Slashdot Mirror


Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boing

An anonymous reader sends word that USB VOIP company Magicjack lost a lawsuit against Boing Boing when the judge declared the legal action a SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation). Magicjack must pay more than $50,000 in legal costs. Boing Boing has posted a page linking and summarizing all the legal documents relating to the lawsuit.

148 comments

  1. Well, MagicJack succeeded in by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    convincing me to not buy their product. Too bad, I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it. But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful
      According to the linked article:

      After the dismissal of the lawsuit, MagicJack CEO Dan Borislow apologized and told us that his lawyers, Arnold & Porter, did not fully disclose to him the weaknesses in his case or properly analyze California law. During negotiations, we were surprised when MagicJack agreed to a settlement of our legal costs, then backed out. We would not agree to keep the actual legal dispute confidential under any circumstances. However, we offered not to publish details of our legal costs or their settlement if Borislow would donate $25,000 to charity. MagicJack, however, offered to pay our legal bill only if we'd agree to keep the whole dispute confidential; when we refused, Borislow wrote that he would 'see us in court.' Nonetheless, we're happy with the outcome. The irony for MagicJack is that the proceedings are public record, so the silence it sought was effectively worthless.

      To some extent it looks like they weren't litigious pricks as much as having gotten very bad legal advice and then not backed out when they should have. So this may be more in the category of "too stubborn" more than anything else.

    2. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

      You mean too aggressive for their own good, if he could use a hardware weapon instead of a litigation weapon he probably would have used it.

    3. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Insightful


      To some extent it looks like they weren't litigious pricks as much as having gotten very bad legal advice and then not backed out when they should have.

      So the lawyer thought they could win and was wrong. That somehow excuses them from being pricks by suing in the first place? You make it sound like the lawyer somehow forced Magic Jack to sue.

        So this may be more in the category of "too stubborn" more than anything else.

      I'd say stubborn pricks describes it quite well. Who sues someone for a factually accurate article that describes something the company publicly posted on their site, but hoped nobody would notice? I hadn't heard about the lawsuit or the spying behaviour of magic jack before. (Though I had heard of magic jack). You better believe I'll tell people that they reserve the right to spy on people based on who they call, then decide to sue people who tell anybody.

      --
      AccountKiller
    4. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      convincing me to not buy their product. Too bad, I was considering getting hold of one to play around with it. But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.

      I ordered two of them but when I tried to activate the service it dropped the web link midway through. I wound up stuck in a limbo of not being able to activate them. I tried to contact tech support but all they offered is that bloody chat support. Every time I do that I end up typing for a half hour to an hour to solve a five minute problem. They said that was the only option so I canceled the service and warned others. Crappy service cost them a customer. Add $20 to the price and high actual support people! Nice idea bad execution.

    5. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      No Ubuntu client. Jerking us around ad infinitum. Convinced me not to touch them a loonnnnng time ago.

    6. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by moosesocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So the lawyer thought they could win and was wrong. That somehow excuses them from being pricks by suing in the first place? You make it sound like the lawyer somehow forced Magic Jack to sue.

      Yes. A good lawyer should have told them they had no chance of winning the lawsuit. Prosecuting a libel case in the US is extremely difficult even when the plaintiff has a legitimate case to make.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    7. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by evilviper · · Score: 1

      You better believe I'll tell people that they reserve the right to spy on people based on who they call, then decide to sue people who tell anybody.

      As opposed to "The Phone Company" who never makes any mention of spying on their customers in EULAs or otherwise, but happily does so just as much as they damn-well please...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So the lawyer thought they could win and was wrong. That somehow excuses them from being pricks by suing in the first place? You make it sound like the lawyer somehow forced Magic Jack to sue.

      Yes. A good lawyer should have told them they had no chance of winning the lawsuit. Prosecuting a libel case in the US is extremely difficult even when the plaintiff has a legitimate case to make.

      But that lawyer would have walked away with less money.

    9. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by plover · · Score: 3, Funny

      MagicJack are indeed stubborn pricks.

      But take it no further: "Litigious bastards" is still a phrase best reserved for SCO.

      --
      John
    10. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      DO NOT EVER TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AWAY FROM THE MOVANT and PUT IT ON THEIR LAWYERS.

      If you hire dicks to sue people, it means you hired dicks to sue people.

      It makes me angry because I've been on the receiving end of such dickishness.

       

    11. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's SOP for agreements to be confidential, so the lawyers would have violated their firm's S&P's to accept something else. This would open the firm up to future malpractice liability, so they would be forced to decline. You just don't practice ad hoc law.

    12. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To some extent it looks like they weren't litigious pricks as much as having gotten very bad legal advice and then not backed out when they should have.

      Or, their litigious pricks who refuse to take responsibility for their own actions, and our now blaming their lawyers.

    13. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by nudicle · · Score: 3, Informative
      The problem with this whole line of thinking is that we don't know what Dan Borislow's lawyers said to him. We only know what Dan Borislow says about his lawyers.

      Trust me, every day good lawyers say to their clients the equivalent of "if things blow up, just blame it your lawyer". They often do this when their clients say "I don't care about the probability of getting what I want, I want to got for it. How can I do damage control?"

    14. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by initialE · · Score: 1

      Dicks are sometimes hired on purpose, sometimes by accident. You hire a lawyer because you are clueless on law, and this should be a lesson in not being such a sucker in life. It's the subsequent action that the CEO took on realizing his mistakes that damn him, not his earlier actions. The desire to hide the suit from public scrutiny, the lack of any apology, that stuff.

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
    15. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by douglips · · Score: 3, Funny

      Waste of time, really. All you have to do to get a BoingBoing post taken down is to somehow link the story to the words "Violet Blue."

    16. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, we get it, the legal advice was bad. How does that excuse being a prick? The guy sued for something that was obviously legal and then tried to silence people from telling what happened. In other words, a prick.

    17. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Ok, but if this was a car analogy, it would be like taking your car to the mechanic and being told "sorry, can't be fixed, parts don't exist anymore" and telling the mechanic to fix it anyway. There's nothing hidden, the entire article was in boingboing for all to see, any good lawyer would have said can't be won.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    18. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      And I've hired crappy lawyers. It's really bad when you're told for years you'll win only to be hit with the other guys fees at the end and the lawyer just shrugs and cashes your check. And what can you do, sue the lawyer? That would be the one case they would probably win.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    19. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by noidentity · · Score: 1

      I ordered two of them but when I tried to activate the service it dropped the web link midway through. I wound up stuck in a limbo of not being able to activate them. I tried to contact tech support but all they offered is that bloody chat support. Every time I do that I end up typing for a half hour to an hour to solve a five minute problem. They said that was the only option so I canceled the service and warned others. Crappy service cost them a customer. Add $20 to the price and high actual support people! Nice idea bad execution.

      Wait, you actually think that some people get service from them, that you're one of the few who didn't?

    20. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by maxume · · Score: 2, Funny

      So they aren't litigious pricks, they are just court-happy jackasses?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    21. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I though CEO's were supposed to be business experts that knew a lot more than the average guy. They certainly get paid enough to make the rest of us assume they are super geniuses with IQ's above 150 and a ton of experience and savvy.

      Maybe corporations should stop hiring as CEO some random dude that is good at schmoozing and start hiring competent Executives that earn their pay instead of playing golf all day or talking in circles. Link CEO pay directly to performance. IF the company loses money, they get ZERO pay. If a company is going gangbusters then they get massive pay. Put those worthless assholes on straight commission.

    22. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      you are correct.

      worthless junk is a far better phrase that is suited for Magic Jack

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    23. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      The real problem is what if I want to be a blogger in Virginia where the protections are not the same as California. I guess it was and still is a real threat to free speech. There should be a federal law against SLAPP lawsuits.

    24. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by EvilBudMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Damn you are so right, but for Magic Jack it's just a cost of quelling free speech. They will probably keep doing this to blogging sites, especially those that aren't as big as Boing Boing. In most other states you can't sue them back either. I think that might be a good idea anytime someone looses a civil suit. Make them pay cost if their was no reasonable way they could win period in all the states in all cases.

      I mean is $50,000 really enough to slow them up? They could stand that all day long and some smaller sites may not last it out that long. What a shame.

    25. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the lawyers were working for them not the other way around. Maybe just maybe the lawyers will now get pissed at them over that comment and that would be real cool to see.

    26. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.

      And if we weren't nerds we probably wouldn't have even known about this. My thanks to slashdot! But why aren't these sorts of things reported in the mainstream press?

    27. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boing Boing doesn't do confidential, and their lawyers like to smack down such dickish threats.

      See Demi Moore's rep's letter http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/28/BoingBoing-net%20121509.PDF
      and Boing Boing's classic reply http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/28/BB-response-to-Demi-Moore.PDF

    28. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      But I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor. And if we weren't nerds we probably wouldn't have even known about this. My thanks to slashdot! But why aren't these sorts of things reported in the mainstream press?

      Not sensationalist enough, I'd say. They probably believe that it's only of interest to nerds, and who cares what they find interesting.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    29. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      So if your doctor gives you bad advice, and you follow it because hey he's the doctor, YOU're the asshole?

      It's unclever to make assumptions either way, we really don't know whether or not their legal team was being above-board with them or not.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    30. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      always hirer dicks if you're going after pussies...

    31. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by LuxMaker · · Score: 1

      I have activated 4 MagicJacks without issue. I suspect the problem here may be a PEBCAK error here but I am not sure unless I have more info on what you did to include the spec of your machine and connection. I am not sure how your post was rated +5 "informative" because it is anything but. I don't doubt that you had an issue with two of them but from the looks of it you didn't even try to download the update which I suspect would of fixed your issue. Just a guess without knowing more. FYI I do not in any way work for MagicJack.


      Update for users with Windows 7
      Taken from FAQ here

      or WinXP
      Taken from FAQ here

      --
      I regret that I only have one mod point to give per post.
    32. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      No what the guy is saying is this : "We wanted to shut you up and our lawyers told us we could so we sued but it didn't work out. Sorry we thought we could win our suit to censor you, we were misinformed."

      I don't care if his lawyers told him they shit rainbows and glitter, he hired thugs to shut up someone for writing about his product. Even if the asshole thought he could win it he shouldn't have done it.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    33. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by groslyunderpaid · · Score: 1

      worthless junk is a far better phrase that is suited for Magic Jack

      Someone help me out here, I must be missing something. I paid MagicJack like $30 I think almost a year ago, and have had almost flawless home phone service, including vm/free long distance/etc, the whole time with no issue.

      What exactly would constitute valuable junk, or whatever the opposite of "worthless junk" is?

    34. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      for my $100 a MONTH to at&t for the iphone... I get 20-45 minutes of wait time for the smallest tech or customer service issues... and don't even get them resolved sometimes. I tried magic jack's chat, I was at least in contact with someone in a few minutes - I understand the cost that phone support adds to any company and I have no complaints. i also agree with someone earlier who said that at least magicjack states that in their EULA while other companies just do it, and don't state it. I'm pretty sure it's only so they can server relevant ads.... sound familiar Google?

    35. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so you enjoy the advertisements and them selling your info to marketing companies?

      you read the EULA right???

    36. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by MoralHazard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're dead right about that. Big Law doesn't like quitters. Firms like A&P, Skadden, etc. are staffed & partnered by the top 10-20% of law school grads, who are the worst kind of Type-A, hypomanic, aggressive, need-to-win kids. (They're also pretty damn smart, but that's orthogonal.) The attitude is like a boot-camp drill instructor: If you didn't kick the other guy's ass, you weren't trying hard enough, even if "hard enough" means working 100-hour weeks for months on end. It's unreal.

      I have a bunch of friends from college that went to the good law schools and ended up taking Big Law offers before the diploma ink was dry. Most of them left before the 5-year mark, got their lives back, and are much happier. The few still climbing the partner-track cliff are some of the smartest, most dedicated people I know, but they have no family life and I only see them about twice a year.

      Of course, they start at $150k+ salaries and move up to $200k and $300k range by their 5th year, so I don't feel too sorry for them. And for the rare few who do manage to hold on all the way to the brass ring (making partner), the annual compensation gets into the low 7-figure range. If they ever get tired of that, they can pretty much pick their next jobs in the corporate world at the $1M+ level.

    37. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Weezul · · Score: 1

      If you hire a litigious pricks lawyers, then *you* are a litigious prick too, period. We should avoid buying the products of litigious pricks like MagicJack. So make sure your family knows about other VoIP companies and/or Skype.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    38. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      if he could use a hardware weapon

      Well, if you count the apparently rather thick skull of his lawyer as hardware, I'd say that's exactly what he did.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    39. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with this whole line of thinking is that we don't know what Dan Borislow's lawyers said to him.

      Doesn't matter. Lawyers are just tools to get what whoever pays them wants, and he wanted Boing Boing to shut up.

      This Borislow character went after a site that was publishing factual material. As it happened, this was information that he didn't want his customers (or potential customers) knowing about. In other words, he wants to do whatever he wants without any consequences and he's only apologizing because he had is ass handed to him on a Sterno-fueled platter.

      Furthermore, if you want to mistreat your customers, and use attack lawyers to silence any criticism of your actions, then you're exactly what I originally called him: a litigious prick.

      Of course, a large number of people that had never heard of Magic Jack now know that the company is owned and operated by a complete jerk. That can't be good for sales ... I mean, cripes if there was ever a prime example of the Streisand effect, this is it. You'd think that someone who runs an Internet communications company would have a bit more on the ball. I guess that just makes him a stupid jerk.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    40. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by J+Story · · Score: 1

      so you enjoy the advertisements and them selling your info to marketing companies?

      you read the EULA right???

      Is that really the case? I know someone who not only has a MagicJack himself, but bought another for a relative on another continent. He's probably had one for more than a year and seems quite happy with the product. If there are ads and reselling of info, then it doesn't seem to have lessened his regard.

      There is all this criticism about the EULA, but is there anyone here who can tell us what this has meant in practise?

    41. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by J+Story · · Score: 1

      I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.

      I think this covers a fair chunk of successful companies, public and private. When you're on the hook for millions of dollars in revenue, and competitors are looking for any weakness to bring you down, a sense of humour can be a liability. As for pricks, Microsoft didn't muscle its way into preeminence by Gates being a nice guy. Even allowing that Google isn't evil, it hasn't gotten to its position today by allowing itself to be pushed around.

    42. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I try not to support companies run by litigious pricks with no sense of humor.

      I think this covers a fair chunk of successful companies, public and private. When you're on the hook for millions of dollars in revenue, and competitors are looking for any weakness to bring you down, a sense of humour can be a liability. As for pricks, Microsoft didn't muscle its way into preeminence by Gates being a nice guy. Even allowing that Google isn't evil, it hasn't gotten to its position today by allowing itself to be pushed around.

      I disagree. If you are successful because you play fast and loose with the law, that does not mean that your behavior is acceptable or even tolerable. You become a liability to everyone else, if not an outright aggressive menace.

      Furthermore, in no way was Magic Jack being "pushed around". They released a publicly available document, and then got upset that a news organization had the temerity to comment upon it. The only pushing around being done was by Magic Jack, who were behaving very badly even by corporate standards. The judge in the case apparently thinks so as well.

      It would appear that you are arguing that Magic Jack's actions were entirely reasonable from a legal and business perspective, and that corporations can and should be allowed to suppress outside commentary that they happen to dislike. If so, I disagree with you on a number of levels.

      Are you arguing that the ends justify the means? I imagine that William H. Gates would agree with you. I don't.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    43. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by J+Story · · Score: 1

      The comment is not specifically related to Magic Jack, and "prick" is more a characteristic of Type "A" personalities than of criminals -- although the two are not mutually exclusive.

      As for Magic Jack, there is not enough for me to conclude that its executive team is "evil". In line with the principle of not ascribing to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence, it's quite possible that the team is young and having to learn as the company grows. Given "New Coke" and "Microsoft Bob", a blooper like this should be surprising to no one.

    44. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      DO NOT EVER TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AWAY FROM THE MOVANT and PUT IT ON THEIR LAWYERS.

      If you hire dicks to sue people, it means you hired dicks to sue people.

      It makes me angry because I've been on the receiving end of such dickishness.

      Thank you!

      IAAL and I can tell you that no sane lawyer would assure their client that they will definitely win anything. There are always risks, and if you fail to appraise your client of those risks then once they lose they will turn their attention to suing you.

      Plus, as I often find myself explaining to people, if people could just grow up and work out their problems amicably then lawyers would be out of a job tomorrow.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
    45. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      As for Magic Jack, there is not enough for me to conclude that its executive team is "evil". In line with the principle of not ascribing to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence, it's quite possible that the team is young and having to learn as the company grows. Given "New Coke" and "Microsoft Bob", a blooper like this should be surprising to no one.

      Sure, next time they'll sue someone who can't afford a lawyer/doesn't have a working relationship with the EFF et al.

      --
      $ make available
    46. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i guess you should try CORDIA... visit their website at www.cordiaip.ph

    47. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i guess much better if you try CORDIA..check our website at www.cordiaip.ph..if you are interested you can email me at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to the numbers posted on our website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman..thanks!

    48. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by cordiaprince16 · · Score: 1

      i guess much better you try CORDIA,you can check their website at www.cordiaip.ph if you are interested to the plans they offer just email at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to any contact numbers posted on their website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman to assist you,believe me its way better than Magicjack..thanks!

    49. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by cordiaprince16 · · Score: 1

      I guess much better try out CORDIA,you can check their website at www.cordiaip.ph if youre interested you can send email at wizkaz16@yahoo.com or call to any contact numbers posted on their website and look for Mr.Andrew de Guzman to assist you..thanks!

    50. Re:Well, MagicJack succeeded in by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      So you'll stop using telephony or you'll support the telecoms? An even worse bunch of litigious bastards?

      VOIP threatens a trillion dollar industry and you assume there won't be battles to get it put in place?

      You are very, very, foolish. Communications are valuable, and so people will extract costs from them regardless of how little they cost to provide, those high costs will go into preventing low cost options from becoming workable... All you're really doing is ensuring that your children end up paying into the telecom monopolies instead of restructuring telecommunications...

  2. Soooo.... by Dexter+Herbivore · · Score: 5, Funny

    MagicJack SLAPPed a Boing Boing? Sounds dirty to me.

    1. Re:Soooo.... by Leraika · · Score: 1

      It is; just not in the way you're implying. This sort of use and abuse of the legal system is foul indeed.

  3. A little background please? by dido · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary could have put in a word about how MagicJack sued for defamation after Boing Boing made a post highly critical of their EULA, before explaining how the judge shot their suit down as a SLAPP...

    --
    Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
    1. Re:A little background please? by hldn · · Score: 3, Funny

      this is their ploy to get us to read the articles.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    2. Re:A little background please? by value_added · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sued for defamation? That's not the half of it!

      In the lawsuit ... MagicJack alleged that these statements were false, misleading, and had irreparably harmed MagicJack's reputation by exposing it to "hate, ridicule and obloquy".

      Someone's got to say it ...

      Our three weapons are ... hate, ridicule and obloquoy!

    3. Re:A little background please? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      ...and obloquy... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as hate, ridicule, obloquoy, and obloquy,.... I'll come in again.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    4. Re:A little background please? by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      This is a legitimate question. Yeah, probably, most other sites would have just jerked the article when warned. But, so what. Really I just mostly look at their pictures so /. must be in cahoots.

    5. Re:A little background please? by TJamieson · · Score: 1

      What, no puffery?

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    6. Re:A little background please? by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      ...and obloquy... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as hate, ridicule, obloquoy, and obloquy,.... I'll come in again.

      What, no puffery?

      G'Day Bruce. Right, I just want to remind you of the faculty rules: Rule One!
      No POOFTAS!

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    7. Re:A little background please? by blackpig · · Score: 1

      Rule Two, no member of the faculty is to maltreat the Abbos in any way at all -- if there's anybody watching.

    8. Re:A little background please? by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you forgot "fanatical devotion to the pope"?

      --
      $ make available
  4. Why the black ops stuff? by cogitolv · · Score: 1

    I read somewhere that they are selling the crap out of these. Sounds like a bunch of greedy bags to me.

    --
    Well, sometimes you eat the bear, sometimes the bear eats you.
    1. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Itninja · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have also read that, despite being advertised on those 'as seen on TV' ads that everyone hates, the product actually does what it says. Even stodgy old Consumer Reports says it's a winner.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    2. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      But their business model is unsustainable. There are real, FCC-mandated costs to terminating calls on the PSTN. Those costs are more than $20/year if you terminate even a few hours of calls in rural areas, and can easily exceed $20/year even if you only ever call metro numbers.

      The only way MagicJack can make a go of it is by becoming a CLEC, preferably in areas with high termination fees, then collecting those termination fees on inbound calls and hoping that they get enough inbound traffic to pay termination fees on all their outbound calls. Presumably most of their outbound calls are to low-rate metro areas, which makes things easier, but it's still playing an arbitrage game. They also stack they deck by explicitly block some high-termination-rate areas -- mostly those used by other companies with the same business model -- meaning you simply can't connect with some people or services in high-tarrif regions.

      The long and the short of it is real phone companies won't put up with this for long if they see it as a real threat. They'll either start doing it themselves and the mandatory termination fees will be restructured, or they'll find some way to make it illegal/convince their lawmakers and regulators that it already is illegal.

    3. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by toadlife · · Score: 2, Informative

      My Dad bought one over a year ago. He still uses it and has been happy with it.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    4. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Itninja · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, but they're not doing that at all. All it is doing to opening (in the background) something similar to MSN Live Messenger (or Yahoo, or any other major chat client) voice chat. There's no compression to speak of and certainly no QoS stuff. LIke recording yourself in a WAV file and emailing it to someone...only really fast. And then there's a small rj-11 jack to plug in a handset. As far as I know web based voice chats are not regulated at all.

      --
      I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    5. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by maxume · · Score: 1

      You can place a call to someone with a regular landline phone.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Problem is that it's really low grade service with a low grade hardware. you NEED a computer, you NEED broadband. Skype does this with an even better hardware base and allows you to skype in and out with local numbers. I have yet to see magicjack offer local numbers in many towns. Plus there are tons of reports all over the internet of it hanging up on calls constantly and a lot of other problems.

      I guess if you want ATT wireless quality of service for your home phone, it's a great device. but I know what VoIP is like and Magicjack is not it.

      Consumer Reports is not what it used to be, I'd not use them as a yardstick that is still accurate.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      your dad could have downloaded skype for free and gotten better service for free instead.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    8. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Mr_Perl · · Score: 1

      I wasted three days trying to get one working after reading a multitude of either

      a) paid astroturf
      b) rabid fans who overlook its faults

      that led me to think it would work. Particularly the first result that comes up in Google claiming someone got their credit card terminal to work through it. Ha, hilarious. This service is so oversold.

      I wasn't able to get even one decent call on a 15Mb/s connection that got top scores on VoIP test.

      In the end I switched to the more expensive, but standalone Ooma, which is pretty cool. Story here if you're interested:

      http://matts.org/voip_with_credit_card_terminal_magic_jack_vs_ooma

      --

      My poetry site welcomes the unusual.
    9. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by TJamieson · · Score: 1

      Is it free to make calls from Skype, to a landline? Last time I looked it cost money. But you are correct -- the MagicJack box is just a generic rebranded USB-to-VoIP box and works perfectly with Skype.

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    10. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Last I checked Magicjack cost money as well. $20.00 a year to "renew" As well as being bombarded with Advertisements on your PC and your phone calls AND they reserve the right to sell your information to marketing companies.... It's all in the EULA, you agree to it by using the device and service.

      $40.00 = 2000 minutes of skypeout calls to regular and cellular numbers in the USA. Not something to sneeze at. so the yearly cost is another 1000 minutes. That's more than a year of calls on my home number. if you exclude all the telemarketers.

      Last I checked Skype does not do that to any of their users.

    11. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have a CLEC. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MagicJack

    12. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

      I've been using MagicJack for over a year now. Who can argue with $20 a year? The primary reason I got the service was for international calls. Local calling is handled almost exclusively with mobile phones. Initially I did have landline with AT&T and ran into issues with voice quality. So considering what I was paying I dropped them and at the strong recommendation of my father got MagicJack. In general it works, but for a long time there were issues with call quality and the occasional dropped calls. Skype wasn't even an option because while it was good for Europe it was absolutely awful for calling to Asia.

      MagicJack has dramatically improved over the past 6-8 months to the point where call quality is no longer an issue. On the other hand, the software for the device tends to be buggy and it can be a pretty big source of frustration. The device stops working if the computer goes into sleep mode and is reactivated. Roughly every few weeks it just stops working and has to be restarted, sometimes requiring multiple attempts to get going. And recently it seemed to crap out in the middle of some supposed update, but after some tinkering it was working fine again. I've never even dared trying customer service because it's supposed to be complete garbage and virtually non-existent.

      Despite the cost savings I planning on switching to something else. Skype's quality has improved and we used it for video chat, but I'm considering Ooma which, from what I've heard, is supposed to be quite good and fairly reliable. MagicJack is a good idea which has been poorly implemented and there certainly is value in spending a little more for quality.

    13. Re:Why the black ops stuff? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      He actually uses Skype too to do video chat with me, but the ability to plug in a standard phone is valuable to him - as I suspect it is for many older people.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  5. TorJack - instant Tor everywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    someone should advertise a TorJack solution, for perpetual Tor use. Once we get all devices using Tor, we win.

  6. "Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boing" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Wow. See how seriously I'm gonna take this story.

    And you guys wonder why jocks like to beat us up...

  7. Great tech, shitty business by bguiz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even BoingBoing agrees that MagicJack's hardware is great stuff... Too bad their marketing/management/legal department seems to think it can get away with shady practices like their crappy EULA.

    1. Re:Great tech, shitty business by Pence128 · · Score: 1

      the hardware isn't all that impressive. start with one of those USB sound card thingies, add 48V DC (power) and 90V AC and a control signal (ringing).

      --
      404: sig not found.
    2. Re:Great tech, shitty business by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Indeed, from what I gather it's mostly the magic ability to freeride on somebody else's network that makes it magic. It's easy to be that cheap when you can get somebody else to pay most of the costs involved. I've been wondering for a while how long they'll be allowed to keep selling their devices.

    3. Re:Great tech, shitty business by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      The hardware is NOT great stuff. It's a cheap china usb soundcard -> Phone interface. Granted you cant screw that up too badly, but it's not cisco enterprise quality Voip hardware.. it's very low cost consumer hardware.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Great tech, shitty business by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it looks like you would have to be a real VOIP company. People around here have bought them to run off of dial up. I'm not kidding either. It's a piece of crap hardware wise too.

    5. Re:Great tech, shitty business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck are you smoking dipshit? Of course someone is paying for the network - the fucking person who bought the magic jack and installed in their house HAS TO have an internet connection.

      Do you work for comcast? Asshole. Go play in traffic.

    6. Re:Great tech, shitty business by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Informative

      The hardware is NOT great stuff. It's a cheap china usb soundcard -> Phone interface. Granted you cant screw that up too badly, but it's not cisco enterprise quality Voip hardware.. it's very low cost consumer hardware.

      Which means what in terms of use? Bad gain? Untenable echo? Impedence problems? Crackly sound?

      Walt Mossberg's review said people he was talking to couldn't tell he wasn't on a landline, though I doubt Walt ever gets a random box off the warehouse shelf.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  8. So MagicJack probed their ports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Option number two looked warm, they took it, and it wasn't as clean an approach as they thought?

    I give...

  9. FUD about Blogging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the article;

    In the lawsuit... It also alleged that I am a professional blogger.

    I knew that bloggers were disreputable sources for Wikipedia, but I had no idea that being a blogger could be used against you in a court of law.

    1. Re:FUD about Blogging by bguiz · · Score: 1

      It also alleged that I am a professional blogger.

      When I read that, I too was wondering what on earth that was meant to imply - as "allege" implies some form of accusation. BoingBoing's writers are most certainly professional bloggers. That is a statement of fact, not an allegation, so what really was the accusation?

    2. Re:FUD about Blogging by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      He is not a professional blogger, rather he is an elite blogger, or so he captioned this photo: http://elitechoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/rob.jpg

      Don't you know the difference?

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    3. Re:FUD about Blogging by Evil+Shabazz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Elite blogging is an oxymoron, like military intelligence or Microsoft Works (tm).

      --
      Down with the career politician! SUPPORT TERM LIMITS
    4. Re:FUD about Blogging by bguiz · · Score: 1

      oxymoron, like ... Microsoft Works (tm)

      Mod parent up!!!

    5. Re:FUD about Blogging by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      "almost exactly"
      "American English"
      "baggy tights"
      "journalistic ethics"
      "creation science"

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:FUD about Blogging by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That's not true, Microsoft works very hard. Just not at making quality products or fixing bugs. In fact, the last time I saw them do any work, they were trying to lift their huge paychecks.

  10. Re:"Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "MagicJack"

    "Boing Boing"

    "Twitter"

    "Blog"

    "Facebook"

    The song was right: We've turned Japanese, people.

  11. So! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the effigies are of:

    Outfit by the name MagicJack
    CEO Dan Borislow
    Their law firm Arnold and Porter

    Open-and-shut case, according to BoingBoing's side of story, but they are an annoying outfit, too, so slide the barbecue dial accordingly.

    Light'em up. BURN, BABY, BURN!!!

  12. Must support Boing Boing by Snaller · · Score: 1

    The last best hope for Amiga peace!

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  13. Alternatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So whats the best cheap alternative to magicjack for folks with hi speed net who want a home phone #?

    1. Re:Alternatives? by Jeff321 · · Score: 2, Informative

      SkypeIn

    2. Re:Alternatives? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      SIP, lots of providers lots of software options

  14. Re:"Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU TAKE THAT BACK. This is a social evolution. There is NOTHING wrong with saying blog. Nor facebook. Nor twitter. In fact everything is done I do by Twitter/facebook. It is more efficient and I can keep up with my friends that way.
     
    You're right--we're all dead, man. Technology in the hands of morons directly results in morons asserting idiocy into society.

  15. STREISSAND EFFECT tag is obligatory.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes yes.. streissand effect -- i had no idea until now. now i will tell everyone about magicjack's evils when people mention it.

  16. I lo;ve MagicJack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I continue to be amused by the power switch on the MagicJack: MagicJack On. MagicJack Off.

    1. Re:I lo;ve MagicJack by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I continue to be amused by the power switch on the MagicJack: MagicJack On. MagicJack Off.

      I got in trouble with my mom once because the SNES instruction manual said "Flip off the power switch".

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:I lo;ve MagicJack by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Bender! Are you jacking on in there?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    3. Re:I lo;ve MagicJack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just the name in general makes me laugh. It sounds like some sort of personal lubrication or pocket pussy product.

      They will eventually go under though. Unsustainable business model. Right now they are relying on the hardware sales. Eventually those will dry up and they will have a huge user base with not enough income to support the infrastructure of all those people. Even now, good luck trying to get decent support from them.

    4. Re:I lo;ve MagicJack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is no power switch.

  17. Re:"Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Facebook is not social interaction, no matter how many times you say it is.

  18. Stuff that matters ? by Antiocheian · · Score: 0

    Why is that important ?

  19. Parallel with Google AdSense by bguiz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring). How is this really much different from Google's adsense inside of gmail, where ads containing keywords found in your email's body are displayed next to your emails?

    Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway, but what really was the difference? Did it boil down to Google's better wording or selling of its adsense, or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email?

    1. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      Google doesn't make it a secret. MagicJack does.

      Thus, they're creeps.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    2. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by Alrescha · · Score: 1

      "It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring)."

      The EULA does not say that 'calls are monitored', it says that 'Our computers may analyze the phone numbers you call'. I think that's a big difference. BoingBoing did a Slashdot-like editorial move and phrased their headline for maximum outrage and minimum accuracy.

      A.

      --
      ...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
    3. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by EvilBudMan · · Score: 1

      If you don't know the difference, really I can't tell you at this point. MagicJack is Eviiiiil and Google is gooood. Now do you see, no? I didn't think so.

    4. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

      It's not a secret if it's printed right there in the EULA.

    5. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      Nitpick ;-)

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    6. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by groslyunderpaid · · Score: 1

      OMG!! Look at these targeted ads! Judging by the ad, it would seem that they have determined by my calling habits that I like to ..... make phone calls?

      My Remote Desktop

      PS No jokes about my cluttered and edited desktop, or choice of OS.

    7. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by bguiz · · Score: 1

      Except that the judge's ruling dismissed the case on the grounds that BoingBoing did indeed make accurate claims - evidence from TFA:

      After it failed to do so, a California judge dismissed MagicJack's suit late last year. She noted that in its complaint, MagicJack essentially admitted the very act it claims to be defamed by.

      As to the statements based on the EULA, such statements, read in context, do not imply that the plaintiff is eavesdropping on its customers calls. Instead, the statements clearly constitute the opinion of the author that analyzing phone numbers for purposes of targeted advertising amounts to "spy[ing]," "snoop[ing]," and "systematic privacy invasion."

    8. Re:Parallel with Google AdSense by caitsith01 · · Score: 1

      It just struck me that the main bone BoingBoing had to pick with MagicJack's EULA is that its users' calls are monitored, and are played targeted ads (obtained from said monitoring). How is this really much different from Google's adsense inside of gmail, where ads containing keywords found in your email's body are displayed next to your emails?

      Not that I am supporting MagicJack or Google in anyway, but what really was the difference? Did it boil down to Google's better wording or selling of its adsense, or are we just more sensitive when it is done to audio/ voice as opposed to when it is done in text/ email?

      The difference is that, as with Apple, people are wilfully blind to the serious privacy problems with using Google products. Arguably Gmail is worse because Google actually trawls and stores the content of your emails, not just the address of the recipient and sender. I had a look at the EULA a while ago - it's pretty bad.

      Disclaimer - it may have changed since then.

      --
      Read Pynchon.
  20. This company is horrible by gargeug · · Score: 5, Informative

    So my boss bought these for our office, and as the tech guy I had to actually deal with them. The device itself is actually quite good, but their company is an abomination of a decent business. One of the jacks stopped working, and so I figured that it should be replaced with the option of transferring our old number to the new jack. Their customer service jerked me around for hours until one of them finally sent me a link to their terms and hung up on me. Basically, once they have your money they will jump through hoops to not help you at all. It is such a sleazy company and I hope nobody here gets fooled by them and actually buys it. Pay more for your service just to deal with a reputable company.

    1. Re:This company is horrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you wasted hours of your company's time for a $40 device?

    2. Re:This company is horrible by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Wow, your boss is pretty dumb. Why the hell would he buy those for the office? is he that clueless or cheap?

      Let me guess, none of you have laptops, everyone is using the cheapest netbooks he can find, you all have card tables for desks, and the pens and paper you have all have different hotel names on them.

      only a complete idiot would use magicjacks for business.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  21. OF COURSE they're litigious pricks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    To some extent it looks like they weren't litigious pricks as much as having gotten very bad legal advice

    How did they find themselves in a situation where they were receiving legal advice, unless they were already committed to assholery? When you're just sitting there minding your own business, lawyers don't just call you up out of the blue and spout advice at you before you can hang up.

    Someone made a statement about MagicJack that MagicJack knew was true. MagicJack decided, "fuck the truth, I wonder if there's a way we can use force to shut them up." Ok, at that point a foolish lawyer might say, "Yes, I think I know a way that you can be a total motherfucking litigious asshole and successfully use force against this totally innocent party in order to suppress the truth," and a gullible MagicJack might believe that the lawyer was telling the truth.

    But anyone who isn't evil, upon hearing that advice from their lawyer (let's ignore the fact that they had already proved themselves evil by even bothering to seek that advice), would say to their lawyer, "Well, that's interesting, Mr. Lawyer. I hope you enjoyed this intellectual exercise, but of course since I'm not a total mother-stabbing new-age-witchcraft-practicing father-raping puppy-shredding nun-strangling terrorist hippie racist moronic flat-earther sexist heretic robber-baron asshole Republican innocent-attacking bastard litigious prostitute kitten-poisoning jerk gay Scientologist thieving SCO homophobic Democrat shit-eating Nazi stupid criminal cocksucking evil Communist odious pig-fucking Christian pedophile nu-metal-wigger Romulan poo-head, I couldn't possibly actually proceed with such a case against a totally innocent party, even though I could successfully work my evil to advance the general cause of harming society and making the world a worse place. As much as I'd really like to, because I really do like injustice."

    We know they're motherfuckers, and bad legal advice is totally beside the point. Accepting bad legal advice only means they're gullible motherfuckers.

    1. Re:OF COURSE they're litigious pricks by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      total mother-stabbing new-age-witchcraft-practicing father-raping puppy-shredding nun-strangling terrorist hippie racist moronic flat-earther sexist heretic robber-baron asshole Republican innocent-attacking bastard litigious prostitute kitten-poisoning jerk gay Scientologist thieving SCO homophobic Democrat shit-eating Nazi stupid criminal cocksucking evil Communist odious pig-fucking Christian pedophile nu-metal-wigger Romulan poo-head

      remind me to use that more often in coversation...

      --
      FGD 135
    2. Re:OF COURSE they're litigious pricks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I was actually considering memorizing that one.... I was particularly impressed that both Republican and Democrat made it into the rant.

    3. Re:OF COURSE they're litigious pricks by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Funny

      a total mother-stabbing new-age-witchcraft-practicing father-raping puppy-shredding nun-strangling terrorist hippie racist moronic flat-earther sexist heretic robber-baron asshole Republican innocent-attacking bastard litigious prostitute kitten-poisoning jerk gay Scientologist thieving SCO homophobic Democrat shit-eating Nazi stupid criminal cocksucking evil Communist odious pig-fucking Christian pedophile nu-metal-wigger Romulan poo-head

      I think you're being a little unfair to the Romulans.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:OF COURSE they're litigious pricks by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      I was actually considering memorizing that one.... I was particularly impressed that both Republican and Democrat made it into the rant.

      Two arms of one party: the lobbying party.

      --
      $ make available
  22. 15 years Ago by Your+Anus · · Score: 1

    25 years ago, that headline would have made no sense.

    --

    In the USA, we like stuff watered down, like beer, television, and freedom.
    1. Re:15 years Ago by dangitman · · Score: 1

      25 years ago, that headline would have made no sense.

      It still doesn't make sense today, in 2010.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  23. You don't have to do it that way by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    You can use gmail from a client program if you don't want to look at google ads.

    You can't avoid MagicJack the same way.

    1. Re:You don't have to do it that way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use gmail from a client program if you don't want to look at google ads.

      You can't avoid MagicJack the same way.

      You can't get completely away from the ads, but you can install the MJ service in another user account. No pop-ups when phone rings.

  24. Re:"Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boi by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 0, Troll

    No one gives a shit about your opinions, no matter how often you present them on Slashdot as facts.

    Well, except for the 3 people that modded you insightful, that is.

    --

    People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
  25. Ran their EULA through EULAlyzer... by WidgetGuy · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...and it concluded: "The license agreement above has a high calculated interest ID. It's extremely long, and there were a high number of detected 'interesting' words or phrases." That means Eulalyzer thinks its a bad EULA. The interesting words or phrases are listed and can be viewed in context: (1) Advertising, (2) Emergency Calls or Services, (3) Third Party, (4) Web Site Address, and (5) Without Notice. I've never seen a EULA with that many "'interesting' words or phrases" called out by the program.

    EULAlyzer is a free (download: http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/downloads.html). If, like me, you don't have the time to read through the EULA's for software you're thinking of purchasing, this is just the program for you. At the very least, it will give you a "heads up" and point you to the 'interesting' parts of the EULA where you can, then, read as much "legalese" as you can stomach..

    --
    One "Aw, Shit!" is worth 100 "Ata boys!"
  26. Can you use them with Asterisk? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's all I care about, not their shitty SIP service, or their shitty customer service, but using them with Asterisk as an interface.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Can you use them with Asterisk? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Why.. get some real SIP hardware for the same price.

      all it is is a usb soundcard that interfaces to a telephone.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Can you use them with Asterisk? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why.. get some real SIP hardware for the same price.

      Because it's the cheapest TNI out there, due to subsidization.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Can you use them with Asterisk? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      HUH? cheapest?

      http://www.amazon.com/Phone-Adapter-Interface-connects-network/dp/B000JCU88S

      $25.00 is less than $40.00 you must not have looked very hard, that was my first hit on amazon.com. I have seen them for $9.95 for generic usb-> phone interfaces that work under linux and windows.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Can you use them with Asterisk? by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 1
      What you want is a Linksys / Cisco PAP2T.
      1. It costs about $40 about the same as MagicJack.
      2. It a real SIP box.
      3. It's able to handle two different accounts and serve two different phone lines.
      4. It's very popular so there's lots of online help available.
      5. Once configured it "just works" for years on end.
      6. When combined with a Gizmo5 account and a Google Voice account you get free calls.
      --
      "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
    5. Re:Can you use them with Asterisk? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have repeatedly seen magicjack in stores for $19.95. I have held off buying one not knowing if it would work with Linux.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  27. Re:"Magicjack Loses Legal Attack Against Boing Boi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You interact with other people (presumably), thus it it social interaction.

    Granted, a broader sense of "social" is needed.

  28. I wouldn't touch the product until by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they include an actual uninstaller. As it stands, you need to manually remove files/registry keys to get rid of it.

  29. MagicJack a Product of ... "Ymax" .. ? by rhadc · · Score: 1

    What really turned me away from the MagicJack was that the company that produced it was called "Ymax." The use of "Ymax", which looks to me like a deliberate attempt to hijack the term "WiMax." Those familiar with WiMax, the 802.16-based wireless access technology, would not likely confuse the WiMax and MagicJack's proprietor. But those on the periphery conversations around WiMax might. The attempt to siphon off good will toward WiMax shared by the ill-informed seems like a deceitful salesman's scam. Not that I know the owner. I'm not getting one.

  30. Typical Corporation. by DarthVain · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This had nothing to do with MagicJack as a product, nor was anyone saying that it was inherently bad, a ripoff, or a scam.

    This was simply BOING BOING pointing out, that like MANY corporations, their EULA is ridiculous. Like so many others, it is A) almost impossible to find, and B) absolutely ridiculous in its content. You have to promise your first born son for sacrifice to the telecommunication gods by buying their product, and you don't really find this out, until you have already bought their product. Move along, nothing to see here. The demands corporations TYPICALLY put in EULA's are above and beyond reasonable and are pretty much crazy. IANAL however I would bet MOST of these EULA's would not stand up in court as binding (though they may give weight for intent or something of that nature).

    Having said all that, MagicJack could have easily amended their stupid EULA to something a bit nicer, or tried to appease their POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS another way. However in true corporate form they would rather hire a bunch of lawyers and duke it out in court to avoid giving consumers what they want. Re-read that statement. Crazy. Not only that, I bet if you pulled the stats as to how many times a EULA like this would even be USED, particularly for a 50$ product with a 3$ subscription fee, it would be minute to the point of non-existence. As we all know while some people may put up a big stink about this sort of thing (and they should) most if faced with the actual situation either are too lazy or don't care enough about it to make any kind of stand anyway.

    In all a stupid move by MagicJack, but one that seems about par for the course for any corporate identity.

    I applaud BOING BOING for its work however, as the basic principle is if you don't like it, or agree with it, simply don't buy it. However in this case and many like it, you would never have found out about it until after you bought the product (if then) so it is already too late, they already got your money.

    This is why it is important what BOING BOING did (particulary when they didn't really have to, other than feeling slighted for being pushed around by lawyers), and why the SLAPP is a good idea, as it keeps the public informed. It isn't saying that MagicJack must change what it does, or fining them for bad behavior. It is just a decision that says, BOING BOING has a legitimate right to inform people about this information, and that MagicJack doesn't have the right to try and use the courts as its thugs to try and prevent it, thus they can pay for most of BOING BOING's legal fees. Thats all.

    Anyway good for BOING BOING, and shame on MagicJack.

  31. And the Winner is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    the lawyer. Regardless of the outcome, lawyers still get paid.

  32. Amen! by Weezul · · Score: 1

    Just make sure your family members never use MagicJack by them about telling them about Skype and other VoIP companies.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    1. Re:Amen! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Just make sure your family members never use MagicJack by them about telling them about Skype

      Yes, because Skype is so much better on the privacy front.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  33. great headline to /. summary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...yea.

    30 years ago, we'd have thought that it was referring to a comic book fight between two superheroes.

    Well, at least there's nothing wrong with mentioning magicja

  34. Subtle difference by alexo · · Score: 1

    So if your doctor gives you bad advice, and you follow it because hey he's the doctor, YOU're the asshole?

    A doctor that gives you bad advice ends up on the wrong end of a malpractice suit.
    A lawyer that gives you bad advice ends up collecting $250/hour.

  35. MagicJack is A CLEC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are a real CLEC. MagicJack is s subsidiary of YiMax. YiMax is an official CLEC and yes they are enjoying the returns of the inbound termination fees.

  36. viable alternative? by mikegarcia · · Score: 1

    I would forget mj and go with a good company like ooma or nettalk. They are newer but play nice with their customers. www.nettalk.com