HardOCP Wins Against Infinium Labs

An anonymous reader writes "HardOCP has won a huge legal round against Infinium Labs. The WhereIsPhantom website has all the details, straight from the court dockets. There is a list of orders a mile long for Infinium Labs and owner Tim Roberts to comply with by Sept. 30th."

Comments

Kick ass!

[mriker]

Congrats HardOCP!!

hardocp won?

[urban_gorilla]

ahahahahahahahahaha!!!
*sigh*

Re:I like [H]ard OCP

[moonbender]

I don't mind them reviewing other kinds of hardware, but Tom's Hardware Guide these days posts everything from editorials to Linux advisories and, what's worse, freaking game previews.

Re:Coral doesn't work 1/2 the damn time

[Guspaz]

Well, then here, see it working properly:

http://servermatrix.com.nyud.net:8090/

It appears to be coralizing the entire page properly. All the images are relative links, so all the images are served up through the cache.

If you're wondering why the page loads so slowly through Coral, that's because nobody is loading the page through Coral in bulk; without a large number of requests to the system, the page won't be cached right away, and you'll have to wait for Coral to download the content before it serves it up to you. However, it IS working and serving it to you; further requests should return cached copies.

Re:Coral doesn't work 1/2 the damn time

[DAldredge]

Can you still mod? I have been told by quite a few /.ers with 4 digit UIDs that they are unable to mode anymore.

Re:your sig

[nursedave]

Which Bush policy is driving the country into the ground? Since the US economy was taking a nosedive before Bush took office, and dove a little harder before even one of his economic incentives went into effect, then really plummetted after 9/11, which maybe could/maybe couldn't have been avoided if Clinton had done a proper job protecting us, then I'm not sure what you're getting at.

But then, you don't either.

Clinton increased our taxes. This gives us less to spend. Bush decreased our taxes. Not only is this right, for it is our money to begin with, not the governments, but it gives us more to spend. As Clinton himself told other nations as advice to encourage development. Not really an adequate argument against that, I'm afraid.

(I know, I shouldn't feed the trolls, but he was so *cute*!)

Re:your sig

[zbuffered]

He's not trolling, he's responding to your .sig.

The US economy faltered right after Bush won the primary. I'm not going to try to convince you that it was related...

Which Bush policy is driving the country into the ground? The Iraq policy. We wouldn't be in a war (that we may not even win) if it weren't for Bush and the neo-conservatives. It's that simple. Whether you like the war or not, it's Bush's war, he owns it, and even though we are the mightiest nation in the world, it seems that he's losing it for us, with the gravest consequences. What? No WMD? Well... Well... Democracy! We're bringing them Democracy! That's a great excuse to invade a sovereign nation (that just happens to have oil).

The UN would be accusing us of war crimes today if they weren't so pussified (like we designed them to be) and we weren't America. If France went into Haiti like we went into Iraq, we would be accusing them of war crimes. If the French tortured innocent Haitians, killing some in the process, and didn't even bother to interrogate some of them, we would have something to say about that, wouldn't we?

Remember when those planes hit the WTC? What did we do about that? Osama who? "I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him." That's because he put those resources in Iraq.

Clinton increased our taxes, giving "us" less to spend, but in so doing he funded social programs that gave us benefits. The average wage-earner today keeps more of the money he makes, but he spends more of it too, on things like health care. He isn't necessarily coming out ahead.

Also, Clinton balanced the budget.

Meanwhile, we're running huge deficits. Neo-conservatives are not fiscal conservatives. To quote Cheney, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the midterm elections. Our due is another big tax cut."

Almost 4 years and 10 trillion dollars later*, what do we have to show for it? No child left behind? An increasing gap between rich and poor? Record corporate profits?

* At the beginning of Bush's term, Greenspan's first testimony before congress was that we needed the tax cut to "avoid paying off the national debt too quickly". We were projecting $5t surplus over 10 years. Now we're projecting $5t deficit. Your share is almost $34,000.

Re:Text of article

[TexArcana2002]

pwnt. Set, match, game to the [H].