The FTC investigates sites that offer products that do bodily harm first, large amounts of money next, and so on down the line. This is explained on their website.
As far as this particular scam goes (and it is a scam), it seems like it's just not high enough on the food chain to warrant a smack-down with the resources that they currently have.
The FTC investigates sites that offer products that do bodily harm first, large amounts of money next, and so on down the line. This is explained on their website.
As far as this particular scam goes (and it is a scam), it seems like it's just not high enough on the food chain to warrant a smack-down with the resources that they currently have.
The FTC investigates sites that offer products that do bodily harm first, large amounts of money next, and so on down the line. This is explained on their website.
As far as this particular scam goes (and it is a scam), it seems like it's just not high enough on the food chain to warrant a smack-down with the resources that they currently have.
Did you read the document? If so, read it again. The Act requires that they furnish you the same report that they would furnish a paying company. Even previous to the establishment of the Act, they have one report per person. They don't generate a crappy report and a comprehensive report. :)
Further, your credit report not only provides you with all of the information in your credit file that could be provided by the consumer reporting company in a consumer report about you to a third party, but it also includes a record of everyone who has received a consumer report about you from the consumer reporting company within a certain period of time.
If anything it's better, not worse, because it is more comprehensive.
Were all of the *other* Ft. Hood shootings ALSO caused by the Internet? Because this isn't the first shooting there and it won't be the last. Guys at Ft. Hood won't even sleep by the windows because of the violent sprees there, quite a few of which happily ended with no bodily harm, but another crazy soldier.
How do I know this? I have had quite a few friends stationed there over the years, and I've visited on many an occasion. Anybody from the Kileen area who says they were surprised by this event is lying.
Worse yet, it has been suggested in some places that the free report is actually one of the weakest reports possible.
Whoever suggested that is an idiot. Under the FACT Act amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you are entitled to one free credit report from each of the three main credit reporting companies in a 12-month period.
Here is the link to the Fair Credit Reporting Act .pdf:
I agree that it's wrong and complicates the issues of copyright and public domain. I also agree that they would lose such a lawsuit.
I disagree with the sentence that I highlighted, which seems to conclude that this notice was added by people who don't understand the law. I disagree. I think it's probable that they understand the law and are just taking advantage of the fact that Joe Sixpack does not understand the law.
It's really unfortunate that, once again, we're seeing how little people seem to understand (or value) the public domain.
I disagree. This is probably a case of smart people who understand know little people understand about the public domain, and are using that knowledge in their attempt to keep people from doing things that they wouldn't like with those photos.
I wouldn't assume that the people who posted that notice don't actually understand public domain until I see them file a lawsuit when someone does exercise their rights and use those photos in an attention-getting way.
I hope they sue me. I'd make a much better defendant than Tenenbaum.
"Hard-working mom of 3 is sued for 5 gazillion dollars after she purchased Beatles tracks that she thought were legal... Defendant was quoted as saying that her case would be a long and winding road, but imagine a world where you can no longer be sued for sharing music."
I hope they sue me. I'd make a much better defendant than Tenenbaum.
"Hard-working mom of 3 is sued for 5 gazillion dollars after she purchased Beatles tracks that she thought were legal... Defendant was quoted as saying that her case would be a long and winding road, but imagine a world where you can no longer be sued for sharing music."
...115 of my favorite Beatles tracks for $29.05. I could have purchased everything for about $120, but opted not to. That's the only money I've spent on the Beatles in... Well, my entire life, since they don't offer mp3s.
RSS
Twitter
Re: (as Rose M. Welch)
The FTC investigates sites that offer products that do bodily harm first, large amounts of money next, and so on down the line. This is explained on their website.
As far as this particular scam goes (and it is a scam), it seems like it's just not high enough on the food chain to warrant a smack-down with the resources that they currently have.
Re: (as Rose M. Welch)
The FTC investigates sites that offer products that do bodily harm first, large amounts of money next, and so on down the line. This is explained on their website.
As far as this particular scam goes (and it is a scam), it seems like it's just not high enough on the food chain to warrant a smack-down with the resources that they currently have.
Re: Re: Re: (as Rose M. Welch)
The FTC investigates sites that offer products that do bodily harm first, large amounts of money next, and so on down the line. This is explained on their website.
As far as this particular scam goes (and it is a scam), it seems like it's just not high enough on the food chain to warrant a smack-down with the resources that they currently have.
Re: Re: Re: (as Rose M. Welch)
Did you read the document? If so, read it again. The Act requires that they furnish you the same report that they would furnish a paying company. Even previous to the establishment of the Act, they have one report per person. They don't generate a crappy report and a comprehensive report. :)
Further, your credit report not only provides you with all of the information in your credit file that could be provided by the consumer reporting company in a consumer report about you to a third party, but it also includes a record of everyone who has received a consumer report about you from the consumer reporting company within a certain period of time.
If anything it's better, not worse, because it is more comprehensive.
Wtf? (as Rose M. Welch)
Were all of the *other* Ft. Hood shootings ALSO caused by the Internet? Because this isn't the first shooting there and it won't be the last. Guys at Ft. Hood won't even sleep by the windows because of the violent sprees there, quite a few of which happily ended with no bodily harm, but another crazy soldier.
How do I know this? I have had quite a few friends stationed there over the years, and I've visited on many an occasion. Anybody from the Kileen area who says they were surprised by this event is lying.
And, no, it wasn't caused by the Internet.
Of course. (as Rose M. Welch)
How many people said that they were going to buy t-shirts and then didn't?
Re: What words don't mean (as Rose M. Welch)
You are full of win.
Re: (as Rose M. Welch)
Worse yet, it has been suggested in some places that the free report is actually one of the weakest reports possible.
Whoever suggested that is an idiot. Under the FACT Act amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you are entitled to one free credit report from each of the three main credit reporting companies in a 12-month period.
Here is the link to the Fair Credit Reporting Act .pdf:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/031224fcra.pdf
Re: Re: Try it with Led Zeppelin (as Rose M. Welch)
I would pay $200 for that...
I think... (as Rose M. Welch)
...that you have to be a human being before you can really act like one. The industry robots just don't cut it.
I think... (as Rose M. Welch)
...that you have to be a human being before you can really act like one. The industry robots just don't cut it.
Re: Re: Re: Sad Fan. (as Rose M. Welch)
No, because most of the members in my family would not grasp the meaning and the rest wouldn't appreciate the message. Oklahoma is full of fail.
(as Rose M. Welch)
Just for the record, those designers should have been fired anyway for having such a horrible site.
Sad Fan. (as Rose M. Welch)
Nooooo!!!!!! I'm broke until after Thanksgiving. *sniff sniff* I wanted this shirt AND the book.
Yay! (as Rose M. Welch)
Thank God for tits and Larry Flynt.
Re: Re: I disagree. (as Rose M. Welch)
I agree that it's wrong and complicates the issues of copyright and public domain. I also agree that they would lose such a lawsuit.
I disagree with the sentence that I highlighted, which seems to conclude that this notice was added by people who don't understand the law. I disagree. I think it's probable that they understand the law and are just taking advantage of the fact that Joe Sixpack does not understand the law.
I disagree. (as Rose M. Welch)
It's really unfortunate that, once again, we're seeing how little people seem to understand (or value) the public domain.
I disagree. This is probably a case of smart people who understand know little people understand about the public domain, and are using that knowledge in their attempt to keep people from doing things that they wouldn't like with those photos.
I wouldn't assume that the people who posted that notice don't actually understand public domain until I see them file a lawsuit when someone does exercise their rights and use those photos in an attention-getting way.
God... (as Rose M. Welch)
I hope they sue me. I'd make a much better defendant than Tenenbaum.
"Hard-working mom of 3 is sued for 5 gazillion dollars after she purchased Beatles tracks that she thought were legal... Defendant was quoted as saying that her case would be a long and winding road, but imagine a world where you can no longer be sued for sharing music."
Re: What about the.. (as Rose M. Welch)
I hope they sue me. I'd make a much better defendant than Tenenbaum.
"Hard-working mom of 3 is sued for 5 gazillion dollars after she purchased Beatles tracks that she thought were legal... Defendant was quoted as saying that her case would be a long and winding road, but imagine a world where you can no longer be sued for sharing music."
I purchased... (as Rose M. Welch)
...115 of my favorite Beatles tracks for $29.05. I could have purchased everything for about $120, but opted not to. That's the only money I've spent on the Beatles in... Well, my entire life, since they don't offer mp3s.