A new dating service has been formed targetting females aged 24-35, promissing to link up gamers with gamerettes. Stock in Russian Mail-order Brides reported down.
It is important that we continue to research things such as this, and many other things that tell us more about human nature, using proper scientific methodology. We should not be afraid of the results if they are unbiased, accurate, reproducible, and properly reported without sensationalism in a peer-reviewed journal.
The problem in the recent months and years is the media taking snippets of different (often unpublished) studies, and sensationalizing them with headlines, and writing up articles based on assumptions and hearsay to draw public ire, and sell papers.
Anyone with any common sense and an understanding of the purpose of and methods of scientific research studies will look at these articles, and then go look up the/actual/ paper, and make their own judgment. Any media article without reference to the actual study, with at least some clue of where it was published such that it can be looked up is immediately dismissed by me when I see it.
The rest is just hype. Next it will be "Video Games Make Kids Into Terrorists!". It's all just journalistic tactics we've seen for the past couple hundred years on any topic that makes people nervous.
I'm just curious why no one has contacted his Bar association. From what I'm reading in these various transcripts, if they are indeed accurate, he is violating several of their ethical guidelines, particularly with his threats. In the very least, several complaints made against him to the Bar would require a review of his actions and the reflections they are making on the legal profession in his jurisdiction.
He would be taken quite a bit less seriously if his teeth were removed and he was no longer able to legally practice law.
"The primary purpose of the bar examination is to ensure that all who are ultimately admitted have demonstrated minimum technical competence. In order to be admitted in Florida, an applicant must have proof of good moral character and must successfully complete the Florida Bar Examination."
In the admission requirements are then the following items:
"What is disqualifying conduct? Pursuant to Rule 3-11 a record manifesting a deficiency in the honesty, trustworthiness, diligence, or reliability may constitute a basis for denial of admission. Any of the following may be considered by the Board to be a basis for further inquiry before recommending admission:
* Unlawful conduct
* Academic misconduct
* Making or procuring any false or misleading statement or omission of relevant information, including any false or misleading statement or omission on the Bar Application, or any amendment, or in any testimony or sworn statement submitted to the Board.
* Misconduct in employment
* Acts involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation
* Abuse of legal process
* Financial irresponsibility
* Neglect of professional obligations
* Violation of an order of a court
* Evidence of mental or emotional instability
* Evidence of drug or alcohol dependency
* Denial of admission to the bar in another jurisdiction on character and fitness grounds
* Disciplinary action by a lawyer disciplinary agency or other professional disciplinary agency of any jurisdiction
* Any other conduct which reflects adversely upon the character and fitness of the applicant
Additional details about the Florida Bar, the exam, and how to file complaints can be found at http://www.floridabar.org/
Prof. Geist came and gave a presentation to my graduating class specifically on PIPEDA just after this had occured.
He told us the whole scenario, and clearly pointed out that after receiving the first spam, he responded, specifically asking that they no longer use his email address for promotional matters.
They ignored his request and sent him a second round of spam. That's when he filed the complaint against them. And won.
It's not only a matter of spam. It's a clear-cut case of ignoring removal requests can be bad for you.
Here's an email I wrote to a friend on this very subject when he sent me this link. It gives a bit more detail that I got from the SG1 chat room, and extensive reading of their forums on this topic.
------------------
I did a follow up on this and read through the forums, and chatted online with a bunch of the people involved.
Basically, all the Stargate SG-1 Episodes were available for download from this website for about two years. The FBI raid and charges are related to that obvious violation of the Copyright act.
As for the details about the FBI destroying equipment, etc, that is a separate matter entirely. It has not been confirmed nor disproved.
The usage of the Patriot Act seems to have been for some portions of speeding up the process of going through his computer equipment when it was seized and/or obtaining financial records. It was very minimal to the overall case. It seems it was done out of haste when a real warrant could have easily been obtained if they had been patient enough. It was a pretty stupid usage of it, and that particular usage of it could probably be challenged in court, and the charges dropped on that ground, but he was in fact committing a crime under the Copyright Act, and was not charged in any way under the Patriot Act.
Some of the common misconceptions are:
- That this was initiated by MGM. It was not. It is all the MPAA. For all anyone knows, MGM has nothing to do with it.
- That the whole thing is based on the Patriot Act. It isn't. It's only a small part of how they obtained the right to go through his stuff to investigate the Copyright violation charges. They had a regular warrant to raid his house, etc. Confiscation of the computer equipment and other such things had nothing to do with the Patriot Act. That's not to say it isn't still disturbing, only not as much as it seems.
The charges have been reduced from Felony to Misdemeanor, which would likely result only in a fine, or community service, not jail time. Furthermore, the guy is pleading Not Guilty, and is receiving pro bono legal support as well as funding from donations from the website. It's my hope that he doesn't try to fight the copyright violation charges, because those are blatant, but rather focuses on the way they used the Patriot Act inappropriately to obtain information. He'll have a better defense that way, and will be able to avoid having precedents set in a bad way.
There are some more details on the forum, but I've been told by one person who seemed to know a lot about it that right now they've been given legal advice to keep things quiet until it is decided, and then a public announcement will be made afterwards, so few other details are available. Most of the posts are just people whining and saying "WTF???????", over and over, without any understanding about what they're talking about.
IANAL, but it seems to me that this practice is illegal in Canada under the new (2001?) PIPEDA Privacy Legislation.
This legislation makes it illegal for any company offering commercial services to ask for personally identifiable information unless that information is specifically required to provide that service. In other words, the online papers would have to prove that they/need/ your name and contact information to send you the latest headlines, something they would undoubtedly be unable to do.
Currently the process of challenging the practice of companies is complaints driven. You have to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission, and they are required to investigate and publish a decision within 1 year. So far they've published over 300 such decisions, including some against major banks and credit checks, major websites and cookies, and other significant change in information gathering practices.
Perhaps someone should file a complaint with them?
Having been a friend of Rob's and present in his business when he still practiced it, and having asked him details on his court preceedings last week, I am very disappointed to see the biased and closed-mindedness of the article that is very misleading.
Rob went out of his way numerous times to protect himself and ensure everything he was doing was legal. According to his lawyer, up until about a year and a half ago (I don't have more details, but this seems to coincided with the DMCA), everything he was doing was legal.
He did not "sell 413 pirated games". He provided a backup service for customers. They would come in, give him the game to backup, and sign a form stating that they legally owned the game, and that they would not redistribute it, bla, bla, bla, and that he was only provided a backup service.
How that got twisted to "selling 413 pirated games" is beyond me. It was very minimal compared to the chipping. He probably did 5 chips for 1 backup. Perhaps "413" was the total number of backups he did? He certainly didn't have 400 games in his store. It was too small ^_^
That aside, the legal situation is amusing. The RCMP spent thousands of dollars to send in undercover agents to try to "catch him in the act". They sent chips to Sony for analysis, and spent 3 months staking it all out. The man had the words "Unlock your playstation!" and the phone number in bright red letters on the side of his van that he drove around town. He obviously wasn't trying to conceil the business. He said numerous times, to me, to the RCMP, to his lawyer, and I believe to the judge, that if they had simply come in and said "You are breaking the law, can you please stop", he would have, without a second thought. What a waste of tax money.
I'm very afraid of what's going on in the Canadian legal system now. Rob now does screen printing for marketing and event companies, and laughs off questions.
Slashdot Mirror
A new dating service has been formed targetting females aged 24-35, promissing to link up gamers with gamerettes. Stock in Russian Mail-order Brides reported down.
It is important that we continue to research things such as this, and many other things that tell us more about human nature, using proper scientific methodology. We should not be afraid of the results if they are unbiased, accurate, reproducible, and properly reported without sensationalism in a peer-reviewed journal.
/actual/ paper, and make their own judgment. Any media article without reference to the actual study, with at least some clue of where it was published such that it can be looked up is immediately dismissed by me when I see it.
The problem in the recent months and years is the media taking snippets of different (often unpublished) studies, and sensationalizing them with headlines, and writing up articles based on assumptions and hearsay to draw public ire, and sell papers.
Anyone with any common sense and an understanding of the purpose of and methods of scientific research studies will look at these articles, and then go look up the
The rest is just hype. Next it will be "Video Games Make Kids Into Terrorists!". It's all just journalistic tactics we've seen for the past couple hundred years on any topic that makes people nervous.
Ninja Chipmunk PWNS Cat!
3 7717418735
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-34734966
When cute goes Ninja!
I'm just curious why no one has contacted his Bar association. From what I'm reading in these various transcripts, if they are indeed accurate, he is violating several of their ethical guidelines, particularly with his threats. In the very least, several complaints made against him to the Bar would require a review of his actions and the reflections they are making on the legal profession in his jurisdiction.
He would be taken quite a bit less seriously if his teeth were removed and he was no longer able to legally practice law.
From the Florida Board of Bar Examiners website:
"The primary purpose of the bar examination is to ensure that all who are ultimately admitted have demonstrated minimum technical competence. In order to be admitted in Florida, an applicant must have proof of good moral character and must successfully complete the Florida Bar Examination."
In the admission requirements are then the following items:
"What is disqualifying conduct?
Pursuant to Rule 3-11 a record manifesting a deficiency in the honesty, trustworthiness, diligence, or reliability may constitute a basis for denial of admission. Any of the following may be considered by the Board to be a basis for further inquiry before recommending admission:
* Unlawful conduct
* Academic misconduct
* Making or procuring any false or misleading statement or omission of relevant information, including any false or misleading statement or omission on the Bar Application, or any amendment, or in any testimony or sworn statement submitted to the Board.
* Misconduct in employment
* Acts involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation
* Abuse of legal process
* Financial irresponsibility
* Neglect of professional obligations
* Violation of an order of a court
* Evidence of mental or emotional instability
* Evidence of drug or alcohol dependency
* Denial of admission to the bar in another jurisdiction on character and fitness grounds
* Disciplinary action by a lawyer disciplinary agency or other professional disciplinary agency of any jurisdiction
* Any other conduct which reflects adversely upon the character and fitness of the applicant
Additional details about the Florida Bar, the exam, and how to file complaints can be found at http://www.floridabar.org/
Prof. Geist came and gave a presentation to my graduating class specifically on PIPEDA just after this had occured.
He told us the whole scenario, and clearly pointed out that after receiving the first spam, he responded, specifically asking that they no longer use his email address for promotional matters.
They ignored his request and sent him a second round of spam. That's when he filed the complaint against them. And won.
It's not only a matter of spam. It's a clear-cut case of ignoring removal requests can be bad for you.
Here's an email I wrote to a friend on this very subject when he sent me this link. It gives a bit more detail that I got from the SG1 chat room, and extensive reading of their forums on this topic.
------------------
I did a follow up on this and read through the forums, and chatted online with a bunch of the people involved.
Basically, all the Stargate SG-1 Episodes were available for download from this website for about two years. The FBI raid and charges are related to that obvious violation of the Copyright act.
As for the details about the FBI destroying equipment, etc, that is a separate matter entirely. It has not been confirmed nor disproved.
The usage of the Patriot Act seems to have been for some portions of speeding up the process of going through his computer equipment when it was seized and/or obtaining financial records. It was very minimal to the overall case. It seems it was done out of haste when a real warrant could have easily been obtained if they had been patient enough. It was a pretty stupid usage of it, and that particular usage of it could probably be challenged in court, and the charges dropped on that ground, but he was in fact committing a crime under the Copyright Act, and was not charged in any way under the Patriot Act.
Some of the common misconceptions are:
- That this was initiated by MGM. It was not. It is all the MPAA. For all anyone knows, MGM has nothing to do with it.
- That the whole thing is based on the Patriot Act. It isn't. It's only a small part of how they obtained the right to go through his stuff to investigate the Copyright violation charges. They had a regular warrant to raid his house, etc. Confiscation of the computer equipment and other such things had nothing to do with the Patriot Act. That's not to say it isn't still disturbing, only not as much as it seems.
The charges have been reduced from Felony to Misdemeanor, which would likely result only in a fine, or community service, not jail time. Furthermore, the guy is pleading Not Guilty, and is receiving pro bono legal support as well as funding from donations from the website. It's my hope that he doesn't try to fight the copyright violation charges, because those are blatant, but rather focuses on the way they used the Patriot Act inappropriately to obtain information. He'll have a better defense that way, and will be able to avoid having precedents set in a bad way.
There are some more details on the forum, but I've been told by one person who seemed to know a lot about it that right now they've been given legal advice to keep things quiet until it is decided, and then a public announcement will be made afterwards, so few other details are available. Most of the posts are just people whining and saying "WTF???????", over and over, without any understanding about what they're talking about.
Hope that clears some of this up.
Cheers,
Mekki
IANAL, but it seems to me that this practice is illegal in Canada under the new (2001?) PIPEDA Privacy Legislation.
/need/ your name and contact information to send you the latest headlines, something they would undoubtedly be unable to do.
This legislation makes it illegal for any company offering commercial services to ask for personally identifiable information unless that information is specifically required to provide that service. In other words, the online papers would have to prove that they
Currently the process of challenging the practice of companies is complaints driven. You have to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission, and they are required to investigate and publish a decision within 1 year. So far they've published over 300 such decisions, including some against major banks and credit checks, major websites and cookies, and other significant change in information gathering practices.
Perhaps someone should file a complaint with them?
Having been a friend of Rob's and present in his business when he still practiced it, and having asked him details on his court preceedings last week, I am very disappointed to see the biased and closed-mindedness of the article that is very misleading.
Rob went out of his way numerous times to protect himself and ensure everything he was doing was legal. According to his lawyer, up until about a year and a half ago (I don't have more details, but this seems to coincided with the DMCA), everything he was doing was legal.
He did not "sell 413 pirated games". He provided a backup service for customers. They would come in, give him the game to backup, and sign a form stating that they legally owned the game, and that they would not redistribute it, bla, bla, bla, and that he was only provided a backup service.
How that got twisted to "selling 413 pirated games" is beyond me. It was very minimal compared to the chipping. He probably did 5 chips for 1 backup. Perhaps "413" was the total number of backups he did? He certainly didn't have 400 games in his store. It was too small ^_^
That aside, the legal situation is amusing. The RCMP spent thousands of dollars to send in undercover agents to try to "catch him in the act". They sent chips to Sony for analysis, and spent 3 months staking it all out. The man had the words "Unlock your playstation!" and the phone number in bright red letters on the side of his van that he drove around town. He obviously wasn't trying to conceil the business. He said numerous times, to me, to the RCMP, to his lawyer, and I believe to the judge, that if they had simply come in and said "You are breaking the law, can you please stop", he would have, without a second thought. What a waste of tax money.
I'm very afraid of what's going on in the Canadian legal system now. Rob now does screen printing for marketing and event companies, and laughs off questions.