The users simply have to state that their uses of the work meets the definition of fair use according to the copyright office.

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. 106 and 17 U.S.C. 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

                the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
                the nature of the copyrighted work;
                the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
                the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.[4]

The crappy authors get paid less for having their books read than the successful author.

I think Google should not only close Google News in spain, but also delist all Spanish (located in spain) sites. I bet the Spanish government would quickly change their tune.

Looking at the comparison pages the savings is in the terms of double (30) to at the most triple bytes (150) and not anywhere near 50%. Yes the quality is better which alone might be ample reason to switch once it's supported in every major browser and image editing software.

That's for one ip. :)

Rightscorp can't claim the subscriber is actually infringing their customers copyright, as their software tool can simply see if the information is available from the host in question but it cannot tell anything else about it. They have no way to know that anyone other than their self has actually downloaded the information in question. They can only guess and I hate to say it but you can't sue over speculation.

54,000 claimed infringements over 64 days sounds like a lot, but it's basically just under once per second, and claiming each time is another incident of infringement. So basically their software is constantly checking the ip, and this could be argued constitutes theft of service since both Cox and the customer in question pays for the bandwidth.

As for them downloading the information themselves, since the tool and the company that runs it is authorized by the copyright holder to search for and access their copyrighted files one could easily argue that no actual infringement taking place.

I also think Cox should establish a reasonable handling charge for investigating and dealing with these automated complaints, I think 10$ per complaint sounds about right. So 54,000 x $10 = $540,000. Plus attorney fees and costs for this frivolous lawsuit.

They couldn't pay me to use or carry that monstrosity. Makes you wonder just what were they thinking...

It's being kept such a secret because the government doesn't want you to know the police are running these devices for the NSA. I can bet you that they are getting copies of anything these things vacuum up.

That's the whole secret here the government has turned the powers of the NSA on the American people in the name of the war on drugs, and the war on crime by claiming they want to fight terrorism. People will give up freedom for that. They will fight tooth and nail the other two reasons. The NSA is providing information directly to local, state, and federal law enforcements on crimes committed by ordinary Americans.

Installed != using

I have chrome and IE installed, but I prefer to use Firefox.

Because the providers are selling me bandwidth. Once they do so it's not their bandwidth any longer, it's mine and so they can't charge netflix for sending me traffic, for fastlanes or anything else It's my bandwidth not theirs..

What the ISP's want to do is charge both sides for the same bandwidth. They also want to discourage cord cutting by making it more expensive.

It comes down to one simple premise; If the ISP's do not have big enough pipes to support their customer base and contractually obligated bandwidth they need to invest in expanding their infrastructure instead of recording it as profits or bonuses for already overpaid executives. It's that simple.

I've seen it but it also requires a prosecutor to bring the suit.

The citizens need a direct cause of action and it needs to be made clear that no privileges or immunities can apply in cases when a protected right was infringed.

We need to make infringement of a constitutionally protected right both by the government and its agents personally liable in a civil suit. I would say a minimum of $100,000. Then these rights violations will come to a rapid stop.

The Opryland Hotel blocks customers wifi at conventions hosted in the hotel since they sell their own service. Here's their statement from Jeff Flaherty, a Marriott spokesman...

"Marriott has a $trong intere$t in en$uring that when our gue$t$ use our Wi-Fi $ervice, they will be protected from rogue wirele$$ hot$pot$ that can cau$e degraded $ervice, insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft."

Dollar signs added for emphasis. That hotel sells dedicated wireless services and custom networks for convention purposes at prices ranging from $250 to $1,000 per access point.

But remember it's all about protecting you! Any time someone says they are doing something for your protection remember it's most likely to further their own interests and not yours.

As I stated when I watched the first couple of people playing the game on twitch.tv the reviewers should call a turd a turd. Bad AI. Many NPCs were simply standing in the open firing 1 shot a second while allowing the players to shoot them with 10 in the same time frame. The entire goal of Destiny is to extract $60 from your pocket with very little care given to ensuring that you are satisfied in the end. I think that most serious gamers will walk away from Destiny in the first week, two at the outside; and be left feeling wanting.

Port Sentry is your friend :)

A. The Sentry tools provide host-level security services for the UNIX platform. PortSentry, Logcheck/LogSentry, and HostSentry protect against portscans, automate log file auditing, and detect suspicious login activity on a continuous basis.

It can also automatically respond to scans by blocking the originating hosts.

I have been using it continuously since the 1990's

http://sentrytools.sourceforge...