas!
...from them thar pinko commie journalists.
Shoplifting isn't the same as piracy.
The fact you can't wrap your head around the common idea that copying isn't theft leads me to believe you are incapable of doing anything other than parroting slogans.
"You wouldn't steal a car?"
Hell no, but if I could make an exact copy of it without costing me a dime more than the electricity cost of running the copy machine, I sure would.
Sharing is human nature.
After making these comments he is going to be approached by every "domestic spy agency" (FBI, CIA, DEA, ICE) telling him how encryption will hurt their ability to get their job done.
If he actually proposes the law and it builds traction he will probably be shot from a book depository.
The police here will turn on their lights just to make it to Sonic before happy hour is over and drinks go back to half price.
I've thought about parking with a camara at 4pm and video taping it. Quite literally I've seen them burn through 3 redlights and just turn off their lights and turn on their left blinker and pull into sonic.
You can tell from the post it's not his real view but is a "if you use this style of logic and level of evidence to justify this _____. How do you deny it when applied in this manner?"
Cognitive Dissonance of the Copyright Maximalists. It's more likely than you think.
In Lenz vs Universal the judge declared that fair use must be considered before fileing a DMCA takedown notice.
Wrong, your video game experience doesn't apply here. Having had to actually shoot people (US Army) and avoid being shot myself this is how you would do it...
Zig zag = common point in the gunmans field of vision. He just has to hold his gun up and fire at you when you cross it again.
Across his field of vision and to the nearest object of cover if you must run.
But in this situation if you had ran you just signed the death certificates for 3 other people.
There is one problem with their issue.
Prior use.
http://www.marklaw.com/trademark-glossary/M-Q.htm
"Once a company has nationwide priority via a federal registration, they can use the mark without restriction anywhere in which any prior user is not already using the mark. However, the registered owner cannot sue to prevent prior users of the mark from expanding into new regions, until the registered owner of the mark can show actual use or in some cases an imminent intention of using the mark in that region. For example, if BeeBop establishes rights to a mark in territory XYZ, and then DooDah registers the mark federally, DooDah can claim priority over all regions in the country except XYZ. While BeeBop can still expand into regions in which DooDah is not using the mark, BeeBop can be forced to discontinue use in the new region the moment DooDah can demonstrate a presence of the mark in that region or an intent to imminently enter that region. Until DooDah can demonstrate such a presence or imminent intention, the federal registration cannot be used to enjoin BeeBop from using the mark in that territory."
IA stands for Information Assurance.
Every company in the Army atleast is supposed to have an Information Assurance Security Officer.
Way it works is each computer on a DoD network has someone that is responsible for it. When I was IASO I was responsible for about 32 computers throughout the battalion.
Basically we are computer janitors, we insure that the latest windows updates are ran and we're the ones that can reset passwords.
Within the control panel where we select "Yes we did this" you can receive notices of what computers attempted to access whatever blocked entity, what user was logged in, etc.
Most IASO's just click the box to make it go away unless it's repeated bullshit (Really, he was up here at 9pm attempting to look at porn for how long?) in which case we usually just talk to the 1st Sergeant and Company Commander and let them take care of it.
I read your posts. They are still shit.
Stop posting.
No one is saying it justifies piracy, how come you and every other Anonymous Coward on here seems to think this blog is dedicated to justifying piracy? It's been repeated tirelessly "Piracy is bad, mmkay".
I'm personally just wanting all the megalawsuits to end. $150,000 per infringement is insane. What is interesting about this is that it is practically stating what the actual "damages" are right here ($150 per infringement), yet if this number should ever be tossed around with the mafIAA on the other side of the court you would have it laughed at.
Fact: Frogger doesn't make you play in the street, violent video games doesn't make you more violent, and games like Guitar hero will never make you a musician.
Re: Doesn't your very article explain WHY Apple should be suing??
I have a "Computer Shop" I own.
Should I be worried some old bearded guy from the 80's is going to come sue me for my business?
"App Store" is descriptive. "Computer Shop" is descriptive. "Muffler repair" is descriptive.