Does this apply only with NSI or with all registrars?
If it applies to all, then shouldn't ICANN have a say in the matter? If it is only with NSI, then we shouldn't be surprised... we realized long ago that they weren't the best registrar to use.
btw, I use dotster as my registrar ($15US/year last time i checked)
I agree, but my local newspaper (which is based in the same city as the real PETA, BTW) reported a few days ago that this decision was made under the Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. Can anyone explain how this law can be used in a case like this?
I find this ironic. If i remember correctly, the majority of the geek community supported (or at least, did not object) the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act when it was proposed and/or passed. But now that it is being enforced, we think differently?
I personally remember saying to myself, "this is a good law! cybersquatting should be stopped!" But like you, I do think the site in question should be forced to shut down (or change URL).
a) Where is the line drawn?
b) If the site was hosted outside of the US, could this law be enforced?
It is this type of thinking that hinders the success of linux. If you want something to become mainstream, it must be user friendly! It really gets to me when people take pride in using a more difficult UI and rant about Microsoft and Windows users.
A company named RealityFusion has done something similar a while ago. From their web site, you can request the SDK. They also have a "Variety Pack" available for download that has a couple of demo programs.
Does anybody here have any experience with their SDK and/or demos? Are there any other companies doing similar things?
as 2600 demonstrated (but should already be obvious to the novice net user), anyone can log in to IRC and claim to somebody else. there is no strong evidence in the chat log to prove that this "security expert" is who he claims to be. perhaps BOTH parties were falsely representing themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
The RIAA site should be shut down for publishing the location of a site that publishes the locations of sites that have copyrighted MP3s.
If it applies to all, then shouldn't ICANN have a say in the matter? If it is only with NSI, then we shouldn't be surprised... we realized long ago that they weren't the best registrar to use.
btw, I use dotster as my registrar ($15US/year last time i checked)
I agree, but my local newspaper (which is based in the same city as the real PETA, BTW) reported a few days ago that this decision was made under the Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. Can anyone explain how this law can be used in a case like this?
I personally remember saying to myself, "this is a good law! cybersquatting should be stopped!" But like you, I do think the site in question should be forced to shut down (or change URL).
a) Where is the line drawn?
b) If the site was hosted outside of the US, could this law be enforced?
It is this type of thinking that hinders the success of linux. If you want something to become mainstream, it must be user friendly! It really gets to me when people take pride in using a more difficult UI and rant about Microsoft and Windows users.
Then why hasn't something similar to IntelliSense been for a linux IDE?
Could somebody please post a summary of the differences between CVS and VSS?
Also, if I were convinced to switch to CVS, what would the migration process consist of?
two words, one tone: busy signal
1) Are there Linux drivers for this camera?
2) How immoral/illegal is it to lie about which OS you are using?
Does anybody here have any experience with their SDK and/or demos? Are there any other companies doing similar things?
BTW, Digimarc and Wired are giving away free USB webcams (does not include shipping/handling) at http://www.digimarc.com/household.
Sorry... wrong URL... dig through the site some more and you will find the source for the specified utilities (plus some others) at ftp://www.interix.com/newpub/t w/unsup/gnu/gpl.util.tgz.
The GPL'ed source code is available at http://www.interix.com/tw/main_contrib.ht ml.
as 2600 demonstrated (but should already be obvious to the novice net user), anyone can log in to IRC and claim to somebody else. there is no strong evidence in the chat log to prove that this "security expert" is who he claims to be. perhaps BOTH parties were falsely representing themselves.