jasonxctf

QUOTE (The Critic @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 02:50 PM) Ahhhh, more short-sighted over-reaction. Disney, etc., SHOULD be looking at classroom movie time as an advertisement for their s***. Unless they fear that kids are bringing in digital camcorders to bootleg movies, all this can do IMO is make some kids want to see it again, which leads to rentals or sales. and with that theory, what if a 15 yr old girl has a sleepover with 20 of her friends. can they not play a movie there either?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 02:46 PM) It is technically a "public showing" which is illegal without proper compensation or permission. The one exception is movies which are in the public domain. i thought that too, but they aren't charging for the view. then, i also found this... Rented or Purchased Movies May Be Played By Teachers Without a License Section 110(1) of Title 17 of the United States Code grants a specific exemption from the copyright laws for: performance or display of a work by instructors or pupils in the course of face-to-face teaching activities of a nonprofit educational institution, in a classroom or similar place devoted to instruction, unless, in the case of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, the performance, or the display of individual images, is given by means of a copy that was not lawfully made under this title, and that the person responsible for the performance knew or had reason to believe was not lawfully made .... This means that no license from the copyright holder is required when a teacher at a public school or non-profit educational institution uses a lawfully purchased or rented copy of a movie in classroom instruction. It doesn't matter who purchased or rented the film, so long as it was legally obtained. The exemption is granted for "face-to-face" teaching activities only. This means that the teacher (or a substitute teacher) must be present. The exemption covers a "classroom or similar place devoted to instruction". This gives teachers some flexibility. For example, it is likely that a gymnasium used for large educational presentations in which several classes are convened together would be covered so long as a teacher presented the film. Note that remotely accessing a film from a central memory storage facility is probably not permitted. See 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a).

Knowing that there are a few legal experts here in Soxtalk, I thought I'd post this question and see what kind of responses I get. My wife is a grade school teacher. Historically they play movies for free days or for rewards for the kids. (Charlie Brown's Halloween, The Santa Claus, etc). Well this year, they were told by Administration that "legally" they can't play these movies in the classroom anymore due to copyright infringement laws. That they could get sued by Disney, etc for unauthorized showings. Common sense tells me that this is BS. Does anyone know for sure?

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 9, 2009 -> 09:04 PM) This is productive: Conservative Christian Group Calls for "No More Muslims" In Military Do you think if this was a white, female solider they would be asking to ban women from serving in the military?

Pelosi wasn’t the only one getting pressure on the amendment. As rumors spread that Republicans might vote “present” in order to scuttle the entire bill, even Cardinal Francis George, archbishop of Chicago and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, called Republican leader John Boehner to make sure the GOP didn’t play any games with the Stupak amendment, sources said.

probably not Macy's since they just posted their first quarterly profit in over a year and was upgraded by all of the analysts. From 11/6 NEW YORK (MarketWatch) - Retail stocks rose on Friday, a day after retailers reported their best monthly sales in over a year. Macy's Inc. /quotes/comstock/13*!m/quotes/nls/m (M 19.14, +1.12, +6.22%) led the gainers after the department store operator was upgraded to overweight from neutral by J.P. Morgan.

QUOTE (jphat007 @ Nov 6, 2009 -> 06:14 PM) Highest AVG and highest OBP (other than Thome) on a team whose offense sucked and we don't want to bring him back. Sounds like a plan!!!!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 6, 2009 -> 04:41 PM) Its all a little fuzzy to me, but here are my best guesses from what I know: --Grandmother is considered retired, so she's not in the calculated population --Same with father --Mother falls into total UE, but maybe not reported UE (the 10.2% number), depending on various things --Not sure on the brother-in-law - if he's a full time student, probably isn't in the population pool for either calculation --Last one, no idea its interesting, I just wrote down all of the immediate members of my wife and my family. (25 in total) Of the 25, 9 are working full time jobs. 16 are not. Most of the 16 who dont work full time jobs don't either because they are too old, too young, too lazy, homemakers or students. Oh yeah, and of the 9 full-time workers, only 2 are over the age of 30.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 6, 2009 -> 03:40 PM) As expected, we went over the magic line. 10.2%. Total UE including underemployed and not looking for work is at 17%. Bad bits: Big rise in people out of work more than 6 months (record), 22nd straight month of shedding jobs (record), average work week stable (bad because no more hours being put on for existing employees, which is a growth indicator). Good bits: Number of jobs lost fell again and has done so for a few months, and temp jobs jumped (temp jobs usually come before FT jobs) My additional take: We need small business to get this thing going. We need to put them in a better position to get credit in loans, but tax credits in targeted industries or even blanket ones would also help. I have a question about the UE at 17%. I'll take live examples of my family and I'm curious who would count in the 17% number. - My grandmother in a nursing home - My father who retired from AA and is on a pension - My mother who swears she wants a job (but doesn't really try) and tutors kids on the side for cash - My brother-in-law who went back to school for his college degree after being a minor league baseball player - My wife's aunt/uncle, who works part time as a school cafeteria worker and bus driver (who dont want to work more hours or they'll fall off unemployment benefits) Who counts and who doesn't?

part of it, I think is the VP of the losing party, is always pinned as the next hope. Happened with Joe Lieberman (remember when he was leading the polls in 2002) and John Edwards in 2006/07 before Hillary jumped in.

QUOTE (knightni @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 09:46 PM) Interesting that you have two shortstops in your lineup. original post was changed.

if you go pods/beckham (from 2009 numbers) theres a 58% chance that someone will start the game, on base for Quentin. and with Pods, theres a 30% chance he'll be on 2B or 3B after he either gets a hit or walk. (1B w/SB, 2B, 3B)

1. Pods-LF 2. Beckham-SS 3. Quentin-RF 4. Konerko-1B 5. ???-DH 6. Rios- CF 7. AJP-C 8. Ramirez-2B 9. Teahen-3B

I guess I just don't get the strategy here. The odds on favorite for the Republican primary is Kirk, who is a moderate Republican. (pretty much the only kind of Republican with a chance here statewide) The reason why Kirk was so heavily recruited was because he can narrow the loss in the Big 6 (Cook, Kane, DuPage, Lake, Kendall and Will) while winning in the rural parts of the state. Maybe he loses 60-40 in the big 6 but wins 70-30 elsewhere. Thus creating a 51-49 win. But then you shoot yourself in the foot, in the Big 6, by bringing in or having photo-ops with Palin, who isn't very popular up here.

Is this wise? Maybe short term help, but I think it spells long term troubles. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/ey...lin-endors.html

I get this crap all the time... got one a few months back of Joe Legal vs Jose Illegal. Tore that sh*t up.

CIT was/is huge in my industry. They were the biggest lender of capital to small-medium sized businesses. They used to have a partnership providing financing to any/all of Dell's business customers not to mention hundreds of others of manufacturers.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Oct 30, 2009 -> 11:42 AM) If anyone is complaining about the UIC atmosphere they should have been there prior to 2007. There was no 10+million dollar, state of the art workout facility conveniently located at Harrison and Halsted. Neither was there a University Village or James Stukel Tower (new dorm rooms not unlike those at DePaul). Also, the East and West campuses may has well have been at separate areas of the country because the mini-ghetto located between it made travel by any means aside from car unlikely. Those were the complaints of students for quite awhile, that there was practically nothing to do near campus. Which is ridiculous in itself because the school is literally five blocks from downtown. But regardless, that sentiment has since changed. I don't know when you visited UIC or what you encountered (I'm guessing you, like many visitors, didn't like the schools architecture), but there are really no excuses anymore for people to complain. its amazing. I graduated from UIC in 2001. So I was there from 1997-2001. To see the transformation is amazing. I lived on Taylor Street from 2000-2001 and the sh*t that we used to have to run through, to get to Illini Bar or Hawkeyes on Friday night was purely scary. I once had a guy chase me into a friends building screaming that he wanted "butter". nearly pushed the door down.

again, Joe should be doing this in private, not public.

im not saying that Joe doesnt have the right to disagree. I think that Bayh, Nelson and Landrieu disagree too. However, there are things that you do/say in public and things you do in private.

maybe the President needs to remind Mr. Lieberman that he kept him from being kicked out of the Democratic caucus and losing his Chairmanship. Maybe that decision needs to be re-visited for Traitor Joe.

two words... thong contest. i've never been the same since.

14/20

you can trust John Stossel. He was born in Chicago Heights.

see a trend???? Whip this horse for the first half of the season, and then designate him to mop up duties for the second half and you'll be fine. Pre All Star Break 2009 1.93ERA 1.29WHIP and a .242BAA Post All Star Break 2009 8.49ERA 2.19WHIP and a .377BAA Pre All Star Break 2008 2.37ERA 0.92WHIP and a .207BAA Post All Star Break 2008 (INJURED) 9.72ERA 1.80WHIP and a .343BAA Pre All Star Break 2007 2.52ERA 1.09WHIP and a .219BAA Post All Star Break 2007 5.23ERA 1.61WHIP and a .293BAA Pre All Star Break 2006 2.74ERA 0.94WHIP and a .190BAA Post All Star Break 2006 4.64ERA 1.58WHIP and a .304BAA