Except that the RBL only put the networks on the list because of web content. As far as I have been able to tell, not one spam has been reported from that network.
The content in question was software that could be used by spammers (and in all honesty, was probably only used by spammers, just like Napster (to bring in a contemporary issue that drove up/.'s page views back then...) was largely used to pirate music), not spamming itself.
The connection with net neutrality is tenuous, at best.
You either do not know what you're talking about or you're a demagogue deliberately distorting things.
Given your UID, you were around/. in the autumn of '00 when this was a hot story. I'll place my bets on the latter.
The filter here isn't based on source or destination, just on volume.
The MAPS RBL, as used by AboveNet and Teleglobe was implemented at the IP routing level. Any packets to networks listed on the RBL, regardless of protocol, were blackholed, based on the source/destination IP address.
Analogy: UPS charges everyone the same rates and takes anyone's packages, but they won't take any packages weighing more than 1000lbs. When the spammer shows up with a 10,000lb package and UPS refuses it, they aren't refusing it because it's from the spammer, they're refusing it because it's over-weight.
That analogy has nothing to do with the AboveNet/Teleglobe affair. Nothing whatsoever.
Here's the analogy: due to a plethora of overweight packages from a ZIP/post-code (or whole city, or a whole county, or a whole state/province, or a whole country, or a whole continent... a netblock could be anything from a/31 to a/1), UPS elects to incinerate any packages sent from or to that ZIP/post-code, etc.
Re:In case of slashdotting...
on
ASCII World Cup
·
· Score: 1, Informative
You can thank the Goatse assholes -- literally -- for that.
People aren't just going to sat. for quality; they are going for commercial free music and access to content they can't get anywhere else. How HD radio changes the fact that terrestrial radio doesn't offer any niche formats is beyond me.
HD Radio (with HD2/3 [the fact that they waited until receivers were on the market to finalize the HD2/3 standard is another clusterfuck... the rule of thumb is to at least wait until you have the installed base to fuck over the early adopters]) addresses the niche format issue at least as well as satellite. Looking at the HD Radio Consortium and ClearChannel FormatLab lists (And yes, CC is making their programming for those available to competing station groups), there's actually more format diversity (and assuming everybody goes for the 24-40 kbit with 3 streams approach [which would, admittedly, give satellite the SQ crown], that would put major markets well within range, if not over individual satellite services in number of music channels).
FCC content rules are still an issue (though ClearChannel plans to offer censored versions for HD and uncensored over the Internet), and there's the issue of how the NAB is essentially promising only commercial-free HD2/3 until satellite is less of a threat (it's not a bait-and-switch... they're being somewhat open with the fact that they plan to pull a switcheroo). However, had they done this 5 years ago, or at a minimum before XMSR/SIRI broke 2 million combined subscribers (which would be 2 years ago, and many/most of those 2 million were truckers), even with commercials (though it will likely require a total rethink of the way the industry sells ads to deal with 40+ local channels in a market, few ever pulling a 5-share) satellite could have been headed off.
It's not really niche formats that are driving satellite now. XM's most listened to channels (per a presentation at a conference earlier this year) are their '60s, '70s, and '80s hits channels, and their classic rock channel (which has since been split in two). Sirius' has indicated similar patterns. Most satellite listeners are listening to stuff they can get, though maybe not as narrowly formatted, from FM. HD2/3 can address that.
The issue is that there's going to be zero interest from the manufacturing partners and potential carmakers unless HD can show it's making progress this year in terms of listener interest and share of the digital broadcast market. You may as well stick a fork in it if they can't get to 500,000 radios in the wild. And given the reception issues (dropouts & having to move the antenna when changing channels) and some buggy radios (the Boston Acoustics flagship model is known to crash while decoding some channels, a fact which is noted in reviews), all of which are priced higher than satellite, 500,000 seems optimistic.
The core problem is that the NAB can't market technology. The ad campaigns running on FM right now ("There are secret frequencies in between the ones on your dial...") are woeful, to say the least.
One that I believe isn't even available to buy. Thats a pretty big show stopper if it can only work over that spectrum.
IINM, the frequency range could be moved to another area of the spectrum that's available. The decoder hardware would be different, but we're talking about a relatively trivial set of changes to existing DAB hardware to make it saleable in the US.
The interfernce problems are mainly with the analog signals, and once those are phased out completely, there shouldn't be a problem.
And when do you honestly think that will be?
The FCC/Congress aren't even setting a date that mandates HD support on all AM/FM receivers, much less a "digital or drop dead" date. I have a crappy GM clock radio that's a dozen years old (though I use it exclusively as a buzzer; my Sirius unit function
i've found it impossible to find an RDS-capable radio at a reasonable price in any of the stores around here, because the manufacturers must figure that anyone that wants to pay extra for a radio will just want to get XM or Sirius.
XM and Sirius each subsidize the manufacture of receivers (Read the financials... there's a line item on their expenses called "Negative margin on equipment sales")... XM to the tune of about $25 per receiver, Sirius to the tune of $70-$75 (their chipset does more work and is more expensive to fab).
The US OEM market is not exactly rushing to HD Radio.
AFAIK, there's only one model that will offer HD Radio as any sort of option: either the BMW 5 or 7 series (I forget which). Ford has signed on to offer HD Radio at some indeterminate point in the future. In the meantime, they've all-but committed themselves to having 75%-plus of their MY2009 run being equipped with Sirius and at least a three-month free trial period (for which privilege is Sirius is effectively paying Ford $100-plus per radio installed). DaimlerChrysler plans to hit a similar penetration by that time or maybe even MY2008. VW/Audi are committed to 100% of their run in 2007 (the press releases are vague as to whether that's MY2007 or CY2007). Kia has a similar commitment (with the same ambiguity) for 2008.
GM and Honda each own major stakes in XM; both are starting to reduce the utility of their AM/FM radios (using lower-gain antennae for instance). The response of the auto critics has been "AM/FM reception sucked, but we listened to XM the whole time anyway."
There are three major OEMs that committed to XM, but have backtracked (Toyota promised a year ago that most of MY2007 would have XM, but AFAIK, it's not even optional on the new Camry; Nissan and Hyundai have behaved similarly of late). Those three, who don't even account for a third of the US market, might go to HD Radio, but at the very earliest, that's an MY2008 thing.
I think my question still stands; why do you care if the US format is different than the European one?
Not the OP, but I've seen some folks in the radio industry grousing that going with the iBiquity IBOC scheme instead of DAB:
Cost HD Radio crucial time to market, while the satellite services snagged the early adopters and fans of niche formats.
Is degrading existing terrestrial radio signals by decreasing signal range for FM and creating amazing levels of interference on adjacent frequencies.
Doesn't entirely work. IBOC over AM is dead in the water (due to those interference issues combined with AM band propagation properties, the FCC is prohibiting IBOC (read digital) broadcasts in the AM band after dusk.
The main downside to DAB is that it's new spectrum, and the terrestrial broadcasters didn't want to have to buy new spectrum. They regret that decision today.
First we'd need to get all sorts of hot, loose women into the engineering field.
That would then, logically, require more hot, loose men in the engineering field (at least half a dozen more would be a significant percentage increase).
Also, with satellite radio, you get things like mixtapes, mashups and other stuff that hasn't been "published"
The future of broadcasting isn't likely to be in pre-recorded music. Ubiquitous wireless internet and so forth guarantee that that will be a dead-end (although satellite may hold on, owing to a monopoly by the technology on seamless coast-to-coast transmission... I doubt we'll be seeing the ability to drive from say New York to Denver and get a 3G signal 90% of the time anytime soon).
The salvation of AM/FM/HD and satellite, all of which will and do have limited "channel"-spaces, will be in unique content. Howard Stern is an example of this. Tons of shows have tried to do strippers, lesbians, porn stars, and general freak shows. Most have absolutely bombed trying to discern and copy the Stern formula (the few that have succeeded are by and large going to satellite or already there). Sporting events tend to require an immediate and live listening experience. Concerts would be the same way. This is why Sirius and XM are in bidding wars over sports contracts.
And it will only intensify as more subscribers come on board. XM should be cash-flow positive within 12 months. The expectation is that Sirius will be in the same state within 18-21 months. Once that barrier is crossed, they will start to really pour money into exclusive content production and into actually giving hardware away (eliminating one of your early observations). I think both satellite providers can survive long term; they may not be satellite dependent in the future, though.
As for ClearChannel, Infinity, et al, I'm not as optimistic. On the one hand, internet broadcasting will be providing better content, in aggregate, at the same price. On the other hand, satellite (and subscription internet broadcasting) will own the market for the highest quality content.
UI is another factor. Satellite radio is a sandbox. Look at the Rock genre's channel layout on Sirius. Starting with early classic rock on channel 14, iterating upwards through the channels yields:
later classic rock
deeper classic rock
jam bands
adult album alternative (classic rock/modern alternative blend)
classic hard rock
modern hard rock
modern mainstream rock/alternative
classic alternative
80s mainstream hard rock
free-form
garage rock (surf, rockabilly, punk, etc.) through the ages
indie/alternative
heavy metal
hard rock/hip hop/punk blend
acoustic coffee house blend
Radio Margaritaville (uncategorizable really)
reggae
In most of those cases, adjacent stations on the dial are mutual "backup stations" for their core listener groups. Guys between 35 and 50 could spend their entire listening time between the first 6 rock channels. Traditional radio doesn't have that; a hip-hop station might end up being the next station on the dial from a smooth jazz station!
One of the core appeals of Internet radio to its early adopters is that it's not sandboxed; however, to achieve significance in the mobile market, it almost has to be sandboxed, and even then is unlikely to improve on satellite unless it tries to be an exact copy of satellite (which means giving up the purported benefits of internet radio!)
As long as Music Choice has their near-monopoly among the digital cable providers, they'll do OK.
Of course, nothing precludes (XM|Sirius) from displacing Music Choice there as well (except I have a niggling suspicion that Comcast owns a major piece of Music Choice, though nothing on either's site that I've seen indicates this). The sat providers can justify paying carriage fees to cable/sat TV providers as a marketing expense; the hope would be to get somebody hooked on Sirius 19//Buzzsaw and decide to get Sirius for their car. MusicChoice can't claim that; their revenue is entirely from being part of the menu of various providers.
Of course, Sirius has a similar deal with Sprint (a subset of their music offerings is available through that outlet).
The current Esquire (in which Jessica Biel is crowned Sexiest Woman Alive) features an article on how intelligent design is more of a threat to Christianity than it is to science. I don't have the print publication handy, but that was basically the gist of it.
Only problem I have with tradesports is nonexistent liquidity. Combine that with an obscene bid/ask spread (at least on baseball) and I'd say you're better off playing Pinnacle's 8-cent line with high limits and guaranteed liquidity.
Example: St. Louis @ Florida tonight... Florida to win is 52/51 (bid/ask). That translates to (before commissions) a line of FLA -108/STL +104.
At the moment, Pinny has FLA -107/STL -101, but you don't need to have anyone fill your order (or more properly, as soon as you file the order, it's filled). Yeah, you save four cents in juice (overruns are 0.94% for TS and 1.94% for Pinnacle), but in my view the hassle's not worth it.
For instance, post-up books offer deposit bonuses along these lines:
Deposit $1,000, get a $100 bonus after you place $2,500 in bets.
The thinking is that, at the standard 20-cent line, with its theoretical hold of 4.5% that the book should hold $112.50 thus netting it $12.50.
However, in a technique perfected and publicized by a guy in Montreal (since immortalized on the sportsbetting fora as "Claude the Fraud"; the fact that he and a mod of one of the major forums had a very messy breakup that ended with nude pictures of her getting posted only added to this tale's immor(t|)ality), you create multiple accounts and arbitrage between them, thus creating guaranteed profits and getting bonuses to boot.
This scam has, of course, tarred the run-of-the-mill bonus whores (who will play at any book, no matter how tenuous its finances or how bad the lines are) with the scammer brush. Books have been scaling back their bonus plans for the past couple of years (though with football season approaching, the bonus war will start up again). Of course, the bonus whores are uniformly stupid; the reduced juice a shop like Pinnacle gives is better than any bonus.
Related to this is the player profiling. Shops like SIA (Sports Inter Action, out of Costa Rica) offer inflated lines (e.g., if the "market" line is say Patriots -4 (and thus Colts +4), they'll post Patriots -5/Colts +5). However, betting too many of those off-market lines marks you as an advantage bettor and you'll get, depending on how much you've won, your account closed or your limits cut.
Most of the UKian sportsbooks (though for tax reasons they run their 'net operations out of Gibraltar or Malta) like Ladbrokes and Will Hill don't take action from the US; I suspect it's because, should the US ever legalize sportsbetting, they want to be able to jump right in. Betfair is another example of this.
OTOH, many/most online casinos refuse to do business with Danes, thanks to a recent spate of bonus-whoring from that country after a few TV specials touted it as an easy way to make money.
Fact is, most countries don't give a shit if someone outside their country complains. This is true of anything. A sportsbook (BetPanAm) in Panama posts a $500,000 bond with the Panamanian government and then, after massive mismanagement, goes tits up. Good thing the bond is there to pay off the players who deposited money there, right? Unfortunately, the government has decided that only residents of Panama can collect from the bond.
A USian, UKian, DEian, or whatever complaining is not going to get shit done with the Macedonian government. You get a Macedonian guy complaining and maybe something will get done.
Yes, but the ones that at least kept the colonials in power until a full transition (cf. South Africa) could be made are the ones that have developed more functional legal systems.
Not stating a causality there, merely a correlation.
I'm wondering about that. The ruling specifically considers "existence in RAM" to be storage. So you can take a memory dump of a Sendmail or whatnot process and comb through that for mail in transit.
As the original submitter, I've seen nothing to indicate that the ruling does not cover those who provide internet connectivity. As far as the law is concerned, providing e-mail makes you an ISP.
Perhaps, in hindsight, it may have been more clear to say something like "e-mail providers" or "e-mail server operators."
The ruling is essentially that any operator of an e-mail server may read at their discretion any e-mail stored on said server. There's no distinction between, say, Comcast or Verizon and Hotmail for this purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the RBL only put the networks on the list because of web content. As far as I have been able to tell, not one spam has been reported from that network.
The content in question was software that could be used by spammers (and in all honesty, was probably only used by spammers, just like Napster (to bring in a contemporary issue that drove up /.'s page views back then...) was largely used to pirate music), not spamming itself.
The connection with net neutrality is tenuous, at best.
You either do not know what you're talking about or you're a demagogue deliberately distorting things.
Given your UID, you were around /. in the autumn of '00 when this was a hot story. I'll place my bets on the latter.
The MAPS RBL, as used by AboveNet and Teleglobe was implemented at the IP routing level. Any packets to networks listed on the RBL, regardless of protocol, were blackholed, based on the source/destination IP address.
That analogy has nothing to do with the AboveNet/Teleglobe affair. Nothing whatsoever.
Here's the analogy: due to a plethora of overweight packages from a ZIP/post-code (or whole city, or a whole county, or a whole state/province, or a whole country, or a whole continent... a netblock could be anything from a /31 to a /1), UPS elects to incinerate any packages sent from or to that ZIP/post-code, etc.
I thought there was only one Goatse asshole...
HD Radio (with HD2/3 [the fact that they waited until receivers were on the market to finalize the HD2/3 standard is another clusterfuck... the rule of thumb is to at least wait until you have the installed base to fuck over the early adopters]) addresses the niche format issue at least as well as satellite. Looking at the HD Radio Consortium and ClearChannel FormatLab lists (And yes, CC is making their programming for those available to competing station groups), there's actually more format diversity (and assuming everybody goes for the 24-40 kbit with 3 streams approach [which would, admittedly, give satellite the SQ crown], that would put major markets well within range, if not over individual satellite services in number of music channels).
FCC content rules are still an issue (though ClearChannel plans to offer censored versions for HD and uncensored over the Internet), and there's the issue of how the NAB is essentially promising only commercial-free HD2/3 until satellite is less of a threat (it's not a bait-and-switch... they're being somewhat open with the fact that they plan to pull a switcheroo). However, had they done this 5 years ago, or at a minimum before XMSR/SIRI broke 2 million combined subscribers (which would be 2 years ago, and many/most of those 2 million were truckers), even with commercials (though it will likely require a total rethink of the way the industry sells ads to deal with 40+ local channels in a market, few ever pulling a 5-share) satellite could have been headed off.
It's not really niche formats that are driving satellite now. XM's most listened to channels (per a presentation at a conference earlier this year) are their '60s, '70s, and '80s hits channels, and their classic rock channel (which has since been split in two). Sirius' has indicated similar patterns. Most satellite listeners are listening to stuff they can get, though maybe not as narrowly formatted, from FM. HD2/3 can address that.
The issue is that there's going to be zero interest from the manufacturing partners and potential carmakers unless HD can show it's making progress this year in terms of listener interest and share of the digital broadcast market. You may as well stick a fork in it if they can't get to 500,000 radios in the wild. And given the reception issues (dropouts & having to move the antenna when changing channels) and some buggy radios (the Boston Acoustics flagship model is known to crash while decoding some channels, a fact which is noted in reviews), all of which are priced higher than satellite, 500,000 seems optimistic.
The core problem is that the NAB can't market technology. The ad campaigns running on FM right now ("There are secret frequencies in between the ones on your dial...") are woeful, to say the least.
IINM, the frequency range could be moved to another area of the spectrum that's available. The decoder hardware would be different, but we're talking about a relatively trivial set of changes to existing DAB hardware to make it saleable in the US.
And when do you honestly think that will be?
The FCC/Congress aren't even setting a date that mandates HD support on all AM/FM receivers, much less a "digital or drop dead" date. I have a crappy GM clock radio that's a dozen years old (though I use it exclusively as a buzzer; my Sirius unit function
XM and Sirius each subsidize the manufacture of receivers (Read the financials... there's a line item on their expenses called "Negative margin on equipment sales")... XM to the tune of about $25 per receiver, Sirius to the tune of $70-$75 (their chipset does more work and is more expensive to fab).
The US OEM market is not exactly rushing to HD Radio.
AFAIK, there's only one model that will offer HD Radio as any sort of option: either the BMW 5 or 7 series (I forget which). Ford has signed on to offer HD Radio at some indeterminate point in the future. In the meantime, they've all-but committed themselves to having 75%-plus of their MY2009 run being equipped with Sirius and at least a three-month free trial period (for which privilege is Sirius is effectively paying Ford $100-plus per radio installed). DaimlerChrysler plans to hit a similar penetration by that time or maybe even MY2008. VW/Audi are committed to 100% of their run in 2007 (the press releases are vague as to whether that's MY2007 or CY2007). Kia has a similar commitment (with the same ambiguity) for 2008.
GM and Honda each own major stakes in XM; both are starting to reduce the utility of their AM/FM radios (using lower-gain antennae for instance). The response of the auto critics has been "AM/FM reception sucked, but we listened to XM the whole time anyway."
There are three major OEMs that committed to XM, but have backtracked (Toyota promised a year ago that most of MY2007 would have XM, but AFAIK, it's not even optional on the new Camry; Nissan and Hyundai have behaved similarly of late). Those three, who don't even account for a third of the US market, might go to HD Radio, but at the very earliest, that's an MY2008 thing.
Not the OP, but I've seen some folks in the radio industry grousing that going with the iBiquity IBOC scheme instead of DAB:
The main downside to DAB is that it's new spectrum, and the terrestrial broadcasters didn't want to have to buy new spectrum. They regret that decision today.
...Singapore treats bloggers like they do "Real Journalists".
*sigh*
Romney's a noted VC...
First we'd need to get all sorts of hot, loose women into the engineering field.
That would then, logically, require more hot, loose men in the engineering field (at least half a dozen more would be a significant percentage increase).
The future of broadcasting isn't likely to be in pre-recorded music. Ubiquitous wireless internet and so forth guarantee that that will be a dead-end (although satellite may hold on, owing to a monopoly by the technology on seamless coast-to-coast transmission... I doubt we'll be seeing the ability to drive from say New York to Denver and get a 3G signal 90% of the time anytime soon).
The salvation of AM/FM/HD and satellite, all of which will and do have limited "channel"-spaces, will be in unique content. Howard Stern is an example of this. Tons of shows have tried to do strippers, lesbians, porn stars, and general freak shows. Most have absolutely bombed trying to discern and copy the Stern formula (the few that have succeeded are by and large going to satellite or already there). Sporting events tend to require an immediate and live listening experience. Concerts would be the same way. This is why Sirius and XM are in bidding wars over sports contracts.
And it will only intensify as more subscribers come on board. XM should be cash-flow positive within 12 months. The expectation is that Sirius will be in the same state within 18-21 months. Once that barrier is crossed, they will start to really pour money into exclusive content production and into actually giving hardware away (eliminating one of your early observations). I think both satellite providers can survive long term; they may not be satellite dependent in the future, though.
As for ClearChannel, Infinity, et al, I'm not as optimistic. On the one hand, internet broadcasting will be providing better content, in aggregate, at the same price. On the other hand, satellite (and subscription internet broadcasting) will own the market for the highest quality content.
UI is another factor. Satellite radio is a sandbox. Look at the Rock genre's channel layout on Sirius. Starting with early classic rock on channel 14, iterating upwards through the channels yields:
In most of those cases, adjacent stations on the dial are mutual "backup stations" for their core listener groups. Guys between 35 and 50 could spend their entire listening time between the first 6 rock channels. Traditional radio doesn't have that; a hip-hop station might end up being the next station on the dial from a smooth jazz station!
One of the core appeals of Internet radio to its early adopters is that it's not sandboxed; however, to achieve significance in the mobile market, it almost has to be sandboxed, and even then is unlikely to improve on satellite unless it tries to be an exact copy of satellite (which means giving up the purported benefits of internet radio!)
As long as Music Choice has their near-monopoly among the digital cable providers, they'll do OK.
Of course, nothing precludes (XM|Sirius) from displacing Music Choice there as well (except I have a niggling suspicion that Comcast owns a major piece of Music Choice, though nothing on either's site that I've seen indicates this). The sat providers can justify paying carriage fees to cable/sat TV providers as a marketing expense; the hope would be to get somebody hooked on Sirius 19//Buzzsaw and decide to get Sirius for their car. MusicChoice can't claim that; their revenue is entirely from being part of the menu of various providers.
Of course, Sirius has a similar deal with Sprint (a subset of their music offerings is available through that outlet).
The current Esquire (in which Jessica Biel is crowned Sexiest Woman Alive) features an article on how intelligent design is more of a threat to Christianity than it is to science. I don't have the print publication handy, but that was basically the gist of it.
Online version of said article, but the meat of it is subscription only.There's a very interesting article regarding market prediction of future events from both a Hayekian perspective and that of von Mises.
Only problem I have with tradesports is nonexistent liquidity. Combine that with an obscene bid/ask spread (at least on baseball) and I'd say you're better off playing Pinnacle's 8-cent line with high limits and guaranteed liquidity.
Example: St. Louis @ Florida tonight... Florida to win is 52/51 (bid/ask). That translates to (before commissions) a line of FLA -108/STL +104.
At the moment, Pinny has FLA -107/STL -101, but you don't need to have anyone fill your order (or more properly, as soon as you file the order, it's filled). Yeah, you save four cents in juice (overruns are 0.94% for TS and 1.94% for Pinnacle), but in my view the hassle's not worth it.
Presumably, they'll take the sports betting method and grade every contract "NO ACTION". Basically, everyone's purchase price is refunded.
For instance, post-up books offer deposit bonuses along these lines:
The thinking is that, at the standard 20-cent line, with its theoretical hold of 4.5% that the book should hold $112.50 thus netting it $12.50.
However, in a technique perfected and publicized by a guy in Montreal (since immortalized on the sportsbetting fora as "Claude the Fraud"; the fact that he and a mod of one of the major forums had a very messy breakup that ended with nude pictures of her getting posted only added to this tale's immor(t|)ality), you create multiple accounts and arbitrage between them, thus creating guaranteed profits and getting bonuses to boot.
This scam has, of course, tarred the run-of-the-mill bonus whores (who will play at any book, no matter how tenuous its finances or how bad the lines are) with the scammer brush. Books have been scaling back their bonus plans for the past couple of years (though with football season approaching, the bonus war will start up again). Of course, the bonus whores are uniformly stupid; the reduced juice a shop like Pinnacle gives is better than any bonus.
Related to this is the player profiling. Shops like SIA (Sports Inter Action, out of Costa Rica) offer inflated lines (e.g., if the "market" line is say Patriots -4 (and thus Colts +4), they'll post Patriots -5/Colts +5). However, betting too many of those off-market lines marks you as an advantage bettor and you'll get, depending on how much you've won, your account closed or your limits cut.
I said "more functional". That's a hell of a lot better than, say, Saudi Arabia.
If I have the expectation that you will not pay, why should I even consider doing business with you?
Online gambling provides a few examples.
Most of the UKian sportsbooks (though for tax reasons they run their 'net operations out of Gibraltar or Malta) like Ladbrokes and Will Hill don't take action from the US; I suspect it's because, should the US ever legalize sportsbetting, they want to be able to jump right in. Betfair is another example of this.
OTOH, many/most online casinos refuse to do business with Danes, thanks to a recent spate of bonus-whoring from that country after a few TV specials touted it as an easy way to make money.
Fact is, most countries don't give a shit if someone outside their country complains. This is true of anything. A sportsbook (BetPanAm) in Panama posts a $500,000 bond with the Panamanian government and then, after massive mismanagement, goes tits up. Good thing the bond is there to pay off the players who deposited money there, right? Unfortunately, the government has decided that only residents of Panama can collect from the bond.
A USian, UKian, DEian, or whatever complaining is not going to get shit done with the Macedonian government. You get a Macedonian guy complaining and maybe something will get done.
Yes, but the ones that at least kept the colonials in power until a full transition (cf. South Africa) could be made are the ones that have developed more functional legal systems.
Not stating a causality there, merely a correlation.
Make that [DBR]MV
I'm wondering about that. The ruling specifically considers "existence in RAM" to be storage. So you can take a memory dump of a Sendmail or whatnot process and comb through that for mail in transit.
Then you have the deferred queue...
As the original submitter, I've seen nothing to indicate that the ruling does not cover those who provide internet connectivity. As far as the law is concerned, providing e-mail makes you an ISP.
Perhaps, in hindsight, it may have been more clear to say something like "e-mail providers" or "e-mail server operators."
The ruling is essentially that any operator of an e-mail server may read at their discretion any e-mail stored on said server. There's no distinction between, say, Comcast or Verizon and Hotmail for this purpose.