Does it also includes supporting reverse engineering? What about fraudelent EULAs that say if you don't agree, that you can get a refund? Or that permit you to reverse engineer to be able to be compatible?
Me thinks this emperor is nude, and it's not a pretty.
These hackers are just thiefs trying to steal videos so the movie makes can't make money. Do you know of any pirated movie movie on the internet? Ummm....They just want to break the law.
This CPHack program is to let kids see porn! But are the sites bocked so, they can't can't get to it and it's easily bypassable already? Umm...They are trying to corrupt our children.
These crackpots are telling lies about us!!! What statements are untrue? Ummmm...they are making inflamatory statements causing us losses! What losses are you having? Ummm...the statements are untrue.
Most of the good programmers didn't learn their programming in school, but learned it on their own.
You learn by looking at what is there and writing your own code. You get better by doing the same.
Before I worked on device drivers, I didn't know how do it. My first device driver was for a Vista V1200 Diskpack under CPM on a 6502 (the IO code was 6502 on the apple, and the higher code was running on the Z80B card). I found it slow, so I got source code and optimized the driver.
Even if you can't program, you can provide finely detailed bug reports and run tests that could reduce where the problem in the code is located.
You could always pay someone to write the driver that you want.
If a case (or claim) is dismissed w/o prejudice the same claim can be re-filed. This in (some jurisdictions) can be done before the defendant answers, or it could be dismissed by the court on a summary judgment or a motion to dismiss. But the it frowned upon after any discovery is done.
AugustFalcon is correct on the intent of finality.
Mattel happens to be trying the same with me. They dismissed w/o prejudice which would allow them to bring the case anywhere they please (maybe someplace without an Anti-SLAPP statute or free speech rights).
Some people take some forms of input better than others. Some people prefer multiple input streams.
But us geeks, especially the old timers who started with 110buad, then to 300, then 1200, up to 56k have higher reading speeds from keeping up with increasing modem speed. We can read at over 1k words/minute, but most people speak
I'd think about buying it. Let see some cop give you a ticket...Make of car: Mach 5, Violation: jumping over police car, cutting through trees on side of road, riding with kid in trunk.
They won't like a Linux box able to record shows. So, what if the Tivo runs linux, they don't care about facts, they just want to scare people into kissing their asses!
Most libraries have filters and public schools have filters now.
The issue would not be either fraud or libel.
Fraud would be for selling a product that claims to filter porn/violence, etc. and filtering much more. In Mass. it could even be under a 93A, which is a consumer protection act.
Libel would be for saying that beaver.edu is in appropriate content.
Don't you love irony?
If it was CyberPatrol it would be more ironic since they filed a baseless libel claim against me. It was so baseless, when the judge (in a summary judgment motion hearing) asked what was libelous, they moved to dismiss.
PITA did not get the site before it was used. Presuming that PETA.ORG was not engaged in commerce, then the Lanaham act would not apply.
If I started a site called slashdot.com to satire slashdot, it would not apply. Now, if I started to sell advertising on the site, then there might be an issue.
This might make a nice lawsuit against some of the filter companies. Especially against filter companies that file lawsuits against people who crack the product so that people can see the list.
Contact the PITA people, the people for the ethical treatment of animals.
Give them a piece of mind. Also, ask them how many trees died for their foolish lawsuit. Trees have feeling too. Maybe we should send PETT (people for the ethical treatment of trees) after them.
Back in 1986 Micrsoft Introduced the Programmers Reference Library. M$ was running this as a special with an Amdek CD-Rom player. It had documents on line, with links to other place in the same or other documents.
Remember the Norton Guides? They had the same thing as a TSR.
In the CPHack, the judge said "in active concert."
There is conspiracy, where one hand does not need to know what the otherhand is doing. They just need to have a common purpose, publish prohibitted data. And 3 or more of this can be considered RICO.
Instead of worrying about bypassing the law, why not fight it and change it?
Recognizing some of these lawsuits as abusive, slapp enough of the companies that bring them.
If you slapp a company hard enough, the others would stop doing this. That is why I am fighting Mattel. When I win, and I will, I am wanting a large enough sum to make sure that other companies flinch when they think about trying to shut someone up with abusive litigation.
When you wrote it was not spyware. Does that mean it's not now?
Something like this is in CyberPatrol too, to check for updates of the CyberNot list.
There has been talk of beta programs monitoring keystrokes to see what users do, so the product could be improved. This can easily be perverted. At one company, people asked if CyberPatrol being used to track attempts at accessing "forbidden" sites to keep track of employees.
When at MSI, while a similar product to CyberPatrol was being developed, I would get calls from the CEO and asked what certain programs were. These programs are ones on my machine that I was running. They were working on control usage of programs. I would get calls and asked what's b.exe or l.exe.
You say that was the intent when you wrote it. But what about after you leave? I have little trust in their ethics.
MSI admitted, under oath, they monitored my internet access from home when I asked for a what would be a reasonable accomodation under the ADA. When asked why, still under oath, they said it was to check up on me because I asked for a reasonable accomodation.
The idea for a deposition is not to provide turthful information. It is to keep from losing the case. It also gives the otherside to evaluate the person being deposed value as a witness.
If deposed, you will be told not to volunteer information and to just answer the question, not anything more.
But the designee's answers has the power to bind them to those answers.
I would have used that deposition to try to have the injunction disolved.
Slashdot Mirror
Does it also includes supporting reverse engineering? What about fraudelent EULAs that say if you don't agree, that you can get a refund? Or that permit you to reverse engineer to be able to be compatible?
Me thinks this emperor is nude, and it's not a pretty.
These hackers are just thiefs trying to steal videos so the movie makes can't make money. Do you know of any pirated movie movie on the internet? Ummm....They just want to break the law.
This CPHack program is to let kids see porn! But are the sites bocked so, they can't can't get to it and it's easily bypassable already? Umm...They are trying to corrupt our children.
These crackpots are telling lies about us!!! What statements are untrue? Ummmm...they are making inflamatory statements causing us losses! What losses are you having? Ummm...the statements are untrue.
Most of the good programmers didn't learn their programming in school, but learned it on their own.
You learn by looking at what is there and writing your own code. You get better by doing the same.
Before I worked on device drivers, I didn't know how do it. My first device driver was for a Vista V1200 Diskpack under CPM on a 6502 (the IO code was 6502 on the apple, and the higher code was running on the Z80B card). I found it slow, so I got source code and optimized the driver.
Even if you can't program, you can provide finely detailed bug reports and run tests that could reduce where the problem in the code is located.
You could always pay someone to write the driver that you want.
I hate people who bitch about a problem and do nothing about solving it.
Either be part of the solution or part of the problem?
AugustFalcon is correct on the intent of finality.
Mattel happens to be trying the same with me. They dismissed w/o prejudice which would allow them to bring the case anywhere they please (maybe someplace without an Anti-SLAPP statute or free speech rights).
But you are right, how interesting could a show about people being stranded on a desert island be?
Or a show about a bunch of strangers living in the same house.
Will there be lawsuit for this guy taking their idea?
But us geeks, especially the old timers who started with 110buad, then to 300, then 1200, up to 56k have higher reading speeds from keeping up with increasing modem speed. We can read at over 1k words/minute, but most people speak
But since you asked, they got rid of the lawyers who filed the countersuit, and replaced them with the one who persecuted the CPHack case.
You think the judge would throw it out?
The homing pigeon is to watch out for accidents up ahead.
They won't like a Linux box able to record shows. So, what if the Tivo runs linux, they don't care about facts, they just want to scare people into kissing their asses!
The issue would not be either fraud or libel.
Fraud would be for selling a product that claims to filter porn/violence, etc. and filtering much more. In Mass. it could even be under a 93A, which is a consumer protection act.
Libel would be for saying that beaver.edu is in appropriate content.
Don't you love irony?
If it was CyberPatrol it would be more ironic since they filed a baseless libel claim against me. It was so baseless, when the judge (in a summary judgment motion hearing) asked what was libelous, they moved to dismiss.
PITA did not get the site before it was used. Presuming that PETA.ORG was not engaged in commerce, then the Lanaham act would not apply.
If I started a site called slashdot.com to satire slashdot, it would not apply. Now, if I started to sell advertising on the site, then there might be an issue.
Give them a piece of mind. Also, ask them how many trees died for their foolish lawsuit. Trees have feeling too. Maybe we should send PETT (people for the ethical treatment of trees) after them.
Might be a problem, the name may trigger SPAM filters looking out for FreeCash offers.
Remember the Norton Guides? They had the same thing as a TSR.
When there is little noise, my hearing becomes more sensitive to noises further away.
The Ergo Brick was designed without a fan. It used a heat conductive gel that used the metal case to conduct away the heat.
But if we eliminate the noise from the fan, then the noise from the monitor, the drives would then become an issue. What's the point?
There is conspiracy, where one hand does not need to know what the otherhand is doing. They just need to have a common purpose, publish prohibitted data. And 3 or more of this can be considered RICO.
Instead of worrying about bypassing the law, why not fight it and change it?
Recognizing some of these lawsuits as abusive, slapp enough of the companies that bring them.
If you slapp a company hard enough, the others would stop doing this. That is why I am fighting Mattel. When I win, and I will, I am wanting a large enough sum to make sure that other companies flinch when they think about trying to shut someone up with abusive litigation.
You have the MPAA getting police to kick down doors and drag 16 y/o to jail.
You have the CPHack case.
We have corporations use lawsuits to shut people up instead of throwing them in jail. Or judges that give vague orders and threaten jail.
Something like this is in CyberPatrol too, to check for updates of the CyberNot list.
There has been talk of beta programs monitoring keystrokes to see what users do, so the product could be improved. This can easily be perverted. At one company, people asked if CyberPatrol being used to track attempts at accessing "forbidden" sites to keep track of employees.
When at MSI, while a similar product to CyberPatrol was being developed, I would get calls from the CEO and asked what certain programs were. These programs are ones on my machine that I was running. They were working on control usage of programs. I would get calls and asked what's b.exe or l.exe.
You say that was the intent when you wrote it. But what about after you leave? I have little trust in their ethics.
MSI admitted, under oath, they monitored my internet access from home when I asked for a what would be a reasonable accomodation under the ADA. When asked why, still under oath, they said it was to check up on me because I asked for a reasonable accomodation.
If deposed, you will be told not to volunteer information and to just answer the question, not anything more.
But the designee's answers has the power to bind them to those answers.
I would have used that deposition to try to have the injunction disolved.