There are lots of wiretapping laws that apply to both parties. Google when they have SSL traffic has an expectation of privacy. They haven't been notified that the person logging in is using a wiretapped / compromised machine.
I'm not sure how the courts will rule on this one but the first time this setup is used to do something like have IT clean out someone's brokerage account by snooping their SSL traffic I suspect the company will be found liable.
I know how they'd rule on it. They're rule it perfectly acceptable as the company owns the network infrastructure and computers, and has the right to do whatever they damn well like with their own equipment - provided it's declared.
Actually,.edu,.mil, and.gov should also be abolished. They should be.edu.us,.mil.us, and.gov.us. The gTLD namespace should not have US TLDs polluting it.
I wouldn't worry too much. Saudi Arabia objected through the public objection procedures, which ICANN says they basically ignore anyway. To have your voice actually heard, you have to pay $5000 (non-refundable, of course) and submit a formal objection. The Saudis complaints won't even be read by the approval board.
The fact that it's not..us is the US ccTLD,.com is a gTLD. The "g" stands for "Global" but the US thinks that because Verisign lives on its turf, it can control it.
Honestly? We do actually have one streaming-on-demand service. It sucks. The content is either old or pay-per-play ($7 per watch - may as well rent the blu-ray, better quality). It's like Netflix, but with ten-times older content, and the content that isn't old has an additional price tag on top of the subscription. And did I mention that it contains no HBO content, despite the fact that... wait for it... HBO owns it?
We do also have the free catch-up services similar to Hulu but with no charges and no handy apps on every platform under the sun - unlike Hulu though, you get 7 days to watch the program before it vanishes, and every network (there's only three, two free to air and one pay tv) has their own platform. And with sub 50GB data caps, it's not something one could realistically make heavy use of.
In terms of Netflix and the like, Netflix has actually gone to the effort of coming here simply to tell us it's not going to happen. They claim our internet is too slow and expensive for them to see any chance of success.
Your problem is probably the same as ours (in NZ). Foxtel (or Sky, here). I assume they own the content market in Australia as well? And they likely keep spouting how they aren't the reason content is unavailable or slow?
And the other reason - the pipes into your country are likely as expensive as ours. Unfortunately, you can blame NZ for that as the Southern Cross Cable is majority owned by Telecom NZ, but I hear you guys have a couple of other pipes as ours. We actually had someone from Netflix come to NZ just to tell us that they will never launch here because bandwidth is too slow and expensive.
Don't companies like Adobe always release their software support-free? I've never seen a support line for Adobe, and even if there was one I'm sure they'd make it a 900 number.
That's not APK. You can tell APK because he has a lot of bold in his posts, and always - and I mean always - changes the subject line of his post. He never replies with the default subject.
Unless there's someone else who also goes on about hosts files a lot?
What you purchase when you buy a music CD or a game is a license to the product, and physical media containing a copy of the licensed material. Since you've paid for a license, acquiring another copy of it is not an unauthorised activity. Rightsholders cannot have their cake and eat it too.
Wait a minute, so you're actually suggesting we pay back low interest debt (it's fucking less than 4% interest rate. Seriously) by selling off high-yield assets? The power companies return 6%-9% dividends. So we're sacrificing a 6%-9% dividend to pay back a sub-4% loan. That's just fiscally retarded, unless the real reason is to move those high-yield assets from public hands to private ones.
Also, we're borrowing a quarter of a billion a week because National is borrowing no less than twice what we actually need to borrow to pay the bills (because the debt is cheap) and using it to shore up the hole in the accounts left by lowering the tax rate for the rich (3% of all income over $60K is a LOT).
So don't give me that bullshit that it's Labour's fault. National screwed the economy so that they could justify their asset fire-sale policies.
Do you really though? If you ask your hospital for a copy of your record, do they give it to you or do they redact it first?
I work for a hospital, and I can answer that: they redact the shit out of it. And they're so fired up about making sure they can redact the information that I would be fired if I ever opened my own medical record. The best part is that they claim in the pretty pamphlet they give new hires that medical records are copyrighted property of the hospital board.
My point, which you seem to have only half gotten, is that unfortunately whenever someone talks about not having options to legally purchase content, invariably you'll have a ton of people showing up to link to Hulu, Netflix, Amazon MP3, etc - completely ignoring that said solutions are not available to, well, most of the world. I've yet to see someone on Slashdot start talking about how iPlayer has the content they want so clearly that is the solution.
You actually do a better job of proving the original point that options are not available by doing that (as well as raising the ire of internationals who get reeeeeally sick of Americans whining about there not being good enough options for getting TV and Music when they have so many good options available - I'm not saying you were doing this by the way).
For what it's worth, that GP also mentioned Craigslist so we can probably safely assume they're American - but still, every time someone goes on about awesome stuff like Amazon MP3 or Netflix, it might be a good idea to prepend that "if you're in the promised land" so that internationals are forewarned that they're about to be bitterly fucking disappointed - as usual.
And I say this from one of the only two countries apart from the US to have Pandora.
Slashdot Mirror
No, no, with Groklaw it's anything that doesn't go 'their' way is because Microsoft paid off the judge.
There are lots of wiretapping laws that apply to both parties. Google when they have SSL traffic has an expectation of privacy. They haven't been notified that the person logging in is using a wiretapped / compromised machine.
I'm not sure how the courts will rule on this one but the first time this setup is used to do something like have IT clean out someone's brokerage account by snooping their SSL traffic I suspect the company will be found liable.
I know how they'd rule on it. They're rule it perfectly acceptable as the company owns the network infrastructure and computers, and has the right to do whatever they damn well like with their own equipment - provided it's declared.
Historical trivialities?
Fair enough, but as it's not a 2LD within the .US ccTLD, it's not US centric.
Think about what "broke college students" DO on those things.
That's why.
Actually, .edu, .mil, and .gov should also be abolished. They should be .edu.us, .mil.us, and .gov.us. The gTLD namespace should not have US TLDs polluting it.
I wouldn't worry too much. Saudi Arabia objected through the public objection procedures, which ICANN says they basically ignore anyway. To have your voice actually heard, you have to pay $5000 (non-refundable, of course) and submit a formal objection. The Saudis complaints won't even be read by the approval board.
The fact that it's not. .us is the US ccTLD, .com is a gTLD. The "g" stands for "Global" but the US thinks that because Verisign lives on its turf, it can control it.
International entities live in the .int TLD.
Honestly? We do actually have one streaming-on-demand service. It sucks. The content is either old or pay-per-play ($7 per watch - may as well rent the blu-ray, better quality). It's like Netflix, but with ten-times older content, and the content that isn't old has an additional price tag on top of the subscription. And did I mention that it contains no HBO content, despite the fact that... wait for it... HBO owns it?
We do also have the free catch-up services similar to Hulu but with no charges and no handy apps on every platform under the sun - unlike Hulu though, you get 7 days to watch the program before it vanishes, and every network (there's only three, two free to air and one pay tv) has their own platform. And with sub 50GB data caps, it's not something one could realistically make heavy use of.
In terms of Netflix and the like, Netflix has actually gone to the effort of coming here simply to tell us it's not going to happen. They claim our internet is too slow and expensive for them to see any chance of success.
Your problem is probably the same as ours (in NZ). Foxtel (or Sky, here). I assume they own the content market in Australia as well? And they likely keep spouting how they aren't the reason content is unavailable or slow?
And the other reason - the pipes into your country are likely as expensive as ours. Unfortunately, you can blame NZ for that as the Southern Cross Cable is majority owned by Telecom NZ, but I hear you guys have a couple of other pipes as ours. We actually had someone from Netflix come to NZ just to tell us that they will never launch here because bandwidth is too slow and expensive.
Quit linking to those scummy assholes will you? Sedo is a goddamn plague on the web.
Don't companies like Adobe always release their software support-free? I've never seen a support line for Adobe, and even if there was one I'm sure they'd make it a 900 number.
They must really hate "To Kill a Mockingbird".
The settlers discovered immortality? Hmm, so that's why everyone goes to Australia.
Ah, I see. It's not the hosts guy though - you'd know if it was him.
That's not APK. You can tell APK because he has a lot of bold in his posts, and always - and I mean always - changes the subject line of his post. He never replies with the default subject.
Unless there's someone else who also goes on about hosts files a lot?
What you purchase when you buy a music CD or a game is a license to the product, and physical media containing a copy of the licensed material. Since you've paid for a license, acquiring another copy of it is not an unauthorised activity. Rightsholders cannot have their cake and eat it too.
Wait a minute, so you're actually suggesting we pay back low interest debt (it's fucking less than 4% interest rate. Seriously) by selling off high-yield assets? The power companies return 6%-9% dividends. So we're sacrificing a 6%-9% dividend to pay back a sub-4% loan. That's just fiscally retarded, unless the real reason is to move those high-yield assets from public hands to private ones.
Also, we're borrowing a quarter of a billion a week because National is borrowing no less than twice what we actually need to borrow to pay the bills (because the debt is cheap) and using it to shore up the hole in the accounts left by lowering the tax rate for the rich (3% of all income over $60K is a LOT).
So don't give me that bullshit that it's Labour's fault. National screwed the economy so that they could justify their asset fire-sale policies.
Filing a regulatory complaint against my employer would likely be a career-limiting-move.
Yes, just don't ask about our Air Force. You've already seen that, the entirety of it raided Kim Dotcom's house.
Did you just call DICOM proprietary?
Do you really though? If you ask your hospital for a copy of your record, do they give it to you or do they redact it first?
I work for a hospital, and I can answer that: they redact the shit out of it. And they're so fired up about making sure they can redact the information that I would be fired if I ever opened my own medical record. The best part is that they claim in the pretty pamphlet they give new hires that medical records are copyrighted property of the hospital board.
My point, which you seem to have only half gotten, is that unfortunately whenever someone talks about not having options to legally purchase content, invariably you'll have a ton of people showing up to link to Hulu, Netflix, Amazon MP3, etc - completely ignoring that said solutions are not available to, well, most of the world. I've yet to see someone on Slashdot start talking about how iPlayer has the content they want so clearly that is the solution.
You actually do a better job of proving the original point that options are not available by doing that (as well as raising the ire of internationals who get reeeeeally sick of Americans whining about there not being good enough options for getting TV and Music when they have so many good options available - I'm not saying you were doing this by the way).
For what it's worth, that GP also mentioned Craigslist so we can probably safely assume they're American - but still, every time someone goes on about awesome stuff like Amazon MP3 or Netflix, it might be a good idea to prepend that "if you're in the promised land" so that internationals are forewarned that they're about to be bitterly fucking disappointed - as usual.
And I say this from one of the only two countries apart from the US to have Pandora.
True. Google's toolbar if you enable the opt-in features sends every single webpage you visit to them.
(Again note that it's opt-in, same as Bing's).