I was getting the terminologies mixed which made my post unclear.
Yeah, the DMCA “takedown notice” is a method of dealing with an independent content host. But under the DMCA you can also send a cease-and-desist notice to the infringing party personally. However they’ve made it their practice to just immediately sue.
ctrl+f "DMCA" in that article doesn't find anything.
You must have been looking at the wrong article, then:
“This lawsuit, though, is a rarity insofar as copyright infringement being connected to linking. Righthaven takes issue with the fact that the Drudge Report has no DMCA takedown regime to respond to those who alleged violations of copyright.”
Has this Righthaven organization heard of the DMCA, and the provisions it provides for relief from copyright infringement?
Nelson put eight sentences of a 30-sentence Review Journal article in one of his posts, along with a link back to the paper; for this he was sued in federal court.
Righthaven demanded that his domain name should be locked and transferred to Righthaven. In addition, the company demanded "willful" statutory damages for copyright infringement, which can be as high as $150,000.
Also, what I don’t understand is this:
Righthaven sends no cease-and-desist letters before suing.
The DMCA is clear-cut about how to handle infringement. A company that side-steps the normal DMCA takedown process (which might have to be snail-mailed – that’s not quick enough for them though!) should have no right to straight away sue the infringing party. None whatsoever. But apparently they can, legally, get away with it.
That’s incorrect. Your online identity is known. People’s real identities have been found using that information and they’ve been charged with crimes for it.
And even if it wasn’t illegal, as it ought not to be (no more than any real life protest is illegal), that simply shows an inability of the online community to enforce consequences for this sort of action.
For instance, if some of the major players banded together and designed their servers to share IP addresses in real-time during a DDoS, the attackers might suddenly find that Google, Hotmail, etc. refused to acknowledge connections from their IP address, making their internet connection fairly useless until they stopped flooding the DDoS target and their IP expired from the blacklist (which could be set to occur in several hours or even less, as long as they had stopped actively participating in the DDoS).
But that would require actual work on their part to find a solution to address their problem and fix it. It’s much easier for them to just yell about how the DDoS attackers are criminals and bring the hurt on a few of them to discourage the rest a la the RIAA playbook.
The question is, is the “distributed” nature caused by thousands of zombie machines controlled by only a few hackers, or is it a distributed network of thousands of real people who are staging the protest?
There are a variety of tools which could be described as “opt-in”. The LOIC (low-orbit ion cannon) is a stand-alone, but browser-based Javascript-driven tools have been created as well. Although simply flooding a server with incoming packets and ignoring responses (if any come back) is one way of overwhelming it, another tactic that may be used against smaller websites is downloading all of the images from its pages repeatedly, which can use up its monthly bandwidth or cause a tiered plan to jump to a more expensive tier. In fact, even ping can be used as a DDoS tool. (Simply pinging a host isn’t the most effective way to mount an attack, but if enough people are doing it the host can be overwhelmed.)
Whether or not botnets are used to attack the same targets is anyone’s guess, but I’d place them in a much different category than anyone intentionally participating in the attack using only their own computer.
It’s no different from the counter-protests which are arranged to drown out and crowd out the Phelps crowd when they try to picket military funerals.
Somehow I doubt that the same people calling these script kiddies “thugs” and telling people that what they’re doing is illegal!!1one would also demand that the Patriot Guard Riders were put in jail for their actions...
positions itself to physically shield the mourners from the presence of the Westboro protesters by blocking the protesters from view with their motorcade, or by having members hold American flags. The group also drowns out the protesters' chants by singing patriotic songs or by revving motorcycle engines.
One of them would be the result of a very small chance of failure at any given time. The other would imply a high chance of failure at the whim of whoever wants to attack them.
A rare screw-up looks bad, but folding whenever someone attacks you is worse.
I'm telling you, before this is all over, the corporatist Republicans will be sorry they started the Tea Party. They thought they could just use these people to get rid of a black guy in power, but anti-authoritarian sentiment is not a genie that easily goes back into the bottle.
The corporatist Republicans, as you call them, didn’t start the Tea Party. Much like Anonymous, the Tea Party kick-started itself because the “corporatist Republicans” felt they could get away with ignoring a lot of what the party’s tentative supporters were asking for, and the so-called lone wolf John McSame was just the last straw.
And I could think of many reasons to get rid of the “black guy in power” but his skin colour is not one of them.
1. Programmable bacteria may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. Programmable bacteria must execute any program given to them by human beings, except where such execution would conflict with the First Law. 3. Programmable bacteria must protect their own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Not to worry, just give them desk jobs doing paperwork. Some of them could also work on environmental models showing that the planet is better off without planes anyway.
Always wondered what the fun was from the level 50 guy's POV. It seems it would be like playing a game with a God code activated. It would get boring after 5 minutes.
At that point, the fun is mostly just watching the level 1 noobs ragequit.
I almost got reported for hacking at college. The professor had put the class notes up on his website but made a typo in the html. I was able to ftp into the site and see what the file name should be and pointed out the problem to him. His face turned purple and he started shouting about how hacking would not be tolerated in his class.
You made the mistake of telling him what you did, and he didn’t understand it. Safer just to tell him he misspelled it. Even if it was something ridiculously impossible to have guessed. If he was skeptical about how you figured it out, just look at him funny... like, everyone knows how ~/classes/CS102-ws02-syllabus.rev6.htm is spelled. Unless maybe they’re a complete moron. Duh.
Then you and any of your classmates who knew what was what could enjoy your mirth later behind his back at his stupidity.
'use a computer in a way that the writer does not completely understand.'
That was more of its original meaning, but it wasn’t illegal then. It was actually really cool. And breaking into computer security systems was called cracking, not hacking.
All that and your conclusion is not that the system of socialized healthcare is unfair, but that smokers are exploiting it and should just be allowed to die so you can stay on your socialized healthcare without having to pay for their medical costs. Amazing.
4chans normal chatter (if you can call it that) gets crushed under the threads like "Edward/Jacob, which side are you on?"
That’s just trolls trolling the newfags. Followed by the trolls trolling the trolls (and newfags) by pretending to rage over the newfaggotry. With probably a few actual newfags adding their voices to the cacophony, but more likely than not they’re just trolls too.
Slashdot Mirror
I was getting the terminologies mixed which made my post unclear.
Yeah, the DMCA “takedown notice” is a method of dealing with an independent content host. But under the DMCA you can also send a cease-and-desist notice to the infringing party personally. However they’ve made it their practice to just immediately sue.
It's a difficult concept but legal protests are legal as long as they continue to obey the relevant laws.
And as long as the relevant laws continue to say that the protest is legal. Does the company you’re picketing have lobbyists?
Who said anything about an ISP? Nelson wasn’t an ISP, he was a real-estate agent running a blog.
Mike Drudge
Is he Matt Drudge’s nephew or something?
ctrl+f "DMCA" in that article doesn't find anything.
You must have been looking at the wrong article, then:
“This lawsuit, though, is a rarity insofar as copyright infringement being connected to linking. Righthaven takes issue with the fact that the Drudge Report has no DMCA takedown regime to respond to those who alleged violations of copyright.”
Has this Righthaven organization heard of the DMCA, and the provisions it provides for relief from copyright infringement?
It would seem not:
Righthaven sends no cease-and-desist letters before suing.
I imagine a judge will take one look at this and say "did you even TRY to work something out with the infringing party before litigating?"
You’d certainly hope so, but apparently not.
That probably depends upon the image being properly credited, which I’m not sure that Drudge did.
That’s their MO.
Another recent case by them asked for the same thing:
Also, what I don’t understand is this:
The DMCA is clear-cut about how to handle infringement. A company that side-steps the normal DMCA takedown process (which might have to be snail-mailed – that’s not quick enough for them though!) should have no right to straight away sue the infringing party. None whatsoever. But apparently they can, legally, get away with it.
The Boston Tea Party was an act of tantrumism too. Rosa Parks was a tantrumist when she refused to stand at the back of the bus.
Picketing is a public act. DDoS is not.
That’s incorrect. Your online identity is known. People’s real identities have been found using that information and they’ve been charged with crimes for it.
And even if it wasn’t illegal, as it ought not to be (no more than any real life protest is illegal), that simply shows an inability of the online community to enforce consequences for this sort of action.
For instance, if some of the major players banded together and designed their servers to share IP addresses in real-time during a DDoS, the attackers might suddenly find that Google, Hotmail, etc. refused to acknowledge connections from their IP address, making their internet connection fairly useless until they stopped flooding the DDoS target and their IP expired from the blacklist (which could be set to occur in several hours or even less, as long as they had stopped actively participating in the DDoS).
But that would require actual work on their part to find a solution to address their problem and fix it. It’s much easier for them to just yell about how the DDoS attackers are criminals and bring the hurt on a few of them to discourage the rest a la the RIAA playbook.
For a DDOS attack, you're anonymously pushing a "go" button.
It’s rarely truly anonymous, or as anonymous as it needs to be (since, after all, people have been found and arrested for it).
Quite possibly you're not even still at your computer while it runs.
You paid for the computer, you’re paying for its internet connection, and you’re paying for the electricity to run it.
The question is, is the “distributed” nature caused by thousands of zombie machines controlled by only a few hackers, or is it a distributed network of thousands of real people who are staging the protest?
There are a variety of tools which could be described as “opt-in”. The LOIC (low-orbit ion cannon) is a stand-alone, but browser-based Javascript-driven tools have been created as well. Although simply flooding a server with incoming packets and ignoring responses (if any come back) is one way of overwhelming it, another tactic that may be used against smaller websites is downloading all of the images from its pages repeatedly, which can use up its monthly bandwidth or cause a tiered plan to jump to a more expensive tier. In fact, even ping can be used as a DDoS tool. (Simply pinging a host isn’t the most effective way to mount an attack, but if enough people are doing it the host can be overwhelmed.)
Whether or not botnets are used to attack the same targets is anyone’s guess, but I’d place them in a much different category than anyone intentionally participating in the attack using only their own computer.
He’s still talking. Nobody can hear him.
It’s no different from the counter-protests which are arranged to drown out and crowd out the Phelps crowd when they try to picket military funerals.
Somehow I doubt that the same people calling these script kiddies “thugs” and telling people that what they’re doing is illegal!!1one would also demand that the Patriot Guard Riders were put in jail for their actions...
positions itself to physically shield the mourners from the presence of the Westboro protesters by blocking the protesters from view with their motorcade, or by having members hold American flags. The group also drowns out the protesters' chants by singing patriotic songs or by revving motorcycle engines.
One of them would be the result of a very small chance of failure at any given time. The other would imply a high chance of failure at the whim of whoever wants to attack them.
A rare screw-up looks bad, but folding whenever someone attacks you is worse.
You’re the one who seems to be preoccupied with people’s race. Why?
By obtaining a federal grant to hire C# programmers, obviously.
I'm telling you, before this is all over, the corporatist Republicans will be sorry they started the Tea Party. They thought they could just use these people to get rid of a black guy in power, but anti-authoritarian sentiment is not a genie that easily goes back into the bottle.
The corporatist Republicans, as you call them, didn’t start the Tea Party. Much like Anonymous, the Tea Party kick-started itself because the “corporatist Republicans” felt they could get away with ignoring a lot of what the party’s tentative supporters were asking for, and the so-called lone wolf John McSame was just the last straw.
And I could think of many reasons to get rid of the “black guy in power” but his skin colour is not one of them.
1. Programmable bacteria may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. Programmable bacteria must execute any program given to them by human beings, except where such execution would conflict with the First Law.
3. Programmable bacteria must protect their own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Not to worry, just give them desk jobs doing paperwork. Some of them could also work on environmental models showing that the planet is better off without planes anyway.
Why not just link to his profile? I’m sure he really wanted all the e-mail anyway...
Always wondered what the fun was from the level 50 guy's POV. It seems it would be like playing a game with a God code activated. It would get boring after 5 minutes.
At that point, the fun is mostly just watching the level 1 noobs ragequit.
I almost got reported for hacking at college. The professor had put the class notes up on his website but made a typo in the html. I was able to ftp into the site and see what the file name should be and pointed out the problem to him. His face turned purple and he started shouting about how hacking would not be tolerated in his class.
You made the mistake of telling him what you did, and he didn’t understand it. Safer just to tell him he misspelled it. Even if it was something ridiculously impossible to have guessed. If he was skeptical about how you figured it out, just look at him funny... like, everyone knows how ~/classes/CS102-ws02-syllabus.rev6.htm is spelled. Unless maybe they’re a complete moron. Duh.
Then you and any of your classmates who knew what was what could enjoy your mirth later behind his back at his stupidity.
'use a computer in a way that the writer does not completely understand.'
That was more of its original meaning, but it wasn’t illegal then. It was actually really cool. And breaking into computer security systems was called cracking, not hacking.
All that and your conclusion is not that the system of socialized healthcare is unfair, but that smokers are exploiting it and should just be allowed to die so you can stay on your socialized healthcare without having to pay for their medical costs. Amazing.
4chans normal chatter (if you can call it that) gets crushed under the threads like "Edward/Jacob, which side are you on?"
That’s just trolls trolling the newfags. Followed by the trolls trolling the trolls (and newfags) by pretending to rage over the newfaggotry. With probably a few actual newfags adding their voices to the cacophony, but more likely than not they’re just trolls too.
It’s trolls all the way down...