Software Piracy Essays - Warez, Software Licenses,

Software Piracy Software piracy is defined as the illegal copying of software for commercial or personal gain. Software companies have tried many methods to prevent piracy, with varying degrees of success. Several agencies like the Software Publishers Association and the Business Software Alliance have been formed to combat both worldwide and domestic piracy. Software piracy is an unresolved, worldwide problem, costing millions of dollars in lost revenue. Software companies have used many different copy protection schemes. The most annoying form of copy protection is the use of a key disk. This type of copy protection requires the user to insert the original disk every time the program is run. It can be quite difficult to keep up with disks that are years old. The most common technique of copy protection requires the user to look up a word or phrase in the program's manual. This method is less annoying than other forms of copy protection, but it can be a nuisance having to locate the manual every time. Software pirates usually have no trouble "cracking" the program, which permanently removes the copy protection. After the invention of CD-ROM, which until lately was uncopyable, most software companies stopped placing copy protection in their programs. Instead, the companies are trying new methods of disc impression. 3M recently developed a new technology of disc impression which allows companies to imprint an image on the read side of a CD-ROM. This technology would not prevent pirates from copying the CD, but it would make a "bootleg" copy differ from the original and make the copy traceable by law enforcement officials (Estes 89). Sometimes, when a person uses a pirated program, there is a "virus" attached to the program. Viruses are self-replicating programs that, when activated, can damage a computer. These viruses are most commonly found on pirated computer games, placed there by some malignant computer programmer. In his January 1993 article, Chris O' Malley points out that if piracy was wiped out viruses would eventually disappear (O' Malley 60). There are ways that a thrifty consumer can save money on software without resorting to piracy. Computer companies often offer discounts on new software if a person has previously purchased an earlier version of the software. Competition between companies also drives prices low and keeps the number of pirated copies down (Morgan 45). People eventually tire or outgrow their software and decide to sell it. Usually, there is no problem transferring the program from one person to another unless the original owner had been bound by a license agreement. In order for the new owner to legally own the software, the old owner must tell the company, in writing, that he would like to transfer the license to the new owner. Most people fail to notify the company when selling software, thus making the unsuspecting new owner a software pirate (Morgan 46). Consumers must be careful when dealing with used software. United States copyright law allows consumers to place a copy of a program on their computer and also make another copy for backup purposes, in case the original disk fails or is destroyed. Some software companies use licensing agreements to restrict people from making more than one copy of a program. Such use of agreements can make an average consumer into a software pirate, in his effort to make sure his expensive software is safe (Murdoch 2). Before 1990 movie rental stores could rent computer software. People who rented the software would copy the software before returning it. In defense, Congress passed the Software Rental Act, outlawing the rental of software. Even though illegal, many stores and even some software companies still rent software. Since retail space in stores is extremely limited, companies could rent older software that did not have a good showing in retail stores (Champion 128). Software companies could take an idea from the home video industry. The larger video makers found that if they sold videos in foreign countries through their own dealerships, the amount of piracy decreased (Weisband 33). A rather unique strategy used by American software manufactures helps raise local interest in stopping software piracy. Companies invest money to begin software corporations in foreign countries. After a few years, the US companies hope that the new, foreign companies will initiate their own anti-piracy organizations (Weisband 30). Microsoft has led the venture by creating small software companies to help battle piracy. By doing this, the companies would want to report piracy because they would be losing money just like American companies are doing now (Weisband 33). The Software Publishers Association, based in

Common Law 2013 Essays - Bias, Free Essays, Term Papers

Common Law 2013 Essays - Bias, Free Essays, Term Papers Nemo judex in re sua is both an ancient and fundamental principle of English law. A judge is disqualified from determining any case in which he or she may be, or may fairly be suspected to be, biased. The word bias comes from the tendency of a bowl to turn in one direction of another. It thus means simply an improper predisposition of a judge to decide in one way or another. But if the fundamental nature of the rule is well recognised, its application and reach is less clear. The law is set about by some subtle distinctions which have been unstable and uncertain in the recent past. The law is now relatively clear, but the way in which it is applied is still open to debate and discussion. A person is barred from deciding any case in which he or she may be, or may fairly be suspected to be, biased. This principle embodies the basic concept of impartiality and applies to courts of law, tribunals, arbitrators and all those having the duty to act judicially. A public authority has a duty to act judicially whenever it makes decisions that affect people's rights or interests, and not only when it applies some judicial type procedure in arriving at decisions. that affect people's rights or interests, and not only when it applies some judicial-type procedure in arriving at decisions. The basis on which impartiality operates is the need to maintain public confidence in the legal system . The erosion of public confidence undermines the nobility of the legal system, and leads to ensuing chaos. It was held He should not have sat. It was accepted that he had had no pecuniary interest himself, and had acted scrupulously. It was a question of whether there was any appearance of bias. The essence of the need for impartiality was observed by Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, in Metropolitan Properties Co.(F.G.C.) Ltd. v. Lannon (1968) Justice must be rooted in confidence and confidence is destroyed when right-minded people go away thinking 'The judge was biased. Besides, Lo rd Denning MR considered the test for apparent bias, and said The court looks at the impression which would be given to other people. Even if he was as impartial as could be, nevertheless if right-minded persons would think that, in the circumstances, there was a real likelihood of bias on his part, then he should not sit. And if he does sit, his decision cannot stand. Public confidence as the basis for the rule against bias is also embodied in the often-quoted words of Lord Hewart, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, that It is not merely of some importance, but of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly be seen to be done It was stated in an article , that Article 6(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 as incorporated in the Human Rights Act 1988, applicable in England since 2000 provides that in the determination of his civil rights and obligations to everyone is entitled to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The independence of courts and impartiality of judges are closely related in that they operate to sustain public confidence in the administration of justice. The twin domestic UK law concepts of actual and apparent bias have their parallel in European law in the recognition by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) that there are two aspects to the requirement of impartiality, subjective and objective impartiality. Subjective impartiality means that the members of the tribunal themselves must be subjectively impartial, none of its members must show bias or personal prejudice, there being a presumption of personal impartiality in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Objective impartiality requires the tribunal to offer guarantees sufficient to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect . Broadly speaking, the ECHR and the ECJ appear to have had less difficulty with the practical application of these concepts than the domestic UK courts. It was stated in an article, Bias by Holly Shout that in a particular, the concept of apparent

Divorce and Its effect on children Research Paper

Divorce and Its effect on children - Research Paper Example Other challenges worth mentioning is the fact that children develop behavioral changes after the separation of their parents since there is always no balance or stability of relationship between the parents as the ones who are supposed to guide the children throughout their lives. When couples divorce, their children lose stability, comfort, and support that always come from the parents (Fagan, and Aaron 11). The result is that the decision leaves some children to fend for themselves making them assume responsibilities that bar them from interacting with their peers. Though in the developed countries children only suffer psychological impacts of divorce, the situation is worse in middle and low-income populations where departure of parents imply that the children will look for livelihood on their own. Divorce is arguably responsible for mental torture as it affects emotions of the children. Children will develop violent behaviors owing to depression and stress of leaving without their parents. In this case, children alienate themselves from their peers fearing that they might be scolded for living without their parents. On the other hand, divorce leaves a lasting impression on the child and forms the basis for their future behaviors. If, for example, the pare nts divorced because of violence, their children may become accustomed to it and perceive violence as a regular occurrence in the society and will subject their future spouses to domestic violence. Most importantly, divorce is responsible for the evils that befall teenagers in the modern society (Fagan, and Aaron 12). Divorce first weakens the existing bond between parents and their children thus leaving the young ones to make personal decisions at tender ages. In this case, children will look for others for attention and might sometimes end up in the wrong company.