All they have to do is seed the data with inconsequential typos and other identifiers. Have a good EULA when they sell the database, and sue the crap out of anyone who steals the data, using the identifiers as evidence. That protects their compilation, while retaining other people's freedom to make their own compilation.
It's the same thing mailing list companies do when they "rent" lists. They have seed names so they can tell when someone makes unauthorized use of the list.
I can understand a company that compiles, edits, cleans and distributes a "phone book" CD-ROM package wanting to prevent someone from just buying one copy, extracting the data and selling it with a different front end. But for them to be able to "own" my phone number is insane.
I presume you ordered the software over the phone - mail order products are covered by a 30 day money back guarantee by law - unless they changed the laws. Call your credit card company or bank if you charged in on a credit or debit card, and dispute the charges. Although that might not be required if you call them and let them know you'll be disputing the charges if they don't issue a refund.
...for increasing the amount of Spam I receive by actually ordering something in response to Spam. I can't believe anyone here is actually rooting for this guy. Maybe I should order that $39 copy of Photoshop and then sue the sellers when I don't get an authentic copy.
Yeah, we're in the same boat alright - I've always used addresses like slashdot@mydomain.extention so I can tell if someone's given out my address - the worst offender was xdrive. I have one domain set up so everything that's not defined gets bounced, and I guess I'll have to do it on my main one.
All of the sudden (as in the last 8 hours) 90% of the spoofed from addresses are in the.mx TLD, and the volume has gone through the roof. Someone with DSL in mexico apparently has the virus and all of the fake addresses at my domain. I may have found the SOB that's been using my domain.
Most of the copies I'm getting now are to invalid addresses at my domain. Made up firstnames @mydomain.com. I originally thought that the virus was making these names up, but then today it dawned on me. A few weeks ago I started getting undeliverable messages to those same made-up addresses. Some spammer(s) is using my domain with random names as a from address in their spams. Now either there are a lot of people with infected machines who have copies of spam with those bogus from addresses that the virus is harvesting, or the same spammer(s) that is using my domain is mass mailing copies of the virus to keep it spreading. So many of these bogus addresses are out there now that all the common firstnames@mydomain.com are pretty much ruined.
I know it's obviously pointless, but I'll try to explain it to you anyhow. Anyone capable of writing and deploying a virus like this obviously has a certain level of intelligence. Yet the fact that they would devote their energy to something that would make so many people so miserable just to harm one company proves how stupid they are. It's similar in concept to intelligence != common sense. I'm sure you're familiar with that one, "whomever" you are.
Sounds to me like your dixie cup is half empty, but your grammar cup overfloweth. Capital punishment for grammar offenses. Maybe you can get that in the next US PATRIOT act.
I shall take my leave of you now, kind Maddam or Sir, for my terrier is asking me for the DNS server addresses for his domain registration.
I'm speaking of all of you who are saying SCO deserves it (and only those people). Do I deserve to deal with this virus BS? I have enough trouble dealing with the spam at my company, now I have to deal with this too. Viruses suck, period. Especially this one, which is forging random "from" addresses. It seems to be using #randomfirstname#@domain.extention - so now on top of the dozen or so viruses an hour I'm getting, I'm also getting bounces that I can't filter because the "to" is random. Don't bother telling me to filter out executables, I already do that. As a matter of policy, I'm the one that checks the filtered "junk" to make sure there were no false positives. It's usually about 500 a day, 1200 over the weekend. Also don't bother telling me to bounce undefined addresses. Not an option. Considering how early in the game it is for this virus, the dozen or more an hour I'm getting will probably turn into a lot more. Whoever put this out there is doing far more damage to innocent bystanders than they can ever hope to do to SCO. SCO will hang themselves eventually - the author(s) of this virus is worse than anyone at SCO.
I do agree with those who are suspicious of the motives - I think the SCO attack is just a front to increase the spread. Some morons will undoubtedly put intentionally infected machines out there, which will be more effective as Spammer relays than as drones to attack SCO. Anyone intentionally letting a machine become infected should have the book thrown at them. It amazes me how stupid very intelligent people can be sometimes.
Yeah I know- when I first had it, it would go out every time it rained. I'm surprised they don't advise people to provide the dish some sort of shelter, but I guess if they did they'd be admitting it's a problem.
Right now it's about 3 feet below a 1.5 foot overhang of our roof. It's just enough so it still gets wet, but no direct rain. Another thing that helped was when I upgraded to a larger dish. Even if you don't use HDTV, the bigger dish seems to pull in a better signal.
I knew there was a good explanation. I first discovered it when I had my dish on the screened in lanai at my apartment. I was amazed I got less rain fade going through a screen than not. Then it dawned on my that it was the fact that the dish was staying dry. Now it's just under the eaves of our house, but it's enough to keep the rain off it.
Have you thought about one of those dual modem routers? They're under $75 and supposedly give 100 MB/s transfer rate. Seems like it might not be a lot cheaper, but would be much more reliable.
Flying J truck stops are all supposed to have 802.11b access shorty (many already do). That's probably what the trucker's are using if they aren't using cell modems. You couldn't use DirecWay for mobile use because you have to have the dish "professionally" pointed. I don't think the marine and RV antennas work for the internet access the way they do for Sat. TV.
I used to have rain fade problems until I took the time to get my dish pointed properly, and got it out of the direct path of raindrops. For some reason, it seems that keeping rain directly off the dish seems to help. I live in Florida, and I rarely loose it even in the rainy season during torrential downpours.
Yeah, that's what I thought, but I never had my hands on a 1st gen, so I wasn't sure. I really dug the new one, and the moving one on the Beocom 1 is groovy- it's a bit big to fit in your pocket so that's probably not an issue with the phone:-)
I've used the one one the beocom 1, and on the iPod. The only difference I see is that the beocom 1 is actually a moving part, where the iPod (the one I used anyhow) was more of a touchpad - which to me makes it more of a scroll circle than a wheel. Don't most wheels turn?:-)
That's the (404) message I got when I clicked on the article author's name. Hehe. Here's what I submitted to Forbes using their comment on the article form:
I am utterly shocked that Forbes would publish such an article as "Fax and Friction", all but defending the practice of sending junk faxes. What were you thinking? The anti-junk fax laws aren't taking away freedom of speech, they're protecting businesses from people who would use other people's paper and toner (not to mention other more indirect costs) to send them unwanted advertisements. The article makes it sound like it's a bad thing that these lawyers and victims (yes victims) are driving the junk faxers out of business. If these companies stopped breaking the law, they wouldn't be getting sued, now would they? For a publication targeted to businesses, I find it odd that you would side with companies who are stealing our paper and toner, tying up our fax lines and putting wear and tear on our office equipment, all to give us unwanted stock picks and the like. Unbelievable.
Good points, but I think they basis for the suit is that they are selling the trademarked name for targeting the (potential) customers of the trademark holder. When you look at it that way, it's kind of like an ad agency selling you a trademarked logo, or a derivitive of one. It's pretty much the same thing as if the phone company sold McDonalds a listing in the white pages under Burger King. It would be obvious that the phone company would be trying to make money on someone else's trademark.
Slashdot Mirror
All they have to do is seed the data with inconsequential typos and other identifiers. Have a good EULA when they sell the database, and sue the crap out of anyone who steals the data, using the identifiers as evidence. That protects their compilation, while retaining other people's freedom to make their own compilation.
It's the same thing mailing list companies do when they "rent" lists. They have seed names so they can tell when someone makes unauthorized use of the list.
I can understand a company that compiles, edits, cleans and distributes a "phone book" CD-ROM package wanting to prevent someone from just buying one copy, extracting the data and selling it with a different front end. But for them to be able to "own" my phone number is insane.
They're related... only the people who have sampled the bottled moonshine actually buy the canned sunshine. :-)
This is news? We've had canned sunshine in our gift shops here in Florida for years!
Guess their crappy software is the reason they don't have a demo. Good luck!
I presume you ordered the software over the phone - mail order products are covered by a 30 day money back guarantee by law - unless they changed the laws. Call your credit card company or bank if you charged in on a credit or debit card, and dispute the charges. Although that might not be required if you call them and let them know you'll be disputing the charges if they don't issue a refund.
...why don't they just make a 10" cylindical mp3 player with big round control knobs at the base and get it over with? :-)
...for increasing the amount of Spam I receive by actually ordering something in response to Spam. I can't believe anyone here is actually rooting for this guy. Maybe I should order that $39 copy of Photoshop and then sue the sellers when I don't get an authentic copy.
Yeah, we're in the same boat alright - I've always used addresses like slashdot@mydomain.extention so I can tell if someone's given out my address - the worst offender was xdrive. I have one domain set up so everything that's not defined gets bounced, and I guess I'll have to do it on my main one.
.mx TLD, and the volume has gone through the roof. Someone with DSL in mexico apparently has the virus and all of the fake addresses at my domain. I may have found the SOB that's been using my domain.
All of the sudden (as in the last 8 hours) 90% of the spoofed from addresses are in the
Most of the copies I'm getting now are to invalid addresses at my domain. Made up firstnames @mydomain.com. I originally thought that the virus was making these names up, but then today it dawned on me. A few weeks ago I started getting undeliverable messages to those same made-up addresses. Some spammer(s) is using my domain with random names as a from address in their spams. Now either there are a lot of people with infected machines who have copies of spam with those bogus from addresses that the virus is harvesting, or the same spammer(s) that is using my domain is mass mailing copies of the virus to keep it spreading. So many of these bogus addresses are out there now that all the common firstnames@mydomain.com are pretty much ruined.
I know it's obviously pointless, but I'll try to explain it to you anyhow. Anyone capable of writing and deploying a virus like this obviously has a certain level of intelligence. Yet the fact that they would devote their energy to something that would make so many people so miserable just to harm one company proves how stupid they are. It's similar in concept to intelligence != common sense. I'm sure you're familiar with that one, "whomever" you are.
Sounds to me like your dixie cup is half empty, but your grammar cup overfloweth. Capital punishment for grammar offenses. Maybe you can get that in the next US PATRIOT act.
I shall take my leave of you now, kind Maddam or Sir, for my terrier is asking me for the DNS server addresses for his domain registration.
I'm speaking of all of you who are saying SCO deserves it (and only those people). Do I deserve to deal with this virus BS? I have enough trouble dealing with the spam at my company, now I have to deal with this too. Viruses suck, period. Especially this one, which is forging random "from" addresses. It seems to be using #randomfirstname#@domain.extention - so now on top of the dozen or so viruses an hour I'm getting, I'm also getting bounces that I can't filter because the "to" is random. Don't bother telling me to filter out executables, I already do that. As a matter of policy, I'm the one that checks the filtered "junk" to make sure there were no false positives. It's usually about 500 a day, 1200 over the weekend. Also don't bother telling me to bounce undefined addresses. Not an option. Considering how early in the game it is for this virus, the dozen or more an hour I'm getting will probably turn into a lot more. Whoever put this out there is doing far more damage to innocent bystanders than they can ever hope to do to SCO. SCO will hang themselves eventually - the author(s) of this virus is worse than anyone at SCO.
I do agree with those who are suspicious of the motives - I think the SCO attack is just a front to increase the spread. Some morons will undoubtedly put intentionally infected machines out there, which will be more effective as Spammer relays than as drones to attack SCO. Anyone intentionally letting a machine become infected should have the book thrown at them. It amazes me how stupid very intelligent people can be sometimes.
Yeah I know- when I first had it, it would go out every time it rained. I'm surprised they don't advise people to provide the dish some sort of shelter, but I guess if they did they'd be admitting it's a problem.
Right now it's about 3 feet below a 1.5 foot overhang of our roof. It's just enough so it still gets wet, but no direct rain. Another thing that helped was when I upgraded to a larger dish. Even if you don't use HDTV, the bigger dish seems to pull in a better signal.
...I'm sorry, that was just plain wrong.
I guess you missed both the word "supposedly" and the ensuing sarcasm. :-)
Me != Serious
I knew there was a good explanation. I first discovered it when I had my dish on the screened in lanai at my apartment. I was amazed I got less rain fade going through a screen than not. Then it dawned on my that it was the fact that the dish was staying dry. Now it's just under the eaves of our house, but it's enough to keep the rain off it.
Have you thought about one of those dual modem routers? They're under $75 and supposedly give 100 MB/s transfer rate. Seems like it might not be a lot cheaper, but would be much more reliable.
Flying J truck stops are all supposed to have 802.11b access shorty (many already do). That's probably what the trucker's are using if they aren't using cell modems. You couldn't use DirecWay for mobile use because you have to have the dish "professionally" pointed. I don't think the marine and RV antennas work for the internet access the way they do for Sat. TV.
I used to have rain fade problems until I took the time to get my dish pointed properly, and got it out of the direct path of raindrops. For some reason, it seems that keeping rain directly off the dish seems to help. I live in Florida, and I rarely loose it even in the rainy season during torrential downpours.
Yeah, that's what I thought, but I never had my hands on a 1st gen, so I wasn't sure. I really dug the new one, and the moving one on the Beocom 1 is groovy- it's a bit big to fit in your pocket so that's probably not an issue with the phone :-)
I've used the one one the beocom 1, and on the iPod. The only difference I see is that the beocom 1 is actually a moving part, where the iPod (the one I used anyhow) was more of a touchpad - which to me makes it more of a scroll circle than a wheel. Don't most wheels turn? :-)
Yeah, the BeoComm 1 cordless phones have a nice one. it's really a great feature, I hope it doesn't get squashed by some stupid patent.
That's the (404) message I got when I clicked on the article author's name. Hehe. Here's what I submitted to Forbes using their comment on the article form:
I am utterly shocked that Forbes would publish such an article as "Fax and Friction", all but defending the practice of sending junk faxes. What were you thinking? The anti-junk fax laws aren't taking away freedom of speech, they're protecting businesses from people who would use other people's paper and toner (not to mention other more indirect costs) to send them unwanted advertisements. The article makes it sound like it's a bad thing that these lawyers and victims (yes victims) are driving the junk faxers out of business. If these companies stopped breaking the law, they wouldn't be getting sued, now would they? For a publication targeted to businesses, I find it odd that you would side with companies who are stealing our paper and toner, tying up our fax lines and putting wear and tear on our office equipment, all to give us unwanted stock picks and the like. Unbelievable.
Mike, a self-described computer gook, registered the name in August.
Is this a typo or have I been left behind in the newest slang update? I feel so old.
Good points, but I think they basis for the suit is that they are selling the trademarked name for targeting the (potential) customers of the trademark holder. When you look at it that way, it's kind of like an ad agency selling you a trademarked logo, or a derivitive of one. It's pretty much the same thing as if the phone company sold McDonalds a listing in the white pages under Burger King. It would be obvious that the phone company would be trying to make money on someone else's trademark.