I don't have any clue how a home user would integrate two ISP connections. At work, we use a system called "Fat Pipe" to connect to our Comcast for Business line and our other ISP with our T1 lines. I assume that costs too much for a home user to invest in.
At the retail store I worked at after high school, we got freebies and stuff promoting movies and I was always curious as to what would happen if I tried to ebay the buttons and stuff for some extra money. I never bothered though because of the 'not for resale' message on the freebies. Its great to see someone get a victory about anything against a music company!!
I can see the judges point that says that the accused doesn't need to give out his pass phrase because the contents of the encrypted data would send him to jail for sure. On the other hand though, if this precedent stays on the books, a smart criminal will just encrypt the incriminating data and will never be able to be prosecuted based on the computer data (assuming he memorizes a strong password). Does that mean that terrorists will be protected too when they encrypt plans for the next attack on their computer?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't have any clue how a home user would integrate two ISP connections. At work, we use a system called "Fat Pipe" to connect to our Comcast for Business line and our other ISP with our T1 lines. I assume that costs too much for a home user to invest in.
At the retail store I worked at after high school, we got freebies and stuff promoting movies and I was always curious as to what would happen if I tried to ebay the buttons and stuff for some extra money. I never bothered though because of the 'not for resale' message on the freebies. Its great to see someone get a victory about anything against a music company!!
I can see the judges point that says that the accused doesn't need to give out his pass phrase because the contents of the encrypted data would send him to jail for sure. On the other hand though, if this precedent stays on the books, a smart criminal will just encrypt the incriminating data and will never be able to be prosecuted based on the computer data (assuming he memorizes a strong password). Does that mean that terrorists will be protected too when they encrypt plans for the next attack on their computer?