"preponderance of the evidence," something that sounds like a lot but in reality is far lower than establishing guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." If the latter edges towards a theoretical 75% assurance of guilt, the percentage for asset forfeiture approaches a coin flip: 51%.
IANAL, but I'd suggest the 75% assurance level you refer to would be more likely covered by the Clear and Convincing evidence standard, with beyond a reasonable doubt at more like the 90% (personally I'd have to be 95% convinced) level.
Rather than directly contacting and harassing her, while not file an Notice of Opposition with the USPTO at http://estta.uspto.gov/filing-type.jsp (select "Notice of Opposition" from the drop down near the bottom of the page under the "File a new proceeding" heading).
Not at all, Trademarks, like patents, are country specific. The US Kmart and Target do not have trademarks on those terms in Australia and have no rights over them. The Wesfarmers (NOT West Farmers) group owns the trademarks on those terms in Australia, and vice-versa, Wesfarmers has no ownership and no rights over those marks in the US.
Time to dig out my old palmpilot that doesn't have any wireless connectivity (except an infra-red port, but at least that's line of site and I can cover it), and install a password manager on there and use it only for retrieving my passwords, no wireless connections, never plug it in to another device, just use the monochrome LED screen for input/output.
Or maybe get out an old smartphone and physically disconnect the antennas.
The position of cab services as operating potentially lethal equipment
You mean like everyone who drives a car? Are taxi's more lethal than other motor vehicles? Why is it the for 99+% of the population a special document known as a "Drivers License" is sufficient to handle said lethal equipment, but a Taxi driver requires some other form of documentation?
and frequently dealing with isolated and vulnerable customers
Like door-to-door salesmen? Pizza delivery drivers? Pool cleaners? Gardeners? Do they all need some sort of special licensing because they frequently deal with isolated and vulnerable customers?
From the article, these do NOT sound like "legally-mandated backup/archive of an email corpus in order to comply with future discovery requests,".
As the article says, these are from DR tapes, which likely means they are full server backup tapes.
DR backups are not designed to go "lets recover email x from the email database stored on server Z".
DR backups are designed for restoring entire servers to an operational state after some sort of disaster - ranging from someone taking a hammer to a server to a nuke destroying the data center.
At best they could restore the entire email database, then search through the restored database for emails (either by querying it directly or importing it back into an email server to do 'normal' email searches).
Not to mention they may have to actually restore multiple instances of the database, because if they are DR backups they are probably monthly full backups, so to retrieve emails that have been deleted at various times, they may have to restore several backup versions to pull out emails that may have been deleted prior to subsequent backups.
All in all, it sounds like they have a bodgy system designed to NOT be able to easily audit/version emails, with no email-specific archiving mechanism (hey, they even said the official way to 'archive' business-relevant emails is to print them out and literally file them on a paper file). Therefore it is a SIDE-EFFECT of DR backups that they are able to retrieve old emails.
Hell, if I was running the backup system and the intent (even if unofficially) was to not keep a history of business decisions, I'd only keep 2 'monthly' backups, overwriting the 3-month old backup with the current month (in addition to the daily incremental backups which would only be kept until the next full backup is verified successful). That way you COULDN'T go back more than 3 months, which is more than sufficient for DR.
Of course, that's of you are using a grandfather/father/son backup schedule, I always preferred "incremental forever" systems myself.
Not free, but you can often get lawyers to send a letter on your behalf for relatively small one-off fees. Depending on the scope of work required to write such a letter, it could cost as little as $50.
Law offices often have form letters already drafted for common matters where they just have insert a few lines of relevant text and it's done.
The extra header(s) are inserted into the packet after it's left your phone and and reached the telco. Therefore depending on where the actual metering of your data usage is done, it may not be included, as it may be inserted after it's already metered your packet.
Of course, it may also be inserted before the metering, so it might be included...
Why do I need a smart TV when I've got a media player that can play shows from my NAS? And a computer for when I want to access other online content? If I really want to view whats on my computer on the TV, I can hook up the computer to the TV.
I don't want a TV that's a computer, I want a TV to display content, and that content is either from the internal FTA tuner or from a video input.
I also misread (as I didn't follow the link) and read it more as a retainer, as in 100k for 50 hours work (total), not as a full time job with a yearly salary of 100k and expecting 50hours per week....
Damn, that's pretty shitty pay for a lawyer with 5+ years experience, even if you include the possible 30k bonus.
Not really being a regular Tor user and only knowing at a high level how Tor works, therefore this might be a stupid question, but shouldn't Tor use a random exit node for each request (i.e. each time you click on a link, even if it's a link to another page on the same site, it randomly chooses a different exit node for that request)?
Or can you set up specific routing with Tor? e.g. facebook.com -> exit node X, gayporn.com -> exit node Y, default -> exit node Z?
And to further obfuscate matters, at least for HTTP/S type traffic (non-latency sensitive traffic) shouldn't the exit node add a random delay (say between 20ms and 250ms for arguments sake) to the outgoing request to make it harder to use correlation (user clicked on link at 10:22:32,300 and at 10:22:32,305 exit node sent a request to howtobuildabomb.edu) to 'mush up' everyones requests?