Massive Solar Flare Headed For Earth

At the least we should get some vivid displays of Aurora Borealis. At the
worst, communications could be affected.

Here's the story:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/scie...lar-Flare.html

Da Parrot-chick wrote:

At the least we should get some vivid displays of Aurora Borealis. At the
worst, communications could be affected.

Here's the story:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/scie...lar-Flare.html


Uh, you might try posting either the whole article or some relevant excerpts
for those who don't want to fiddle with NYT registration....

[article follows in whole]

Strong Geomagnetic Storm Expected to Hit
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: October 23, 2003

Filed at 4:23 a.m. ET

"BOULDER, Colo. (AP) -- A strong geomagnetic storm was expected to hit Earth
on Friday with the potential to affect electrical grids and satellite
communications.

One of the largest sunspot clusters in years developed over the past three
days and produced a coronal mass ejection, similar to a solar flare, at 3
a.m. EDT Wednesday, forecasters at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration said.

The disturbance was expected to produce a geomagnetic storm rated G3. A G5
storm is the strongest.

The storm could make the aurora visible as far south as Oregon and Illinois.

A coronal mass ejection is an explosion of gas and charged particles into
space from the corona, the outermost layer of the sun's atmosphere.

A second sunspot cluster not yet visible from Earth could produce more
geomagnetic storms in the next two weeks, NOAA said."

/





--
Best
Greg

I posted the link because it's a copyrighted article.

I have kill filed you about four or five times within the past year, and
each time you come up with a new email address to get through it. What does
that say about your desperation to be noticed?

That was a rhetorical question; I don't expect nor will see your answer.

*plonk*

"Gregory Morrow" wrote in message
k.net...

Da Parrot-chick wrote:

At the least we should get some vivid displays of Aurora Borealis. At
the
worst, communications could be affected.

Here's the story:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/scie...lar-Flare.html


Uh, you might try posting either the whole article or some relevant
excerpts
for those who don't want to fiddle with NYT registration....

[article follows in whole]

snip

Da Parrot-chick squawked:

I posted the link because it's a copyrighted article.


So, the NYT is going to sue you for posting the text of a short AP newsfeed
article?

Care to cite any legal precedence for this?


I have kill filed you about four or five times within the past year, and
each time you come up with a new email address to get through it. What
does
that say about your desperation to be noticed?


But you *always* seem to respond. So who is *desperate*, eh? Looks like
"someone's" feathers are ruffled, and it *ain't* me :-)


That was a rhetorical question; I don't expect nor will see your answer.

*plonk*


"Yaaaaawn..."


--
Best
Greg

Gregory Morrow wrote:
Da Parrot-chick squawked:


I posted the link because it's a copyrighted article.



So, the NYT is going to sue you for posting the text of a short AP newsfeed
article?

Care to cite any legal precedence for this?

What difference does it make if they sue him, it is still a copyright
violation???

There is ample precedence for control over how copyrighted material is
distributed

"mrtravel" wrote in message
...
Gregory Morrow wrote:
Da Parrot-chick squawked:


I posted the link because it's a copyrighted article.



So, the NYT is going to sue you for posting the text of a short AP
newsfeed
article?

Care to cite any legal precedence for this?

What difference does it make if they sue him, it is still a copyright
violation???

There is ample precedence for control over how copyrighted material is
distributed

Not only is reproducing copyrighted material against federal law, as a
professional writer myself I has respect for the writer. Some folks think
it's okay as long as they don't get caught. They have their way and I have
mine. Greg's way, along with him, is now in my trash. But thanks for the
note of support.

Da Parrot-chick wrote:

Not only is reproducing copyrighted material against federal law, as a
professional writer myself I has respect for the writer. Some folks think
it's okay as long as they don't get caught. They have their way and I have
mine. Greg's way, along with him, is now in my trash. But thanks for the
note of support.


A lot of people don't understand the concept of copyright and trademark,
until it is something of theirs that gets misused. The copyright owner
has the right to control the distribution of their works even if the
unauthorized distributor is not making money doing it.

"mrtravel" wrote in message
m...
Da Parrot-chick wrote:

Not only is reproducing copyrighted material against federal law, as a
professional writer myself I has respect for the writer. Some folks
think
it's okay as long as they don't get caught. They have their way and I
have
mine. Greg's way, along with him, is now in my trash. But thanks for
the
note of support.


A lot of people don't understand the concept of copyright and trademark,
until it is something of theirs that gets misused. The copyright owner
has the right to control the distribution of their works even if the
unauthorized distributor is not making money doing it.

I am not a lawyer, but i would have thought there was a case to be made that
if a copyright owner makes something freely available on the net, that it is
then in the public domain, and so freely available to all, for whatever
reasonable purpose they choose.

Also someone said it was against Federal Law (USA I assume) what happens if
I (from the UK) copy it from the web and use it or repost it. Shirley there
is no precedent for breaking the law of a country you are not in and maybe
have never been to and never will go to.

Miss L. Toe wrote:

Also someone said it was against Federal Law (USA I assume) what happens if
I (from the UK) copy it from the web and use it or repost it. Shirley there
is no precedent for breaking the law of a country you are not in and maybe
have never been to and never will go to.


Does the UK not have copyright laws applicable to foreign materials?

The issue isn't that it is or is not freely available, it is the
copyright owner's decision where to distribute it, for free or
otherwise. In any case, the material we were talking about specifically
is not "freely" available. You have to register for their web site to
view it.

"mrtravel" wrote in message
...
Miss L. Toe wrote:

Also someone said it was against Federal Law (USA I assume) what happens
if
I (from the UK) copy it from the web and use it or repost it. Shirley
there
is no precedent for breaking the law of a country you are not in and
maybe
have never been to and never will go to.


Does the UK not have copyright laws applicable to foreign materials?


I've got absolutely no idea.

But if it does I'll go to Cuba (or somewhere and download it there).

The issue isn't that it is or is not freely available, it is the
copyright owner's decision where to distribute it, for free or
otherwise. In any case, the material we were talking about specifically
is not "freely" available. You have to register for their web site to
view it.


But do you have to pay to register ? - If not then it is freely available.