SEMW

53 ms·

451.
by SEMW 14y ago
If you don't know whose side to take in a trademark dispute, one heuristic is: default to whichever side is trying to get the trademark invalidated. Because getting a trademark invalidated doesn't stop you using it -- it just stops you from
452.
by SEMW 14y ago
Fair point. For the analogy I was going for a hypothetical rigid broomstick, made of stuff that's as incompressible as physically possible. The speed of sound in that would be c . Yeah, that isn't very realistic, but I don't think that hur
453.
by SEMW 14y ago
> People often cite the speed of light when talking about electronics when actually electrons don't travel at the speed of light (they have mass) Actual electrons move pretty slowly - of the order of millimetres per hour. That speed has
454.
by SEMW 14y ago
A lot of jurisdictions, e.g. England, have a 'loser pays' rule (as the default anyway, it's usually at the discretion of the court), and don't seem to be particularly less fair to malpractice victims etc. than the US. One reason may be bett
455.
by SEMW 14y ago
> many people in this thread want to name and shame the individual prosecutor in this case. That is seriously misdirected effort that is not going to solve the systemic problems. It may even exasperate them, as it falsely implies that
456.
by SEMW 14y ago
> What I was trying to say above is that a prosecutor's goal is to prosecute as many cases as fully as possible. They do not consider whether it is meritorious to pursue a case according to some outside moral standard, that's not their
457.
by SEMW 14y ago
It does in some areas though. E.g. you have provisions like this one from the housing act, talking about when tenancies can be automatically transferred, on the death of one spouse, to the other one: " a person who was living with the tenan
458.
by SEMW 14y ago
That's true in that case, but strictly it isn't quite true that any act that doesn't involve copying isn't restricted by copyright law. E.g. in the EU, doing a public performance of a work is restricted by copyright, as is renting/lending t
459.
by SEMW 14y ago
You'd show it the same way you prove anything in a civil case: with evidence that, on the balance of probabilities, shows that it's the case. That's nothing to do with copyright law specifically.
460.
by SEMW 14y ago
That's ebay's choice, but they're certainly not obliged to do that by copyright -- in the EU, at least. First Sale has been upheld (in the context of software) by the ECJ pretty recently (even for software you've downloaded rather than boug
461.
by SEMW 14y ago
Nah, the case was just about the copyright ownership. The company that bought the copyright (Raben) was an Australian footwear company that sold Doc Martens. Griggs weren't trying to stop them using the logo and there was no passing off, so
462.
by SEMW 14y ago
> Unless the author of a work is an employee or explicitly assigns copyright to someone else, the author retains the copyright. Presumably you're talking from a US perspective. I've no idea about US law, but certainly here in the UK, wh
463.
by SEMW 14y ago
Let's have a bit of common sense here. 'Contracts override rights in law' is as wrong as 'Rights in law override contracts' (note that I'm not saying your comment said or implied that). Clearly, there are some regulations that you can contr
464.
by SEMW 14y ago
The EU is not a national legislature, they do not have unlimited competence to legislate. If they take anti-monopoly action against a company which is outside their powers set out in Article 102 TFEU, the company can get it overturned. If t
465.
by SEMW 14y ago
Atwood is an admitted fan of Microsoft products, so yeah, this is written from that perspective. Blogs aren't encyclopedias - they don't have to be NPOV to be worth reading. If you don't want to read opinion posts written by people who are
466.
by SEMW 14y ago
It isn't, and shouldn't, be a matter of just picking your top four people and saying they should be on the notes forever. It changes with each new note series. Newton was on the D-series £1 note. Michael Faraday was on the E-series £20 note
467.
by SEMW 14y ago
> The court is very specific about what has to be said which is that Apple make it clear that the court ruled that Samsung did not copy the iPad On the contrary. The court was very specific that this case actually has nothing to do with
468.
by SEMW 14y ago
> How will she ever find the means to get her books back? By suing a large corporation half-way round the earth? IANAL. But for anyone in a similar situation, consumer protection law is usually better than you think. Don't assume you
469.
by SEMW 14y ago
Nah, you just sue in Norway. Might be expensive for Amazon to defend, but that's their problem. More specifically: Norway is part of the Brussels regime for determining jurisdiction to sue ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_Regime ).
470.
by SEMW 14y ago
> "In agreement with the court ruling Apple acknowledges Samsung hasn't copied the design of the iPad The court ruled no such thing. "[The case] is not about whether Samsung copied Apple's iPad. Infringement of a registered design does
471.
by SEMW 14y ago
> I can already tell when someone is guilty of plagiarism Plagiarism? The case has nothing to do with plagiarism. It's not about copyright, it's about registered designs. Quoting TFA: "It is not about whether Samsung copied Apple's iPad
472.
by SEMW 14y ago
> I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with these anti-monopoly laws. ...Do you have a reason for thinking that? The connection isn't obvious. If your reason for disagreeing with software patents is an
473.
by SEMW 14y ago
I've switched from iGoogle to opera portal ( http://portal.opera.com/ ), which is a pretty close equivalent (similar 3-column view etc). Only major loss is it has very few gadgets compared to iGoogle, it's mostly just for rss feeds. (And
474.
by SEMW 14y ago
> At hi-res, they'll likely not look as correct as the Mac rendering. The higher res you go, the less differences there'll be between the two rendering methods. Fitting to the pixel-grid doesn't alter very much if the pixel grid is smal
475.
by SEMW 14y ago
25% market share isn't 'the definition' of a monopoly in the UK, as far as I'm aware (IANAL or in any way an expert in this). It's one of the necessary (but not sufficient) conditions for the OFT to refer a merger to the Competition Commiss
476.
by SEMW 14y ago
I'm not very familiar with US law, but a few moments googling suggests that that's nonsense, and the standard the police must reach to conduct a stop and search in the US, for e.g. weapons ("reasonable suspicion", per Terry v Ohio), is esse
477.
by SEMW 14y ago
Think of it like a stop-and-search power. It is too wide, but not choosing to stop and search everyone who they have the power to isn't really like selective enforcement - it's just a power they can choose to use if they feel they need to.
478.
by SEMW 14y ago
Technically, no. "Selective enforcement" is when the authorities selectively choose whether to arrest and prosecute someone for breaking a law. That's not quite the case here, as there is no breach of the law unless & until a notice is
479.
by SEMW 14y ago
The law doesn't work like that. It doesn't matter how important it is - if the police haven't given you a notice to decrypt it, the statute isn't engaged.
480.
by SEMW 14y ago
> Yes, the law doesn’t actually apply to you is you’re the Home Secretary. Well, no. The law doesn't say 'if you have encrypted information you have to decrypt it'. It says 'if you have encrypted information you have to decrypt it if t

More ›