Even better than that is the quotation from Oliver North, famed figure in the Iran-Contra Arms scandal in the 1980s. Note that there were tons of accusations that North ordered senstive documents destroyed to prevent the truth about the scandal from emerging. When later asked about why such important elements of the deal were never commemorated in writing, North is quoted as saying: "If it's really important, you don't have to write down." Actually, I can't find the direct quote around here, but that's a pretty close paraphrase. ==
My browser even accepts cookies. I run Guidescope, which filters some stuff, but I don't have it set to block cookies. Lego just rejected me too, with the same message (essentially, Lego told me to go pound sand because I don't accept cookies).
Lego, not only is your cookie block stupid, IT DOESN'T EVEN WORK! Oh, and you would happen to be using this cookie stuff to be monitoring kids under 13, would you?
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
I wonder what happens if someone reads DeCSS into the Swedish Parliamentary records. Let's see the MPAA try to take that down! They can arrest a Norwegian, but can they shut down an entire foreign government?
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but I'm tired of putting up meaningful disclaimers. It's been a long, exhausting day, and I need a beer. If you want to act on what's in this message, go see a lawyer, licensed in your jurisdiction, who gives a crap.
I love the idea of reading it into the public record. If my hazy memory serves me, that's what happened with the Pentagon Papers back in the early 70s, and hell hath no fury like the Defense Department scorned. However, after it was read into the record, it was fair game. Then the journalists could report on it willy nilly without worrying about pesky security clearances and stolen documents.
The Speech and Debate Clause of the US Constitution protects Senators and Congresstypes from prosecution for acts taken in the course of official government proceedings (within reason). I'd love to see a Representative go to the well of the House and read DeCSS into the record. Maybe the EFF's lobbyists could try to pull that one off.
The unanimity of support for the DMCA can be broken by one Member of Congress who has the courage to stand up to the MPAA, RIAA and those who seek to congregate control over speech in the hands of faceless monopolistic multinational middlemen conglomerates.
Sheesh, it's definitely beer time. I reserve the right to retract all these statements after I've had two beers and an amount of sleep to be named later. ==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Ok, so if the Privacy Foundation is so upset about web bugs in MS Word documents, why does their OWN ADVISORY have a web bug in it?
My filter (Guidescope) caught this little sucker:
http://www.privacyfoundation.org/graphics/1pix.gif
(Awaiting an explanation.) ==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but this is not advice. Please consult your own attorney before acting on any information in this posting.
That disclaimer aside, this appears to be a rather dumb trick. The RIAA is suing mp3board.com for providing pirated mp3s for commercial gain (putting aside the whole linking thing in the MPAA v. 2600 case). mp3board basically does do that, right? I don't want to get into the whole piracy/fair use debate here - that's not the point.
In this new action, piracy is just a red herring.
It's my understanding that mp3board.com's method of distributing mp3s is a direct download from a website (or a link to someone's website, yadda, yadda...)
So now mp3board sues AOL for creating Gnutella? WHY? In order to sue in civil court, you must have what's called "standing" to sue. Standing in a nutshell means that you have been injured by the actions of a defendant, and have the right to go into court to seek remedies to that injury.
Where the hell is mp3board injured by the mere existence of Gnutella? The only real effect mp3board might feel is that of competition - Gnuteela being a competing method of delivery. Certainly this isn't a justifiable injury. I think what they have in mind is criminal defense law - they're pointing blame on someone else who is doing something worse than they are, in the hopes that a jury will find them not liable. But that doesn't change their conduct.
Essentially, mp3board.com got caught doing 75 in a 55 mph zone. As the cop is giving them the ticket, AOL/TWX/Gnutella blows by at 100 mph. The events are unrelated - it in no way lessens mp3board.com's punishment, and in no way is mp3board injured by AOL/TWX/Gnutella's conduct. Now whether the cops (picture Ponch and John in tan jumpsuits with RIAA logos on the shoulder) pursue AOL/TWX/Gnutella is a different story.
Oh, and best of luck proving that damages caused by Gnutella are attributable to AOL/TWX. AOL's made it pretty clear that they didn't approve of Gnutella, pinning losses on them is pretty unlikely. ==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
I had a friend who visited an NSA museum in Maryland... he found out about it only because he had a security clearance. You needed the security clearance to get in - and I thought $47 to get into Disneyland was a high admission cost. Is this that same museum, or is there another still-classified museum? Can you tell us about it, in general non-compromising terms? If its the same thing, why has it been de-classified? == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
This is not legal advice - please consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction before acting on any information in this posting. I work for the AZ Attorney General, but I am not speaking for her on this matter, and my comments here do not reflect on her policy or the policies of the State of Arizona.
Now that the disclaimer's out of the way, yes, I too was stunned. That places an advertisement under the name of the author - seems like misappropriation of the author's identity for a commercial endorsement - a tort called "Commercial Appropriation." That's the whole Vanna White case scenario - basically, if you are using my words an image to sell products, I deserve compensation. I actually egosurfed Deja for an old FAQ I used to maintain (which is very clearly copyrighted in its text) to see if they'd placed ads in that. (They hadn't, yet.) I'm substantially closer to a Federal Courthouse (drive by it on my way to work), and while I couldn't pursue this because of my employment, I can think of some people who might represent me...
Anyway, that is just plain reckless. But Deja has sucked ever since they went away from the 'Dejanews' format to this new useless Deja-portal format - I never look at it anymore, while I used to be a weekly visitor. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Thankfully e-commerce doesn't have to pay taxes. Maybe eBay should do it themselves, and leave tax-paid-for courts and police to protect the taxpayers.
It's a pay to play world! == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Look people, the Voting Integrity Project went to court to try and stop the internet primary, and lost. They tried arguing that the votes could be forged. So can real votes, and they're watching both intently. They tried arguing the Digital Divide. Wrong again, the court said, because the party took extensive steps to make sure the polling places were out in the rural areas, with several in each county. VIP tried to attack on a loss on anonymity, and lost again, because there is a double blind for ballots cast in polling places as well - in Arizona you sign in at the polling place, and they assign you a ballot number. The ballot is passed along, and later, if challenged, can be traced back to an individual voter. The electronic system worked similarly.
Being familiar with computers, I talked extensively with Arizona Democratic Party Chairman Mark Fleisher, Executive Director Cortland Coleman, consultants from Election.com, and state party lawyers. I expressed much concern about the setup because of the potential for DoS attack. They had actual humans sitting monitoring the severals round the clock, watching the votes tally up, looking for things symptomatic of a DoS attack, waiting to take action against it. You'll note that NO ATTACK OCCURRED.
Yes, I hammered them because their client software didn't support Macs - it was a Java error which tested out on some Macs, but not others. I'm a Mac user, and was denied the ability to vote from home on my G3. I was able to speak with a human at their tech support line without waiting on hold at 1:30 am in the morning who directed me to another location that I could vote from.
The long and short of it was that there were not really any major problems, no voting abnormalities, and turnout increased 622%. The electronic voting, combined with mail in voting and polling places, gave people more options to vote. regardless of the naysayers, I think it was a success and will likely be repeated soon. The "Voter Integrity Project" did not have a case then, and it doesn't now, either.
ObDisclaimer: I do not work for the Arizona Democratic Party, or election.com. I do not speak for my employer on this matter, and they have no position on the Arizona Democratic Party's electronic primary election. I am a lawyer, but there is no legal advice in this message for you. Before acting on anything in this message, please consult your own attorney. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
One person pointed out that all the players were there, the artists, the corps and the web guys. His point was no consumer organizations, granted.
What was more interesting is that the artists have organized. This gives the Courtney Loves and Sheryl Crows (and yes, the Metallicas) a group to work with that isn't the RIAA.
Essentially, to this point it's been:
RIAA to Napster: Die!
Napster to RIAA, in response: No, you die!
Now the artists fly in from off the turnbuckle and scream "You both die!"
I think the artists are probably the most level-headed people in this whole debate, and certainly have a lot to add. I'm glad they're organized now. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
This is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard. It takes a Judge or Magistrate to issue a search warrant - you can't get one with just an automated web engine - law enforcement has to apply for them, and the applications are almost always in person, with cop and judge in the same room. And the things are difficult to get, especially ones involving a wiretap. You have to be unable to get sufficient evidence by any other reasonable means. Further, Judges closely supervise the implementation and conduct of wiretaps, and those wiretaps are required to minimize the monitoring of conversations unrelated to the crime being investigated, even conversations with the suspects, let alone others not involved in the investigation.
To get back close to the real topic, the fact that the government can sample a large volume of mail for a couple of keywords is minimized - only things relating to the crime are pulled out of the stream. And like other posters have said, if you don't encrypt your mail, that's like sending a postcard - anyone can read it.
The rest of your comment is just silly dogma. Too bad a search of Dogpile and Google didn't find anything even close to what you are claiming. I'll resist the temptation to flame you vigorously, but needless to say, your post is quite inaccurate in just about every aspect, from your claims about software, to your claims of vast archives of records tracking you on the internet.
People express quite a bit more disagreement when they've been a victim of crime, and the criminal's privacy is held more important the victim's life, liberty and property.
ObDisclaimer: I am an attorney, but this is not legal advice. Consult your own lawyer before acting on any information contained in this post. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
As of July 18, this is an unlawful business practice, according to Arizona Statute 13-2316. The newly enacted statute, available online as House Bill 2428 is quoted in relevant part below (new language in ALLCAPS).
(Note: The summaries say that this is a "Class 6 Felony". This is incorrect.)
A. A person WHO ACTS WITHOUT AUTHORITY OR WHO EXCEEDS AUTHORIZATION OF USE commits computer TAMPERING BY:
...
6. PREVENTING A COMPUTER USER FROM EXITING A SITE, COMPUTER SYSTEM OR NETWORK-CONNECTED LOCATION IN ORDER TO COMPEL THE USER'S COMPUTER TO CONTINUE COMMUNICATING WITH, CONNECTING TO OR DISPLAYING THE CONTENT OF THE SERVICE, SITE OR SYSTEM.
...
D. A VIOLATION OF SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 6 OF THIS SECTION CONSTITUTES AN UNLAWFUL PRACTICE UNDER SECTION 44-1522 AND IS IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER CAUSES OF ACTION, REMEDIES AND PENALTIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THIS STATE. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY INVESTIGATE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION PURSUANT TO TITLE 44, CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 7.
Section 44-1522 is currently in effect, and reads in relevant part:
44-1522. Unlawful practices; intended interpretation of provisions
A. The act, use, or employment by any person of any deception, deceptive act or practice, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise whether or not any person has in fact been misled, deceived, or damaged thereby, is declared to be an unlawful practice.
Yes, I work for the Arizona Attorney General, but I am not a spokesman for them. I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice. Please consult your own attorney before taking any actions based upon information in this posting. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
I can empathize with this - I grew up in the Baltimore area, well known, at least it used to be, for its distinctive seafood cuisine. Ive been away for >25 years now, and each time I go back to visit, there's less and less places that can make really good crab dishes, and the area looks more and more like every other area - roads covered with burger kings, dennys, wendys, uno pizza's etc.
I lived in the DC area for 4 years, and went up to Baltimore frequently - almost went to school at the U of MD campus there. I noticed what you're saying about the dying seafood industry, and it's the same story as other formerly great fisheries like Long Island and parts of the Grand Banks - sprawl and reckless development has put bad things into the water, and (get ready, I'm agreeing with Katz) rampant corporatism has overfished (or, in the case of the Chesapeake Bay, overcrabbed) until the stocks were depleted.
Baltimore is getting it from both sides. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Not having read "Failure is Not An Option," I can't really compare it to the other book I recently read - "Last Man on The Moon" by Gemini and Apollo astronaut Gene Cernan.
Cernan's book is written from the perscpective of the astronaut (obviously) battling the NASA brass, the difficult training and the various tribulations (he covers all the lows and highs) of being one of the most high profile people in America in the 60s and 70s.
I think it'd be an interesting contrast to "Failure..." because of the diversity of perspective - kinda like reading the two competing books on Mitnick's time on the lam. Kranz's perspective likely differs dramatically from that of fighter pilot Cernan.
This may be the ultimate in nerdy things to admit, but I don't read books that much. My father actually called me from a book signing somewhere to ask me if I wanted a copy of Cernan's book. After I got by the "Who the hell is Gene Cernan?" part (he was on Apollo 10 and Apollo 17 - the last trip to the Moon), I said sure, thinking I'd stuff it on a shelf somewhere. After reading the opening chapters thinking "I'll never finish this," I did plow right through it.
Anyway, to stay on topic, it would be a good contrast to this book. (And, no I don't work for Cernan or any publishing companies.) == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
First of all, it all depends on your state government's reaction to the delivery of services via internet. Many elected officials I have spoken with want nothing to do with technology, and don't understand those who do. It's generational, like the people back at the turn of the last century who wanted nothing to do with that newfangled thing called electricity. The more people you elect who care about technology, the more you will see government trying to utilize it to deliver services.
Just as corporate websites have evolved from pretty ads that pushed out information into e-commerce sites that actually made sales and generated revenue, government websites are evolving into useful service deliverers. This has the potential to be much more than just a "line killer" as Katz terms it. Here in Arizona, the state's adopted a directive called "No Wrong Door" in response to people attempting to get various services from the government and being told to go to another agency. No Wrong Door is easy in an electronic sense- passing people across webpages or redirecting electronic inquiries is a breeze not only in terms of time, but in manpower and in the lessening of a demand for services at brick-and-mortar government offices.
It's not going to kill lines, it's on the warpath to killing bureaucracy!
Anyway, Arizona has passed a new law permitting all state agencies to accept credit cards, which may seem fundamental to you all, but remember Gov't is adverse to lining the pockets of other businesses on the basis of 2-3% "processing fees". The government is looking beyond that, and saying that 2-3% fee is better than the thousands lost in bad checks and the millions spent on bricks and mortar. This is very long term thinking, when you're talking about term limited elected officials who run every two years.
Arizona has been providing some services online for years. I can renew my car registration, even get replacement plates or a duplicate driver's license online. There are other services, like paying fines, etc., but I haven't used them.;)
BTW - Bricks and Mortar retailers, who pay sales taxes, are a little pissed at all this. They view themselves as funding the electronification of government, putting it on an even level with other e-businesses which don't pay taxes. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Re:College Campus Studies?
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
I'd be very interested in seeing the comparison in campuses with depressed CD buying nearby and campuses which have banned napster. Anyone have a copy of the full report including which colleges were in the study?
I think there's a huge logistical hole in these studies. (I tried to find one to link to, but they all seem to have faded into the newsfeed din.) College campuses not only have lots of CD sotres, but think of what else they have - lots of INTERNET terminals and connections. The Internet is still quite full of dot.coms whose business plans involve selling CDs to these college students, with their disposable incomes.
I live near a large college campus (where I was recently a student). Yes, I have not bought any CDs at stores near campus... I have however, bought from several online retailers.
Short and sweet: CD sales at stores near campuses are down, because E-Commerce is stealing their sales!
Well, that's my hypothesis, anyway. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
The Localhost.com spam lawsuit was very similar to this, and that was a few years back. Didn't this set a legal precedent(or something similar)?
I am a lawyer, but I'm probably not licensed in your jurisdiction. Regardless, I am not giving you legal advice. Please consult an attorney in your area before acting upon information in this post.
The Localhost claim is different because the host there was suing for defamation. That's a civil claim, not a criminal charge. Also, it wouldn't be binding precedent - it was merely a low level ruling in a Colorado state court.
No, I think this IBM case is much better. I've pursued cases like this with no success, because there is some question of consent by the "victim" if they were running an open relay. Regardless of how stupid it is, open relays are still very common, and spammers regularly abuse them. If the spammer somehow hacked the relay, that will help the case.
The other aspect is the forgery - use of IBM's name. Another thread on this topic had a post talking about a guy who was calling other people and leaving a third party's name and phone number. Depending on your state law, that might not be forgery, because it's a voice communication. That's why the appropriate criminal charge there was phone harassment, which is usually an extremely low-level felony or a misdemeanor. Spam involves printing the actual text of the name IBM.COM in the email. That's the forgery. Making it appear as if IBM was sending it, that's the fraud. If it was my case, I'd also charge theft for any damage caused to IBM by the actions of the spammer - time lost on machine downtime, and cost to fix machines. Manpower and overtime to fix the problem might be worth asking for, too (probably depends on the judge).
But if the IBM.COM machine was an open relay.... I dunno. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
From the Freedom Ship Web Site (my emphasis added):
Governing Laws Freedom Ship is only a ship, not a political entity. It will operate under the same rules and regulations as any cruise ship. As a sea-going commercial vessel, it will fly the flag of a specific country (to be determined at a later date), enjoy the protection of that country, and be subject to its laws and regulations, as well as to maritime law. In addition, its residents will be subject to the ships Rules and Regulations. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Besides, online cd sales places at this point literally sell a cd and ship it to you, and they can sell them for cheaper due to a loophole in the recording industry's pricing scheme (they forbid places that sell their cds to advertise a price lower than X dollars... online places don't advertise generally, so it doesn't affect them) (there's currently debate going on in congress about whether or not this policy is of the recording industry's is legal... it may drop prices for everyone soon)
Actually, I believe the Supreme Court recently took up this issue. If I recall correctly, they said that such practices were illegal. However, I cannot say that for sure, so if anyone has better information they can cite, do post it. ===
There was a similar case within the last 5 years called 44 Liquormart . In that case, Rhode Island statutes prevented the advertising of alcohol prices except in the form of price tags on the actual merchandise. RI's rationale was that the supression of advertising discouraged underage drinking. The court did strike the statute down as anti-competitive. A similar case from Virginia some years back dealt with banning advertising of perscription drug prices - I believe the result was the same, but I don't have time right now to look it up.
While I'm not advising the RIAA (or anyone suing them), they could make the case that these are apples and oranges. 44 Liquormart was a state statute, and theirs is an industry-based self-regulation. But it still stinks of anti-competitiveness... a cartel setting prices.
Actually, I just poked around and found this story (which I actually submitted a while back. That wasn't a Supreme Court case, but just an FTC settlement.
Anyway... == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
This whole thing sinks or swims on the trade secret argument. Can a trade secret be widely distributed and protected with a clickwrap agreement? The law covering Andover's liability for postings is pretty settled.
Trade secrets are only trade secrets if the company tries to keep them secret. Microsoft didn't try very hard here... silly clickwrap agreement, Kerebros is for everyone. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
All the/.ers screaming for blood over CD prices...maybe you should contact the FTC and tell them to keep up the good work. == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
"Rejecting" the conduit claim is somewhat essential to Napster's case (from what I've read), but the article doesn't say what kind of ruling the judge handed down. It seems to say it was in response to the RIAA's motion for Summary Judgment. A MSJ is one of the opening volleys in any lawsuit, and does somewhat narrow the scope of the case.
This seems to be little more than a RIAA blurb press release to trumpet the news from Friday.... this is generically known as "spin." Other articles I read said that there were matters of fact to be determined by a jury... that means this case is going to progress.
(IANAL - I am now a lawyer - passed the bar exam on Saturday!) == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
My Monday paper also contained an attack on Napster, from "Komputer Klinic" Kolumnist Kim Komando. Now, she may not have the star power of Lars, but in certain circles, especially newer users of computers, she does have a following. She has a talk radio show, and runs a nationally syndicated column in papers like the Los Angeles Times. She attacked Napster pretty brutally in her column this week, intending to scare new users away.
Someone needs to get out and hit back against these folks and the RIAA.... == "This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bring the weenies to roast when it hits that Yahoo! guy in Quasi, Australia. 2001-03-09 22:51:37
==
Even better than that is the quotation from Oliver North, famed figure in the Iran-Contra Arms scandal in the 1980s. Note that there were tons of accusations that North ordered senstive documents destroyed to prevent the truth about the scandal from emerging. When later asked about why such important elements of the deal were never commemorated in writing, North is quoted as saying: "If it's really important, you don't have to write down." Actually, I can't find the direct quote around here, but that's a pretty close paraphrase.
==
Lego, not only is your cookie block stupid, IT DOESN'T EVEN WORK! Oh, and you would happen to be using this cookie stuff to be monitoring kids under 13, would you?
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Read the rules:
CONTEST VOID IN ARIZONA, FLORIDA, MARYLAND, NORTH DAKOTA AND VERMONT AND TO THE RESIDENTS OF THESE STATES.
No free TiVo for me.
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, but I'm tired of putting up meaningful disclaimers. It's been a long, exhausting day, and I need a beer. If you want to act on what's in this message, go see a lawyer, licensed in your jurisdiction, who gives a crap.
I love the idea of reading it into the public record. If my hazy memory serves me, that's what happened with the Pentagon Papers back in the early 70s, and hell hath no fury like the Defense Department scorned. However, after it was read into the record, it was fair game. Then the journalists could report on it willy nilly without worrying about pesky security clearances and stolen documents.
The Speech and Debate Clause of the US Constitution protects Senators and Congresstypes from prosecution for acts taken in the course of official government proceedings (within reason). I'd love to see a Representative go to the well of the House and read DeCSS into the record. Maybe the EFF's lobbyists could try to pull that one off.
The unanimity of support for the DMCA can be broken by one Member of Congress who has the courage to stand up to the MPAA, RIAA and those who seek to congregate control over speech in the hands of faceless monopolistic multinational middlemen conglomerates.
Sheesh, it's definitely beer time. I reserve the right to retract all these statements after I've had two beers and an amount of sleep to be named later.
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Ok, so if the Privacy Foundation is so upset about web bugs in MS Word documents, why does their OWN ADVISORY have a web bug in it? My filter (Guidescope) caught this little sucker: http://www.privacyfoundation.org/graphics/1pix.gif
(Awaiting an explanation.)
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
That disclaimer aside, this appears to be a rather dumb trick. The RIAA is suing mp3board.com for providing pirated mp3s for commercial gain (putting aside the whole linking thing in the MPAA v. 2600 case). mp3board basically does do that, right? I don't want to get into the whole piracy/fair use debate here - that's not the point.
In this new action, piracy is just a red herring.
It's my understanding that mp3board.com's method of distributing mp3s is a direct download from a website (or a link to someone's website, yadda, yadda...)
So now mp3board sues AOL for creating Gnutella? WHY? In order to sue in civil court, you must have what's called "standing" to sue. Standing in a nutshell means that you have been injured by the actions of a defendant, and have the right to go into court to seek remedies to that injury.
Where the hell is mp3board injured by the mere existence of Gnutella? The only real effect mp3board might feel is that of competition - Gnuteela being a competing method of delivery. Certainly this isn't a justifiable injury. I think what they have in mind is criminal defense law - they're pointing blame on someone else who is doing something worse than they are, in the hopes that a jury will find them not liable. But that doesn't change their conduct.
Essentially, mp3board.com got caught doing 75 in a 55 mph zone. As the cop is giving them the ticket, AOL/TWX/Gnutella blows by at 100 mph. The events are unrelated - it in no way lessens mp3board.com's punishment, and in no way is mp3board injured by AOL/TWX/Gnutella's conduct. Now whether the cops (picture Ponch and John in tan jumpsuits with RIAA logos on the shoulder) pursue AOL/TWX/Gnutella is a different story.
Oh, and best of luck proving that damages caused by Gnutella are attributable to AOL/TWX. AOL's made it pretty clear that they didn't approve of Gnutella, pinning losses on them is pretty unlikely.
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
I had a friend who visited an NSA museum in Maryland... he found out about it only because he had a security clearance. You needed the security clearance to get in - and I thought $47 to get into Disneyland was a high admission cost. Is this that same museum, or is there another still-classified museum? Can you tell us about it, in general non-compromising terms? If its the same thing, why has it been de-classified?
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Now that the disclaimer's out of the way, yes, I too was stunned. That places an advertisement under the name of the author - seems like misappropriation of the author's identity for a commercial endorsement - a tort called "Commercial Appropriation." That's the whole Vanna White case scenario - basically, if you are using my words an image to sell products, I deserve compensation. I actually egosurfed Deja for an old FAQ I used to maintain (which is very clearly copyrighted in its text) to see if they'd placed ads in that. (They hadn't, yet.) I'm substantially closer to a Federal Courthouse (drive by it on my way to work), and while I couldn't pursue this because of my employment, I can think of some people who might represent me...
Anyway, that is just plain reckless. But Deja has sucked ever since they went away from the 'Dejanews' format to this new useless Deja-portal format - I never look at it anymore, while I used to be a weekly visitor.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
It's a pay to play world!
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Look people, the Voting Integrity Project went to court to try and stop the internet primary, and lost. They tried arguing that the votes could be forged. So can real votes, and they're watching both intently. They tried arguing the Digital Divide. Wrong again, the court said, because the party took extensive steps to make sure the polling places were out in the rural areas, with several in each county. VIP tried to attack on a loss on anonymity, and lost again, because there is a double blind for ballots cast in polling places as well - in Arizona you sign in at the polling place, and they assign you a ballot number. The ballot is passed along, and later, if challenged, can be traced back to an individual voter. The electronic system worked similarly.
Being familiar with computers, I talked extensively with Arizona Democratic Party Chairman Mark Fleisher, Executive Director Cortland Coleman, consultants from Election.com, and state party lawyers. I expressed much concern about the setup because of the potential for DoS attack. They had actual humans sitting monitoring the severals round the clock, watching the votes tally up, looking for things symptomatic of a DoS attack, waiting to take action against it. You'll note that NO ATTACK OCCURRED.
Yes, I hammered them because their client software didn't support Macs - it was a Java error which tested out on some Macs, but not others. I'm a Mac user, and was denied the ability to vote from home on my G3. I was able to speak with a human at their tech support line without waiting on hold at 1:30 am in the morning who directed me to another location that I could vote from.
The long and short of it was that there were not really any major problems, no voting abnormalities, and turnout increased 622%. The electronic voting, combined with mail in voting and polling places, gave people more options to vote. regardless of the naysayers, I think it was a success and will likely be repeated soon. The "Voter Integrity Project" did not have a case then, and it doesn't now, either.
ObDisclaimer: I do not work for the Arizona Democratic Party, or election.com. I do not speak for my employer on this matter, and they have no position on the Arizona Democratic Party's electronic primary election. I am a lawyer, but there is no legal advice in this message for you. Before acting on anything in this message, please consult your own attorney.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
What was more interesting is that the artists have organized. This gives the Courtney Loves and Sheryl Crows (and yes, the Metallicas) a group to work with that isn't the RIAA.
Essentially, to this point it's been:
- RIAA to Napster: Die!
- Napster to RIAA, in response: No, you die!
Now the artists fly in from off the turnbuckle and scream "You both die!"I think the artists are probably the most level-headed people in this whole debate, and certainly have a lot to add. I'm glad they're organized now.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
To get back close to the real topic, the fact that the government can sample a large volume of mail for a couple of keywords is minimized - only things relating to the crime are pulled out of the stream. And like other posters have said, if you don't encrypt your mail, that's like sending a postcard - anyone can read it.
The rest of your comment is just silly dogma. Too bad a search of Dogpile and Google didn't find anything even close to what you are claiming. I'll resist the temptation to flame you vigorously, but needless to say, your post is quite inaccurate in just about every aspect, from your claims about software, to your claims of vast archives of records tracking you on the internet.
People express quite a bit more disagreement when they've been a victim of crime, and the criminal's privacy is held more important the victim's life, liberty and property.
ObDisclaimer: I am an attorney, but this is not legal advice. Consult your own lawyer before acting on any information contained in this post.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
(Note: The summaries say that this is a "Class 6 Felony". This is incorrect.)
13-2316. Computer tampering; venue; forfeiture; classification
A. A person WHO ACTS WITHOUT AUTHORITY OR WHO EXCEEDS AUTHORIZATION OF USE commits computer TAMPERING BY:
6. PREVENTING A COMPUTER USER FROM EXITING A SITE, COMPUTER SYSTEM OR NETWORK-CONNECTED LOCATION IN ORDER TO COMPEL THE USER'S COMPUTER TO CONTINUE COMMUNICATING WITH, CONNECTING TO OR DISPLAYING THE CONTENT OF THE SERVICE, SITE OR SYSTEM.
D. A VIOLATION OF SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 6 OF THIS SECTION CONSTITUTES AN UNLAWFUL PRACTICE UNDER SECTION 44-1522 AND IS IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER CAUSES OF ACTION, REMEDIES AND PENALTIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THIS STATE. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY INVESTIGATE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION PURSUANT TO TITLE 44, CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 7.
Section 44-1522 is currently in effect, and reads in relevant part:
44-1522. Unlawful practices; intended interpretation of provisions
A. The act, use, or employment by any person of any deception, deceptive act or practice, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise whether or not any person has in fact been misled, deceived, or damaged thereby, is declared to be an unlawful practice.
Yes, I work for the Arizona Attorney General, but I am not a spokesman for them. I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice. Please consult your own attorney before taking any actions based upon information in this posting.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
I lived in the DC area for 4 years, and went up to Baltimore frequently - almost went to school at the U of MD campus there. I noticed what you're saying about the dying seafood industry, and it's the same story as other formerly great fisheries like Long Island and parts of the Grand Banks - sprawl and reckless development has put bad things into the water, and (get ready, I'm agreeing with Katz) rampant corporatism has overfished (or, in the case of the Chesapeake Bay, overcrabbed) until the stocks were depleted.
Baltimore is getting it from both sides.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Cernan's book is written from the perscpective of the astronaut (obviously) battling the NASA brass, the difficult training and the various tribulations (he covers all the lows and highs) of being one of the most high profile people in America in the 60s and 70s.
I think it'd be an interesting contrast to "Failure..." because of the diversity of perspective - kinda like reading the two competing books on Mitnick's time on the lam. Kranz's perspective likely differs dramatically from that of fighter pilot Cernan.
This may be the ultimate in nerdy things to admit, but I don't read books that much. My father actually called me from a book signing somewhere to ask me if I wanted a copy of Cernan's book. After I got by the "Who the hell is Gene Cernan?" part (he was on Apollo 10 and Apollo 17 - the last trip to the Moon), I said sure, thinking I'd stuff it on a shelf somewhere. After reading the opening chapters thinking "I'll never finish this," I did plow right through it.
Anyway, to stay on topic, it would be a good contrast to this book. (And, no I don't work for Cernan or any publishing companies.)
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Just as corporate websites have evolved from pretty ads that pushed out information into e-commerce sites that actually made sales and generated revenue, government websites are evolving into useful service deliverers. This has the potential to be much more than just a "line killer" as Katz terms it. Here in Arizona, the state's adopted a directive called "No Wrong Door" in response to people attempting to get various services from the government and being told to go to another agency. No Wrong Door is easy in an electronic sense- passing people across webpages or redirecting electronic inquiries is a breeze not only in terms of time, but in manpower and in the lessening of a demand for services at brick-and-mortar government offices.
It's not going to kill lines, it's on the warpath to killing bureaucracy!
Anyway, Arizona has passed a new law permitting all state agencies to accept credit cards, which may seem fundamental to you all, but remember Gov't is adverse to lining the pockets of other businesses on the basis of 2-3% "processing fees". The government is looking beyond that, and saying that 2-3% fee is better than the thousands lost in bad checks and the millions spent on bricks and mortar. This is very long term thinking, when you're talking about term limited elected officials who run every two years.
Arizona has been providing some services online for years. I can renew my car registration, even get replacement plates or a duplicate driver's license online. There are other services, like paying fines, etc., but I haven't used them. ;)
BTW - Bricks and Mortar retailers, who pay sales taxes, are a little pissed at all this. They view themselves as funding the electronification of government, putting it on an even level with other e-businesses which don't pay taxes.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
I think there's a huge logistical hole in these studies. (I tried to find one to link to, but they all seem to have faded into the newsfeed din.) College campuses not only have lots of CD sotres, but think of what else they have - lots of INTERNET terminals and connections. The Internet is still quite full of dot.coms whose business plans involve selling CDs to these college students, with their disposable incomes.
I live near a large college campus (where I was recently a student). Yes, I have not bought any CDs at stores near campus... I have however, bought from several online retailers.
Short and sweet: CD sales at stores near campuses are down, because E-Commerce is stealing their sales!
Well, that's my hypothesis, anyway.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
The Localhost claim is different because the host there was suing for defamation. That's a civil claim, not a criminal charge. Also, it wouldn't be binding precedent - it was merely a low level ruling in a Colorado state court.
No, I think this IBM case is much better. I've pursued cases like this with no success, because there is some question of consent by the "victim" if they were running an open relay. Regardless of how stupid it is, open relays are still very common, and spammers regularly abuse them. If the spammer somehow hacked the relay, that will help the case.
The other aspect is the forgery - use of IBM's name. Another thread on this topic had a post talking about a guy who was calling other people and leaving a third party's name and phone number. Depending on your state law, that might not be forgery, because it's a voice communication. That's why the appropriate criminal charge there was phone harassment, which is usually an extremely low-level felony or a misdemeanor. Spam involves printing the actual text of the name IBM.COM in the email. That's the forgery. Making it appear as if IBM was sending it, that's the fraud. If it was my case, I'd also charge theft for any damage caused to IBM by the actions of the spammer - time lost on machine downtime, and cost to fix machines. Manpower and overtime to fix the problem might be worth asking for, too (probably depends on the judge).
But if the IBM.COM machine was an open relay.... I dunno.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
http://www.freedomship.com/
(a project to build a mobile libertarian haven disguised as an overgrown cruise ship)
Not Quite.
From the Freedom Ship Web Site (my emphasis added):
Governing Laws
Freedom Ship is only a ship, not a political entity. It will operate under the same rules and regulations as any cruise ship. As a sea-going commercial vessel, it will fly the flag of a specific country (to be determined at a later date), enjoy the protection of that country, and be subject to its laws and regulations, as well as to maritime law. In addition, its residents will be subject to the ships Rules and Regulations.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Cylons wrote:
Besides, online cd sales places at this point literally sell a cd and ship it to you, and they can sell them for cheaper due to a loophole in the recording industry's pricing scheme (they forbid places that sell their cds to advertise a price lower than X dollars... online places don't advertise generally, so it doesn't affect them) (there's currently debate going on in congress about whether or not this policy is of the recording industry's is legal... it may drop prices for everyone soon)
Actually, I believe the Supreme Court recently took up this issue. If I recall correctly, they said that such practices were illegal. However, I cannot say that for sure, so if anyone has better information they can cite, do post it.
===
There was a similar case within the last 5 years called 44 Liquormart . In that case, Rhode Island statutes prevented the advertising of alcohol prices except in the form of price tags on the actual merchandise. RI's rationale was that the supression of advertising discouraged underage drinking. The court did strike the statute down as anti-competitive. A similar case from Virginia some years back dealt with banning advertising of perscription drug prices - I believe the result was the same, but I don't have time right now to look it up.
While I'm not advising the RIAA (or anyone suing them), they could make the case that these are apples and oranges. 44 Liquormart was a state statute, and theirs is an industry-based self-regulation. But it still stinks of anti-competitiveness... a cartel setting prices.
Actually, I just poked around and found this story (which I actually submitted a while back. That wasn't a Supreme Court case, but just an FTC settlement.
Anyway...
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Trade secrets are only trade secrets if the company tries to keep them secret. Microsoft didn't try very hard here... silly clickwrap agreement, Kerebros is for everyone.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
All the /.ers screaming for blood over CD prices...maybe you should contact the FTC and tell them to keep up the good work.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
This seems to be little more than a RIAA blurb press release to trumpet the news from Friday.... this is generically known as "spin." Other articles I read said that there were matters of fact to be determined by a jury... that means this case is going to progress.
(IANAL - I am now a lawyer - passed the bar exam on Saturday!)
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
First Lars. Now Dre.
My Monday paper also contained an attack on Napster, from "Komputer Klinic" Kolumnist Kim Komando. Now, she may not have the star power of Lars, but in certain circles, especially newer users of computers, she does have a following. She has a talk radio show, and runs a nationally syndicated column in papers like the Los Angeles Times . She attacked Napster pretty brutally in her column this week, intending to scare new users away.
Someone needs to get out and hit back against these folks and the RIAA....
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."