That revolves around print on demand for books that are out of copyright or where the copyright has been abandoned.
>
Background
Valancourt Books is a print-on-demand independent publishing house specializing in rare and out-of-print books. Valancourt had not registered its books for copyright as the Library of Congress already had original-edition copies of the books Valancourt republishes and any new material in its publications was limited to notes and introductions.
If you want a physical copy of The Sorrows of Satan, you can buy it from them.
> The Copyright Office has stated that it would modify the language of its deposit demand letters and withdraw its demand for copies if the Copyright Office was notified of the copyright's abandonment.
> Several legislative changes have been proposed to address all elements of the case: changes to Section 407 to tie some legal benefit to the deposit, monetary compensation to copyright holders for depositing books, and regulation for a simple and costless method of copyright abandonment.
That doesn't change that if you were to publish a book today (or for that matter, have published a book in the past 100 years in the US), you are required to deposit a copy of the book with the Library of Congress.
You wildly underestimate the self-preservation instincts of the Mexican fishermen towns.
Unless the businessman arrives with Blackwater, businessman either becomes the fisherman, or fish bait and a warning for future businessmen with similar intentions.
As long as the pollution is a negative externality and the polluting option is (immediately) cheaper, people (especially poorer people) will choose the cheaper option.
All of these may result in you bringing in less $ overall, so it really depends on how much each fraud case costs you, but you could (off the top of my head):
- Enable always checking CVV
- Require 3DS
- Ban a card after N disputes
- Ban an email/other identifier after N disputes
- Ban certain payment methods, banks etc
- Add a visible or invisible captcha to fight automated abuse/card testing
I suspect Stripe walks a fine line where they want to help you prevent fraud, but they also want to avoid vendors complaining to them that their customers can’t pay.
Context: I worked on a payments team for a short while.
None of the technical measures you mentioned are relevant with “friendly fraud”. And that’s exactly the problem that Stripe doesn’t solve. And doesn’t want to help merchants fight against.
Certain 3DS setups would shift fraud liability to the payment network itself. That is the only payment network solution to an entity that will happily sign off on clearly false chargebacks. Then they would themselves be fighting the institution agreeing to sign off on bad chargebacks.
you sell and after that its gone. If there is a house you can a) live in it (by doing so you cut your own families costs by a massive amount) or b) rent it and get a little extra each month.
Once you sell it you pay more taxes. Do you think any of the money you got will go to your kids, or even grandkids? Id say in 80% of all cases it will be long gone before that time comes.
CTEs really tripped me up when I started using them professionally. My mental model was that they result in reusable objects in memory and thus could be used to improve performance as well as composition.
After discovering the truth, it was interesting to find out that almost everyone I knew who wasn't a snr db engineer shared the same incorrect assumption.
>Imagine a programming language without functions. You can only write code that operates on concrete values, i.e. variables or literals. So instead of writing a function and calling it anywhere you have to write these little code templates as comments and every time you want to “call” the “function” you copy the template and do a search/replace.
>This would be tiresome. But that’s what SQL is. The concrete values are the table names. The code is the queries. And the function templates you have to search replace are your business logic, which must be inlined everywhere it is used.
So long as you make your payments on time, the lienholder cannot confiscate your property to make the pie whole. The money might be theirs, but the property is yours.
It’s called “mandatory deposit”