No. No. No. What I mean is many contituents, each sending their 200 spams a day to their congressperson. Ie. Do select all text, reply, change the reply address to the congressperson's address (instead of the spammers), add a note at the top saying, "Here is another spam that I got. Please pass a law outlawing spamm."
Maybe Al queda is using spam to coordinate their terrorism. Embed encoded messages into the spam, and only the terrorists will know the method to grab the messages. Everyone else will just ignroe the spam.
What this will do is reduce using yahoo as SPAM drop boxes. If you can get a free forward to another free forward, it makes it harder to track the real destination of the spam responses.
But in this case, and many others the opt-in was a lie. I have had companies claim I opted in with an address, but that address was only given to one company for their list, not for distribution. Another SPAMMER claimed an email address only used on my wesbite, was opted in on.
Proper Opt-in lists are a good thing. Now, if someone sells a non-opt in list or SPAMMING software, making the claim that it is a valid marketing method, they should be hung out to dry.
I for one would be happy to testify in this type of case.
Bitching and moaning, does not cut it. You must fight the SPAM!
ICANN controls the name registrars. They control the name conflict policies. If you register a site protest site, like barbieslapp.com or mattelabuse.com and the people you are protesting objects, the name conflict resolution policy comes into play.
There was a piece a long time ago that compared the costs of hiring a Super programmer, and average programmer, and an incompetent programmer.
It compared the lines of code and number of bugs to the salaries. Of course it said it was cheaper to hire a super programmer. But, it found that the only difference between the average programmer and the incompetent programmer was the number of bugs generated, not the lines of code.
People need to be reminded of the high cost of debugging. It takes a long time to track down a bug.
When I was at the MIS center for Designs by Levi, I saw them configuring OS/2 1.0 text mode for one of the cash registers.
While on a contract job in 2000 for a cash register company, some of their cash registers still run under OS/2. And, they run their central control systems under OS/2.
And it is a trial court. Other courts may look at it, but they don't give it much of weight. If it came from a appeals court, then it would have some real impact.
Though, one may use the briefs as sources of information to write their own briefs.
Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedures 11, an attorney is supposed to verify with every document that they sign and file with the court that it is filed in good faith and based on valid legal theory.
You are suggesting that the attorney commit fraud on the court. Of course to prove that you did send it, they may require you to produce your computer so their experts may search it. Of course, if they were smart, they would submit a request for admission first. Then if you deny that you sent the email, they can hit you with the costs of recovering the data and investigating and deposing the ISPs to confirm that it was your email.
There is a statute of fraunds in many jurisdictions. The statute of frauds require that certain types of contracts be in writing, because the likelyhood or the temptation of fraud.
Large amounts of money.
Contracts to pay the debts of another.
Contracts that cannot be completed in a year.
What exactly is covered by the statute of frauds depends on the jurisdictions.
Then ask them which case they speak of in their Feb 02 internet newletter. The case where you do not have to establish damages for a claim of tresspass to chattel.
There is some theories to file a lawsuit on, but there is one problem....the EULA!
Before you can install the software, they require you to surrender all your rights before installation. If you say, "No, I don't agree" they will stop the installation. This is really disturbing where you buy a computer, take it out of the box, and Windows puts you through this.
It does not really matter what the MoFo lawyers get. Well, maybe, sort of. The Mofo lawyer cost would only be applicable as far as establishing damages beyond the statutory amounts, but to do that, they will have to open up their billing records to the SPAMMERS.
The firm that is handling the case for MoFo will get paid attorney fees from the SPAMMERs. A plaintiff cannot get paid for their time in prosecuting a lawsuit.
I think he does take a little liberty with the decision. He takes the position that providing an in-line link is infringment. I disagree, the court ruled that a framed, in-line image is infringment. The difference is that framing the image is an affirmative act in giving the impression that the image is part of the site belonging to the thumbnailer, not the site of the copyright holder. Just putting a link to the image without framing may give the impression, but is not an affirmative act to give the impression.
Slashdot Mirror
No. No. No. What I mean is many contituents, each sending their 200 spams a day to their congressperson. Ie. Do select all text, reply, change the reply address to the congressperson's address (instead of the spammers), add a note at the top saying, "Here is another spam that I got. Please pass a law outlawing spamm."
Far fetched? Maybe.
The Chinese government ignored SPAM problems, until enough people blacklisted China and then they took notice.
Maybe we should forward all the spam that we receive to congress, with a little note attached. Maybe they would take notice, then.
What this will do is reduce using yahoo as SPAM drop boxes. If you can get a free forward to another free forward, it makes it harder to track the real destination of the spam responses.
But in this case, and many others the opt-in was a lie. I have had companies claim I opted in with an address, but that address was only given to one company for their list, not for distribution. Another SPAMMER claimed an email address only used on my wesbite, was opted in on.
Proper Opt-in lists are a good thing. Now, if someone sells a non-opt in list or SPAMMING software, making the claim that it is a valid marketing method, they should be hung out to dry.
I for one would be happy to testify in this type of case.
Bitching and moaning, does not cut it. You must fight the SPAM!
What has to be updated are navigation systems that use magnetic north and calculate the true north based on magnetic variance.
If you remember from Carl also is the disenter of eliminating public involvement in ICANN.
What are they hiding?
It compared the lines of code and number of bugs to the salaries. Of course it said it was cheaper to hire a super programmer. But, it found that the only difference between the average programmer and the incompetent programmer was the number of bugs generated, not the lines of code.
People need to be reminded of the high cost of debugging. It takes a long time to track down a bug.
When I was at the MIS center for Designs by Levi, I saw them configuring OS/2 1.0 text mode for one of the cash registers.
While on a contract job in 2000 for a cash register company, some of their cash registers still run under OS/2. And, they run their central control systems under OS/2.
Though, one may use the briefs as sources of information to write their own briefs.
IANAL until, after I go to law school, pass the bar, and confirm that your retainer check cleared.
You are suggesting that the attorney commit fraud on the court. Of course to prove that you did send it, they may require you to produce your computer so their experts may search it. Of course, if they were smart, they would submit a request for admission first. Then if you deny that you sent the email, they can hit you with the costs of recovering the data and investigating and deposing the ISPs to confirm that it was your email.
- Large amounts of money.
- Contracts to pay the debts of another.
- Contracts that cannot be completed in a year.
What exactly is covered by the statute of frauds depends on the jurisdictions.Each class of mail service must be self sufficient.
Then ask them which case they speak of in their Feb 02 internet newletter. The case where you do not have to establish damages for a claim of tresspass to chattel.
Before you can install the software, they require you to surrender all your rights before installation. If you say, "No, I don't agree" they will stop the installation. This is really disturbing where you buy a computer, take it out of the box, and Windows puts you through this.
The firm that is handling the case for MoFo will get paid attorney fees from the SPAMMERs. A plaintiff cannot get paid for their time in prosecuting a lawsuit.
I think he does take a little liberty with the decision. He takes the position that providing an in-line link is infringment. I disagree, the court ruled that a framed, in-line image is infringment. The difference is that framing the image is an affirmative act in giving the impression that the image is part of the site belonging to the thumbnailer, not the site of the copyright holder. Just putting a link to the image without framing may give the impression, but is not an affirmative act to give the impression.
He is bitching about Intel's practices.
Similar rulings in the United States would start detailing the landscape of rights of website owners to keep SPAMMERS from scraping.
Easy to prove, he made an admission that was recorded and video taped.
Doesn't he want all music pirates convicted?
So, this only holds true with a focused sites. Using links, but then checking the links based on text would be useful, but not just links alone.