True, there has not be blood drawn. But remember, sharks don't eat lawyers -- professional courtesy.
But, part of large corporate strategy is to run up legal bills. This seems like Mattel's legal strategy. If MPAA sends a nasty note to an ISP, they will shut down the site just to avoid spending thousands on a lawyer.
If you don't have a place for abandoned software to go, it will live on the streets and steal.
This is how Polarbar Mailer came to be. Polarbar is a all java mailer that came from JStreet Mailer.
But generally, when a company goes under, the creditors think that the code is worth money. By the time they realize it's not, they can't find it anymore and everyone is gone.
Supercheap Linux system w/firewall
on
Linux In A Box
·
· Score: 5
Why bother with a special embedded system? If you are looking for a cheap system, why not take an old 386 system/paperweight and setup the Floppy Firewall?
This is a simple distro (free!) that gets you up and running on a low-end system w/o a hard drive.
Right now, the telco sells your phone information to make a profit.
We should increase the protections against govermental and business intrusions.
In the United States, we only have the freedoms that we fight for. We have surrendered them to business and the government slowly over time. We must stop.
I have not been able to read the statute. So aome of this is guesswork based on reading the comments.
1. There will be the same problem as witht he Washington law. The problem with knowingly sending the SPAM to Washington. Also, the issue of constitutionality of state laws affecting interstate commerce.
2. Even though there is attorney fees, there still is a resistance for a court to award $5000 in fees for a $10 case.
3. There should be a $1000 or $10/per email violation. And include lost wages to appear in court. Court costs and attorney fees do not include the lost wages for the prosecution.
4. There should also be the same sort of penalty available for the people who had their servers hijacked or addresses forged.
5. A penalty for people who sell an email address that has not been authorized to be spammed.
6. Penalty for a Software publisher that writes software that hijacks servers to spam.
There has been success in having individuals rewarded to stop fraud. That is why Abraham Lincoln put the Qui Tam laws into place. That allows an individual to file a lawsuit on behalf of the federal government
By filing a lawsuit or taking legal action, you tend to generate more publicity.
If Mattel didn't file a lawsuit and restraining orders, most people would not have heard of CPHack.
If Mattel didn't file a countsuit for libel against me, most people would not have heard of it, and it would have been over by now. And there would not have been the press coverage (two newspaper artcles, two on-line articles, or any TV appearance.)
Since this is an appeals court case, I would think it has some influence on other circuits. In a circuit that has not ruled on similar issues, the courts commonly look at decisions from other circuits. If the circuit has ruled on the same issue, they will usually rely on their own decisions.
But in all cases, the courts will do what they want. If they feel their previous decisions don't hold anymore, they will ignore it.
One of the few reports on this that I have seen that is mostly factual.
One side claims that these hackers will be making movies available on the internet. The otherside makes it look like no program will be able to work anything.
The t-shirt and other images of the code was a good trial trick.
I thought that the protectability of computer source code was established with the PGP case.
This injunction is not permanent until after the Napster trial has concluded. A TRO (reporary restraining order) is very short term. A restraining order could last the length of the trial, but if Napster wins, then the restraining order would be disolved.
I would hope that Napster would win, and then the judge would be required to award large damages from the effect of the restraining order.
I have not bought any Music CDs or DVDs in quite a while. When in the stores, I have advised others that they should not buy them because of these lawsuits.
The computer tresspass act might cover this, but it may be a stretch too.
We may not be blocking cookies, but we are not authorizing them either. How is having cookies placed by banner ads used to track movement, any different from reading the history file off the hard drive?
But to extend this, what about SPAM? They are sending commands to a SMTP server that is designed to transfer (without permissions) SPAM data to a mail client to be stored on your local machine.
It might be a stretch, but I'd like to see the law applied to those areas.
It's true that a business will react by the bottom line.
The only was is to have introduce statutory damages and attorney fees. That is, even if you can show no damages, that it is assumed that there is $X in damages.
This type of damages are needed in privacy act legislation,credit reporting legislation, and SPAM legilation.
Otherwise, they will say, well, we know it's illegal, but they can't prove it was our false report that caused damages.
But it does bring up an interesting point. That the large corporations are using IP rights to crush smaller ones, or countries from exploiting natural resources.
On top of that, they are required to fund PSA's... some of which paint them in pretty good light, and those that don't are still free publicity. previously, it was illegal for them to even do TV product placements.
It may have been against the law for TV placements, but I believe that law was thrown out for constitutionality issues. They also can't do movie placements, billboards, labeled products, children advertising, etc.
Now, the next lawsuit against them will be much easier.
The internet has turned the lonely pamphleteer into a publisher with a huge potential audience.
This has both good and bad.
The good -- more information can get out.
The bad -- more information can get out.
Since there is a very low barrier to entry, almost anyone can be a publisher. So, any writer the good, bad, or ugly can "publish" what they want. There are no copy editors, fact checkers, etc.
This has opened up a myriad of legal issues, libel or just plain bitching.
It also scares the likes of RIAA and MPAA where they are losing their control over publishing. Now the small guy for little money, can get their music or short movies out on the net.
I think so. I didn't see any "feel good" ads. I have seen some ads laying out some of the terms of the agreements, no kid ads, no cartoon characters, etc.
They are also paying out billions of dollars in a settlement.
I would also say that the $145,000,000,000 damages assessed by a jury is a loss. Though that probably in appeal for a long time.
One potential disadvantage to a large company with lots of litigation is that if someone is ruled against them in one case, they can't fight the same thing in other cases.
Having deep pockets help. Many companies think they can litigate the other party into bankruptcy. Justice can prevail. The little guy can win. Though it is tough. When the little guy wins, the PR machines spin the facts to make it look like the system needs to be reformed, but leaves out how they bankrupted hundreds of others to win.
Remember Stack v. MS? Stack won $130m Microsoft won $30m. But MS bought Stack.
You may not agree with the McDonalds' coffee cup case, but they are a big guy too.
Big tobbacco lost! It took years and years, but they lost. It took hundreds of plaintiff lawyers to coordinate via the internet.
I have been using sharing information on my case with others via the net to help them (and myself) to win against Mattel.
Most of what he says is true. Many "reviewers" just rehash the press kits.
A few years ago, spoke to a person who wrote a compiler review/comparison. It turns out that someone at the magazine changed the score card numbers. It seemed as though the numbers had some correlation to the advertising dollars.
The text of the review wasn't changed so that the numbers never matched the text.
Now with the magazines that have the scorecards, I will know what went on if the text does not match the numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
But, part of large corporate strategy is to run up legal bills. This seems like Mattel's legal strategy. If MPAA sends a nasty note to an ISP, they will shut down the site just to avoid spending thousands on a lawyer.
This is how Polarbar Mailer came to be. Polarbar is a all java mailer that came from JStreet Mailer.
But generally, when a company goes under, the creditors think that the code is worth money. By the time they realize it's not, they can't find it anymore and everyone is gone.
This is a simple distro (free!) that gets you up and running on a low-end system w/o a hard drive.
Get your Floppy Firewall at http://www.zelow.no/floppyfw.
If it don't have what you want, you can always add more. But, if you add too much, you might have to add a hard drive.
We should increase the protections against govermental and business intrusions.
In the United States, we only have the freedoms that we fight for. We have surrendered them to business and the government slowly over time. We must stop.
1. There will be the same problem as witht he Washington law. The problem with knowingly sending the SPAM to Washington. Also, the issue of constitutionality of state laws affecting interstate commerce.
2. Even though there is attorney fees, there still is a resistance for a court to award $5000 in fees for a $10 case.
3. There should be a $1000 or $10/per email violation. And include lost wages to appear in court. Court costs and attorney fees do not include the lost wages for the prosecution.
4. There should also be the same sort of penalty available for the people who had their servers hijacked or addresses forged.
5. A penalty for people who sell an email address that has not been authorized to be spammed.
6. Penalty for a Software publisher that writes software that hijacks servers to spam.
There has been success in having individuals rewarded to stop fraud. That is why Abraham Lincoln put the Qui Tam laws into place. That allows an individual to file a lawsuit on behalf of the federal government
I thought that much of the publicity from the CPHack case was planned.
Just because I'm paranoid, does not mean that everyone is out to get me too.
If Mattel didn't file a lawsuit and restraining orders, most people would not have heard of CPHack.
If Mattel didn't file a countsuit for libel against me, most people would not have heard of it, and it would have been over by now. And there would not have been the press coverage (two newspaper artcles, two on-line articles, or any TV appearance.)
Their lawyers would demand it, we will just give them what they demand. They would just not expect the condition. :)
The MPAA wants this shirts off our back.
Lets print DeCSS on underware, wear it for a week straight, then let them have that.
Since this is an appeals court case, I would think it has some influence on other circuits. In a circuit that has not ruled on similar issues, the courts commonly look at decisions from other circuits. If the circuit has ruled on the same issue, they will usually rely on their own decisions.
But in all cases, the courts will do what they want. If they feel their previous decisions don't hold anymore, they will ignore it.
One side claims that these hackers will be making movies available on the internet. The otherside makes it look like no program will be able to work anything.
The t-shirt and other images of the code was a good trial trick.
I thought that the protectability of computer source code was established with the PGP case.
Only criminals don't want the police to search their car/house/purse/pockets?
The check is in the mail.
Three lies.
In a free country to keep ones rights, you can't surrender them. For when you do, it ceases to become a free country.
Go ahead, those kids in China need their $1/day pay.
Why don't you buy some DVDs? Send some donations to the MPAA and RIAA legal funds too?
This injunction is not permanent until after the Napster trial has concluded. A TRO (reporary restraining order) is very short term. A restraining order could last the length of the trial, but if Napster wins, then the restraining order would be disolved.
I would hope that Napster would win, and then the judge would be required to award large damages from the effect of the restraining order.
I have not bought any Music CDs or DVDs in quite a while. When in the stores, I have advised others that they should not buy them because of these lawsuits.
Someone could write a windows email virus that will shut down 50% of the machines on the net..never mind, already happened.
A person can shut down half the city of Boston with a fertilizer truck in the right place.
There is no real security. Someone can always find a way around it.
People don't realize that they lose their rights in the name of security, but are defrauded because they don't get security.
We may not be blocking cookies, but we are not authorizing them either. How is having cookies placed by banner ads used to track movement, any different from reading the history file off the hard drive?
But to extend this, what about SPAM? They are sending commands to a SMTP server that is designed to transfer (without permissions) SPAM data to a mail client to be stored on your local machine.
It might be a stretch, but I'd like to see the law applied to those areas.
The only was is to have introduce statutory damages and attorney fees. That is, even if you can show no damages, that it is assumed that there is $X in damages.
This type of damages are needed in privacy act legislation,credit reporting legislation, and SPAM legilation.
Otherwise, they will say, well, we know it's illegal, but they can't prove it was our false report that caused damages.
But it does bring up an interesting point. That the large corporations are using IP rights to crush smaller ones, or countries from exploiting natural resources.
This has both good and bad.
The good -- more information can get out.
The bad -- more information can get out.
Since there is a very low barrier to entry, almost anyone can be a publisher. So, any writer the good, bad, or ugly can "publish" what they want. There are no copy editors, fact checkers, etc.
This has opened up a myriad of legal issues, libel or just plain bitching.
It also scares the likes of RIAA and MPAA where they are losing their control over publishing. Now the small guy for little money, can get their music or short movies out on the net.
They are also paying out billions of dollars in a settlement.
I would also say that the $145,000,000,000 damages assessed by a jury is a loss. Though that probably in appeal for a long time.
One potential disadvantage to a large company with lots of litigation is that if someone is ruled against them in one case, they can't fight the same thing in other cases.
Remember Stack v. MS? Stack won $130m Microsoft won $30m. But MS bought Stack.
You may not agree with the McDonalds' coffee cup case, but they are a big guy too.
Big tobbacco lost! It took years and years, but they lost. It took hundreds of plaintiff lawyers to coordinate via the internet.
I have been using sharing information on my case with others via the net to help them (and myself) to win against Mattel.
A few years ago, spoke to a person who wrote a compiler review/comparison. It turns out that someone at the magazine changed the score card numbers. It seemed as though the numbers had some correlation to the advertising dollars.
The text of the review wasn't changed so that the numbers never matched the text.
Now with the magazines that have the scorecards, I will know what went on if the text does not match the numbers.