So you've never actually been there? As I said. you wouldn't understand.
If you _HAD_ been there you'd know you just made a stupid suggestion. Minimum wage doesn't pay the bills. Working for McD's is digging your own grave: you do lots of work and the situation gets worse.
She quit, and finally, almost a year later, she's now getting unemployment for the seven months she was out of work
What if she couldn't hold out for the year? Say she was homeless after the first two months. Where would they send the unemployment check ten months later, and would she still be in any emotional/psychological state to be able to receive and cash it?
American society is all about relative ethics. People who are rich and powerful get away with it. People who aren't rich and powerful don't get away with it.
You can be a granite idealist. I'm going to be a sympathetic realist.
You cannot lose you job for refusing to break the law
But you can lose your job for insubordination. Perhaps the CEO didn't ask them to actually send packets but only asked them to write scripts to coordinate connections and status between networks. I don't know what the actual nature of their jobs was but it is conceivable but the boss was coordinating the actions of the DDoS botnets and the underlings simply saw it as patching an interactive neural network together.
You can sue in response if you are unjustly terminated for this
If you're single, white, heterosexual, and not disabled by some legal definition then it's nearly impossible to find an attorney to take on a wrongful termination suit. The employer claims insubordination. The attorney will request at least $10k for the retainer fee just to subpoena the relevant corporate documents (which will always somehow disappear from HR's filling cabinet) and investigate legal avenues of trying to PROVE that the insubordination was justified.
Judging by the description of the packet monkeys, I doubt they had an extra $10k between them.
Someone please tell me why I should feel sorry for the poor "monkeys" that were helping him commit felonies?
Find five guys who have no savings left, are two weeks away from eviction, and haven't eaten in a week. Promise them a barely living wage (just enough to keep their head above water) to write a few scripts and send a bunch of packets. They don't even need to physical hurt anyone.
You wouldn't understand unless you've been two weeks away from eviction, haven't eaten in a week, and have no savings left. If you want to reply with "but it was still a felony and they knew that" then, well, you just don't understand.
you don't need new laws when you could just apply the old laws
But...but...but... what would we pay our representatives their exorbitant salaries and luxurious retirement package for? And...and...and... how could we screw unpopular citizens over for entertainment if we simplified the laws and made them easily understandable? Don't you also find amusement in watching someone go through hell as their being poked and prodded through a legal maze?
You won't find many if you're living under the bridge and haven't showered in a week. Circumstances can be extreme and the slippery slope drops off quickly once you lose your place of residence.
The best thing to do is refuse, and if you lose your job... there could be worse things. But still, it sucks
I imagine that, for the five packet monkeys, there couldn't be much worse than losing their job. They probably didn't have shining resumes, were probably on their last legs of financial debt hell, and possibly didn't interview very well.
When faced with joblessness and possible homelessness a little DDoS doesn't look that bad. I don't advocate network disruption but we need a way to offset the overwhelming balance of power that comes with wealth so that people aren't caught in this kind of position.
I guess I'm only posting because I feel sorry for the five-packet monkeys who've probably been subsisting on Ramen noodles for the last three years only to end up charged with felonies.
Yes, absolutely. We must cover the planet with laws which can be misinterpreted, selectively enforced, and abused to generate revenue for the ever hungry federal budget which will _NEVER_ be able to dig itself out of the debt hole to the Federal Reserve.
A suspicious government will imprison its people in the same manner that suspicious parents ground their children.
Now he's skipped out on $750,000 bail, while the five packet monkeys who worked for him are left facing felony charges of their own.
Executives pulled this stunt with stockholders quite heavily over the last 5 years. I imagine that he didn't actually pay out $750k but probably put up "collateral" with an appraised worth of $750k. It doesn't mean much if he's been cutting his own salary, stock options, and other investments at several million/year.
I believe it's due to winamp's integration with IE
It's because Winamp uses XML to parse skin archives which allows hotlinking to untrusted locations.
Now, if we could get rid of this crack like addiction to one-click computing, the skin file would have a README which would tell the user to copy the files to the appropriate location. While the majority of users would blissfully copy the.exe along with the rest at least it wouldn't be executed.
Of course, then there'd be a web-page someplace with a link just to check to see if the skin had been installed in a default location with the.exe intact. It's a distributed approach to chipping away at security. This is the same thing that happens to people who install dozens of "cuteware" apps. Each one breaks something else a little more until eventually there's a hole in the system.
Winamp parses the XML file which contains an embedded link to the.exe in the Winamp skin archive.
Why are markup languages allowed to link to executables? Allowing arbitrary hotlinks to an untrusted location without proper validation is a security hole the size of an aircraft carrier.
That's precisely what this is. It's like checking for secret doors in a dungeon in an old RPG like Bard's Tale. One step forward, check right, check left. One step forward, check right, check left. Repeat until you find an opening.
This sort of thing could very easily affect Linux as well. As much as I love Linux I've been waiting for someone to spring something like this through Mozilla. It's only a matter of time before someone figures it out.
SCO hasn't presented ANY evidence that their claims are with merit.
It's pretty sad that a little jargon and a legal budget goes a long way into turning complete vapor into a lawsuit to try and destroy a reputation, isn't it?
Indeed. The fact that the courts even entertain these suits is a perfect example of how corrupt, skewed, and worthless our political and legal system is in the US.
As long as I have enough money in my legal fund and enough of a history with technical jargon-speak it seems I am given the opportunity to tank a competitor. Can you imagine if this sort of vampirism was practiced on private citizens?
Oh wait... the IRS, RIAA, and MPAA already have a copyright on the textbook which teaches this type of behavior.
I think SCO going bankrupt after the litigation process drains what little profit they are making off of their crappy version of UNIX is pretty good punishment
You're heartlessly advocating the loss of jobs for people who really have little choice in the matter.
At the same time bankruptcy may very well be part of the business plan. Build it up, milk it for all it's worth and leave it in the laps of the insurance companies to fight the debtors when it hits rock bottom. The top investors and execs are still going to make off with hordes of cash and the everyday employees will be left high and dry. It's the single most shining example of exactly what happened from 1995-2000.
What I find to be most disturbing is that a corporate entity with a rather large legal fund can put together a legal brief to tie up courts and raise a challenge to a company the likes of IBM when the long and short of the case is an unfounded claim of,"We owned it first and they copied us!"
Can you imagine if a company of any size would do this to a private citizen? RIAA? MPAA? Harassment? There'd be no chance for the private citizen.
That we've been reading about this for such a long period of time is nothing short than IRREFUTABLE PROOF that the current system of Americah courts and politics is horrendously in favor of those with the most money to spend and has very little to do with truth or justice.
Revolt? It's not worth the effort. But keep in mind that _EVERYTHING_ which you think is right, good, and true about your government can be manipulated in this very same manner.
Specious argument. This same argument could be said about anything; books, knives, clothes
No one is getting sued for sharing books, knives, or clothing. My argument is not specious. If companies want to have a childish pouting fit because "Jimmy promised to keep that a secret! I never said he could tell Joey!" then they should quit selling CDs. Otherwise, refine the business model and evolve. No one else gets a free ride.
Another specious argument. Since by its very nature software, whether music or applications, can in some way eventually be copied the owners are simply doing what they can to stem the tide of those who believe it is fine to give away something which they do not have to right to give away
It's not specious. Have you heard of GNU? They recognize that the material is easily copied and redistributed and they ADVOCATE it. What's even better is their actually giving the intellectual property obsessed proprietary industry a good run.
No because it is still part of the original plant and they are using it for their own purpose
I've sold plenty of my trimmings to friends for nominal fees.
No because you went out and bought all the ingredients and created the bread yourself
And p2p sharers legally purchased all of their own equipment to create their own distribution system.
People will use any excuse they can to justify not having to pay for something
I paid for it. I can share it. Deal with it. Raise the price or quit selling it. Enough of these underhanded backstabbing interpretatios of the terms of sale. They accepted money and I accepted a product. Unless they want to mount a government agent in every house they cannot pretend to dictate the nonviolent use of the product.
Agricultural companies don't lobby for federal criminalization for getting a fertile plant from genetically engineered seed. They subsidize it out of their own pocket, they lobby for federal susubsidy, and they produce seed which, for the most part, is sterile and cannot be copied. The agri industry realizes that there is no point in criminalizing the customer if the product is easily copied.
The Hallmark industry does not attempt to lobby for the criminalization of people who make their own greeting cards. We do not have "greeting card pirates" from people who pattern their homemade cards off of a design seen in the store. At the same time, the home greeting card creators have not sunk Hallmark.
Xerox did not sink paperbacks. Bit copy programs did not sink the software industry. Pirated Photoshop has not bankrupted Adobe.
Yes, copyright infringement is illegal. Sure, licensing agreements and distribution rights do exist in the law. "Let's support more laws which protect the right of the wealthy to criminalize the common citizen." Copyright laws don't do anything to preserve the ownership of the original author/creator/scientist in today's world. FACE REALITY. No more whining about sharing.
What's in a name? A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet. Theft involves a physical loss of property.
If you come up with a sure-fire pickup line and I overhear you using it and decide to use it for myself, is that theft? If you are selling a diet regimen and one of your clients decides to share your diet secrets with their overweight friends, is that theft? If I sell a book on surefire stock market investing and you share the tips contained inside with your friends, is that theft?
As mentioned by one of the other posters...all crimes are artificial
Sure. Whatever. There's a clear line between what people commonly DON'T do (real crime) and what they've been taught to preach against but go ahead and do anyway (sex, filesharing, underage smoking, underage drinking).
The CD barely sold, but the tracks were quite popular on the P2P networks
Was the band promoted with equal vigor in all the teenie magazines? You've pointed out how easy it is for media companies to engineer the next superstar or tank a band they don't really like. The p2p effect is minimal. People will take anything for free.
There is nothing artificial about the crime of copyright infringement
Agricultural companies subsidized, out of their own pocket, the sale of genetically engineered seed until they could produce seed which turned into sterile plants. They did not lobby for federal oversight and DNA testing because they owned the copyright on that genetically engineered seed.
Hallmark did use the Attorney General's office to hunt down people who would go to the store, study a greeting card they liked, and then go home to produce the same thing for free on their printer using greeting card software.
Your grocer will not sue you if you take the seeds from the peppers or tomatoes and grow your own plants in your backyard.
Every other industry which produces a product which is easily reproduced after the point of sale has faced REALITY and adjusted their business model to accomodate the possibility.
Slashdot Mirror
I heard when you work at Mcdonald's
So you've never actually been there? As I said. you wouldn't understand.
If you _HAD_ been there you'd know you just made a stupid suggestion. Minimum wage doesn't pay the bills. Working for McD's is digging your own grave: you do lots of work and the situation gets worse.
She quit, and finally, almost a year later, she's now getting unemployment for the seven months she was out of work
What if she couldn't hold out for the year? Say she was homeless after the first two months. Where would they send the unemployment check ten months later, and would she still be in any emotional/psychological state to be able to receive and cash it?
Your friend got a fair deal. Not everyone does.
no one cares
At the end of the day that's the most insightful observation that can be made.
What else would we all do at work on a Friday, though?
Sorry, this example of relative ethics is bull.
American society is all about relative ethics. People who are rich and powerful get away with it. People who aren't rich and powerful don't get away with it.
You can be a granite idealist. I'm going to be a sympathetic realist.
You cannot lose you job for refusing to break the law
But you can lose your job for insubordination. Perhaps the CEO didn't ask them to actually send packets but only asked them to write scripts to coordinate connections and status between networks. I don't know what the actual nature of their jobs was but it is conceivable but the boss was coordinating the actions of the DDoS botnets and the underlings simply saw it as patching an interactive neural network together.
You can sue in response if you are unjustly terminated for this
If you're single, white, heterosexual, and not disabled by some legal definition then it's nearly impossible to find an attorney to take on a wrongful termination suit. The employer claims insubordination. The attorney will request at least $10k for the retainer fee just to subpoena the relevant corporate documents (which will always somehow disappear from HR's filling cabinet) and investigate legal avenues of trying to PROVE that the insubordination was justified.
Judging by the description of the packet monkeys, I doubt they had an extra $10k between them.
Someone please tell me why I should feel sorry for the poor "monkeys" that were helping him commit felonies?
Find five guys who have no savings left, are two weeks away from eviction, and haven't eaten in a week. Promise them a barely living wage (just enough to keep their head above water) to write a few scripts and send a bunch of packets. They don't even need to physical hurt anyone.
You wouldn't understand unless you've been two weeks away from eviction, haven't eaten in a week, and have no savings left. If you want to reply with "but it was still a felony and they knew that" then, well, you just don't understand.
Any group of cretins who try to beat the competition with slimey business practices rather than a superior product deserve this type of rebuke
I agree. Sadly, superior marketing beats superior technology every time.
you don't need new laws when you could just apply the old laws
But...but...but... what would we pay our representatives their exorbitant salaries and luxurious retirement package for? And...and...and... how could we screw unpopular citizens over for entertainment if we simplified the laws and made them easily understandable? Don't you also find amusement in watching someone go through hell as their being poked and prodded through a legal maze?
I'd rather be unemployed and searching for a job
You won't find many if you're living under the bridge and haven't showered in a week. Circumstances can be extreme and the slippery slope drops off quickly once you lose your place of residence.
Or, report him to the police
Uhhh... yeah. I'm sure they'll take a police report and get right on that. Watch out for the corporate retaliation.
The best thing to do is refuse, and if you lose your job... there could be worse things. But still, it sucks
I imagine that, for the five packet monkeys, there couldn't be much worse than losing their job. They probably didn't have shining resumes, were probably on their last legs of financial debt hell, and possibly didn't interview very well.
When faced with joblessness and possible homelessness a little DDoS doesn't look that bad. I don't advocate network disruption but we need a way to offset the overwhelming balance of power that comes with wealth so that people aren't caught in this kind of position.
I guess I'm only posting because I feel sorry for the five-packet monkeys who've probably been subsisting on Ramen noodles for the last three years only to end up charged with felonies.
new laws need to cover this kind of disruption
Yes, absolutely. We must cover the planet with laws which can be misinterpreted, selectively enforced, and abused to generate revenue for the ever hungry federal budget which will _NEVER_ be able to dig itself out of the debt hole to the Federal Reserve.
A suspicious government will imprison its people in the same manner that suspicious parents ground their children.
perhaps it was a question of uneducated, incompetent and/or overzealous authorities
Are there any other kinds?
A suspicious government will imprison its people in the same way that suspicious parents ground their children.
Now he's skipped out on $750,000 bail, while the five packet monkeys who worked for him are left facing felony charges of their own.
Executives pulled this stunt with stockholders quite heavily over the last 5 years. I imagine that he didn't actually pay out $750k but probably put up "collateral" with an appraised worth of $750k. It doesn't mean much if he's been cutting his own salary, stock options, and other investments at several million/year.
I believe it's due to winamp's integration with IE
.exe along with the rest at least it wouldn't be executed.
.exe intact. It's a distributed approach to chipping away at security. This is the same thing that happens to people who install dozens of "cuteware" apps. Each one breaks something else a little more until eventually there's a hole in the system.
It's because Winamp uses XML to parse skin archives which allows hotlinking to untrusted locations.
Now, if we could get rid of this crack like addiction to one-click computing, the skin file would have a README which would tell the user to copy the files to the appropriate location. While the majority of users would blissfully copy the
Of course, then there'd be a web-page someplace with a link just to check to see if the skin had been installed in a default location with the
who then runs the code
.exe in the Winamp skin archive.
Winamp parses the XML file which contains an embedded link to the
Why are markup languages allowed to link to executables? Allowing arbitrary hotlinks to an untrusted location without proper validation is a security hole the size of an aircraft carrier.
or at least a whole hell of a lot more creative
That's precisely what this is. It's like checking for secret doors in a dungeon in an old RPG like Bard's Tale. One step forward, check right, check left. One step forward, check right, check left. Repeat until you find an opening.
This sort of thing could very easily affect Linux as well. As much as I love Linux I've been waiting for someone to spring something like this through Mozilla. It's only a matter of time before someone figures it out.
SCO hasn't presented ANY evidence that their claims are with merit.
It's pretty sad that a little jargon and a legal budget goes a long way into turning complete vapor into a lawsuit to try and destroy a reputation, isn't it?
Indeed. The fact that the courts even entertain these suits is a perfect example of how corrupt, skewed, and worthless our political and legal system is in the US.
As long as I have enough money in my legal fund and enough of a history with technical jargon-speak it seems I am given the opportunity to tank a competitor. Can you imagine if this sort of vampirism was practiced on private citizens?
Oh wait... the IRS, RIAA, and MPAA already have a copyright on the textbook which teaches this type of behavior.
I think SCO going bankrupt after the litigation process drains what little profit they are making off of their crappy version of UNIX is pretty good punishment
You're heartlessly advocating the loss of jobs for people who really have little choice in the matter.
At the same time bankruptcy may very well be part of the business plan. Build it up, milk it for all it's worth and leave it in the laps of the insurance companies to fight the debtors when it hits rock bottom. The top investors and execs are still going to make off with hordes of cash and the everyday employees will be left high and dry. It's the single most shining example of exactly what happened from 1995-2000.
What I find to be most disturbing is that a corporate entity with a rather large legal fund can put together a legal brief to tie up courts and raise a challenge to a company the likes of IBM when the long and short of the case is an unfounded claim of,"We owned it first and they copied us!"
Can you imagine if a company of any size would do this to a private citizen? RIAA? MPAA? Harassment? There'd be no chance for the private citizen.
That we've been reading about this for such a long period of time is nothing short than IRREFUTABLE PROOF that the current system of Americah courts and politics is horrendously in favor of those with the most money to spend and has very little to do with truth or justice.
Revolt? It's not worth the effort. But keep in mind that _EVERYTHING_ which you think is right, good, and true about your government can be manipulated in this very same manner.
Specious argument. This same argument could be said about anything; books, knives, clothes
No one is getting sued for sharing books, knives, or clothing. My argument is not specious. If companies want to have a childish pouting fit because "Jimmy promised to keep that a secret! I never said he could tell Joey!" then they should quit selling CDs. Otherwise, refine the business model and evolve. No one else gets a free ride.
Another specious argument. Since by its very nature software, whether music or applications, can in some way eventually be copied the owners are simply doing what they can to stem the tide of those who believe it is fine to give away something which they do not have to right to give away
It's not specious. Have you heard of GNU? They recognize that the material is easily copied and redistributed and they ADVOCATE it. What's even better is their actually giving the intellectual property obsessed proprietary industry a good run.
No because it is still part of the original plant and they are using it for their own purpose
I've sold plenty of my trimmings to friends for nominal fees.
No because you went out and bought all the ingredients and created the bread yourself
And p2p sharers legally purchased all of their own equipment to create their own distribution system.
People will use any excuse they can to justify not having to pay for something
I paid for it. I can share it. Deal with it. Raise the price or quit selling it. Enough of these underhanded backstabbing interpretatios of the terms of sale. They accepted money and I accepted a product. Unless they want to mount a government agent in every house they cannot pretend to dictate the nonviolent use of the product.
Agricultural companies don't lobby for federal criminalization for getting a fertile plant from genetically engineered seed. They subsidize it out of their own pocket, they lobby for federal susubsidy, and they produce seed which, for the most part, is sterile and cannot be copied. The agri industry realizes that there is no point in criminalizing the customer if the product is easily copied.
The Hallmark industry does not attempt to lobby for the criminalization of people who make their own greeting cards. We do not have "greeting card pirates" from people who pattern their homemade cards off of a design seen in the store. At the same time, the home greeting card creators have not sunk Hallmark.
Xerox did not sink paperbacks. Bit copy programs did not sink the software industry. Pirated Photoshop has not bankrupted Adobe.
Yes, copyright infringement is illegal. Sure, licensing agreements and distribution rights do exist in the law. "Let's support more laws which protect the right of the wealthy to criminalize the common citizen." Copyright laws don't do anything to preserve the ownership of the original author/creator/scientist in today's world. FACE REALITY. No more whining about sharing.
Please see the "No Electronic Theft"
What's in a name? A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet. Theft involves a physical loss of property.
If you come up with a sure-fire pickup line and I overhear you using it and decide to use it for myself, is that theft? If you are selling a diet regimen and one of your clients decides to share your diet secrets with their overweight friends, is that theft? If I sell a book on surefire stock market investing and you share the tips contained inside with your friends, is that theft?
As mentioned by one of the other posters...all crimes are artificial
Sure. Whatever. There's a clear line between what people commonly DON'T do (real crime) and what they've been taught to preach against but go ahead and do anyway (sex, filesharing, underage smoking, underage drinking).
The CD barely sold, but the tracks were quite popular on the P2P networks
Was the band promoted with equal vigor in all the teenie magazines? You've pointed out how easy it is for media companies to engineer the next superstar or tank a band they don't really like. The p2p effect is minimal. People will take anything for free.
There is nothing artificial about the crime of copyright infringement
Agricultural companies subsidized, out of their own pocket, the sale of genetically engineered seed until they could produce seed which turned into sterile plants. They did not lobby for federal oversight and DNA testing because they owned the copyright on that genetically engineered seed.
Hallmark did use the Attorney General's office to hunt down people who would go to the store, study a greeting card they liked, and then go home to produce the same thing for free on their printer using greeting card software.
Your grocer will not sue you if you take the seeds from the peppers or tomatoes and grow your own plants in your backyard.
Every other industry which produces a product which is easily reproduced after the point of sale has faced REALITY and adjusted their business model to accomodate the possibility.
What makes the music industry so holy?