Annoyingly all the partner countries see this as a bad thing and scramble to crush their own economies into dust to help exporters (fucking New Zealand! The $0.85 exchange rate is the only reason petrol is only $2.17 a litre!)
So what you're saying is it all points back to the United States (Gamestop Inc)?
Surprise surprise.
Valve is incorporated in the United States, and are not bound to those laws, hence you can do none of those things.
Substitute "Prenda Law" for "Recording Industry Association of America".... and the story remains just as accurate. Yet which is facing sanctions?
Could be worse... at least Facebook purges EXIF data!
If you're paying 5%, you're being ripped off.
Perhaps hackers won't be able to direct purchasers to themselves, but this is an absolute massive opening (that's what she said) to allow hackers to ruin someone's life. Imagine a messy divorce, and one of the parties is a vengeful douche. Cue the other party in the divorce suddenly being shipped everything under the sun... most likely things that will get them in trouble, fired, or otherwise ostracized from the community.
Not likely. AmEx is ridiculously reputation sensitive, and wouldn't take on any product that could cause embarrassment. Ever noticed how CCBill doesn't accept AmEx?
You can claim that something's infringing for a start - the statement that the information in the notice is accurate is not under penalty of perjury. The statement in the counter-notice IS.
Actually, the GPL does not bind the copyright owner - even the FSF makes this clear. It can only bind people who require a license from the copyright owner in order to do something with a work. Oracle is well within their rights to dual license, just as you are with anything you independently create.
Then hold your government accountable for it, rather than just ignoring the laws you don't like. Your argument is an excuse, not a justification. And it's not even a good one.
€10 EUR is pretty close to $25 NZD. And they have to pay for all three, and the tribunal doesn't have to award them the costs of those back. And, they can only send one a month per person.
An American high school education or a foreign one?
For the billionth fucking time, it wasn't tax payers money.
It wouldn't work. You'd be contributing $40,000 a month to cost them $4,000 at most.
No, because the tribunal will see that as willful infringement and will not be inclined to hand out such tiny payments. In fact, you'd probably end up being hit with something closer to the statutory $15,000 maximum.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.
