Grabbing a message from the stream is not that hard. Yes.
Getting access to a pile of email that was sent over the course of days to years, I believe, is a much bigger issue. The stream takes good timing, access and preparation. Access to inbox or other folders of an entire email collection is scary. If the private sign leaves the stored email it will allow providers to do what they will with these email documents in the collections of users. Sending a message to a friend about a need for a product could turn into a barrage of ads for same or competing products. Storing old messages with idle threats with a buddy could turn into law suits. There could be corporate theft of ideas and more. How about getting fired from a job for idle discussions of other things you think about regarding other lines of work or even a competing company. Then there are the criminal cases that could be setup against you for some idle "what-if" messages with a child, friend, or co-worker. Information and insight about an individual could cause all kinds of difficulties in the wrong hands. If I wanted someone to be party to a conversation, I would have sent the message to that party when I wrote it.
Email server ownership is a big help in these times. "Guilty until proven Innocent" is the opponent of privacy laws and practice. I do not have the time to waste proving every little aspect of my life was not a crime just because someone came into a conversation late, reading their own storyline into my existence. As it is now in consumer America, I have to open boxes at the checkout counter just to ensure the actual item purchased is in the box, and not just floor tiles. I also have to call phone and credit companies over charges that were added in error. Do I need to mention the corrections on food from a drive through, even after seeing the list in perfect order on the screen before getting to the window?
Being closer to a theorist though, I am looking at the Hypervisor taking part in the new unconstitutional legal system, where the hardware will also provide a virtual snoop. GWBOS will boot from the network, no local files needed, and potential for mass observation.
You thought Sony's root kit was something? Try the hardwired version in the hardware.
You can call people crazy for this kind of conjecture, but now it is all "legal" for the moment. What executive orders or classified "requests" are being fed to hardware makers as you read this? I am not trolling for political screamers. There is now a law on the books this very moment that would allow this type of thing.
As far as I am concerned, no company that white-lists "entities" is in security.
White-listing processes/applications/files/data is not global, and is the only level for security. White-listing a company or organization is never an option. It is politics.
This was a blatant attempt by the weak Bushie AG to push his view of Bush. He wants the thinking that Bush is "trying to succeed" to be treated like he "is succeeding".
They are however a single corporation that multiple high contact sites are using. The part that raises flags with me is this one corporation is getting usage information with IP addresses from all of the users. I have yet to see a company that I would trust with even my power-on schedule, much less my entire DNS lookup list for each and every thing I do on the internet. Akamai is the reason I switched away from Zone Alarm for client side firewalls. ZA overrode the DNS settings to use Akamai servers.
This has nothing to do with Carrier Net Neutrality. Wire owners are the target, not data service providers.
I make heavy personal use of Asterisk PBX software. It allows my blacklisting unwanted calls. It also allows my own system of "follow-me" call forwarding to pass calls to my cell if the home extensions fail to answer.
Scheduling a call with the cron daemon is pretty easy. A kind of wake up service is also fairly easy to setup. With a cordless phone for home use, this could call said extension at various times of the day. When you answer the call, you would have to press a number or something to confirm that you are fine. Failing to press the number, it could make second attempts in case there was just fumbling, like a followup call within a minute or two. Failing more than once, it could email people, send calls to people, play a recorded message for each call appropriate for the target of the "notification". With the use of a cell phone, it could even check on you when away from home since it could work like any automated phone call/customer service line. Besides having a phone ring to wake you up in the middle of the night, hampering your sleep, I do not know how much help it would be in the night time hours. The cordless phones out now could cover most of people's small yards as well. It can also be easy to "911" yourself carrying it around with you, and with a little more effort, when you call 911, it could make other calls automatcally for you. Think 911 with a custom menu for types of emergencies with phone and email notifications to work with.
The mutltiple notice to people for multiple types of needs using multiple methods of communication could be of some help. Cell phone calls to my house, being identified as my cell phone via "caller id", I get prompted with a menu to allow me to cause things to happen, when any other call would ring the phones in the house. A cell phone speed dial could be setup to call home and cause functions to occur using said "menus" which are limited by what you can get a pc to execute. (email, phone call outbound recordings, serial cable control for some devices, IR controls of something near the computer with a TV universal remote function....)
Some of these ideas could enable automated response testing, and easy one button emergency notification. The GPS portion could be handled by recorded messages from cell phone orginating "emergency button" to mention the cell phone number/carrier to emergency contacts for use in tracking. Not so automated in that respect, but seems to be a workable solution.
"Why would a company release unfavorable reviews..."
And why should anyone care about one-sided views of anything. I would rather have both sides to get a full picture instead of PR crap like this bias. Thank you though for bringing my point to the surface.
"This can be any company though"
Which is why I used the term "companies". I do not believe "evil" was mentioned until your statement.
The common sense to which you should refer is not that companies are biased toward their own products, but that consumers should not care what a company states in regards to their own products. Go to a third-party that is not paid by the owner if you want review or opinion. Look for a balanced study or review.
Didn't I see a study that states companies (MS in this case) are less likely to release studies where the numbers reflect poorly on the company or it's products/services?
This is just a reflection of the current US mindset. Yahoo, while harming a couple individuals, is spreading the "freedom" out to many. This is just like our own government monitors watching their own people and their daily activities. It may cause harm to many innocents while taking down a terrorist or two.
Though the nation was founded by those who think this is WRONG to harm innocents in the process of justice, those in charge don't mind. (the sheep do not matter....)
First thing into my head was "You guys are from NASA!!" from "Conspiracy Theory".
Is the MPAA trying to get more ways to play their game and push their protections? Or is Google going to back some of these in an attempt to beat out authors in their battle to scan books for their new search toys for Book Searches? Or for that matter, is another search site going to use this to battle Google in the Book Bin?
Trust NO ONE!! (I wish I could still sleep...... That basic book burner thing just does not do it for me.)
This seems like any other denial of service attack to the BT users.
This is vigilantism. I am not even a BT user, but how is this different from a DoS attack on a web server or any other portion of machines connected? From the descriptions of the fragments, and slow downloads, it seems disruptive. No matter if you have an issue with someone's activities, a DoS attack is still not a valid way to tread.
This is one behind the corporate effort to keep software toys out of the hands of the users(students and more). He cannot even see that the ones that "Cannot Play" with his toys do not gain interest in creating his toys under his watchful eye.
Hmm..
Maybe it is not sinking in. I give it five more years and 50% fewer employees.
Come On! How can there be R & D without the legal ability to "DO" R & D?
"Your Rights Online" to me, includes the change in definitions that MS is giving common terms which effect my rights online. By changing the terms spyware and adware, and their associated types of programs/software, weakening views by the public of their level of invasion into MY business/life, my rights are affected. Especially with society accepting a shrinking list of things associated with these terms, it IS a rights issue. These are the accepted definitions used in my fights throughout the rest of my life online to protect MY possessions and lifestyle.
This may not be a free speech issue, but it is a Rights Issue. With these and many other marketing PR stunts, one cannot even look at the word "FREE" anymore and still believe it means "without cost". Why? Because the Microsofts of all the other industries have succeeded in passing on their changes to this and many other words to protect themselves and confuse the public.
FREE does not mean FREE, and now they are trying to make Adware not mean Adware, and Spyware not mean Spyware.
You say "Use some other tool". I say "Tell the world to switch from gasoline engines". That would be just as easy, since this country is full of corner Hydrogen pumps, and Radio Shack Fuel Cell stands. Yeah, right... (or has MS bought auto factories and started the "Pollution is good for you" campaign? or the "If there is 2% gasoline in the liquid, it really is GAS and will not hurt the hardware" campaign?)
By changing their "recommendation" to "Ignore" from "Remove", they are stating from what MUST be a knowlegible view that Gator does not take anything away from the computing environment or power. This is not accurate for the majority of instances that CAN occur, and they do not clarify what the specifics are in the one case it might be accurate. Telling me to Ignore the Gator spyware is an attempt to place the one person out of 1000 (a generous stat off the top of my head) that wants the software, and labelling them as the majority of those choosing. That is not logically accurate, anymore than the "Free Rent" signs on apartment complexes.
By trying to define for the rest of us what the term "Your Rights Online" means with your specific view of this topic, you are no better than the PR you comment on. (Not any worse either.)
This was a threat. It does not come off to me like a plea to users. He is saying they will not, not "cannot", put out decent content if they cannot protect it to the point of keeping their overpaid companies in business. There is no value to the content they have been putting out recently. Re-hashed content from the past, like it was a part of the business model they came up with when the first recording abilities showed up in their arsenal. They were thinking, "Allright, we no longer have to fill every minute with new content. What's more, we can use past content with new versions using new actors and new modern phrases and send the same content out. The longer we last, the less we have to do."
We can do one of two things, (without giving in to these media terrorists). Learn to live without the media mind killer, (not likely with most people I know), or start another corporate killing industry of Open Source or Shareware media. Not media making apps, but produce the content ourselves. Writing Open Source software is something people are doing out of need in many cases due to the lack of innovation or lack of "perfect fit". Not everyone does this, but those that do are helping millions of others. Why not media content? As it has been stated again and again by many, including these corporate babies, the ability to make and distribute media content is no longer a "corporate only" ability. Many are making content, but not enough to cover all the demand.
Where are all those people that cannot watch a show or listen to a tune without saying all the things that could have been done better? Explain to them how open that field is. All of you with these tech toys need to get with these creative minds and help them put their thoughts to content.
I take all my stuff, place it around my residence and something comes to life. That is fact, not resemblance of any intelligence.
I would rather see this like the thoughts behind "Men In Black". We could be the mold in the corner of the Galaxy of junk. Piles of "stuff" tends to grow something when the right pieces of "stuff" comes together....
We do not even have the means to understand or know enough that would be considered even a "mark on a ruler" of the universe. Why would anyone believe otherwise without any measurable level of evidence or knowledge?
A nanometer is not a mark on the milage counter of this universe.
My wonderful childhood memories are screaming at this one. No scanning without your knowledge leads me to think the life that follows implantation consists of..
"STOP TOUCHING ME!!QUIT IT!!STOP TOUCHING ME!!" and if I recall... "MOM, HE'S TOUCHING ME!!"
There is also a consideration for "un-intelligent" users that may get trojans or virii. The upload cap being low will keep evil things from spreading as quickly from "their customers" equipment. This keeps thier ISP service out of the blacklists when things go bad. Also legal feedback when things go bad will be minimized.
Ignoring the mis-picked term or misspelling, being a P2P hub was I would think a little different. Serving gigabytes of data can be done from a single floppy of local storage. Don't the links/paths to data that reside on another machine in any locale count as "serving"?
Mention the grammer, but don't hound the guy/gal.
The main servers could have been in Bermuda for all they said.
In a world of Ad-driven economies, with commercials and ads created for their hidden details to pass legal inspection, why would anyone expect illegal and invalid scams to not catch the eye of a consumer.
I drive by apartment complexes daily with "FREE RENT" written all over them. That is an oxymoron. Legal passed it, but it is another language than the english I was taught. It is a non-email scam.
Scams can simply be beat by the removal of obfuscation from society. The blinders are on. I just wish I was as untrusting as I and all others should be. I do not trust email. I do not trust web-sites. I still use 800 numbers off my billing.
Securing one's own pc is the responsibility of the user, yes. Knowingly offering viral code on your site does not conflict with that user responsibility. Identity theft is as bad and in cases just as deadly as a real virus.
If the user has to be responsible for his system, the operators must be just as responsible for their servers.
If any site knowingly has infected code offered on their system, and they continue to offer the code, and it infects any machines under my view, there WILL be hell to pay. Failure to disclose will ensure this. Disclosure and removal/closure is the only safety they will have from any I know!
Second, the article used other sources as well what as the linked study mentioned, and virii and trojans named from other sources. These virii and trojans were NOT linux related. They do not infect linux PCs (unless some windows emulator is doing too "good" a job). They do however, infect Windows PCs.
The problem overall listed here is nothing more than "people do not read the directions for anything they use, unless they get NOWHERE without reading/learning".
This is a big problem with people in general, and it will not change in this generation. The SPAM problem will remain as long as there are people in too much of a rush to learn, and as long as the current email system is in place.
The fact that they put up the money without a real fight, could be their attempt at an example to the courts of what their own targeted "offenders" are supposed to be doing.
"We Own Linux. Pay Us If You Are Using It! You Have Been Caught Too."
Slashdot Mirror
Grabbing a message from the stream is not that hard. Yes.
Getting access to a pile of email that was sent over the course of days to years, I believe, is a much bigger issue. The stream takes good timing, access and preparation. Access to inbox or other folders of an entire email collection is scary. If the private sign leaves the stored email it will allow providers to do what they will with these email documents in the collections of users. Sending a message to a friend about a need for a product could turn into a barrage of ads for same or competing products. Storing old messages with idle threats with a buddy could turn into law suits. There could be corporate theft of ideas and more. How about getting fired from a job for idle discussions of other things you think about regarding other lines of work or even a competing company. Then there are the criminal cases that could be setup against you for some idle "what-if" messages with a child, friend, or co-worker. Information and insight about an individual could cause all kinds of difficulties in the wrong hands. If I wanted someone to be party to a conversation, I would have sent the message to that party when I wrote it.
Email server ownership is a big help in these times. "Guilty until proven Innocent" is the opponent of privacy laws and practice. I do not have the time to waste proving every little aspect of my life was not a crime just because someone came into a conversation late, reading their own storyline into my existence. As it is now in consumer America, I have to open boxes at the checkout counter just to ensure the actual item purchased is in the box, and not just floor tiles. I also have to call phone and credit companies over charges that were added in error. Do I need to mention the corrections on food from a drive through, even after seeing the list in perfect order on the screen before getting to the window?
Do not add to my itinerary, as it is full.
How is this protection of children?????
1) Concerned someone is eyeing your child.
2) Allow thousands to eye your child to protect your child from being eyed?
3) ???
4) Guess who profits?
Agreed. Completely.
Being closer to a theorist though, I am looking at the Hypervisor taking part in the new unconstitutional legal system, where the hardware will also provide a virtual snoop. GWBOS will boot from the network, no local files needed, and potential for mass observation.
You thought Sony's root kit was something? Try the hardwired version in the hardware.
You can call people crazy for this kind of conjecture, but now it is all "legal" for the moment. What executive orders or classified "requests" are being fed to hardware makers as you read this? I am not trolling for political screamers. There is now a law on the books this very moment that would allow this type of thing.
As far as I am concerned, no company that white-lists "entities" is in security.
White-listing processes/applications/files/data is not global, and is the only level for security. White-listing a company or organization is never an option. It is politics.
This was a blatant attempt by the weak Bushie AG to push his view of Bush. He wants the thinking that Bush is "trying to succeed" to be treated like he "is succeeding".
I see through you Alberto!!!
They are not the carrier, yes.
They are however a single corporation that multiple high contact sites are using. The part that raises flags with me is this one corporation is getting usage information with IP addresses from all of the users. I have yet to see a company that I would trust with even my power-on schedule, much less my entire DNS lookup list for each and every thing I do on the internet. Akamai is the reason I switched away from Zone Alarm for client side firewalls. ZA overrode the DNS settings to use Akamai servers.
This has nothing to do with Carrier Net Neutrality. Wire owners are the target, not data service providers.
1-.98
I make heavy personal use of Asterisk PBX software. It allows my blacklisting unwanted calls. It also allows my own system of "follow-me" call forwarding to pass calls to my cell if the home extensions fail to answer.
Scheduling a call with the cron daemon is pretty easy. A kind of wake up service is also fairly easy to setup. With a cordless phone for home use, this could call said extension at various times of the day. When you answer the call, you would have to press a number or something to confirm that you are fine. Failing to press the number, it could make second attempts in case there was just fumbling, like a followup call within a minute or two. Failing more than once, it could email people, send calls to people, play a recorded message for each call appropriate for the target of the "notification". With the use of a cell phone, it could even check on you when away from home since it could work like any automated phone call/customer service line. Besides having a phone ring to wake you up in the middle of the night, hampering your sleep, I do not know how much help it would be in the night time hours. The cordless phones out now could cover most of people's small yards as well. It can also be easy to "911" yourself carrying it around with you, and with a little more effort, when you call 911, it could make other calls automatcally for you. Think 911 with a custom menu for types of emergencies with phone and email notifications to work with.
The mutltiple notice to people for multiple types of needs using multiple methods of communication could be of some help. Cell phone calls to my house, being identified as my cell phone via "caller id", I get prompted with a menu to allow me to cause things to happen, when any other call would ring the phones in the house. A cell phone speed dial could be setup to call home and cause functions to occur using said "menus" which are limited by what you can get a pc to execute. (email, phone call outbound recordings, serial cable control for some devices, IR controls of something near the computer with a TV universal remote function....)
Some of these ideas could enable automated response testing, and easy one button emergency notification. The GPS portion could be handled by recorded messages from cell phone orginating "emergency button" to mention the cell phone number/carrier to emergency contacts for use in tracking. Not so automated in that respect, but seems to be a workable solution.
"Why would a company release unfavorable reviews..."
And why should anyone care about one-sided views of anything. I would rather have both sides to get a full picture instead of PR crap like this bias. Thank you though for bringing my point to the surface.
"This can be any company though"
Which is why I used the term "companies". I do not believe "evil" was mentioned until your statement.
The common sense to which you should refer is not that companies are biased toward their own products, but that consumers should not care what a company states in regards to their own products. Go to a third-party that is not paid by the owner if you want review or opinion. Look for a balanced study or review.
Didn't I see a study that states companies (MS in this case) are less likely to release studies where the numbers reflect poorly on the company or it's products/services?
This is just a reflection of the current US mindset. Yahoo, while harming a couple individuals, is spreading the "freedom" out to many. This is just like our own government monitors watching their own people and their daily activities. It may cause harm to many innocents while taking down a terrorist or two.
Though the nation was founded by those who think this is WRONG to harm innocents in the process of justice, those in charge don't mind. (the sheep do not matter....)
Why is having a hyperlink to someone's site any more criminal than a politician hitting the national/worldwide news services in an election year?
Google only points to sites. The politician is pointing to google as a pointer to the same sites he says should not be pointed to.
The politician is even advertising to people with and without internet access.
First thing into my head was "You guys are from NASA!!" from "Conspiracy Theory".
Is the MPAA trying to get more ways to play their game and push their protections? Or is Google going to back some of these in an attempt to beat out authors in their battle to scan books for their new search toys for Book Searches? Or for that matter, is another search site going to use this to battle Google in the Book Bin?
Trust NO ONE!! (I wish I could still sleep...... That basic book burner thing just does not do it for me.)
mod me down
This seems like any other denial of service attack to the BT users.
This is vigilantism. I am not even a BT user, but how is this different from a DoS attack on a web server or any other portion of machines connected? From the descriptions of the fragments, and slow downloads, it seems disruptive. No matter if you have an issue with someone's activities, a DoS attack is still not a valid way to tread.
But what do I know..
This is one behind the corporate effort to keep software toys out of the hands of the users(students and more). He cannot even see that the ones that "Cannot Play" with his toys do not gain interest in creating his toys under his watchful eye.
Hmm..
Maybe it is not sinking in. I give it five more years and 50% fewer employees.
Come On! How can there be R & D without the legal ability to "DO" R & D?
"Your Rights Online" to me, includes the change in definitions that MS is giving common terms which effect my rights online. By changing the terms spyware and adware, and their associated types of programs/software, weakening views by the public of their level of invasion into MY business/life, my rights are affected. Especially with society accepting a shrinking list of things associated with these terms, it IS a rights issue. These are the accepted definitions used in my fights throughout the rest of my life online to protect MY possessions and lifestyle.
This may not be a free speech issue, but it is a Rights Issue. With these and many other marketing PR stunts, one cannot even look at the word "FREE" anymore and still believe it means "without cost". Why? Because the Microsofts of all the other industries have succeeded in passing on their changes to this and many other words to protect themselves and confuse the public.
FREE does not mean FREE, and now they are trying to make Adware not mean Adware, and Spyware not mean Spyware.
You say "Use some other tool". I say "Tell the world to switch from gasoline engines". That would be just as easy, since this country is full of corner Hydrogen pumps, and Radio Shack Fuel Cell stands. Yeah, right... (or has MS bought auto factories and started the "Pollution is good for you" campaign? or the "If there is 2% gasoline in the liquid, it really is GAS and will not hurt the hardware" campaign?)
By changing their "recommendation" to "Ignore" from "Remove", they are stating from what MUST be a knowlegible view that Gator does not take anything away from the computing environment or power. This is not accurate for the majority of instances that CAN occur, and they do not clarify what the specifics are in the one case it might be accurate. Telling me to Ignore the Gator spyware is an attempt to place the one person out of 1000 (a generous stat off the top of my head) that wants the software, and labelling them as the majority of those choosing. That is not logically accurate, anymore than the "Free Rent" signs on apartment complexes.
By trying to define for the rest of us what the term "Your Rights Online" means with your specific view of this topic, you are no better than the PR you comment on. (Not any worse either.)
just my views.. DO NOT STOP MAKING YOUR VIEWS!
This was a threat. It does not come off to me like a plea to users. He is saying they will not, not "cannot", put out decent content if they cannot protect it to the point of keeping their overpaid companies in business. There is no value to the content they have been putting out recently. Re-hashed content from the past, like it was a part of the business model they came up with when the first recording abilities showed up in their arsenal. They were thinking, "Allright, we no longer have to fill every minute with new content. What's more, we can use past content with new versions using new actors and new modern phrases and send the same content out. The longer we last, the less we have to do."
We can do one of two things, (without giving in to these media terrorists). Learn to live without the media mind killer, (not likely with most people I know), or start another corporate killing industry of Open Source or Shareware media. Not media making apps, but produce the content ourselves. Writing Open Source software is something people are doing out of need in many cases due to the lack of innovation or lack of "perfect fit". Not everyone does this, but those that do are helping millions of others. Why not media content? As it has been stated again and again by many, including these corporate babies, the ability to make and distribute media content is no longer a "corporate only" ability. Many are making content, but not enough to cover all the demand.
Where are all those people that cannot watch a show or listen to a tune without saying all the things that could have been done better? Explain to them how open that field is. All of you with these tech toys need to get with these creative minds and help them put their thoughts to content.
I hope some listen.
I take all my stuff, place it around my residence and something comes to life. That is fact, not resemblance of any intelligence.
I would rather see this like the thoughts behind "Men In Black". We could be the mold in the corner of the Galaxy of junk. Piles of "stuff" tends to grow something when the right pieces of "stuff" comes together....
We do not even have the means to understand or know enough that would be considered even a "mark on a ruler" of the universe. Why would anyone believe otherwise without any measurable level of evidence or knowledge?
A nanometer is not a mark on the milage counter of this universe.
My wonderful childhood memories are screaming at this one. No scanning without your knowledge leads me to think the life that follows implantation consists of..
"STOP TOUCHING ME!!QUIT IT!!STOP TOUCHING ME!!"
and if I recall...
"MOM, HE'S TOUCHING ME!!"
Don't live in the past.
I suppose this was due to an End-Donatee-Server-License spelled out in Bill's large personal donation to the cause....
There is also a consideration for "un-intelligent" users that may get trojans or virii. The upload cap being low will keep evil things from spreading as quickly from "their customers" equipment. This keeps thier ISP service out of the blacklists when things go bad. Also legal feedback when things go bad will be minimized.
Ignoring the mis-picked term or misspelling, being a P2P hub was I would think a little different. Serving gigabytes of data can be done from a single floppy of local storage. Don't the links/paths to data that reside on another machine in any locale count as "serving"?
Mention the grammer, but don't hound the guy/gal.
The main servers could have been in Bermuda for all they said.
In a world of Ad-driven economies, with commercials and ads created for their hidden details to pass legal inspection, why would anyone expect illegal and invalid scams to not catch the eye of a consumer.
I drive by apartment complexes daily with "FREE RENT" written all over them. That is an oxymoron. Legal passed it, but it is another language than the english I was taught. It is a non-email scam.
Scams can simply be beat by the removal of obfuscation from society. The blinders are on. I just wish I was as untrusting as I and all others should be. I do not trust email. I do not trust web-sites. I still use 800 numbers off my billing.
wake up and move on
Securing one's own pc is the responsibility of the user, yes. Knowingly offering viral code on your site does not conflict with that user responsibility. Identity theft is as bad and in cases just as deadly as a real virus.
If the user has to be responsible for his system, the operators must be just as responsible for their servers.
If any site knowingly has infected code offered on their system, and they continue to offer the code, and it infects any machines under my view, there WILL be hell to pay. Failure to disclose will ensure this. Disclosure and removal/closure is the only safety they will have from any I know!
First, you read the study, not the article.
Second, the article used other sources as well what as the linked study mentioned, and virii and trojans named from other sources. These virii and trojans were NOT linux related. They do not infect linux PCs (unless some windows emulator is doing too "good" a job). They do however, infect Windows PCs.
The problem overall listed here is nothing more than "people do not read the directions for anything they use, unless they get NOWHERE without reading/learning".
This is a big problem with people in general, and it will not change in this generation. The SPAM problem will remain as long as there are people in too much of a rush to learn, and as long as the current email system is in place.
The fact that they put up the money without a real fight, could be their attempt at an example to the courts of what their own targeted "offenders" are supposed to be doing.
"We Own Linux. Pay Us If You Are Using It! You Have Been Caught Too."