On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:20:28 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote:
> Hi Samuel! > 09 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SH> How can one copyright a cartridge? > Don't ask me ... ask lexmark > SH> Unless the container and its components have some unique features and > SH> characteristics and component materials which make it quite unlike > SH> anything else, then how can it be copyrighted or patented? > I'm neither US law expert, nor printer cartdidge expert. > But the cartridges contain special chips, whith the sole purpose of making > refilling impossible ... maybe these chips are copyrighted ?? just a guess. Even if they were copyrighted or patented there ought not to be a law against one's refilling of his own containers for his own use unless there were some legitimate concerns over safety and environmental hazards involved. > Or maybe just another case where the DMCA is used to bully people and scare > them away ?? This is probably the case. > SH> It would seem to me that it would be lawful for any manufacturer to > SH> copy the ink cartridges designed by their competitors. > It seems to me that nobody would be sooooo stupid to finance his own big > brother with his own tax money ... > guess what is happening in the US right now ?? > Bush invented the Department of homeland security (also known as "Big Brother") > 170000 people working there, budget of over 35 billion $/year !!!!!! > And nobody cares !!! The so-called Big Brother department was created in order to consolidate the functions of several intelligence and law enforcement agencies into one big super-agency. It was created for efficiency reasons, so as to avoid the duplication of the same kind of work by several different agencies and to improve communications and the sharing of information. Nobody cares because anything done for the mere purpose of improving efficiency in government will save the taxpayers some money. > In a normal country millions of people would be on the streets, demanding W to > be sent to guantanamo ... (or to any place where he can be kept secure, and > where hes boundless dumbness cannot harm the country ....) > nothing is happening ... everybody is happy ... > and now to the most sick part of all ... Bush is seen as a good president. > over 75% of americans think that he does a good job ... > Boy ... I can't say how happy I am that I had the luck of not being born in the > US ! > What has W to do that americans wake up ?? > implant chips in every american, and send the brain waves directly to M$ ? > <sing> and the laaaand of the freeeee </sing> > Back to big brother > First move from M$ was to designate Thomas Richey as M$ director for homeland > security ... who waits now that W buys software for huge amounts of $$ from M$ What did Micro$oft have to do with getting Thomas Richey a job? I don't even know who Thomas Richey is. I thought Tom Ridge was the director of Homeland Security. The reason why government and most big corporations use Micro$oft operating $ystem$ and $oftware is that the schools, colleges, and other educational institutions in the US don't offer many courses on alternative operating systems and software. If the government and the corporations would install something else on their systems they would have only a very few employees who would would have any idea of how to work with it. Nearly everyone would have to be re-trained. Very little work would be accomplished during the re-training phase. In the local community colleges around here one will find only one short introductory course on alternative operating systems listed in the course catalogs. The teaching staff will officially discourage the students from becoming very interested in alternative operating systems because they say that area employers seeking to hire people for computer-related jobs are looking only for people who know how to do Micro$oft stuff. Unfortunately this is mostly true. > And another highly sick part is the `Cyber Security Enhancement Act' (CSEA) > a law that IMO clearly violates international Law, and UN law. I have never heard of the "Cyber Security Enhancement Act". If it were something so highly controversial, why don't they talk about it in the news? I watch CNN and Fox News almost every day and I read the newsfeeds from the BBC and the New York Times. Also I read local newspapers at least twice a week. The average citizen cannot keep up with every piece of new legislation that comes around. The citizen trusts the news media to report on all the significant bills. I have recently learned from you that the news media is failing us in this regard. Sam Heywood -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/
