In 3010 AD, archaeologists discovered a sealed vault hidden deep under the Earth - full of technologies that are defective by design, algorithms engineered to restrict the users on how they can enjoy their own media, even rootkits disguised as music CDs.
So person B making photos of the iPhone after it lost its "trade secret" status because it was divulged to person A through Apple's negligence is not "copying a trade secret."
My point was that if person A and B are both committing a felony then it's a special case governed by the misappropriation clause. Since the trade secret was misappropriated instead of disclosed, it's still being protected.
Suppose Hogan took a few pictures of the phone without ever touching it and then selling those pictures to Gizmodo for $5000, then both parties would be in the clear and this trade secret would have been properly disclosed.
If Gizmodo found the phone and photographed it, I would be in total agreement with you.
However in this case Gizmodo acquired the phone illegally, which triggers the misappropriation clause in the Economic Espionage Act of 1996.
Gizmodo really should have consulted a lawyer on this one. The lawyer probably would have advised Hogan to photograph of the phone without taking it apart and then sell those photographs to Gizmodo. And then promptly return the phone to the nearest police station. This way no illegal act would have occurred and the Hogan and Gizmodo team would have uncovered Apple's trade secret in a perfectly legal manner.
... if a trade secret is acquired by improper means (a somewhat wider concept than "illegal means" but inclusive of such means), the secret is generally deemed to have been misappropriated. Thus if a trade secret has been acquired via industrial espionage, its acquirer will probably be subject to legal liability for acquiring it improperly.
Since in this case the prototype was acquired by Gizmodo illegally, they must face the full consequences of the law.
"Extinction" is a very high bar to clear, except for losers like panda bears that are large enough to shoot and barely capable of reproducing without assistance.
Barely capable of reproducing without assistance can refer to many slashdot readers.
I think you got it reversed. All humans are incapable of reproducing without assistance, except for the handful of/. scientists who possess the proper cloning apparatus.
Please excuse my ignorance, but isn't WEP/WPA/WPA2 all vulnerable currently? Sure, cracking WPA invovle a lot of bruteforcing, but anyone remotely afflictively with a university or college can easily get that kind of computing power.
If I'm not mistaken only a RADIUS server can truly secure your wifi network currently. I'm ashamed to admit that I don't have enough geek credit left to get one of those.
If you set up a password and then hand it out to everyone you're basically inviting people to use your wifi. By doing that you're implicitly bearing the consequences of all your users' copyright violations.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoever issued you the laptop should probably contact the Australian embassy to get special clearance.
If you declare that you're not bring any porn with you and they find the flash drives then you're going to be in big trouble.
In the very least they can hold you without charge for 12 days just to ruin your vacation.
In 3010 AD, archaeologists discovered a sealed vault hidden deep under the Earth - full of technologies that are defective by design, algorithms engineered to restrict the users on how they can enjoy their own media, even rootkits disguised as music CDs.
What did they find? DRM Hell.
Especially on phones running Android, where anyone proficient in Java can make a fake "Power off" button that zeros out the entire device.
Can you ping me yet?
How about now?
Unfortunately, it won't be un-repealed when the wars end
I'm sorry; I don't quite follow you.
We've always been at war with Eastasia. It's silly to imply that the war will ever end.
Like losing your virginity.
I'm sorry, you lost me.
Jokes aside, I'm beginning to see your point. I stand corrected on the issue.
Your mom is so fat...
Politicians may have multiple characters, but all those characters share the same wallet.
So person B making photos of the iPhone after it lost its "trade secret" status because it was divulged to person A through Apple's negligence is not "copying a trade secret."
My point was that if person A and B are both committing a felony then it's a special case governed by the misappropriation clause. Since the trade secret was misappropriated instead of disclosed, it's still being protected.
Suppose Hogan took a few pictures of the phone without ever touching it and then selling those pictures to Gizmodo for $5000, then both parties would be in the clear and this trade secret would have been properly disclosed.
How old are the laser sharks again?
Being discrete:
"A reliable source sent us some pictures of what appears to be the gen next iPhone"
Not being discrete:
Using 6 pages of text and pictures to detail how they acquired the stolen property.
If Gizmodo found the phone and photographed it, I would be in total agreement with you.
However in this case Gizmodo acquired the phone illegally, which triggers the misappropriation clause in the Economic Espionage Act of 1996.
Gizmodo really should have consulted a lawyer on this one. The lawyer probably would have advised Hogan to photograph of the phone without taking it apart and then sell those photographs to Gizmodo. And then promptly return the phone to the nearest police station. This way no illegal act would have occurred and the Hogan and Gizmodo team would have uncovered Apple's trade secret in a perfectly legal manner.
Since in this case the prototype was acquired by Gizmodo illegally, they must face the full consequences of the law.
Was your apartment next to a donut shop by any chance?
"Extinction" is a very high bar to clear, except for losers like panda bears that are large enough to shoot and barely capable of reproducing without assistance.
Barely capable of reproducing without assistance can refer to many slashdot readers.
I think you got it reversed. All humans are incapable of reproducing without assistance, except for the handful of /. scientists who possess the proper cloning apparatus.
The entire joke rests on the fact that there's no such wikipedia article. Even Randall admits there shouldn't be article on the word.
My going rate is a six-pack of something interesting. ;)
What's the going rate for those WPA2 passwords? ;)
May I suggest the ASM-135 ASAT. We did spend $5.3 billion dollars (1986 dollars no less) on it so might as well use them all up now.
Please excuse my ignorance, but isn't WEP/WPA/WPA2 all vulnerable currently? Sure, cracking WPA invovle a lot of bruteforcing, but anyone remotely afflictively with a university or college can easily get that kind of computing power.
If I'm not mistaken only a RADIUS server can truly secure your wifi network currently. I'm ashamed to admit that I don't have enough geek credit left to get one of those.
(x goes from 0.01 to 0.6 depending on who you ask)
Excuse me, I think you forgot the x = 100 case, i.e. where we survey the prison population.
If you set up a password and then hand it out to everyone you're basically inviting people to use your wifi. By doing that you're implicitly bearing the consequences of all your users' copyright violations.
So if I just turn off SSID broadcast it'll be ok?
You can't really blame him; the recidivism rate is 67.5% after all.
Judging by how many North Koreans perish from starvation every year, I think it's safe to say that their carbon footprint is actually negative.