"The Chapter 11 reorg will protect them from getting decimated by Novell when they win their countersuit"
"Decimated" means destroying 1 in 10. IIRC, if a unit in the Roman Legion was cowardly|treasonous|bad, they counted off by 10's, a number was picked, and whoever had that number was beaten to death by the otehr 9 "luck ones".
I don't think Novell or IBM want SCO "decimated". I think "obliterated" is more appropriate.
1) Not reporting something illegal when discovered in the normal course of business, i.e. whistleblowing. Fear for job safety or simple moral cowardice?
2) Actively doing things that the employee knows are illegal/immoral/unethical. Come on - does a "profession" really need a code of ethics to tell its members not to seek information to which they are not entitled? Maybe they need to reevaluate calling themselves "professionals".
"That's part of what (clearly) annoys Stallman about Torvalds. Stallman's making this huge principled stand for freedom, and all Torvalds really cares about is his kernel."
And therein lies the rub. You see, from a *practical* standpoint, Linus Torvalds has done more than Stallman did to accomplish Stallman's very own aims - by an order of magnitude. Torvalds, by using the GPL as a tool to assist and promote his pet project, also brought the GPL into much greater prominence. But it was the fact that Torvalds cares primarily about his project that alowed thsi to happen - if Linux wasn't a good and useful idea and execution to start with, it would have gone nowhere. After all, it doesn't matter how "free" a piece of software is - if it is a piece of crap, no one will use it if they have a choice.
THAT is what really galls Stallman: not that the GPL isn't Torvaldss first concern, but that Torvalds has done so much more than Stallman in promoting Free Software, and it wasn't even Torvalds' primary goal! Imagine how frustrated Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would be if, when seeking information about poverty and rights, people went to the person running a soup kitchen instead of themselves. Please note that I don't equate Stallman and those 2 clown on a personal level, but an organizational one. He may have had the "vision", but others have done more to promote it than he ever could accomplish, and that must be galling.
"In much the same way that religious voters will tolerate massive corruption and sexual perversion from politicians who claim deep religious convictions (of the White Anglo Saxon Protestant variety only please)"
Huh?
20 years ago, a Democrat was busted having sex with a Congressional page. He was reelected a number of times, and retired.
Last year, a Republican was busted sending suggestive text messages to a page. The Republican leadership kicked him out summarily.
15 years ago, a Democrat was found to have been keeping house with a male prositute, who was turning tricks on the side in an apartment of Franks. He has been reelected a number of times since, and is still a sitting member of congress.
Now, a Republican has been caught soliciting a blowjob, and he is also being pressured to leave by the Republicans.
"But it sounds like in this case she did have the files in question, just trying to find a loophole out of it."
It matters a great deal from a legal standpoint. If Universal doesn't actually own the copyrights to the material, then they have no standing to sue, regardless of what the defendant is alledged to have done. And given the history of the music business regarding copyright and royalty abuse with artists, it is a legitimate question to raise - if it is discovered that Universal never really took ownership of the copyright, then a) the suit gets dismissed b) someone elses lawyers start knocking on Universal's door, looking for "misdirected" royalties (maybe they won't be able to find their address, just like Stevie Nicks) Of course, the suit could be re-filed by the actual copyright holder.
From a tactical standpoint, getting Universal's people up on a stand to walk a jury through a byzantine recording contract to explain just how it is that they own the copyright and are owed a kajillion dollars in damages when the original artist gets a pittance is almost certain to dispose a jury toward the defendant.
If we can bleat about "due process" and "competent defense" for murderer's, rapists, thugs, petty theives, and Gitmo detainess, surely this person deserves that same support?
It's already happening. The NRC passed new regulations regarding heightened security for radoactive materials used for purposes other than nuclear fuel - medical irradiation, industrial radiography, etc. Fear of someone stealing the stuff for a "dirty bomb". The regulations, on their face, are very reasonable:
1) 2 secured barriers between the public and the material. This can be an additional keycard on the room where the material resides (assuming exterior security) to 2 locks on a trailer - they can even be keyed alike.
2) A formal plan needs to be in place with local first responders - police, FD, whoever.
3) There must be provisions for immediate implementation of the plan if security is breached.
So the NRC has an agreement with about 45 states where the state inspectors implement the NRC regulations. You'd think, with such basic guidelines, there would be no problems. WRONG! Inspectors have been coming up with all kinds of stuff - installing security grids above ceilings to prevent intruders, installing motion detectors in the ceiling space, requiring the removal of all glass and louvers in any doors leading to the rooms, no matter how small. Keep in mind that the amterial is stored in a piece of equipment that weights several tons (lead shielding) and requires a crane and heavy riging to install.
To top it off, they won't give a pre-inspection or design review to let you know if your new construction is OK - build it, then they will show up and, if they don't like it, write citations to fix whatever they think needs fixing.
Wow - flash back to 1974. Dad was working on the Crystal River project, and one day he brought us out there to feed the gator in the cooling water canal. Marshmallows, if I remember correctly.
Ok, now that I've trolled in another post, I'm wondering if the folks trying to get him kicked out of the Bar could enter the subpoena ITSELF as evidence of JT's unfitness to practice law.
You are taking the second statement I made out of context. They had ALREADY submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. They did this all on their lonesome - they requested that it be moved from a local court to a federal court, because they argued that the federal court had jurisdiction. Then they tried to argue that the Federal court didn't have jurisdiction. Sorry, too late - you don't get to keep changing jurisdictions at your pleasure.
They should have argued that the local court didn't have jurisdiction, period. They probably would have won, and then it would have been incumbent on the plaintiff to re-file in a court of the proper jurisdiction. Instead, they made it easy for the guy, requesting federal court jurisdiction and then ignoring it.
They VOLUNTARILY subjected themselves to federal jurisdiction, and after that the normal procedural rules apply. Specifically, the rules regarding default judgements when a party is non-responsive.
Although I agree with your general point, your particular example is way off base. the "reinstitute the draft" legislation proposed in Congress was a political ploy designed to scare young voters and their mothers into voting Democrat in the (then) upcoming election. It worked pretty well, too - many folks were really scared of a reinstitution of the draft, despite opposition from the military itself and repeated denials from the administration.
How do I know it was simply a campaign ploy? Because, after the election, all talk of a draft disappeared. If the sponsors realy meant to do as you propose, then why did they drop it?
Yes, he could, because Spamhaus submitted to that court's jurisdiction. they shouldn't have, but they did. And one can't make an argument that jurisdiction doesn't apply after a ruling goes against you.
Spamhaus's lawyers screwed up, bad. They could have made the jurisdiction argument up front, and this would all have gone away. Perhaps they should sue their lawyers, but that doesn't mean that they are not subject to the judgement of the court that those lawyers acknowledged had jurisdiction (although inadvertently).
"My mother tongue is Dutch, we have a German coworker, and you never know if the next guy will be Italian. There is also this team that has to maintain code written by Spanish people.... in Spanish.... and they don't know Spanish. Fun times, if you like to hear them curse...."
And so began the Third European Conflict, the first two being mislabeled "world wars".
Don't worry, it's coming folks. Pass the popcorn.
(Of course, so is another civil war in the US. As time approaches infinity, the probability of any given war approaches unity)
"Although anthrax spores and smallpox aren't paint chips, the masks do provide protection against bioterrorism, since the most likely used bacterium would be dispersed in particle form, Utgoff says. In fact, the anthrax mail attacks first spotlighted the N95, as office mailrooms scurried for protective gear.
The N95 is made by various manufacturers under different names, from MSA's "Affinity Foldable Respirator" to 3M's "Particulate Respirator." Look for "NIOSH N95" on the package; the "N95" is a government efficiency rating that means the mask blocks about 95 percent of particles that are 0.3 microns in size or larger.
The N95 rating meets the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for protection against tuberculosis and anthrax spores, as well as the most foreseeable bioweaponry, which ranges in size from 1.0 to 5.0 microns. So the N95s are more than capable of preventing their inhalation."
The flu virus comes under those sizes as well. The rest of the articcle points out the masks shortcomings for other attacks, and errors in useage, but this topic is flu, and using ANY equipment improperly is a first class ticket to the Darwin's.
For a slightly less cynical take, how about the fact that financial services can survive if people don't, but the opposite isn't necessarily true.
After 9/11 in NYC, there was a mini panic because the ATM system was down locally for a while. Imagine if it was down for a week or longer. And the local branch is closed because the tellers are out sick. Do you carry enough cash to carry you through the week. Do you even HAVE checks? Many don't.
Also, the Feds maintain some level of control over the financial institutions - if the SEC orders them to do the exercise, they'll do it. Who is going to order food distribution companies to do it? The FDA? Maybe the ICC? Just because planning like this can't be done universally doesn't mean it shouldn't be done locally.
I work for a Very Large Charitable Organization in facilities construction, and our group has gotten involved in some of the pandemic flu planning. There are some truly frightening scenarios out there, from "Really Bad Flu Season", through "1918, Part II", to TEOTWAWKI.
The part where some of it hit home for me was when a coworker, who is our resident disaster junkie/survivalist, came back from his first panflu planning meeting. Normally he comes back from meetings grumbling that no one is taking a problem seriously. This time he was concerned that he himself hadn't been taking it seriously enough, and I've been to his bunker site!
Currently in Indonesia the mortality rate for bird flu cases is around 50%, and they are starting to see human to human transmission. If the lethality of the virus survives the mutation to a strain more transmissible between humans, one can assume that it will infect about 25% of the world populace - that was 1918 numbers, it will probably be more now with easy international travel and higher density in the cities.
So, if you sit in a pod of 8 cubicles, here's the breakdown (1918 transmissibility, current lethality)
1 of you is dead 1 of you is permanently disabled, or out for months of recovery
So now your workforce is reduced by 25% - oh, wait, 2 of you will also be out caring for sick loved ones, so that's half gone. And medical personnel are basically gone - they have been exposed multiple times and are either dead, sick, or not going to work because they don't want to become either (btw, that's not my projection, that's from the CDC).
Vaccine? Indonesia is not giving samples to international health authorities, for fears that any vaccine developed will be too expensive for them to afford (not a paranoid assumption)
Conclusion: Go buy some N95 masks and gloves (both cheap) and just pay a little attention. Neitehr will go to waste - use the gloves for working on cars and the masks for wood shop. And just pay attention.
Funny, I just discovered that my Blackberry will NOT sync up by itself - I need to tell it to do so. It was slow by 5 minutes, in the 5 months I've had it, which is shitty timekeeping even for a watch my kids got out of a cereal box.
Because the discovery process is a means by which EXISTING evidence is gathered, not a means to CREATE evidence. Records that are created in the normal course of business are subject to discovery, but one is typically not compelled to create records for use solely by your opponents in a trial.
Let's say you own a small take-out restaurant. People order, your cashier takes the order and calls the order out to the chef. The cash register is an older model that is basically a glorified adding machine - it provides a record of the cash transactions, but not of what was ordered. You make a lot of money selling a sandwich called "identity0 Hoagies" ((if you aren't from the SE PA region, google it)
Now you are being sued by your competitor for ilicitly using his secret formula for hoagies . As part of discovery, he wants to know your revenue from hoagie sales. You respond that you can show him gross revenue from the cash register receipts, but you don't know how much you make from those hoagies per se, because you don't keep specific records of those sorts, and the cash register receipts contain revenue from otehr sandwiches, soda, pretzels, etc.
In a conventional trial, the plaintiff could get the receipts, invoices for the various supplies you purchased, and testimony from the cashier, from which maybe he could reconstruct the data he wants. But the judge decides that isn't enough, since she doesn't know anything about how small businesses work. She decides that, since the information existed at one point, in the form of verbal communication, then it is subject to discovery. But since that information is, by it's very nature, transient, there is no way to transmit it to the plaintiff. So the judge orders you to install a recording system to capture those transient orders in a permanent format so the plaintiff can get his information so he can better sue you. You don't need a recording system, won't use it in the normal course of business, and it's an added expense to you, but it's only purpose is to serve in a lawsuit.
This judges order would get bounced on appeal in a heartbeat, but the same thing is happening in this case. The judge is ordering TorrentSpy to install a system, at their own expense, to record the contents of RAM on a running basis, which is transient data which is of no use to them and which they don't use in the normal course of business.
And you are proposing that they also be required to sift through that data and find the info that their opponent's need, or translate it into info that they can easily understand. That's like a German suing someone in the US and demanding that all documents turned over be translated first into German so he doesn't need to hire a translator.
But hey, since this involves computers, none of the old rules apply, right?
Slashdot Mirror
"The Chapter 11 reorg will protect them from getting decimated by Novell when they win their countersuit"
"Decimated" means destroying 1 in 10. IIRC, if a unit in the Roman Legion was cowardly|treasonous|bad, they counted off by 10's, a number was picked, and whoever had that number was beaten to death by the otehr 9 "luck ones".
I don't think Novell or IBM want SCO "decimated". I think "obliterated" is more appropriate.
"Other things, well, make me wonder what my ancestors were thinking there. A fist is "die Faust", so it's feminine."
If you'd ever seen any German porn with "die Faust" in the title, there would be no question in your mind.
Not that I have any knowledge of German porn, of course.
1) Not reporting something illegal when discovered in the normal course of business, i.e. whistleblowing. Fear for job safety or simple moral cowardice?
2) Actively doing things that the employee knows are illegal/immoral/unethical. Come on - does a "profession" really need a code of ethics to tell its members not to seek information to which they are not entitled? Maybe they need to reevaluate calling themselves "professionals".
"That's part of what (clearly) annoys Stallman about Torvalds. Stallman's making this huge principled stand for freedom, and all Torvalds really cares about is his kernel."
And therein lies the rub. You see, from a *practical* standpoint, Linus Torvalds has done more than Stallman did to accomplish Stallman's very own aims - by an order of magnitude. Torvalds, by using the GPL as a tool to assist and promote his pet project, also brought the GPL into much greater prominence. But it was the fact that Torvalds cares primarily about his project that alowed thsi to happen - if Linux wasn't a good and useful idea and execution to start with, it would have gone nowhere. After all, it doesn't matter how "free" a piece of software is - if it is a piece of crap, no one will use it if they have a choice.
THAT is what really galls Stallman: not that the GPL isn't Torvaldss first concern, but that Torvalds has done so much more than Stallman in promoting Free Software, and it wasn't even Torvalds' primary goal! Imagine how frustrated Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would be if, when seeking information about poverty and rights, people went to the person running a soup kitchen instead of themselves. Please note that I don't equate Stallman and those 2 clown on a personal level, but an organizational one. He may have had the "vision", but others have done more to promote it than he ever could accomplish, and that must be galling.
"In much the same way that religious voters will tolerate massive corruption and sexual perversion from politicians who claim deep religious convictions (of the White Anglo Saxon Protestant variety only please)"
Huh?
20 years ago, a Democrat was busted having sex with a Congressional page. He was reelected a number of times, and retired.
Last year, a Republican was busted sending suggestive text messages to a page. The Republican leadership kicked him out summarily.
15 years ago, a Democrat was found to have been keeping house with a male prositute, who was turning tricks on the side in an apartment of Franks. He has been reelected a number of times since, and is still a sitting member of congress.
Now, a Republican has been caught soliciting a blowjob, and he is also being pressured to leave by the Republicans.
Now, WHO is more tolerant of sexual misconduct?
"But it sounds like in this case she did have the files in question, just trying to find a loophole out of it."
It matters a great deal from a legal standpoint. If Universal doesn't actually own the copyrights to the material, then they have no standing to sue, regardless of what the defendant is alledged to have done. And given the history of the music business regarding copyright and royalty abuse with artists, it is a legitimate question to raise - if it is discovered that Universal never really took ownership of the copyright, then
a) the suit gets dismissed
b) someone elses lawyers start knocking on Universal's door, looking for "misdirected" royalties (maybe they won't be able to find their address, just like Stevie Nicks)
Of course, the suit could be re-filed by the actual copyright holder.
From a tactical standpoint, getting Universal's people up on a stand to walk a jury through a byzantine recording contract to explain just how it is that they own the copyright and are owed a kajillion dollars in damages when the original artist gets a pittance is almost certain to dispose a jury toward the defendant.
If we can bleat about "due process" and "competent defense" for murderer's, rapists, thugs, petty theives, and Gitmo detainess, surely this person deserves that same support?
It's already happening. The NRC passed new regulations regarding heightened security for radoactive materials used for purposes other than nuclear fuel - medical irradiation, industrial radiography, etc. Fear of someone stealing the stuff for a "dirty bomb". The regulations, on their face, are very reasonable:
1) 2 secured barriers between the public and the material. This can be an additional keycard on the room where the material resides (assuming exterior security) to 2 locks on a trailer - they can even be keyed alike.
2) A formal plan needs to be in place with local first responders - police, FD, whoever.
3) There must be provisions for immediate implementation of the plan if security is breached.
So the NRC has an agreement with about 45 states where the state inspectors implement the NRC regulations. You'd think, with such basic guidelines, there would be no problems. WRONG! Inspectors have been coming up with all kinds of stuff - installing security grids above ceilings to prevent intruders, installing motion detectors in the ceiling space, requiring the removal of all glass and louvers in any doors leading to the rooms, no matter how small. Keep in mind that the amterial is stored in a piece of equipment that weights several tons (lead shielding) and requires a crane and heavy riging to install.
To top it off, they won't give a pre-inspection or design review to let you know if your new construction is OK - build it, then they will show up and, if they don't like it, write citations to fix whatever they think needs fixing.
I believe you are referring to the neutron bomb, planned but never deployed decades ago.
Truth be told, I'm surprised the green whackjobs haven't tried to develop one yet - Earth without humans - except them, of course.
Wow - flash back to 1974. Dad was working on the Crystal River project, and one day he brought us out there to feed the gator in the cooling water canal. Marshmallows, if I remember correctly.
Ok, now that I've trolled in another post, I'm wondering if the folks trying to get him kicked out of the Bar could enter the subpoena ITSELF as evidence of JT's unfitness to practice law.
Jack Thompson vs. George Bush - whatever are slashdotters to do?
"It's also great for browsing through image^H^H^H^H^H porn folders."
Fixed that for ya.
You are taking the second statement I made out of context. They had ALREADY submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. They did this all on their lonesome - they requested that it be moved from a local court to a federal court, because they argued that the federal court had jurisdiction. Then they tried to argue that the Federal court didn't have jurisdiction. Sorry, too late - you don't get to keep changing jurisdictions at your pleasure.
They should have argued that the local court didn't have jurisdiction, period. They probably would have won, and then it would have been incumbent on the plaintiff to re-file in a court of the proper jurisdiction. Instead, they made it easy for the guy, requesting federal court jurisdiction and then ignoring it.
They VOLUNTARILY subjected themselves to federal jurisdiction, and after that the normal procedural rules apply. Specifically, the rules regarding default judgements when a party is non-responsive.
Is it agriculture? Is it a service? Floor wax? Desert topping?
Although I agree with your general point, your particular example is way off base. the "reinstitute the draft" legislation proposed in Congress was a political ploy designed to scare young voters and their mothers into voting Democrat in the (then) upcoming election. It worked pretty well, too - many folks were really scared of a reinstitution of the draft, despite opposition from the military itself and repeated denials from the administration.
How do I know it was simply a campaign ploy? Because, after the election, all talk of a draft disappeared. If the sponsors realy meant to do as you propose, then why did they drop it?
Yes, he could, because Spamhaus submitted to that court's jurisdiction. they shouldn't have, but they did. And one can't make an argument that jurisdiction doesn't apply after a ruling goes against you.
Spamhaus's lawyers screwed up, bad. They could have made the jurisdiction argument up front, and this would all have gone away. Perhaps they should sue their lawyers, but that doesn't mean that they are not subject to the judgement of the court that those lawyers acknowledged had jurisdiction (although inadvertently).
"My mother tongue is Dutch, we have a German coworker, and you never know if the next guy will be Italian. There is also this team that has to maintain code written by Spanish people.... in Spanish.... and they don't know Spanish. Fun times, if you like to hear them curse...."
And so began the Third European Conflict, the first two being mislabeled "world wars".
Don't worry, it's coming folks. Pass the popcorn.
(Of course, so is another civil war in the US. As time approaches infinity, the probability of any given war approaches unity)
"which proves my point that Opera needs a spell check like Firefox!"
I have to use IE at work , you insensitive clod!
(And, before someone points it out, I'm too cheap to buy a flash drive)
Did you even read your own link?
"Although anthrax spores and smallpox aren't paint chips, the masks do provide protection against bioterrorism, since the most likely used bacterium would be dispersed in particle form, Utgoff says. In fact, the anthrax mail attacks first spotlighted the N95, as office mailrooms scurried for protective gear.
The N95 is made by various manufacturers under different names, from MSA's "Affinity Foldable Respirator" to 3M's "Particulate Respirator." Look for "NIOSH N95" on the package; the "N95" is a government efficiency rating that means the mask blocks about 95 percent of particles that are 0.3 microns in size or larger.
The N95 rating meets the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for protection against tuberculosis and anthrax spores, as well as the most foreseeable bioweaponry, which ranges in size from 1.0 to 5.0 microns. So the N95s are more than capable of preventing their inhalation."
The flu virus comes under those sizes as well. The rest of the articcle points out the masks shortcomings for other attacks, and errors in useage, but this topic is flu, and using ANY equipment improperly is a first class ticket to the Darwin's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoagie
3rd hit. "Identity0" was the name of the parent poster, so as to personalize the story for him.
For a slightly less cynical take, how about the fact that financial services can survive if people don't, but the opposite isn't necessarily true.
After 9/11 in NYC, there was a mini panic because the ATM system was down locally for a while. Imagine if it was down for a week or longer. And the local branch is closed because the tellers are out sick. Do you carry enough cash to carry you through the week. Do you even HAVE checks? Many don't.
Also, the Feds maintain some level of control over the financial institutions - if the SEC orders them to do the exercise, they'll do it. Who is going to order food distribution companies to do it? The FDA? Maybe the ICC? Just because planning like this can't be done universally doesn't mean it shouldn't be done locally.
I work for a Very Large Charitable Organization in facilities construction, and our group has gotten involved in some of the pandemic flu planning. There are some truly frightening scenarios out there, from "Really Bad Flu Season", through "1918, Part II", to TEOTWAWKI.
The part where some of it hit home for me was when a coworker, who is our resident disaster junkie/survivalist, came back from his first panflu planning meeting. Normally he comes back from meetings grumbling that no one is taking a problem seriously. This time he was concerned that he himself hadn't been taking it seriously enough, and I've been to his bunker site!
Currently in Indonesia the mortality rate for bird flu cases is around 50%, and they are starting to see human to human transmission. If the lethality of the virus survives the mutation to a strain more transmissible between humans, one can assume that it will infect about 25% of the world populace - that was 1918 numbers, it will probably be more now with easy international travel and higher density in the cities.
So, if you sit in a pod of 8 cubicles, here's the breakdown (1918 transmissibility, current lethality)
1 of you is dead
1 of you is permanently disabled, or out for months of recovery
So now your workforce is reduced by 25% - oh, wait, 2 of you will also be out caring for sick loved ones, so that's half gone. And medical personnel are basically gone - they have been exposed multiple times and are either dead, sick, or not going to work because they don't want to become either (btw, that's not my projection, that's from the CDC).
Vaccine? Indonesia is not giving samples to international health authorities, for fears that any vaccine developed will be too expensive for them to afford (not a paranoid assumption)
Conclusion: Go buy some N95 masks and gloves (both cheap) and just pay a little attention. Neitehr will go to waste - use the gloves for working on cars and the masks for wood shop. And just pay attention.
I did - 5 months ago. That's why I'm so pissed - it's set to get teh network time but won't.
If I knew that this was going to be such a piece of crap I would never have let my boss take away my Treo.
Funny, I just discovered that my Blackberry will NOT sync up by itself - I need to tell it to do so. It was slow by 5 minutes, in the 5 months I've had it, which is shitty timekeeping even for a watch my kids got out of a cereal box.
God I hate this piece of shit...
Because the discovery process is a means by which EXISTING evidence is gathered, not a means to CREATE evidence. Records that are created in the normal course of business are subject to discovery, but one is typically not compelled to create records for use solely by your opponents in a trial.
Let's say you own a small take-out restaurant. People order, your cashier takes the order and calls the order out to the chef. The cash register is an older model that is basically a glorified adding machine - it provides a record of the cash transactions, but not of what was ordered. You make a lot of money selling a sandwich called "identity0 Hoagies" ((if you aren't from the SE PA region, google it)
Now you are being sued by your competitor for ilicitly using his secret formula for hoagies . As part of discovery, he wants to know your revenue from hoagie sales. You respond that you can show him gross revenue from the cash register receipts, but you don't know how much you make from those hoagies per se, because you don't keep specific records of those sorts, and the cash register receipts contain revenue from otehr sandwiches, soda, pretzels, etc.
In a conventional trial, the plaintiff could get the receipts, invoices for the various supplies you purchased, and testimony from the cashier, from which maybe he could reconstruct the data he wants. But the judge decides that isn't enough, since she doesn't know anything about how small businesses work. She decides that, since the information existed at one point, in the form of verbal communication, then it is subject to discovery. But since that information is, by it's very nature, transient, there is no way to transmit it to the plaintiff. So the judge orders you to install a recording system to capture those transient orders in a permanent format so the plaintiff can get his information so he can better sue you. You don't need a recording system, won't use it in the normal course of business, and it's an added expense to you, but it's only purpose is to serve in a lawsuit.
This judges order would get bounced on appeal in a heartbeat, but the same thing is happening in this case. The judge is ordering TorrentSpy to install a system, at their own expense, to record the contents of RAM on a running basis, which is transient data which is of no use to them and which they don't use in the normal course of business.
And you are proposing that they also be required to sift through that data and find the info that their opponent's need, or translate it into info that they can easily understand. That's like a German suing someone in the US and demanding that all documents turned over be translated first into German so he doesn't need to hire a translator.
But hey, since this involves computers, none of the old rules apply, right?