There has been very little quality reporting on this case. Thanks for posting your comments on it. It would be really nice if you could take your 200 pages of notes and write up a summary of the key evidence (or maybe just post the notes).
According to the linked article there must have been a finding that Mr. Childs caused at least $200,000 in damages. I have not seen this addressed anywhere*. Would you care to comment on that? How was this number arrived at? Would the damages have been different if he had been hit by a bus?
*The article has been amended to indicate the city incurred $1 million in expenses to regain control of the network and do vulnerability testing.
Of course you would want said data heavily encrypted, in case your laptop was stolen.
At first thought, that makes sense. But the backed-up and encrypted data was the network configuration. Is that really a secret? Is there any reason you couldn't post it on the internet and let everybody see it?
Why are there no public records of everything that happened during this trial?
There are. To get the transcript, all you have to do is go down to the court, pay $0.50/page to have them printed out, pick them up, scan them into a computer, and post them on the internet. With four months of testimony I imagine there are only a few thousand pages. You can also get the various court filings for several hundred dollars each.
Well, what was he expecting to happen? From what little background I could dig up on this case he was already on confrontational terms with his boss. She pulled together a bunch of witnesses and the police, made a conference call and asked him for the password. If he had handed it over he could have been punished for doing so. It's not unlike when Joan of Arc was asked if she knew she was in God's grace (she would have implicated herself if she had answered either yes or no)--except that Joan of Arc was smarter than Mr. Childs.
Sound like this could have some bad repercussions for IT folks. Of course all I know about the situation is what has been posted on Slashdot. There could be, and usually is, more to the story. Now that the trial is over with will the court records be posted somewhere?
That's an excellent question. Throughout this entire case I've felt like I was only getting one side of the story. For example, I haven't seen any quotes from the prosecutor. Prosecuting someone for failing to disclose a password is absurd. There has got to be something else going on.
Let's say he was hit by a bus, killed, and consequently unable to disclose the password. Would he be guilty of computer tampering in that case? How about the bus driver?
We do not yet have the technology to detect Earth-like planets in most places. Of the 430 exoplanets we have found, the vast majority are huge, like Jupiter. The smallest planet we have found outside our solar system is almost twice the size of Earth and it's only 20 light-years away. Just because we haven't found anything smaller doesn't mean it isn't there. The trouble is that current technology isn't capable of detecting it.
Because we've been searching quite intensively for such planets and I don't think we've found any confirmed cases yet.
Do you know how we detect these planets? There are two ways. One, we measure how the host star wobbles relative to all other stars in the sky and infer mass and orbit of planets based on that. Two, we get really, really lucky that the planet's orbit happens to line up perfectly with our view of the star and we capture a picture of the planet passing in front of its host star. Of the 430 known exoplanets, 398 of them were discovered in the last 10 years. 56 of them were discovered in the past 12 months, including the smallest one.
Terrestrial bodies are sufficiently difficult to detect that we probably haven't found all of the large objects in our own solar system. Some of the moons around Jupiter weren't discovered until 2003. Makemake is 1800km in diameter and wasn't discovered until 2005. A new moon was discovered orbiting Saturn just nine months ago.
The mileage requirements vary depending on the class of vehicle. Manufacturers that sell more cars will have higher mileage requirements than manufacturers that sell more trucks.
The Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) puts restrictions on how you can record. Specifically, you must use equipment that has had royalties paid on it. You must use media that has had royalties paid on it (the difference between an audio CD and a data CD). And the equipment can not allow serial copying, meaning it can not allow you to make a copy of a copy.
If I'm not mistaken AHRA only applies to audio recordings, so it does not apply to video. Television broadcasts can be "time-shifted" with a VCR as a matter of fair use. That precedent was set in Sony v Universal Studios eight years prior to the AHRA.
Support longer headlines. This one was at the limit. Spelling out 'you' would have made it too long. Alternatively, the author could have rephrased the headline.
The researchers did not run a poll asking people how much they weight and how much HFCS they consumed. If they had, that would simply be a correlation as they had no control over what the subjects consumed.
In this study the researchers controlled the experiment. They randomly selected which group each rat would participate in. Then they controlled which foods the rats ate. This study did not simply find a correlation. It found cause and effect in two of the four experimental groups. The effect from the other two experimental groups were not large enough to draw a conclusion.
No, the study was not perfect. No study is. Even though the results were statistically significant they could still be a random fluke. The results need to be replicated.
Have you ever read a proposed law? Here is a random snippet from the bill we are discussing:
(a) Requiring Coverage of Counseling and Pharmacotherapy for Cessation of Tobacco Use by Pregnant Women- Section 1905 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d), as amended by sections 2001(a)(3)(B) and 2303, is further amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(4)--
(A) by striking `and' before `(C)'; and (B) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the following new subparagraph: `; and (D) counseling and pharmacotherapy for cessation of tobacco use by pregnant women (as defined in subsection (bb))'; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
...
You don't consider that dense text? If I'm reading it correctly this part of the bill amends another part of the bill which amends an existing statute. How is a person supposed to make sense of this? You have to dig through existing statutes and add the wording yourself just to find out what it says. Even with that, there is no guarantee this amendment isn't overwritten by another section of the 2000 page bill. Even if someone references a section of a bill and points you directly to the source you have no way of knowing if what you're reading is what the bill really says since it could be amended someplace else in the bill.
It takes months to update the statutes after the President signs a bill because someone has to go through every law that was modified and update the wording to fit changes described in the bill. The sad thing is, this is the way most bills are written. Even more sad is that this bill is supposed to be brand new!
Basically the appeals court found that the prosecutor and cop in the case were granted Absolute Immunity from prosecution for their actions in intentionally framing this guy for multiple felony and misdemeanor crimes. The appeals court found that the plaintiff did indeed get falsely accused, and that the prosecutor knowingly participated in presenting false testimony to get indictments - but the poor guy has no recourse.
The court left one claim open. Rehberg's claim of retaliatory prosecution against Paulk can still go forward. He's the guy that allegedly committed perjury. The court ruling also noted the defendants could be charged with a crime. The immunity only applies to civil actions. I believe the point of granting immunity is because the defendant in every prosecution would sue the prosecutor if they had the chance.
One more thing. The court did not necessarily agree that any perjury, malicious prosecution, or other illegal actions occurred. They simply took the most egregious claims at face value to determine if immunity applied.
In the older paradigm, like, the Postal Service, mail never left the Postal Service's possession and was not subject to third parties.
The postal service is a third party! The article even pointed out that third-class mail does not have fourth amendment protection because the postal service reserves the right to open it. My recollection from previous articles on this case was that the man's ISP reserves a similar right to examine the email.
C is terrible to teach, they'll have to deal with pointers all the time. Reading something from input? Pointers. Passing by reference? Pointers. Strings? Pointers. Sure you may omit that those are pointers but the segmentation faults will show up for regular reality checks. Same for C++. Python means working with dynamic typing. PHP dynamic and weak typing. Don't get me started on Visual Basic.
VB.Net* has the advantages you've listed for Pascal and Java, and it solves all the problems you listed for other languages so why not get you started on it? Its only real drawback is that it's a proprietary language. That won't effect the contest.
*VB 6 is not supported any more, and VBA and VB Script would be absurd suggestions, so the story submitter is obviously referring to VB.Net.
I have heard it would cost $1,500 per home to run fiber to every home in the nation. That's $225 billion. If you want better and more affordable communications install fiber co-ops throughout the nation that do nothing but the physical installation from the home to a neighborhood hub. From the hub, any ISP that chooses can compete for your business.
"On August 5th 1945, an atomic explosion occurred within an annihilation bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Popular Science Monthly has looked forward to such a scientific triumph for many years..."
Anyone else appalled by the lack of humanity in this article?
That is a sign of the times. We had just ended the war with Germany and Italy. The atomic bombings were meant to end the war with Japan--the nation that launched the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and brought the United States into the war. An estimated 60 million people died because of World War II. Two-thirds of those 60 million were civilians. Japan was responsible for the Nanking Massacre which did not endear them any sympathy.
Entire cities were firebombed during the war. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were less destructive than many firebombings that had occurred in the preceding years. The effects of radiation were not yet well-known to the general public. More powerful nuclear weapons had not yet been developed and the ramifications of nuclear war had not yet set in.
I also doubt it was the weapon they looked forward to, so much as the ability to use nuclear energy.
You're pretty close but this part isn't quite right.
Also, it does require there to be a 'good-faith belief' that the material in question is infringing (i.e. that is not the perjury part), and
a statement on penalty of perjury that the distribution of the material they are purporting it to be is not authorised by the copyright holder (that one could get some of the agents behind the recent takedowns of music blogs in hot water, because some of those definitely have been authorised by the copyright holders), and that they are either the copyright holder or the copyright holder's appointed agent.
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
They don't have to have a good faith belief that the material infringes. They only need a good faith belief that the use described in the complaint was not authorized. It does not matter if the use described in the complaint is totally fictitious.
The penalty of perjury part only applies to a statement that the person filing the complaint (i.e. lawyer) is authorized to act on behalf of a copyright holder whose rights have allegedly been infringed. The law doesn't even require that it be the same copyright holder.
More likely people who use trusted computing will get a tax deduction. Why do you think Microsoft's Vice President for Trustworthy Computing is proposing this?
Why was this modded troll? The parent post is correct. Also, one of the legal advantages copyright registration confers is the ability to actually file suit and enforce the copyright which is what the grandparent post overlooked.
You need a citation for the constitution? Fine. US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8:
The Congress shall have Power...
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Whether or not the work in question promotes the progress of useful arts is certainly a subjective issue that a court will have to decide. You may question if the courts would even consider such an argument. They have certainly done so before. See Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service.
The requirement to deposit a copy with the LoC was dropped decades ago.
While I conceded in another post that the copy is deposited with the copyright office, the copyright office is actually part of the Library of Congress. However, it is possible to deposit an unpublished work and have it kept out of the LoC catalog.
Since I suspect that wasn't the point you were trying to get at I suggest you read that other post before you respond.
I am pretty sure all you have to do to copyright something is just to put it in a fixed form and maybe say "Hey this is copyrighted." There is no "filing" for copyright.
While it is correct that copyright takes hold the moment a work is fixed in a tangible form it is also irrelevant to what I said. From my original post:
Ironically, to bring this matter to court they have to officially file for copyright which will include depositing a copy of it in the Library of Congress.
While I concede the copy is actually deposited with the copyright office the rest of my statement is correct. Again I quote the copyright office:
Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work
Registration is also required to claim statutory damages. Unless Microsoft has already registered the work they can only claim damages for the actual value of the work which is nothing.
You sound like a complete ass.
As a general rule, name-calling tends to reflect more strongly upon the person doing the labeling.
Slashdot Mirror
There has been very little quality reporting on this case. Thanks for posting your comments on it. It would be really nice if you could take your 200 pages of notes and write up a summary of the key evidence (or maybe just post the notes).
According to the linked article there must have been a finding that Mr. Childs caused at least $200,000 in damages. I have not seen this addressed anywhere*. Would you care to comment on that? How was this number arrived at? Would the damages have been different if he had been hit by a bus?
*The article has been amended to indicate the city incurred $1 million in expenses to regain control of the network and do vulnerability testing.
At first thought, that makes sense. But the backed-up and encrypted data was the network configuration. Is that really a secret? Is there any reason you couldn't post it on the internet and let everybody see it?
There are. To get the transcript, all you have to do is go down to the court, pay $0.50/page to have them printed out, pick them up, scan them into a computer, and post them on the internet. With four months of testimony I imagine there are only a few thousand pages. You can also get the various court filings for several hundred dollars each.
Well, what was he expecting to happen? From what little background I could dig up on this case he was already on confrontational terms with his boss. She pulled together a bunch of witnesses and the police, made a conference call and asked him for the password. If he had handed it over he could have been punished for doing so. It's not unlike when Joan of Arc was asked if she knew she was in God's grace (she would have implicated herself if she had answered either yes or no)--except that Joan of Arc was smarter than Mr. Childs.
That's an excellent question. Throughout this entire case I've felt like I was only getting one side of the story. For example, I haven't seen any quotes from the prosecutor. Prosecuting someone for failing to disclose a password is absurd. There has got to be something else going on.
Let's say he was hit by a bus, killed, and consequently unable to disclose the password. Would he be guilty of computer tampering in that case? How about the bus driver?
Do you know how we detect these planets? There are two ways. One, we measure how the host star wobbles relative to all other stars in the sky and infer mass and orbit of planets based on that. Two, we get really, really lucky that the planet's orbit happens to line up perfectly with our view of the star and we capture a picture of the planet passing in front of its host star. Of the 430 known exoplanets, 398 of them were discovered in the last 10 years. 56 of them were discovered in the past 12 months, including the smallest one.
Terrestrial bodies are sufficiently difficult to detect that we probably haven't found all of the large objects in our own solar system. Some of the moons around Jupiter weren't discovered until 2003. Makemake is 1800km in diameter and wasn't discovered until 2005. A new moon was discovered orbiting Saturn just nine months ago.
In Universal v 2600, Universal argued just the opposite. They claimed it was obviously enacted under the commerce clause. The intellectual rights clause "Authorizes Protection for 'Writings,' Not Prohibition of Technologies Regardless of Originality, Duration, or Infringement".
Stevens was also one of only two judges in Eldred v Ashcroft to reject the Copyright Term Extension Act as unconstitutional.
The EFF is a member. With that said, take a look at the URL. That giant code raises all kinds of red flags about tracking who posted the link.
The mileage requirements vary depending on the class of vehicle. Manufacturers that sell more cars will have higher mileage requirements than manufacturers that sell more trucks.
The Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) puts restrictions on how you can record. Specifically, you must use equipment that has had royalties paid on it. You must use media that has had royalties paid on it (the difference between an audio CD and a data CD). And the equipment can not allow serial copying, meaning it can not allow you to make a copy of a copy.
If I'm not mistaken AHRA only applies to audio recordings, so it does not apply to video. Television broadcasts can be "time-shifted" with a VCR as a matter of fair use. That precedent was set in Sony v Universal Studios eight years prior to the AHRA.
Support longer headlines. This one was at the limit. Spelling out 'you' would have made it too long. Alternatively, the author could have rephrased the headline.
The researchers did not run a poll asking people how much they weight and how much HFCS they consumed. If they had, that would simply be a correlation as they had no control over what the subjects consumed.
In this study the researchers controlled the experiment. They randomly selected which group each rat would participate in. Then they controlled which foods the rats ate. This study did not simply find a correlation. It found cause and effect in two of the four experimental groups. The effect from the other two experimental groups were not large enough to draw a conclusion.
No, the study was not perfect. No study is. Even though the results were statistically significant they could still be a random fluke. The results need to be replicated.
You don't consider that dense text? If I'm reading it correctly this part of the bill amends another part of the bill which amends an existing statute. How is a person supposed to make sense of this? You have to dig through existing statutes and add the wording yourself just to find out what it says. Even with that, there is no guarantee this amendment isn't overwritten by another section of the 2000 page bill. Even if someone references a section of a bill and points you directly to the source you have no way of knowing if what you're reading is what the bill really says since it could be amended someplace else in the bill.
It takes months to update the statutes after the President signs a bill because someone has to go through every law that was modified and update the wording to fit changes described in the bill. The sad thing is, this is the way most bills are written. Even more sad is that this bill is supposed to be brand new!
The court left one claim open. Rehberg's claim of retaliatory prosecution against Paulk can still go forward. He's the guy that allegedly committed perjury. The court ruling also noted the defendants could be charged with a crime. The immunity only applies to civil actions. I believe the point of granting immunity is because the defendant in every prosecution would sue the prosecutor if they had the chance.
One more thing. The court did not necessarily agree that any perjury, malicious prosecution, or other illegal actions occurred. They simply took the most egregious claims at face value to determine if immunity applied.
The postal service is a third party! The article even pointed out that third-class mail does not have fourth amendment protection because the postal service reserves the right to open it. My recollection from previous articles on this case was that the man's ISP reserves a similar right to examine the email.
VB.Net* has the advantages you've listed for Pascal and Java, and it solves all the problems you listed for other languages so why not get you started on it? Its only real drawback is that it's a proprietary language. That won't effect the contest.
*VB 6 is not supported any more, and VBA and VB Script would be absurd suggestions, so the story submitter is obviously referring to VB.Net.
I have heard it would cost $1,500 per home to run fiber to every home in the nation. That's $225 billion. If you want better and more affordable communications install fiber co-ops throughout the nation that do nothing but the physical installation from the home to a neighborhood hub. From the hub, any ISP that chooses can compete for your business.
That is a sign of the times. We had just ended the war with Germany and Italy. The atomic bombings were meant to end the war with Japan--the nation that launched the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and brought the United States into the war. An estimated 60 million people died because of World War II. Two-thirds of those 60 million were civilians. Japan was responsible for the Nanking Massacre which did not endear them any sympathy.
Entire cities were firebombed during the war. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were less destructive than many firebombings that had occurred in the preceding years. The effects of radiation were not yet well-known to the general public. More powerful nuclear weapons had not yet been developed and the ramifications of nuclear war had not yet set in.
I also doubt it was the weapon they looked forward to, so much as the ability to use nuclear energy.
The actual law requires:
They don't have to have a good faith belief that the material infringes. They only need a good faith belief that the use described in the complaint was not authorized. It does not matter if the use described in the complaint is totally fictitious.
The penalty of perjury part only applies to a statement that the person filing the complaint (i.e. lawyer) is authorized to act on behalf of a copyright holder whose rights have allegedly been infringed. The law doesn't even require that it be the same copyright holder.
More likely people who use trusted computing will get a tax deduction. Why do you think Microsoft's Vice President for Trustworthy Computing is proposing this?
Why was this modded troll? The parent post is correct. Also, one of the legal advantages copyright registration confers is the ability to actually file suit and enforce the copyright which is what the grandparent post overlooked.
Whether or not the work in question promotes the progress of useful arts is certainly a subjective issue that a court will have to decide. You may question if the courts would even consider such an argument. They have certainly done so before. See Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service.
While I conceded in another post that the copy is deposited with the copyright office, the copyright office is actually part of the Library of Congress. However, it is possible to deposit an unpublished work and have it kept out of the LoC catalog.
Since I suspect that wasn't the point you were trying to get at I suggest you read that other post before you respond.
While it is correct that copyright takes hold the moment a work is fixed in a tangible form it is also irrelevant to what I said. From my original post:
While I concede the copy is actually deposited with the copyright office the rest of my statement is correct. Again I quote the copyright office:
Registration is also required to claim statutory damages. Unless Microsoft has already registered the work they can only claim damages for the actual value of the work which is nothing.
As a general rule, name-calling tends to reflect more strongly upon the person doing the labeling.