I was wondering about that too, but it seems to me that since the random phrases that are inserted into spam to fool your filters are generated by a script, they shouldn't count as copyrightable. That would be sort of like Microsoft copyrighting all your Excel spreadsheets (I know they'd like to, but let's ignore that for this conversation).
Now, as far as the bits which are actually the pitch portion of the spam, since those were most likely written by a human, they would be subject to copyright.
Impressive. You got all the way to 5. Too bad I noticed that A)The copyright in the article is AP and B)your fake copyright says "This material may be...", instead of "may NOT be..". That's what really tripped me.
That's right. Because you know what will happen then don't you? The more aggressive environmentalists will say we can't send people there, and no way in hell can you colonize Mars, because we'll screw up the Martian bugs' habitat. And then even our robotic missions will have to go through some sort of expensive sterilization to make sure they don't squish anything. It would, in short, take all the fun out of the final frontier.
A. The court agrees with Infinium Labs, ruling that the article is not, in fact, protected speech. HardOCP is punished and this case is not a First Amendment issue.
B. The court agrees with HardOCP, ruling that the article is protected speech. Infinium Labs' case is thrown out, and this case is not a First Amendment issue.
If it's not a First Amendment issue, then what are you implying protects the speech?
I think this could be pretty easily beaten, and I'm surprised my spam isn't already showing this characteristic, now that I think about it...
(all spammers, please don't read anymore below here, I don't want to give you ideas).
In my example, I get spam sent to me and several other people at my work. It would be trivial for spammers to modify their algorithms so that instead of sending to x people in my office, they send to (x-1) people in my office, and use that last address as the "From" field. Of course, you could set up your email server to detect this (mail coming from outside claiming to be from inside). Does Exchange Server provide this kind of functionality? If not, it would be all too easy for spammers to break this method.
Easily 30% of the spam I've received over the last few months has been addressed to several people in my office (and not to anyone outside the office). I'm guessing this a result of viruses harvesting emails off people's computers, then it's a simple matter of finding all known emails in a given domain. Would this break the system described here?
Rather than mod you down, I'll just let you (and all the other knee-jerks) know that THIS WAS NOT AN INDIAN PROGRAMMER. This was a guy named Mark Dennis. Not a very Indian sounding name. Also, Mark Dennis actually subcontracted the job involving the database out to someone in New Jersey.
Maybe IHBT, but the article summary could make you believe this had to do with offshore outsourcing, so that's a misconception we should clear up early.
The USA arranged for the USSR to buy defective computer chips that caused a major disaster in a nuclear facility.
Not a nuclear facility, an oil pipeline. Look closer at the article summary, especially look at the "non" in front of "nuclear". Still bad for the air, but nothing like a nuclear disaster.
Vega is only 25 light years away, so they'd be looking at the 70's. Of course, once they hear Disco, they'll probably decide nothing of value could have ever come from our system.
That could just be because this book is about the underreported stories of 2003, well after Clinton left. Although I actually prefer Bush to Clinton, it's naive to assume that *anyone* with as much power as the president of the U.S.A. isn't going to be corrupted in some manner.
Jim Davis, director of operations at the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry association, says those concerns are overblown. "If you break all the connections and allow no data to pass from anywhere to anywhere, you've got great security - but why'd you put the digital systems in the first place?," says Davis.
Yes, why are you putting digital systems in in the first place, if the price is laxer security?
Sorry if this seems offtopic, but as I'm sure you know, many states have been considering Super-DMCA style laws. Those laws usually have a clause prohibiting the hiding of the source or destination of a network communication. That would make Freenet illegal. Maybe your state senator is in the ??AA's pocket, but he can't be seen supporting the Chinese governement's censorship of it's citizens either, so you should make sure he knows that's exactly what he's doing if he supports those kinds of bills.
This might be true for distant galaxies, but this is a planet in our own Milky Way, and even if what you say is true, it wouldn't seem that the wraparound would occur over such a short (cosmically short anyway) distance.
Slashdot Mirror
I was wondering about that too, but it seems to me that since the random phrases that are inserted into spam to fool your filters are generated by a script, they shouldn't count as copyrightable. That would be sort of like Microsoft copyrighting all your Excel spreadsheets (I know they'd like to, but let's ignore that for this conversation). Now, as far as the bits which are actually the pitch portion of the spam, since those were most likely written by a human, they would be subject to copyright.
Impressive. You got all the way to 5. Too bad I noticed that A)The copyright in the article is AP and B)your fake copyright says "This material may be...", instead of "may NOT be..". That's what really tripped me.
That's right. Because you know what will happen then don't you? The more aggressive environmentalists will say we can't send people there, and no way in hell can you colonize Mars, because we'll screw up the Martian bugs' habitat. And then even our robotic missions will have to go through some sort of expensive sterilization to make sure they don't squish anything. It would, in short, take all the fun out of the final frontier.
Java
If it's not a First Amendment issue, then what are you implying protects the speech?
I think this could be pretty easily beaten, and I'm surprised my spam isn't already showing this characteristic, now that I think about it...
(all spammers, please don't read anymore below here, I don't want to give you ideas).
In my example, I get spam sent to me and several other people at my work. It would be trivial for spammers to modify their algorithms so that instead of sending to x people in my office, they send to (x-1) people in my office, and use that last address as the "From" field. Of course, you could set up your email server to detect this (mail coming from outside claiming to be from inside). Does Exchange Server provide this kind of functionality? If not, it would be all too easy for spammers to break this method.
Easily 30% of the spam I've received over the last few months has been addressed to several people in my office (and not to anyone outside the office). I'm guessing this a result of viruses harvesting emails off people's computers, then it's a simple matter of finding all known emails in a given domain. Would this break the system described here?
Rather than mod you down, I'll just let you (and all the other knee-jerks) know that THIS WAS NOT AN INDIAN PROGRAMMER. This was a guy named Mark Dennis. Not a very Indian sounding name. Also, Mark Dennis actually subcontracted the job involving the database out to someone in New Jersey. Maybe IHBT, but the article summary could make you believe this had to do with offshore outsourcing, so that's a misconception we should clear up early.
Your .sig is so ironic.
Not a nuclear facility, an oil pipeline. Look closer at the article summary, especially look at the "non" in front of "nuclear". Still bad for the air, but nothing like a nuclear disaster.
Vega is only 25 light years away, so they'd be looking at the 70's. Of course, once they hear Disco, they'll probably decide nothing of value could have ever come from our system.
That could just be because this book is about the underreported stories of 2003, well after Clinton left. Although I actually prefer Bush to Clinton, it's naive to assume that *anyone* with as much power as the president of the U.S.A. isn't going to be corrupted in some manner.
Jim Davis, director of operations at the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry association, says those concerns are overblown. "If you break all the connections and allow no data to pass from anywhere to anywhere, you've got great security - but why'd you put the digital systems in the first place?," says Davis.
Yes, why are you putting digital systems in in the first place, if the price is laxer security?
Sorry if this seems offtopic, but as I'm sure you know, many states have been considering Super-DMCA style laws. Those laws usually have a clause prohibiting the hiding of the source or destination of a network communication. That would make Freenet illegal. Maybe your state senator is in the ??AA's pocket, but he can't be seen supporting the Chinese governement's censorship of it's citizens either, so you should make sure he knows that's exactly what he's doing if he supports those kinds of bills.
This might be true for distant galaxies, but this is a planet in our own Milky Way, and even if what you say is true, it wouldn't seem that the wraparound would occur over such a short (cosmically short anyway) distance.