I think that a lot of the posts about these seizures show that there are serious problems with (or at least questions about) seizing domain names without a trial. I'd like to know what can be done about it. Are there any suggestions on what readers can do to prevent more of these seizures? Should we contact our representatives, can we contact the judge or ICE? What options are there to stop this or slow it down?
I believe ESPN plays this song from time to time on Sportscenter going into or out of commercials. I'm definitely not sure of that but the artist and song title sound familiar and I think I saw them on Sportscenter.
I hope this isn't the last we hear about him. I'm hoping that we see some sort of class action lawsuit from the victims of his extortion campaign. I would love to see Crosley, ACS, and all of their copyright-holding clients be the targets of a lawsuit to repay all the victims of this extortion scheme.
I wonder what he would think if his site was shut down without a trial or hearing. The people at ICE don't really seem to do much fact checking before seizing sites; so what if his competition convinced ICE agents that his site was full of counterfeit items and he had no chance to ever defend himself. He should consider what it's like to be on the other side of these laws before blindly supporting them.
In my area we have our cable provider and now Verizon FIOS. I made a quick call to my cable provider saying that I was switching to FIOS and they took $30/month off my bill for the next year. If we didn't have FIOS then the cable provider wouldn't have any incentive to cut me a deal. The prices are better if you ask for it in my area.
Well that really clears it up for the FCC. Because the first ever open source OS is only available on wireless phones so they don't have to make rules regarding wireless.
By their logic, if there was ever an open source operating system that could be installed on wired devices then they wouldn't have to make rules on wired services either. Unfortunately Linux and other FOSS operating systems have never existed in wired devices.
I think there's a few other possible reasons for this - the first is that most representatives suck at representing the people. They usually represent one extreme or the other and a lot of people can't identify with those views.
The second reason is that just getting one lonely representative in office won't do much to affect policy. If I could pay to get any rep of my choosing into a power position then that would probably be worth it. But just getting either one of the two crazy puppets in my district into office is a waste of money.
Wikileaks is the same as spam e-mails. Every year some law enforcement agency says they've arrested a "spam king" who sent 30% of the world's spam. Within a week or two everyone's inboxes are full of spam again. Taking down one person just keeps money funneling into law enforcement and PR.
If airports and airplanes are so important that everyone needs to be scanned, then I think our politicians should be protected in the same way.
I vote for a new law that requires these nude scanners and enhanced pat downs at all federal buildings in Washington DC. Every congressman, senator, aide, lobbyist, and visitor should be scanned and groped to protect our wonderful representatives.
I have quite a few relatives in the area that the North Country Gazette serves, and most of the publication's audience doesn't have a great understanding of computers, the internet, or any applicable laws. I'm guessing that this warning may be enough to scare a few people away from their site. But it probably won't do anything to get more people to give them money.
I'm not a big Twitter user, but I do see the value in it. However, I don't see anything on the surface of Twitter that would actually be a new technological invention or innovation. They have a neat service, but limiting the length of a user's message isn't really an invention it's just dealing with limitations of some cell phones. It leads to a lot of fun and creativity, but it's not an invention. Maybe they invented something on the back end that I'm not aware of.
Very true. Breitbart's intent was to show the crowd's reaction, and not to claim that Sherrod was a racist. I can't stand Breitbart, but it is important to get the facts straight.
If Breitbart can be sued for defamation, then he should also be able to sue the news stations that took his message and intent out of context as well. He never meant to attack or defame Sherrod, but to show the crowd's reaction. So his message has been taken out of context just as Sherrod's quotes were taken out of context.
Cutting people off is still dangerous. If you draw a parallel to home phones - lets say it's the 1980's or 90's and some kids were making prank calls so politicians decide "lets take away their phones!" What would they do in the case of an emergency without a phone?
If you look at the situation today - what would you do in the event of a minor medical scare? What if you can't get on the internet to look up the names and numbers of doctors, poison control, the location of a hospital? I don't own a phone book and I would have a tough time looking up emergency information short of calling 911. You can try 411 or the operator but it would waste a large amount of time that could lead to disaster.
Clearly by this standard Microsoft should be able to sue every company with "soft" in their name. You might get confused between them and every other software company, and every soft serve ice cream shop... mmm mint chocolate Windows.