Slashdot Mirror

While the Distributed Proofreading Document Guidelines do call for sacrificing many aspects of text formatting, DPed works retain italics (using html-style tags), and boldface (sortof -- all caps for some reason). Double carriage returns indicate paragraph breaks, and line-lengths are preserved. Upper ASCII characters are required, too, so most of the accents and non-English standard characters are preserved. Some book projects have their own special guidelines that differ from the Doc Standards, and several of them include plans to distribute the finished work with high-res scans of illustrations, music staves, whathaveyou included.

How Gutenberg distributes them once DP hands off the text is up to Gutenberg. There are other repositories of texts online (see archive.org ) that do things differently. What's perhaps most important, in terms of preservation, is that a fragile old book has been scanned for posterity. Distribution and portability benefits from its conversion to semi-plain and very plain text. As long as the original scanned images are preserved, they can be revisited if a richer document is required.

Now, if only E Ink would get a product to market!

While the Distributed Proofreading Document Guidelines do call for sacrificing many aspects of text formatting, DPed works retain italics (using html-style tags), and boldface (sortof -- all caps for some reason). Double carriage returns indicate paragraph breaks, and line-lengths are preserved. Upper ASCII characters are required, too, so most of the accents and non-English standard characters are preserved. Some book projects have their own special guidelines that differ from the Doc Standards, and several of them include plans to distribute the finished work with high-res scans of illustrations, music staves, whathaveyou included.

How Gutenberg distributes them once DP hands off the text is up to Gutenberg. There are other repositories of texts online (see archive.org ) that do things differently. What's perhaps most important, in terms of preservation, is that a fragile old book has been scanned for posterity. Distribution and portability benefits from its conversion to semi-plain and very plain text. As long as the original scanned images are preserved, they can be revisited if a richer document is required.

Now, if only E Ink would get a product to market!

This distributed proofreading group looks like they might have the answer for helping PG get closer to being 'there'. Having people proofread one page at a time comparing the ocr'd text to the original scan is an excellent idea for speeding up the proofreading process as well as improving the quality.

Queries executed in one frame can generate results in another frame, simplifying navigation by reducing the need to jump back and forth between screens.

Thus Project Gutenberg has inched ahead at a snail's pace. In its 32nd year of existence, the collection has only 6,267 etexts.

I prefer to phrase it, "Thus Project Gutenberg has raced ahead at an amazing rate. In its 32nd year in existence, the collection has 6,267 etexts, averaging almost 200 etexts per year. That works out to about one book every other day. This is more impressive given that in the first twenty years of the projects existance the Internet didn't exist anywhere near the form we take it for granted today. The popularization of the Internet has just accelerated the rate the Project Gutenberg grows. With the help of Distributed Proofreaders, a project that allows average people to donate small amounts of time to proofread just one page at a time, Project Gutenberg can expect to add over 400 etexts per year. Clearly Project Gutenberg is thriving."

Rah, Rah Distributed Proofreaders!

The Slashdot story added several thousand users to their rolls, myself included, and upped the output volume dramatically. Things have quieted down a bit in the months since the Slashdotting, but it's going *very* well over at DP. I encourage anyone who is remotely interested in helping to create a phat, free digital library to check it out and get involved.

It's truly amazing what you can accomplish with a large-enough group of volunteers, over a long-enough period of time. I've spent relatively little time proofing -- just a few pages whenever I've nothing else to do -- but over the course of several months it turns out I've proofed 551 pages... that's a decent-sized book that I, personally, have helped to bring to the masses. How cool is that?

It's off the homepage now, but I believe that a previous note from DP project management estimated that if it continues at its current pace, Distributed Proofreading will manage to add ~2,000 books to the Project Gutenberg library this year alone!

Apparently the author of the article missed Distributed Proofreaders. They seem to have survived their Slashdotting and actually retained a good fraction of their new users. This month they've proofed 116,827 pages! (Cut that in half for unique pages, I think) They have completed in their 2(?) years of existence 918 books, and have another 317 being assembled. It really seems like they are only limited by what they can get their hands on in the public domain.

In any case, the real obstacle to a useful electronic library isn't labor. It's copyright.

Distributed Proofreaders. Recently discussed on /. as well.

$ whois
www.hollywoodreporter.com

No match for "WWW.HOLLYWOODREPORTER.COM".

Wayback machine

Some quick notes: www.hollywoodreporter.com recently posted an article about RIAA web site being hacked and then suddenly it disappeared from Internet DNS.

In January 1996, I set up a site to keep track of social events happening in Sydney Australia. The site consisted of a dynamic database of events, accessed by a perl CGI script. The front page to the site contained a number of static links pointing to dynamic pages, generated by the CGI script.

The static parts of the site are in the Internet Archive.

The dynamic content is missing from the archive (I still have the perl script and database on my local hard disk), but it is obvious from the form of the hypertext references that they point to dynamic pages, as they contain prefix expressions.

The Internet archive entry is dated January 17th 1999. The site was in existence well before this date. The archived page contains a message from me, dated 23rd May 1997, the date the site ceased operation. On 13th January 1997, I sent a message to aus.culture.ultimo in which I stated that the site had been running for twelve months. This message is archived at google:

So there it is. A dynamic/static web site whose history can be verified back to January 1996 by independent sources.

It looks like you can get to the forums where they're looking for people to help out in SF.

Also in the cache listing are cache links to many pages with listings of the actual cds. I'm not sure this stuff is really worth all the fuss, but I guess people have said that about most junk that historians and archeologists treasure today.

OT: Did anyone else notice Google's new tour page? Ok, so I'm a little bored today.

• 1996 I.D. Annual Design Review Interactie Media Winners CD-ROM
• A Close Look ~ the Ferrari 333 SP
• A Jack Kerouac Romnibus
• Alexander Graham Bell
• An Olympic Journey
• Around Barcelona: The Best Contemporary Architecture

• 1996 I.D. Annual Design Review Interactie Media Winners CD-ROM
• A Close Look ~ the Ferrari 333 SP
• A Jack Kerouac Romnibus
• Alexander Graham Bell
• An Olympic Journey
• Around Barcelona: The Best Contemporary Architecture

• 1996 I.D. Annual Design Review Interactie Media Winners CD-ROM
• A Close Look ~ the Ferrari 333 SP
• A Jack Kerouac Romnibus
• Alexander Graham Bell
• An Olympic Journey
• Around Barcelona: The Best Contemporary Architecture

• 1996 I.D. Annual Design Review Interactie Media Winners CD-ROM
• A Close Look ~ the Ferrari 333 SP
• A Jack Kerouac Romnibus
• Alexander Graham Bell
• An Olympic Journey
• Around Barcelona: The Best Contemporary Architecture

• 1996 I.D. Annual Design Review Interactie Media Winners CD-ROM
• A Close Look ~ the Ferrari 333 SP
• A Jack Kerouac Romnibus
• Alexander Graham Bell
• An Olympic Journey
• Around Barcelona: The Best Contemporary Architecture

• 1996 I.D. Annual Design Review Interactie Media Winners CD-ROM
• A Close Look ~ the Ferrari 333 SP
• A Jack Kerouac Romnibus
• Alexander Graham Bell
• An Olympic Journey
• Around Barcelona: The Best Contemporary Architecture

This is a great way to use The Way Back Machine The should just rename it to The Prior Art Archive. Oh wait, that name sucks, better stick with way back machine.

Here is the text of the e-mail I sent to museumtour.com after uncovering what I think may be prior art, in only a few minutes poking around on the web:

Sir,

I have been appalled by the acceptance of over-broad patents by the USPTO for some time, and was similarly appalled to see the abuse of a patent on Frames-based browsing used to threaten legal action against your site. Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that I may have found some invalidating prior art. [Please insert standard not-a-lawyer disclaimers here.]

As far as I can tell, the patent covers the existence of links in one frame that affect the display of information in another. This technique was described and published in the original documentation on frames, which you can see on the Netscape website here:

http://home.netscape.com/assist/net_sites/frames.h tml

This includes the text:

These properties offer new possibilities:

1. Elements that the user should always see, such as control bars, copyright notices, and title graphics can be placed in a static, individual frame. As the user navigates the site in "live" frames, the static frame's contents remain fixed, even though adjoining frames redraw.

2. Table of contents are more functional. One frame can contain TOC links that, when clicked, display results in an adjoining frame.

3. Frames side-by-side design allows queries to be posed and answered on the same page, with one frame holding the query form, and the other presenting the results.

Point 2 appears to describe the technique patented, and therefore constitutes prior art if published before 17 May 1996.

This documentation does not itself have a date, and has not been archived by the Wayback Machine (http://www.archive.org), but appears to have been in existence for some time prior to the patent application date. The evidence for this comes in a reference from a post to the HTML mailing list in January 1996:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/1996J an/0110.html

It should be possible to check with Netscape to determine the date of publication of this web page.

I hope that this is of some use.

If you search for http://bell.com and click on the first result (Oct. 20, 1996) there is an image map at the bottom of the page that seems to be in violation. Near the top of the page there is a last updated date of 3/1/96. IANAL so I do not know if the proof has to be before 05/1995, but this is at least before the application date.

Also of interest may be http://uu.net from May 12, 1996 which has a last updated date of 5/10/96. At the bottom of nearly every page except the front page there is an image that links to their index page. I know that this one is kinda iffy, but where do we draw the line?

Another thing is that many companies tell their employees not to disclose anything until filing for the patent. So even if Ameritech was part of Bell, could they have accidentally disclosed it before filing?

If you search for http://bell.com and click on the first result (Oct. 20, 1996) there is an image map at the bottom of the page that seems to be in violation. Near the top of the page there is a last updated date of 3/1/96. IANAL so I do not know if the proof has to be before 05/1995, but this is at least before the application date.

Also of interest may be http://uu.net from May 12, 1996 which has a last updated date of 5/10/96. At the bottom of nearly every page except the front page there is an image that links to their index page. I know that this one is kinda iffy, but where do we draw the line?

Another thing is that many companies tell their employees not to disclose anything until filing for the patent. So even if Ameritech was part of Bell, could they have accidentally disclosed it before filing?

The six 'buttons' surrounding the bull logo at the top of the page each link to dynamic content. The logo itself and it's surrounding block, however, form part of a static include file .

Incontrovertible prior art. I actually still have many of these files in their April 30th, 1996 form

Link please? I'll give you a headstart with a link to the Wayback archive.

Amazon was founded in 1995 and Yahoo (as far as I could find) had no consistent nav until late 1996/early 1997.

However, if it's so trivial, certainly you can single-handedly reveal the prior art and report it to Museumtours? TIA

This is the best comment I've seen so far, but it doesn't really prove prior art. The page you refer to is dated 1999. As with many innovations, the presence of an enabling mechanism does not necessarily indicate prior art.

Can you prove that frames were intended for use as contemplated by the patent, i.e. a consistent user interface across a document or site? Not from that article. Remember too that not only frames are at issue here -- a navigation bar using tables or divisions would appear to be covered by the patent as well.

While it is blatently obvious with hindsight that frames can be used in this manner, some Googling around will show that a huge amount of web design material at the time references a document called "Ameritech Web Page User Interface Standards and Design Guidelines" by Detweiler, M.C. and Omanson, R.C. (1996), on the matter of creating a consistent user interface by using frames. If that doesn't ring a bell, Ameritech was the original holder of the patent, and recently acquired by SBC.

Reading the patent provides some more insight too: they contemplate a document with embedded codes indicating document sections, that conforms to a predefined structure. Read this way, the patent does not partain to HMTL frames, because HTML is a hypertext linked collection of documents, not a single document. A navbar or frame moving the view to named references within a single document, however, would clearly violate the patent.

So is the patent valid? Well, that involves proving prior art; not just that frames existed, but that they were used for the purpose of navigation, both in a single document and between documents. Any evidence of tables to do the same thing would also be useful. Also crutial is having an incontestible source -- printed information is best, a reputable online news source or journal is the next best thing.

w3.org records Edelstein's Sep 1995 proposal to include frames in the HTML specification, but the example page he sites is no longer available.

The Netscape Navigator 2.0 announcement contains "Frames, a new page presentation capability that enables the display of multiple, independently scrollable panels on a single screen, each with its own distinct Internet address. They also enable a region of the screen to be frozen in place as the user scrolls through information on a page". Tantalising, but it doesn't mention using the frozen region for navigation.

Most promising are the Mozilla 2.0 release notes. Two of the example links are broken, while third doesn't work in my browser, although the pages appear to be there. It clearly demonstrates the use of a navigation frame to select different pages in a site, and view them in a "dynamic" frame. That said, the navigation frame itself is not entirely static (it scrolls, but does not change), and there is no navigation inside a single document from the frame.

There is a lot of effort required to find proper evidence of prior art that will hold up in court. The Wayback Machine would provide great evidence, if only we can find it.

http://web.archive.org/web/19960511013133/http://w ww.altavista.digital.com/

Check out that graphical navbar at the top.

http://web.archive.org/web/19961030020512/www.berk eley.edu/about/

Anyway, Great Outdoor Recreation Pages is a fairly old site, and while wayback only goes back to November 1996, I think it may be older.

Take a look at the Internet Archive. They have terabytes of copyright clear material including mpeg2 public domain video and lossless audio. They are experimenting with 3 different p2p systems with their audio collection.

Maybe you should talk to these people. They've got 30TB of copyright clear music and have as their goal "universal access to human knowledge".

If you're into live music, archive.org has been amassing an enormous collection of live concerts in SHN (and FLAC) format for about 6 months now. If you're bored at work (or home) and have a ton of bandwidth, go here.

- A.P.

Yes. Also known as The Free World.

Wake Up!

The links in the article are really to comp-u-geek.net and not to adopt-a-gek. DO NOT CLICK!

While I certainly hope the projects improve their interfaces, it's not like they're only ones. QuickTime has problems (and used to be much worse!). RealOne's interface is ghastly as well. And don't forget Windows Media Player (scroll down to see a screenshot, helpfully described as "gorgeous", but certainly not "useful").

Yes, media players on Linux have crappy interfaces. Most media players, regardless of platform, have crappy interfaces. Perhaps Linux is worse at the moment, but it's not the condemnation that the poster suggested it was.

If this sounds familiar, this may be why. (pointing to archived site as theonion.com seems to have done some housecleaning....

Wapit believes in a mobile driven future and is dedicated to lead the new generation of simple, time and place independent mobile communication.

Wapit creates advanced mobile middleware technology and applications. Our customers can use our technology to build and maintain multiple, revenue generating mobile solutions tailored to their market needs.

Founded in 1998, Wapit Ltd. headquarters are in Helsinki, Finland.

Sunday
January 27, 2002

491,524 group buying members!

Saving on everyday services has never been easier. With OnlineChoice, you join hundreds of thousands of others in powerful, free, no obligation consumer buying pools -- and we use this collective clout to negotiate great deals. Group buying power lowers your monthly bills.

1) What happened to Swapit?

Swapit was forced to close down because it could not obtain additional funding. As soon as it became apparent that no further funding would take place, Swapit shut down its website.

2) Is Swapit coming back?

Swapit is closed permanently. It is not coming back under another name or as another company.

3) What happens to my credits?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use to which all Swapit Members agreed to prior to using the Swapit site, once any of the CDs and games was accepted, customers were credited with "Swapit Bucks" which are not redeemable for cash under any circumstances whatsoever. Since Swapit is now closed, credits are not able to be redeemed and are gone.

4) Can I get my CDs and games back?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use, transfer of title of ownership occurred upon acceptance of the goods by Swapit. At that point, the goods became the property of Swapit. Swapit's lender, which has a secured interest in all of Swapit's assets, including the CDs and games, is owed much more than the value of Swapit's property. Swapit expects the secured lender to foreclose upon Swapit's property. Swapit does not know what the secured lender intends to do with the property once it completes the foreclosure.

5) Are there arrangements for settlement with customers?

Due to its circumstances, Swapit is not able to offer its customers financial compensation. Swapit is exploring whether it may be possible for its customers to receive credits with other similar sites. At this time, there are no arrangements in place. If it becomes possible for customers to receive credit with another site, you will see a notice posted at Swapit.com

Chocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored WaterChocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored Water
Limp Bizkit /$5.00
games
browse all games

NASCAR 2001NASCAR 2001
PlayStation2 /$24.00
1 Halfway Between The Gutter & The Stars (Explicit) (Fatboy Slim) /$6.75
2 Jagged Little Pill (Alanis Morissette) /$2.50
3 Tragic Kingdom (No Doubt) /$2.50Crazy Taxi (Dreamcast) /$14.00
2 Lunar Silver Star Story (PlayStation) /$28.00
3 Tony Hawk's Pro Skater (PlayStation) /$13.25

Wapit believes in a mobile driven future and is dedicated to lead the new generation of simple, time and place independent mobile communication.

Wapit creates advanced mobile middleware technology and applications. Our customers can use our technology to build and maintain multiple, revenue generating mobile solutions tailored to their market needs.

Founded in 1998, Wapit Ltd. headquarters are in Helsinki, Finland.

Sunday
January 27, 2002

491,524 group buying members!

Saving on everyday services has never been easier. With OnlineChoice, you join hundreds of thousands of others in powerful, free, no obligation consumer buying pools -- and we use this collective clout to negotiate great deals. Group buying power lowers your monthly bills.

1) What happened to Swapit?

Swapit was forced to close down because it could not obtain additional funding. As soon as it became apparent that no further funding would take place, Swapit shut down its website.

2) Is Swapit coming back?

Swapit is closed permanently. It is not coming back under another name or as another company.

3) What happens to my credits?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use to which all Swapit Members agreed to prior to using the Swapit site, once any of the CDs and games was accepted, customers were credited with "Swapit Bucks" which are not redeemable for cash under any circumstances whatsoever. Since Swapit is now closed, credits are not able to be redeemed and are gone.

4) Can I get my CDs and games back?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use, transfer of title of ownership occurred upon acceptance of the goods by Swapit. At that point, the goods became the property of Swapit. Swapit's lender, which has a secured interest in all of Swapit's assets, including the CDs and games, is owed much more than the value of Swapit's property. Swapit expects the secured lender to foreclose upon Swapit's property. Swapit does not know what the secured lender intends to do with the property once it completes the foreclosure.

5) Are there arrangements for settlement with customers?

Due to its circumstances, Swapit is not able to offer its customers financial compensation. Swapit is exploring whether it may be possible for its customers to receive credits with other similar sites. At this time, there are no arrangements in place. If it becomes possible for customers to receive credit with another site, you will see a notice posted at Swapit.com

Chocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored WaterChocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored Water
Limp Bizkit /$5.00
games
browse all games

NASCAR 2001NASCAR 2001
PlayStation2 /$24.00
1 Halfway Between The Gutter & The Stars (Explicit) (Fatboy Slim) /$6.75
2 Jagged Little Pill (Alanis Morissette) /$2.50
3 Tragic Kingdom (No Doubt) /$2.50Crazy Taxi (Dreamcast) /$14.00
2 Lunar Silver Star Story (PlayStation) /$28.00
3 Tony Hawk's Pro Skater (PlayStation) /$13.25

Wapit believes in a mobile driven future and is dedicated to lead the new generation of simple, time and place independent mobile communication.

Wapit creates advanced mobile middleware technology and applications. Our customers can use our technology to build and maintain multiple, revenue generating mobile solutions tailored to their market needs.

Founded in 1998, Wapit Ltd. headquarters are in Helsinki, Finland.

Sunday
January 27, 2002

491,524 group buying members!

Saving on everyday services has never been easier. With OnlineChoice, you join hundreds of thousands of others in powerful, free, no obligation consumer buying pools -- and we use this collective clout to negotiate great deals. Group buying power lowers your monthly bills.

1) What happened to Swapit?

Swapit was forced to close down because it could not obtain additional funding. As soon as it became apparent that no further funding would take place, Swapit shut down its website.

2) Is Swapit coming back?

Swapit is closed permanently. It is not coming back under another name or as another company.

3) What happens to my credits?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use to which all Swapit Members agreed to prior to using the Swapit site, once any of the CDs and games was accepted, customers were credited with "Swapit Bucks" which are not redeemable for cash under any circumstances whatsoever. Since Swapit is now closed, credits are not able to be redeemed and are gone.

4) Can I get my CDs and games back?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use, transfer of title of ownership occurred upon acceptance of the goods by Swapit. At that point, the goods became the property of Swapit. Swapit's lender, which has a secured interest in all of Swapit's assets, including the CDs and games, is owed much more than the value of Swapit's property. Swapit expects the secured lender to foreclose upon Swapit's property. Swapit does not know what the secured lender intends to do with the property once it completes the foreclosure.

5) Are there arrangements for settlement with customers?

Due to its circumstances, Swapit is not able to offer its customers financial compensation. Swapit is exploring whether it may be possible for its customers to receive credits with other similar sites. At this time, there are no arrangements in place. If it becomes possible for customers to receive credit with another site, you will see a notice posted at Swapit.com

Chocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored WaterChocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored Water
Limp Bizkit /$5.00
games
browse all games

NASCAR 2001NASCAR 2001
PlayStation2 /$24.00
1 Halfway Between The Gutter & The Stars (Explicit) (Fatboy Slim) /$6.75
2 Jagged Little Pill (Alanis Morissette) /$2.50
3 Tragic Kingdom (No Doubt) /$2.50Crazy Taxi (Dreamcast) /$14.00
2 Lunar Silver Star Story (PlayStation) /$28.00
3 Tony Hawk's Pro Skater (PlayStation) /$13.25

Wapit believes in a mobile driven future and is dedicated to lead the new generation of simple, time and place independent mobile communication.

Wapit creates advanced mobile middleware technology and applications. Our customers can use our technology to build and maintain multiple, revenue generating mobile solutions tailored to their market needs.

Founded in 1998, Wapit Ltd. headquarters are in Helsinki, Finland.

Sunday
January 27, 2002

491,524 group buying members!

Saving on everyday services has never been easier. With OnlineChoice, you join hundreds of thousands of others in powerful, free, no obligation consumer buying pools -- and we use this collective clout to negotiate great deals. Group buying power lowers your monthly bills.

1) What happened to Swapit?

Swapit was forced to close down because it could not obtain additional funding. As soon as it became apparent that no further funding would take place, Swapit shut down its website.

2) Is Swapit coming back?

Swapit is closed permanently. It is not coming back under another name or as another company.

3) What happens to my credits?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use to which all Swapit Members agreed to prior to using the Swapit site, once any of the CDs and games was accepted, customers were credited with "Swapit Bucks" which are not redeemable for cash under any circumstances whatsoever. Since Swapit is now closed, credits are not able to be redeemed and are gone.

4) Can I get my CDs and games back?

According to the Terms and Conditions of Use, transfer of title of ownership occurred upon acceptance of the goods by Swapit. At that point, the goods became the property of Swapit. Swapit's lender, which has a secured interest in all of Swapit's assets, including the CDs and games, is owed much more than the value of Swapit's property. Swapit expects the secured lender to foreclose upon Swapit's property. Swapit does not know what the secured lender intends to do with the property once it completes the foreclosure.

5) Are there arrangements for settlement with customers?

Due to its circumstances, Swapit is not able to offer its customers financial compensation. Swapit is exploring whether it may be possible for its customers to receive credits with other similar sites. At this time, there are no arrangements in place. If it becomes possible for customers to receive credit with another site, you will see a notice posted at Swapit.com

Chocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored WaterChocolate Starfish & The Hotdog Flavored Water
Limp Bizkit /$5.00
games
browse all games

NASCAR 2001NASCAR 2001
PlayStation2 /$24.00
1 Halfway Between The Gutter & The Stars (Explicit) (Fatboy Slim) /$6.75
2 Jagged Little Pill (Alanis Morissette) /$2.50
3 Tragic Kingdom (No Doubt) /$2.50Crazy Taxi (Dreamcast) /$14.00
2 Lunar Silver Star Story (PlayStation) /$28.00
3 Tony Hawk's Pro Skater (PlayStation) /$13.25

The Wayback Machine has this in their archive.

The Wayback Machine has this in their archive.

For those who would like to see what the page looked like, this is the last one i could find: click here its dated Oct. 25th, 2001

Don't know why people bother getting other people to take down web sites, really.

http://web.archive.org/web/20011025014320/http://w ww.yourvote.com/pci/

At least the data is not completely gone.

Gentlemen, start your mirrors.

I can see how the PCI-SIG might have a case for objecting to the use of the logo - you usually have to be a member to use that. Attibuting the PCI name might have alleviated the situation also.

It's also cached "permamently" on the wonderful
WayBack Machine with the latest cached copy on October 2001 here

It will at least be there unless Jim (or lawyers) contact them to have it removed.

Everybody should grab your copies now so this information remains public and useful. And by all means give lots of credit to the hardworking Jim Boemler and just remove the offensive PCI(tm) logo.

It's also cached "permamently" on the wonderful
WayBack Machine with the latest cached copy on October 2001 here

It will at least be there unless Jim (or lawyers) contact them to have it removed.

Everybody should grab your copies now so this information remains public and useful. And by all means give lots of credit to the hardworking Jim Boemler and just remove the offensive PCI(tm) logo.

You have to check the archive for altavista.digital.com to get the original sites

Remember the $3.35 million domain name dispute from 1997 ?

You have to check the archive for altavista.digital.com to get the original sites

Remember the $3.35 million domain name dispute from 1997 ?

There's an article that describes its demise pretty well here.

It tried to be a "portal site," only it wasn't a very good one at all. Botched implementation, a cluttered site and a search engine left unimproved sent a lot of users fleeing over time.

I guess they learned their lesson, albeit too late. If you look at their site now as compared to their site in 2000 you can see a significant difference.