Ma tausta ei tea aga äge Mortal Kombati versioon. _________________ www.FunBox.ee - kvaliteetsed õhupallid, värvikad kostüümid ja kõik muu vajalik meeldejääva peo korraldamiseks!
Keskmine tarbija ei tea, misasi on Blu-ray ning ostab endiselt DVD-plaate kokku ja tootja toodabki seda, mida ostetakse.
Ikaldus, ma ütlen.
Nt Sipsik jäigi ostmata, kuna ainult DVD-na saadaval.
Esimese koroonalaine ajal oli aega nii palju, et tühjendasin kodust filmiriiulit ning vähendasin DVD-plaatide hulka 2-3x - kõik filmid, mis on nagunii
parema kvaliteediga kuskil olemas, läksid ära.
eesti kontekstis oleks imelik kui blurayd ostetaks. siinmail on hinnavahe ikka väga räme.
euroopa pool on blurayde hinnad palju mõistlikumad, aeg-ajalt soodukad sinna otsa.
vod platvormid on muidugi oht aga loodetavasti füüsiline meedia päris ära ka ei kao _________________ - londiste
...aga mina ei saa kunagi suureks!
Vaatasin just Jokeri ära.Ei meeldinud eriti,nagu arvasingi,seepärast seda kohe vaatama ei tormanud.Aga nüüd on nähtud vähemalt _________________ parem varblane katusel,kui nuga neerus
Today we're going to look into the most famous of these, the case of Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser, heavily dramatized in a Hollywood movie starring Christopher Walken, and find out how closely its popular narrative may (or may not) track the truth.
So what did Percy Schmeiser do?
So if it wasn't for growing seeds accidentally deposited onto Percy Schmeiser's field — as the movie claims — what did Monsanto sue him for?
The facts of this case are quite clear. They can be easily looked up in the court documents, and in the references below. Percy was a canola farmer, and like most farmers, he used the weed killer Roundup. Somehow, he found in 1997 that a number of his canola plants were resistant to it. They were, in fact, Monsanto's Roundup Ready® canola. How those plants got there was never at issue in the lawsuit; in fact, Percy never even made a defense that the seeds were on his property accidentally. Maybe they were accidental (though that seems unlikely since they constituted about 60% of his field); maybe he bought them; maybe someone secretly planted them; maybe the commercial canola seed he bought somehow contained them. According to Monsanto's policy, he was even free to sell those crops. Doesn't matter how they got there.
What does matter is what Percy did next. He took all the Roundup Ready canola plants that survived his Roundup application — which was several acres worth — and saved their seeds. He had the seeds commercially cleaned. Then, in 1998, he planted 1,000 acres of Roundup Ready canola that he hadn't paid for. He did it with full knowledge that what he was doing was in violation of Monsanto's licensing agreement. It was only because the seed cleaning facility realized what was going on and sent samples to Monsanto that Percy ever got caught. Monsanto offered him a licensing agreement, he refused, and so they went to court.
If an installer disk for Microsoft Word somehow appears on your desk, and you then knowingly install it and use it, Microsoft is entitled to the cost of their product. Doesn't matter how the disk got there, whether your friend left it, whether a burglar snuck in and placed it there, or whether you stole it. By the same token that Microsoft is owed the value of their product, a seed manufacturer is owed the contractual value of their seeds when a farmer grows and sells an entire crop of it. This is not a novel or exceptional concept.
Percy Schmeiser rightfully lost the case, which went all the way to Canada's Supreme Court, though no damages were awarded since he didn't really make any money off the crop. But the case — and others like it — have inspired much discussion. The conversation of whether patent laws are fair or need to be overhauled is a perfectly valid one. It's also justified to debate whether seed producers, or companies who form many of the other links in the long chain of processes that constitute the agriculture industry, should be exempted from those patent protections due to very real issues like food security. However, I argue that such policy debates are most productive when they are informed by facts that are true, rather than by falsehoods. I can't think of any reason that anybody who takes an interest in food security would want policy to be based on anything less than real data and correct facts. Consequently, I can't think of any good reason that any person with a genuine moral interest in food security would support false narratives against Monsanto or any other seed producer, no matter how popular those narratives might be.
Seda ma siin mõtlesin, et kuidas nad neid linnu nii kiiresti kogu aeg suudavad üles ehitada seal teisel pool ookeani, aga meil siin ei suudeta isegi tänavaauke aastaga lappida
Krt, mul on Telia1 ja 2 tasuta filmi vaatamata, aga pole miskit, mida vaadata tahaks
sa ei või postitada uusi teemasid siia foorumisse sa ei või vastata selle foorumi teemadele sa ei või muuta oma postitusi selles foorumis sa ei või kustutada oma postitusi selles foorumis sa ei või vastata küsitlustele selles foorumis sa ei saa lisada manuseid selles foorumis sa võid manuseid alla laadida selles foorumis
Hinnavaatlus ei vastuta foorumis tehtud postituste eest.
:: KKK
:: otsing 
:: statistika
:: kasutajate nimekiri
:: kasutajate grupid
:: registreeri
teata moderaatorile
Spoiler 
