Oh, all the email's on an offshore server outside the court's jurisdiction?
That's fine. The court has the CEO locked up for contempt until the contents of that offshore mail server are delivered for discovery. Or the judge signs an order allowing hired stormtroopers to take every PC in the company for forensic analysis. Problem solved. Or am I missing something here? I imagine judges look dimly upon such blatant attempts to conceal evidence to protect against what you're calling "legal attacks" and that they call "justice."
Although that is the cynical, (and usually valid, IMHO) interpretation, here's another one:
It's not just about destroying evidence that could be used against you, maybe. I'm not in Records Management, but I bet complying with a subpoena is a lot easier when there's simply less email hanging around--if you have a good, enforced retention policy, you can honestly say "Here is what we have. We don't have anything older than n days, according to policy," and save thousands of dollars in staff time that would have been spent mounting old backup tapes and cruising employees hard disks trying to honestly comply with a court order.
It's the DMCA wielding, BSA hiring corporate thugs that say "Code is PROPERTY!" Then, when they hear "Property is subject to taxation," they say, "uh, but it's, uh, special property, and, uh, shoudln't be taxed like other property." Quite laughable. If they want to be able to lock up bits as property, then they can damn well pay taxes on them, too.
What if Blizzard is just doing this for the publicity?
That would prove that they have the stupidest PR flacks in the universe. Maybe Adobe had Sklyarov taken away in chains to drum up publicity for eBooks, too.
Hell, I've never played one of their little games in my life. And now I'm sharing the WC3 ISO with the patched bnetd server on three filesharing services, just because I want to see the bastards die. I can't imagine how pissed I'd be if I had actually given them money in the past.
I wish people would open their eyes and see what will happen if Blizzard loses this. It will change their business model.
Yep. Their business model is now fighting the EFF in court. That ought to get them lots of revenue. We need to continue to get the message out: "Sue your customers and die!"
I hope the case bankrupts them or at least drives them out of the game market. And I will dance a jig on their grave.
Rather, we need secure, unforgeable, globally unique identifiers. And smartcards are the most promising and least obtrusive way of doing that.
May I suggest a convenient mark on the right hand or forehead?
Those who volunteer to take this are hellbound fools. If it becomes mandatory, I'll go down in a blaze of glory, hopefully sending a few of Satan's minions on their way to hell in the process.
The Social Security card is a piece of paper which asserts a binding between a name and a number. It's not a reasonable form of identification at all, and that's why it says "not for identification" right on the card.
They said "not for identification" years ago, but the ones being issued now do not, nor have any for at least the last ten years. See this for a little on that.
Interesting, but not likely. I think the legislation of the last few years and the SSSCA hearings demonstrate that Rosen, Valenti, et al have a pretty solid lock on the U.S. government. More likely will be that the levies here will be raised to match.
You can go buy a "new" Pentium II 400 at some stores, too. Hell, I can probably find you an MIB C-64 on eBay, since that would meet your definition of the word "new," too.
Shocking isn't it. Those bloody customers keep asking for Office.
That's what happens when the manufacturer of Office has a monopoly and users are forced to use it to be able to exchange data with them. Shocking, isn't it.
Ah, you've discovered the great Karma sinkhole of daring to criticize Apple on Slashdot since the release of OSX.
Now that Apple's ported a *nix, they can do no wrong, despite being a repackager of clone hardware on a force-bundled operating system having licensed the one-click patent, c&d'd and threatened to sue kids making skins, crippled DVD authoring software, and killed clone makers they'd made agreements with.
Hell, I think Apple could hire Jack Valenti as a spokesperson and put Hilary Rosen naked on the screen of the new iMac as wallpaper, and you'd still get modded down for daring to criticize them here!
Because the Linux users are smart enough to, and unfortunately often required to, lie about their browser/OS for online banking, etc., which will often dump a user if the User Agent string doesn't report a blessed version of IE or NS >= 4 running on Windows or Macintosh.
But the beans go into the same pot. Buy a Clie, and you're funding an RIAA member and GPL violator (POSE). Pure and simple. Sorry, Sony. Next Palm won't be a Clie this time.
And if you head over to any number of theme sites you can even make it look like OS X.
Please list the theme sites where I can download OS X like themes. We're, uh, interested in trying them on our Linux boxen. Yeah, trying them out, that's it.
That's right--if they want to sell the product, and be entitled to copyright, then they should be compelled to disclose the source after they stop selling the product or when the copyright expires. (Of course, copyright shouldn't be an effective eternity, either.)
This way, the only legal way to close the source would be to either never offer it as a commercial product or to put the closed source version in the public domain without ever having sold it.
In return for the having been able to keep the source closed to market the product, they should be compelled to disclose the source when they cease doing so, then.
Is it really the right of the people to say what private citizens must give and give up?
In this case, yes, it is, because "intellectual" "property" is really neither. It's a temporary monopoly generously granted by the state (i.e. the people, theoretically) in return for creating new stuff.
It's no more unreasonable to condition that temporary monopoly on a requirement to offer a product in a reasonable and non-discriminatory manner or lose that monopoly than it is for Congress to go on extending it for those who bought legislators like Disney.
But the state's and NAI's interests probably dovetail here--I wouldn't be surprised to hear someday that NAI got some more nice fat government contracts for "security software," likely in return for
keeping crypto looking like a fringe technology that for other than banks and the military, is only of use to terrorists and paedophiles.
Yep, Apples used to have SCSI, and standard PCs didn't. However, lots of PCs come with Firewire now, and Apple abandoned the superior but more expensive SCSI for the inferior, consumer grade ATA drives. And they did that before the price spread made it a no-brainer like it is now, for those not involved in linear editing or production mastering.
I'm not trying to pick on TiVo in particular--all the PVRs are subject to downgrading, etc. as the companies change hands or lose in court. I'm glad to hear there's a vibrant hacker community taking care of the store, though.
No--I'm sure there are subscription hacks that have been done already. I just doubt that an insider would risk prosecution by letting go of any TiVo installed backdoors in the boxes. Someone will own those assets, even in the case of TiVo's bankruptcy or hostile acquisition.
Slashdot Mirror
That's fine. The court has the CEO locked up for contempt until the contents of that offshore mail server are delivered for discovery. Or the judge signs an order allowing hired stormtroopers to take every PC in the company for forensic analysis. Problem solved. Or am I missing something here? I imagine judges look dimly upon such blatant attempts to conceal evidence to protect against what you're calling "legal attacks" and that they call "justice."
It's not just about destroying evidence that could be used against you, maybe. I'm not in Records Management, but I bet complying with a subpoena is a lot easier when there's simply less email hanging around--if you have a good, enforced retention policy, you can honestly say "Here is what we have. We don't have anything older than n days, according to policy," and save thousands of dollars in staff time that would have been spent mounting old backup tapes and cruising employees hard disks trying to honestly comply with a court order.
Hopefully, it'll be the last Blizzard product we see, period. The DMCA-toting jackbooted bastards need to go under.
It's the DMCA wielding, BSA hiring corporate thugs that say "Code is PROPERTY!" Then, when they hear "Property is subject to taxation," they say, "uh, but it's, uh, special property, and, uh, shoudln't be taxed like other property." Quite laughable. If they want to be able to lock up bits as property, then they can damn well pay taxes on them, too.
That would prove that they have the stupidest PR flacks in the universe. Maybe Adobe had Sklyarov taken away in chains to drum up publicity for eBooks, too.
Hell, I've never played one of their little games in my life. And now I'm sharing the WC3 ISO with the patched bnetd server on three filesharing services, just because I want to see the bastards die. I can't imagine how pissed I'd be if I had actually given them money in the past.
Yep. Their business model is now fighting the EFF in court. That ought to get them lots of revenue. We need to continue to get the message out: "Sue your customers and die!"
I hope the case bankrupts them or at least drives them out of the game market. And I will dance a jig on their grave.
May I suggest a convenient mark on the right hand or forehead?
Those who volunteer to take this are hellbound fools. If it becomes mandatory, I'll go down in a blaze of glory, hopefully sending a few of Satan's minions on their way to hell in the process.
They said "not for identification" years ago, but the ones being issued now do not, nor have any for at least the last ten years. See this for a little on that.
Interesting, but not likely. I think the legislation of the last few years and the SSSCA hearings demonstrate that Rosen, Valenti, et al have a pretty solid lock on the U.S. government. More likely will be that the levies here will be raised to match.
OK, thanks.
That's what happens when the manufacturer of Office has a monopoly and users are forced to use it to be able to exchange data with them. Shocking, isn't it.
No, it didn't. You can still buy the old-style iMac for $800. The flat-panel one costs $1300, true, but that isn't the only iMac choice.
Maybe you just missed the part in the sentence you quoted where he said "new." NEW. NEEEEEWWWWW! Not "old style." So I boldfaced it for you.
Now that Apple's ported a *nix, they can do no wrong, despite being a repackager of clone hardware on a force-bundled operating system having licensed the one-click patent, c&d'd and threatened to sue kids making skins, crippled DVD authoring software, and killed clone makers they'd made agreements with.
Hell, I think Apple could hire Jack Valenti as a spokesperson and put Hilary Rosen naked on the screen of the new iMac as wallpaper, and you'd still get modded down for daring to criticize them here!
Because the Linux users are smart enough to, and unfortunately often required to, lie about their browser/OS for online banking, etc., which will often dump a user if the User Agent string doesn't report a blessed version of IE or NS >= 4 running on Windows or Macintosh.
But the beans go into the same pot. Buy a Clie, and you're funding an RIAA member and GPL violator (POSE). Pure and simple. Sorry, Sony. Next Palm won't be a Clie this time.
That's nice--it grabs the 70K stub. Now how does one capture the whole trailer?
Please list the theme sites where I can download OS X like themes. We're, uh, interested in trying them on our Linux boxen. Yeah, trying them out, that's it.
Regards,
Apple Legal
This way, the only legal way to close the source would be to either never offer it as a commercial product or to put the closed source version in the public domain without ever having sold it.
In return for the having been able to keep the source closed to market the product, they should be compelled to disclose the source when they cease doing so, then.
In this case, yes, it is, because "intellectual" "property" is really neither. It's a temporary monopoly generously granted by the state (i.e. the people, theoretically) in return for creating new stuff.
It's no more unreasonable to condition that temporary monopoly on a requirement to offer a product in a reasonable and non-discriminatory manner or lose that monopoly than it is for Congress to go on extending it for those who bought legislators like Disney.
But the state's and NAI's interests probably dovetail here--I wouldn't be surprised to hear someday that NAI got some more nice fat government contracts for "security software," likely in return for keeping crypto looking like a fringe technology that for other than banks and the military, is only of use to terrorists and paedophiles.
Yep, Apples used to have SCSI, and standard PCs didn't. However, lots of PCs come with Firewire now, and Apple abandoned the superior but more expensive SCSI for the inferior, consumer grade ATA drives. And they did that before the price spread made it a no-brainer like it is now, for those not involved in linear editing or production mastering.
I'm not trying to pick on TiVo in particular--all the PVRs are subject to downgrading, etc. as the companies change hands or lose in court. I'm glad to hear there's a vibrant hacker community taking care of the store, though.
Now I have to go find every BBS archive that has my G-Phile with box lists and update them.
No--I'm sure there are subscription hacks that have been done already. I just doubt that an insider would risk prosecution by letting go of any TiVo installed backdoors in the boxes. Someone will own those assets, even in the case of TiVo's bankruptcy or hostile acquisition.