Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

X10 Files For Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection

Posted by simoniker on from the but-i-love-their-ads-so dept.

telstar writes "As a followup to the recent Slashdot story about X10 losing a $4.3 million patent infringement suit over pop-unders, X10, the wireless camera company that 'only last year billed itself as the world's largest online advertiser', have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. This allows them to continue to operate, but they'll be shielded from creditors while they reorganize their finances - so rest easy, X10 popups are here to stay."

2 of 322 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Sad for the brothers by AllUsernamesAreGone · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    IANAL, but at least in the UK...

    Computer Misuse Act 1990 (c. 18) section 3 covers things like "A person is guilty of an offence if he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer;" (opening unrequested popup advertisements.. well, they are modification of the contents of the computer that are unauthorised, so got them there). Now, subsection 2 gives the requirements for intent as given in subsection 1, and "to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer" sounds very much like popunders to me: they are hindering you seeing the contents of the popup by placing the main window in the way. Subsections 3, 4 and 5 are even nastier for them.

    IMO popunders are a blantant violation of the UK's computer misuse act, unrequested popups probably are as well as they hinder the use of the main browser and are unauthorised and unrequested.

  2. Good God, who dropped you when you were young? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    (opening unrequested popup advertisements.. well, they are modification of the contents of the computer that are unauthorised, so got them there)

    Not only is this an idiotic comment, unless you can cite case law to support your argument you havn't "got" anybody. I like to see you argue in front of a judge that a window being opened by a website which you just surfed to is both "unrequested" and a "modification of the contents of the computer".

    I really mean that, I would love to see it. A comedy goldmine just waiting to happen.

    "to prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer" sounds very much like popunders to me: they are hindering you seeing the contents of the popup by placing the main window in the way.

    Again, I fear you must have been dropped when young. Its the only way I can reconcile the notion that you seriously believe what you have written. A pop-under ad "hinders access to any program or data"? How so? Unless you're an idiot, you can move the top most window and..there! The pop-under can be seen. Hardly "hindered" now is it?

    You are one of the biggest fools I've had the displeaser to read on Slashdot in a very long time, and I read Slashdot at -1 Nested, daily, for the past four years. You'd probably be proud of the destinction.