Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: irc-junkie.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to irc-junkie.org.

Comments · 4

  1. Re:Id don't think it breaks the GPL by Talrias · · Score: 1 · on Does Shareware X-Chat for Windows Violate the GPL?

    It does; because he added in extra code to the Windows binary, which is not available in the source. He admits it himself.

  2. More on this story by Quickfry · · Score: 1 · on Does Shareware X-Chat for Windows Violate the GPL?

    IRC-Junkie article on Xchat shareware Read more here, FreeNode #xchat is interesting too..

  3. There is more to the story by jasonhamilton · · Score: 3, Informative · on Too slow! FBI Shuts Down Hosting Service
    If you'd been watching IRC sites such as SearchIRC, and IRCJunkie, there has been discussions over this topic since the 15th.

    The only problem is, no one really seems to know what is going on!

    Speculation on cause has ranged from DDoS attacks to having to do with the Microsoft leaked source code.

  4. Purely Voluntary Decision, Eh? by FsG · · Score: 1 · on DALnet For Chatting, Not File Sharing
    On the announcement page, DALnet states that no group or organization is forcing it to make this controversial decision. I, for one, didn't believe this for a second, and here is why. First, you have to understand that DALnet's higher administration has known for years that such a move is practically legal suicide. If you don't block anything, you aren't legally liable for the content transmitted. Once you start selectively blocking things, you're liable if you let something slip through. Furthermore, DALnet use to have a policy about removing those who do illegal stuff (child pornography trading, warez, etc.) but the network CEO personally repealed those policies when he saw the usercount quickly dropping because of them. Why re-instate them now?

    There's more. Anyone who keeps up with IRC news knows that other networks such as IRC-Chat were very recently contacted by the MPAA, who asked them to take an active role in stopping file distribution. At this very same time, DALnet announces a nearly identical policy out of the blue, while claiming that it did so purely voluntarily.

    If nothing else, that seems a little odd.