They don't have to take it to court. They'll just ruin your credit score by reporting it and sell the debt to a collector who will hound you day and night. If you want a judge to ever see it you're the one ponying up the cash to take it there.
Agreed, the professor overreacted at the end. It's obvious he reacted out of frustration.
When a student cheats one of two things should happen. If the school has an honor code, then there needs to be an ethical hearing by the school to determine the punishment. I think it would be a good idea if the student were also automatically be dis-enrolled from that course. The professor should have the option to fail that student immediately for the entire course or, at minimum, the professor should be authorized (maybe required?) to give that student a zero for the assignment with no opportunity to make it up.
I wouldn't find it too far out to allow the professor to lower a grade for disrespect either but that's a weaker argument. Part of being a professional is figuring out how to play well with others, even difficult teachers.
This just in. My turkey sandwiches are absolute the best in the world! No one beats my turkey sandwich.
How do I know? i made 3 and my family ate them all! Every single one!
So, I see two scenarios are possible:
A. It appears this is a chronic problem across the industry and none of the engineers, regulators, or lawyers has caught it until slashdot anonymous coward saved the world with his post.
B. This particular AC is a egotistical blowhard who wants to sound authoritative.
Let me think for a moment... which is the more likely scenario?
Well... of course you can sell it if you want. It would not be against the law to do so. You did buy the hardware. It will, however, stop working for the new owner at some point in the future.
Let's be clear. "You're not allowed" does not mean men from black helicopters coming through your skylight denying you your resale rights.
Part of the condition was her carrying the badge around anyway (no battery) and never talking about or objecting to the program.
The letter from the district, posted on Infowars no less, showed no such condition for stopping the disenrollment. She merely had to wear the [chipless] id.
The family's story has since changed, upon further questioning by real journalists, to that they believe carrying the [chipless] id would be the same as condoning the program.
Bullshit. That is what the father may have claimed initially. His story, after subsequent interviews by actual journalists who cared to ask the right questions, changed to [paraphrased] "carrying the non-chipped ID would be equivalent to our endorsement of the RFID program." He lied to the initial reporter to get media traction and is backtracking.
The letter from the district, posted on Infowars, whack-a-doodle site itself, made it quite clear how she could stop disenrollment and outlined the specific steps required. Stop objecting and publicly support the program were nowhere to be found in those conditions.