formeruser
Gawker treated David Geithner like crap.
formeruser

Right there with you. We had some interesting Newberry Award books we read for the local English festival. But the books the English Lit teachers assigned in high school were horrible.

Well, the Girl Scouts who use the room before my son's Cub Scout den meets have been making friendship bracelets and selling cookies. I don't know how helpful the bracelets would be, but I suppose a large enough supply of Thin Mints could be used for survival. They could be sold for cash that can be used for more

That makes some sense. My kids got me a Whirley Pop popper for Christmas, and oil gets on the lid and has to be wiped off every time. But I'm not sure it's enough of a "hassle" to warrant lining a lid with foil.

Beat me to it, Jake. I've got a guest VLAN I can activate when company comes and brings devices. But it's got AP isolation activated to keep those devices from seeing other devices on the network.

I cannot speak to the legality of the behavior here. But the state's driver guide tells you not to do it. So there's a good chance that it's illegal here, too.

The most annoying thing I run into are people who don't know how to take advantage of a courteous driver.

A custom ROM isn't necessarily the solution. GPS on my Aria with a stock ROM was great. But it stank with CM7.1. By that, I mean that I'd get to the destination before GPS locked on.

"The recent 'Kelo' decision handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court has modified eminent domain to allow governments to take land away from private individuals and give it to others if the resulting development will result in more tax revenue."

If you look at the copyright rules, you'll see that monetary gain is not necessary for infringement to occur. You can, in fact, spend or lose money, and it's still infringement.

"I love people here who are either in denial or minimizing the act of piracy."

"Ok, technically this isn't the tort of theft or conversion. I still think that, morality aside, the basic meaning of the word "steal" can still apply, since you may be causing economic loss to the copyright holder. What they seem to be up in arms about is not the file itself but the fact that you didn't buy it from

"But is like saying that the people you distributed would have definitely see a rerun with the commercial breaks so they would count it as a commercial loss, not like they would have recorded it on a dvr and just skip the advertising, I understand hbo because you`re paying for the channel specifically so they see the

"But if someone's primary means of earning income (for argument's sake) comes from selling that intellectual property, and you deprive them of income, isn't that,in effect, stealing that income from them? "

"Identity theft, for example, doesn't preclude the person whose identity it is from using that identity (to sign up for credit cards, etc.)"

The infringement with bittorent comes from the distributing, not necessarily the downloading.

The use of the term "cromulent" embiggens us all.

Theft involves removing the ability of the "owner" to access or use property. Copyright infringement involves ignoring someone else's rights, but you're not affecting their access to their property.

Actually, it's not simply "copying," either. It's copyright infringement. Copying can, in fact, be "fair use" and non-infringing.

response to dupe comment removed.

Point taken.