So by taking this step, do the ISPs take responsibility for threats on their network? What sort of practical precident will this set requiring ISPs to ban organizations and IPs that are considered a "security threat."
After that, how long before P2P becomes such a threat?
Timing the jump from version to version, however, is important. Given their way, MS might make getting anything other than the newest version of their software patently impossibly. Legally impossible too, if they can buy enough senators.
Microsoft's privacy policy could be pristine, it wouldn't matter. They gather enough information under the auspices of Windows Update that they can just lie and lie and lie. The amount of money that they make by selling our souls to marketing firms more than makes up for any legal costs.
...and we should make sure that all of the copy machines in the MPIAA officies are removed. They're obviously there for copying books anyway; if they want to do that they should have to do it by hand! (and then we go after the pens)
We really do need a nuclear war to put all this in perspective.
...to copyright law. The difficulties in actually going through due process extends to criminal law as well. More and more cases are brought up under the heading 'Terrorism' simply to avoid Habeus Corpis or any public outcry.
I vote (heh) we do the same with the goverment that we would with a computer with this much kruft:
At what point of blocking a person's internet capability does this become a breach of contract? Once people realize that I can swap files using HTTP, will they remove my ability to browse the web?
I don't have a contract handy, so if it's covered so be it; But if it _is_ in your contract then maybe you should re-think who you pay $50 a month.
It's not the creation of the software in this case that they are claiming as a violation -- it is the continued distribution of the software that is claimed to be illegal.
If the governments of the world deign to charge us all a tax on goods purchased over the internet, then the least they could do in recompense is regulate shipping charges down to compensate for tax increase. Less gouging on shipping, more money for the government and prices that aren't any higher than they are now (if they manage the shift properly).
Slashdot Mirror
...at least not according to their lawyers.
So by taking this step, do the ISPs take responsibility for threats on their network? What sort of practical precident will this set requiring ISPs to ban organizations and IPs that are considered a "security threat."
After that, how long before P2P becomes such a threat?
Timing the jump from version to version, however, is important. Given their way, MS might make getting anything other than the newest version of their software patently impossibly. Legally impossible too, if they can buy enough senators.
Microsoft's privacy policy could be pristine, it wouldn't matter. They gather enough information under the auspices of Windows Update that they can just lie and lie and lie. The amount of money that they make by selling our souls to marketing firms more than makes up for any legal costs.
...and we should make sure that all of the copy machines in the MPIAA officies are removed. They're obviously there for copying books anyway; if they want to do that they should have to do it by hand!
(and then we go after the pens)
We really do need a nuclear war to put all this in perspective.
Only because I can't recite incantations neccesary
to make a unix machine function properly without using man pages.
[Paraphrase]
You are willing to give up liberty for safety. You deserve neither.
[/Paraphrase]
...to copyright law. The difficulties in actually going through due process extends to criminal law as well. More and more cases are brought up under the heading 'Terrorism' simply to avoid Habeus Corpis or any public outcry.
/u
I vote (heh) we do the same with the goverment that we would with a computer with this much kruft:
C:\ Format Washington_D_C:
yes yes yes.
Damn, that would be nice.
Last time I checked, the internet did not EXIST on my computer. I was connected to it, but my computer isn't Hoss enough to hold the whole damn thing.
Who needs to get paid for that?
Has this been tested, legally, in the US?
When they sell locks that they KNOW don't secure properly 100% of the time, yes.
It would be much better if Microsoft, being at the root of the vulnerability, were held liable for each and every 911 call.
What, that they as a people recognize that a monopoly by a somewhat corrupt company is generally bad?
But then, you could look at it this way: Now they will have a nation full of un-working computers.
"from attacks by "hackers and terrorists."
Enough statements like this and there will be no effective difference between the two.
Watch out, script kiddies: first you could get the death penalty, now you may not get a trial.
-And no, you're not installing an NSA/CIA/FBI/TLA
-backdoor onto your system
That's because, chances are, that it's already there.
At what point of blocking a person's internet capability does this become a breach of contract? Once people realize that I can swap files using HTTP, will they remove my ability to browse the web?
I don't have a contract handy, so if it's covered so be it; But if it _is_ in your contract then maybe you should re-think who you pay $50 a month.
...but there's room on my hard drive.
It's not the creation of the software in this case that they are claiming as a violation -- it is the continued distribution of the software that is claimed to be illegal.
(Dice Rolling)
Sorry guys, it seems that you've landed on a biased judge.
Go to the Appeals Court. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.
Hope you roll up someone with sense next time.
Something good about battlefield earth: It didn't make me cry.
Neccesarry roughness did -- after I realized that I had wasted two hours of my life, I cried like a baby.
If the governments of the world deign to charge us all a tax on goods purchased over the internet, then the least they could do in recompense is regulate shipping charges down to compensate for tax increase. Less gouging on shipping, more money for the government and prices that aren't any higher than they are now (if they manage the shift properly).
Sound like a decent idea?
daemones
-"I'm not evil. Evil is too subjective."