Posts

Showing posts from August, 2004

Re: I am an idiot(humor?)

Message ID: 171259 Posted By: mitmosnar Posted On: 2004-08-23 18:20:00 Subject: Re: I am an idiot(humor?) Recs: 0 Then you will no doubt not be amused by this pre-coital photo of biff and ledite toiling away in SCO's secret Troll headquarters: http://www.freewebs.com/joeyfiasco/biff%5Fledite.jpg ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "mitmosnar" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

Re: I am an idiot(humor?)

Message ID: 171199 Posted By: spamsux99 Posted On: 2004-08-23 17:26:00 Subject: Re: I am an idiot(humor?) Recs: 0 > I'm rather baffled by this badpenguins > comment. I'm guessing that it's humor, or > perhaps FUD masquerading as humor. Or perhaps your sense of humor is lacking in, say, sophistication. Just a guess. Or yeah, it could be fud. Wink wink. > I found it about as funny as the 'recent > picture of Darl' by something_guru 2 weeks > back. (If you clicked it, you know what I > mean.) I have to admit, pictures of Darl's head are as offensive as grown men doing the nasty. You got me there. ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "spamsux99" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ----------------------------------------

Re: I am an idiot(humor?)

Message ID: 171181 Posted By: edlin_user Posted On: 2004-08-23 17:07:00 Subject: Re: I am an idiot(humor?) Recs: 1 >>> Don't worry Al, others have also discovered the truth about PJ. Put on your tinfoil hats and read about it here :) badpenguins.com/article.php?story=20040525235702194 >>> I'm rather baffled by this badpenguins comment. I'm guessing that it's humor, or perhaps FUD masquerading as humor. I found it about as funny as the 'recent picture of Darl' by something_guru 2 weeks back. (If you clicked it, you know what I mean.) ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "edlin_user" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

Re: I am an idiot

Message ID: 171166 Posted By: spamsux99 Posted On: 2004-08-23 16:35:00 Subject: Re: I am an idiot Recs: 0 Don't worry Al, others have also discovered the truth about PJ. Put on your tinfoil hats and read about it here :) badpenguins.com/article.php?story=20040525235702194 ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "spamsux99" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

I am an idiot

Message ID: 171107 Posted By: al_petrofsky Posted On: 2004-08-23 15:59:00 Subject: I am an idiot Recs: 37 (First, I should clarify (because the link that I gave apparently did not work for everyone) that I was talking not about the story on that page, but about the comments by PJ and me regarding whether it was possible for SCO to be "found guilty" of infringement in this case.) Upon further study, I find that I am a vegetable. It appears that the federal courts do indeed occasionally speak of one found liable for a tort (such as copyright infringement) to be "found guilty" of the tort. See laws.lp.findlaw.com/7th/992362.html (Eastern Trading Co. v. Refco, Inc, 7th Cir. 2000) for an example. This was covered in an apropos opinion, No. CP98-01, of the Nevada Commission on Ethics. A candidate for treasurer complained that his opponent advertised that he was "found guilty" of fraud, when the court had only said that he was &quo