So now Slashdot is carrying articles that are mere speculation. I realize that "serious programmers" love to trash VB everywhere, but can't we at least have facts on our side first?
And how do these people know when a domain has expired back into the available pool? Do they track whois records which list expiry dates, get the listfrom registrars, are registrars themselves, or what?
TPB is likely completely legal in Sweden. If they weren't, they would have been shuttered long before now. Still, unless Sweden has a Loser Pays system, the (il)legal system there will attempt to grind them down through endless prosecution. Once any government starts acting like that, they need to be replaced NOW!
The article summary is garbage, or should I say simply wrong?
Google set 4 conditions it wanted to see. The FCC agreed with 2 of them, so Google is faced with half a glass. (Yes I know the Engineer's view of half a glass.) I don't recall them saying they'd bid reserve to ensure only half of their wishes.
Then why is there virtually no judge willing to put a stop to this at the initial John Doe ex parte stage? I can't believe that they all slept through that day of class in judge school.
Doesn't matter who did it, we didn't want it. The whole idea of standards is a single standard. This idea of dueling parallel standards was garbage from the beginning.
Knowingly suing the wrong person - and the RIAA knows that, at best, they've only found the ISP account holder - should be the cause of severe sanctions against both the RIAA, and the judge who let's this case continue a moment longer than necessary. Either the RIAA shows evidence tying the person sued to the actual infringing user and computer at the time of filing, or they have no case, and no right to extort innocent broadband account holders. This close-enough-for-government-work, let-us-poke-around-long-enough-and-I'm-sure-we'll-uncover-something approach has to end!
The defendants still lost their motion to disallow the subpoena for their identities. I also cannot find anything in the decision where the judge actually says she considers that the RIAA lawyers should be fined. Sure, she makes clear that she doesn't like it, but that is all. This is all very unfortunate so far.
I would think if the joinder is found to be improper, then all the Does after Doe #1 would quickly be severed, meaning only the first Doe would have his/her information subpoenaed, and individual cases would have to be filed for each additional Doe defendant. Given that the RIAA already doesn't like filing individual ex parte expedited discovery oriented cases, one guesses that mass litigation has been to their benefit so far. It's a benefit we'd like to remove from them.
I do wish that the magistrate judge had put these feelings about this in the body of his opinion, and not just a footnote.
Unfortunately, this magistrate judge also believes, feels, whatever, that the Supreme Court didn't say in Trombly what everybody else feels they said in Twombly. That has really hurt the defendants, if the trial judge agrees.
This tactic would be brought to a screeching halt if the courts required that private data uncovered under court ordered discovery could only be used at the trial for the case where the subpoenas were issued. This includes RIAA extortion attempts by their Settlement Support Center. Note that the RIAA typically doesn't even say how they got the names they've sued when they file the individual cases afterwards. That way they don't have to defend their illegitimate tactics.
Note also that this common sense idea should long ago have been part of our judicial system in order to prevent misuse of the courts in revealing private data in cases that are nothing more than court-sanctioned information farming. Cases which are dismissed immediately afterwards. People have been fired after companies have used these tactics to uncover anonymous critics using cases that they never could have won at trial - and that's outright wrong!
In the very backwards state of Arizona, they still use paper ballots. Yet when those ballots are inserted into the ballot box, they go through a visual scanner that kicks the ballot back out immediately if it is improperly marked. While you can choose not to vote on any given ballot issue, accidentally marking more than one vote for an issue will reject the ballot immediately, and you can get a new one on the spot to correct. Paper ballots don't need to have the problems cited here, and obviously have some advantages in recounts afterwards.
Of course, by the ACLU rules, voting Republican is a source of voter error, and reason for the ballot to be rejected.
My vote has to go to the Nintendo 64. Watching Super Mario 64, and later Zelda Ocarina of Time, run around in 3 dimensions was just such a quantum leap from Pong and Tank (yes I go back to the very beginning) that there is no way to say anyone else ever brought such a leap to gaming.
U2 started using Stage Crew Services, a non union shop, back in the '90s. Seeing as how they were born working class and still tout their so-called activism, that smells of hypocrisy to me.
What a laugh! Are you somehow required to hire overpriced union workers at whatever amount of money they decide to extort from you in order to show how much you really care? Non-union workers are equally valuable humans too.
Only disconnect for illegal downloads of U2's music, or for all music? If all music, then U2 has entirely overstepped their bounds on deciding that the whole world should follow their whims.
For that matter, does U2 even own their own records, or do they belong to the record companies? U2 may be demanding actions be taken on things that aren't even theirs.
But then again, who expects wisdom from a rock band and their management?
I would imagine that bringing someone up on charges that didn't exist in criminal law would be enough to warrant a dismissal.
The problem is that the dismissal apparently happens after the disclosure of the personal identifying information. Once the cat's out of the bag, it doesn't go be in willingly.
Just another argument against IP logging in favor of privacy. If you keep logs, the courts will demand them. Heck, if you keep it in ram (TorrentSpy) the courts will try to demand them. If you're entitled to privacy on the Internet, then IP logging has to go.
The real villains here are the Swiss prosecutors who are going along with this scheme. They should be ashamed -- and Fired! (Donald Trump, where are you?)
Problem is, we're trying to make cell phones smaller and cheaper, not larger. Larding them up with unnecessary to the act of communicating features (you know this wouldn't be the only idea that just has to be included) is totally moving in the wrong direction. If this is a problem, just put fixed detectors out there.
Slashdot Mirror
So now Slashdot is carrying articles that are mere speculation. I realize that "serious programmers" love to trash VB everywhere, but can't we at least have facts on our side first?
And how do these people know when a domain has expired back into the available pool? Do they track whois records which list expiry dates, get the listfrom registrars, are registrars themselves, or what?
Only a Hotwarts-trained wizard should dare to represent himself as a Head of Weather Manipulation. Lesser muggles will surely fail.
So where's the complete list of Token Ring flaws, deficiencies, short-comings, fud, and the rest?
Compared to NO NETWORK, ARCnet wasn't bad.
You forgot SneakerNet.
It only takes one rogue, bought-off, prosecutor to tarnish the entire country over this.
TPB is likely completely legal in Sweden. If they weren't, they would have been shuttered long before now. Still, unless Sweden has a Loser Pays system, the (il)legal system there will attempt to grind them down through endless prosecution. Once any government starts acting like that, they need to be replaced NOW!
Now where did I put that button?
The article summary is garbage, or should I say simply wrong?
Google set 4 conditions it wanted to see. The FCC agreed with 2 of them, so Google is faced with half a glass. (Yes I know the Engineer's view of half a glass.) I don't recall them saying they'd bid reserve to ensure only half of their wishes.
Then why is there virtually no judge willing to put a stop to this at the initial John Doe ex parte stage? I can't believe that they all slept through that day of class in judge school.
Doesn't matter who did it, we didn't want it. The whole idea of standards is a single standard. This idea of dueling parallel standards was garbage from the beginning.
Then you're probably not on Comcast.
Knowingly suing the wrong person - and the RIAA knows that, at best, they've only found the ISP account holder - should be the cause of severe sanctions against both the RIAA, and the judge who let's this case continue a moment longer than necessary. Either the RIAA shows evidence tying the person sued to the actual infringing user and computer at the time of filing, or they have no case, and no right to extort innocent broadband account holders. This close-enough-for-government-work, let-us-poke-around-long-enough-and-I'm-sure-we'll-uncover-something approach has to end!
And the "solomon" typo of BumbleFinger.
I would think if the joinder is found to be improper, then all the Does after Doe #1 would quickly be severed, meaning only the first Doe would have his/her information subpoenaed, and individual cases would have to be filed for each additional Doe defendant. Given that the RIAA already doesn't like filing individual ex parte expedited discovery oriented cases, one guesses that mass litigation has been to their benefit so far. It's a benefit we'd like to remove from them.
I do wish that the magistrate judge had put these feelings about this in the body of his opinion, and not just a footnote.
Unfortunately, this magistrate judge also believes, feels, whatever, that the Supreme Court didn't say in Trombly what everybody else feels they said in Twombly. That has really hurt the defendants, if the trial judge agrees.
Note also that this common sense idea should long ago have been part of our judicial system in order to prevent misuse of the courts in revealing private data in cases that are nothing more than court-sanctioned information farming. Cases which are dismissed immediately afterwards. People have been fired after companies have used these tactics to uncover anonymous critics using cases that they never could have won at trial - and that's outright wrong!
Of course, by the ACLU rules, voting Republican is a source of voter error, and reason for the ballot to be rejected.
My vote has to go to the Nintendo 64. Watching Super Mario 64, and later Zelda Ocarina of Time, run around in 3 dimensions was just such a quantum leap from Pong and Tank (yes I go back to the very beginning) that there is no way to say anyone else ever brought such a leap to gaming.
What a laugh! Are you somehow required to hire overpriced union workers at whatever amount of money they decide to extort from you in order to show how much you really care? Non-union workers are equally valuable humans too.
For that matter, does U2 even own their own records, or do they belong to the record companies? U2 may be demanding actions be taken on things that aren't even theirs.
But then again, who expects wisdom from a rock band and their management?
The problem is that the dismissal apparently happens after the disclosure of the personal identifying information. Once the cat's out of the bag, it doesn't go be in willingly.
Just another argument against IP logging in favor of privacy. If you keep logs, the courts will demand them. Heck, if you keep it in ram (TorrentSpy) the courts will try to demand them. If you're entitled to privacy on the Internet, then IP logging has to go.
The real villains here are the Swiss prosecutors who are going along with this scheme. They should be ashamed -- and Fired! (Donald Trump, where are you?)
Problem is, we're trying to make cell phones smaller and cheaper, not larger. Larding them up with unnecessary to the act of communicating features (you know this wouldn't be the only idea that just has to be included) is totally moving in the wrong direction. If this is a problem, just put fixed detectors out there.