Shadow Six 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (220) comment rss

  • On the post: Details Of How The DC Online Voting System Was Hacked: Small Vulnerability, Huge Consequences

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2010 @ 11:27am

    Re: Re: How?

    I'm sure it can be done, if you used a VM or some other insulated package. The point here is, for 3xA security, the System call is should never be a first tier solution. Especially to such a common task. Using libs (o/dll) to invoke or expose the desired functionality without commitment is always preferred over nixing security domains all together.

    What company was responsible for this App?

  • On the post: Details Of How The DC Online Voting System Was Hacked: Small Vulnerability, Huge Consequences

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2010 @ 11:12am

    Re: Re: Re: How?

    This serves as prior art :)

  • On the post: Astronaut Sues Dido For Using His Photo In Album Cover

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2010 @ 10:58am

    Jurisdiction?

    Hmm I thought that, as in most cases, where the photo was taken has Jurisdiction? As in, if you photo some celeb in Fla. they have no case in California.

    I think I remember reading that...

  • On the post: Details Of How The DC Online Voting System Was Hacked: Small Vulnerability, Huge Consequences

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2010 @ 09:38am

    How?

    I hate to be this guy, on a forum that's topically legal in nature, but this is so old school, I cant stand it.

    I'm astounded that any security minded architect would use the command line interface for anything at all. Even the disk written to has a viable interface wrapper in any language take your pick. I'm not saying there aren't vulnerabilities mind you. What I *am* saying is that upload of anything must be reproduced by the applications software in a DMZ before entering the data handler. That's 101 since forever. I'm really surprised at this level, given the sensitivity of the data, and the obvious vector for attack, that these methods would be employed at all? Call HP or someone that does a security audit of source code design before handing over tax payer money. This would have been identified in the initial sweep.

    On the other hand, I recon we just aint gonna trust them fangled computers to make Democracy. We just aint got the technology. Oh well, suppose electing them politicians/lobbyists is the best we gonna get.

  • On the post: Will The Supreme Court Review Patent Invalidation Standard In Microsoft vs. i4i Case?

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 01 Oct, 2010 @ 03:16pm

    My heart weeps

    Seeing as how MS is one of the reasons we have this mess right now, I find it difficult to see how they're going to spin this. They essentially want a ruling that says "it's ok when we do it, but not when it's done to us". I point to the EU, and the intense lobbying MS funded over there. They also pillage billions every year for blanket "protection" from their IP goons.

    Sooooooo yeah, fuck em.

  • On the post: Patent Lawsuit Fight Over Who Has The Right To Sell Paris Hilton Hair Extensions

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 01 Oct, 2010 @ 01:47pm

    Re: Re: HairBrains!

    wait... it's a prosthetic mullet?

  • On the post: Is It Too Difficult To Expect The Press To Understand The Difference Between Patents And Copyright?

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 29 Sep, 2010 @ 07:07am

    EveryDog

    Considering they're in a copyright industry, you would expect them to know the difference. I can understand though, the patent system today is all about make believe and sci-fi. Who can dream up an inevitable feature for an existing product, then race to the patent office, with starry eyed optimism. Thinking you're shrewed enough..

    I'm waiting for the counter suit, when EveryScape gets hit with EveryPatent in Adobes portfolio and has to fork over EveryThing. I wonder if the press will copy paste this article or act like it's a discovery :)

  • On the post: Vast Majority Of Software Patents In Lawsuits Lose

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2010 @ 10:08pm

    Re: Software patents and NPEs

    +1

  • On the post: Woman Trademarks Her Name, Says No One Can Use It Without Her Permission

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2010 @ 11:27am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: with all due respect

    mmm. I think this thread is dead, so I'll leave this for another day. But, that distinction just doesn't sit right with me, for a number of reasons..

  • On the post: Fox News Sues Senate Candidate For Using Clip In Commercial

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2010 @ 10:51am

    Re: Re:

    I can't help but notice how those who like to say that you always this or that.... ALWAYS say the opposite of this or that. You could be bloging about Wal-Mart's lawyers throwing dying children out onto the street for using the word Mart at a bake sale, and one of these A-hole Lawyer/lobbyists would be right there, "sigh"ing and telling everyone that you don't know what your talking about. After how many years of studying law, is it even possible that you don't have a clue? Unless you have stage 4 Alzheimer's it's rhetoric about rhetoric.

  • On the post: Woman Trademarks Her Name, Says No One Can Use It Without Her Permission

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2010 @ 10:03am

    with all due respect

    Mike, I fail to see how copyright and patents are lumped together. One excludes use of an instance of a work, where the other excludes use of an entire concept, irrespective of an instance of a given work. They're both clearly out of hand, but there are few show stoppers born out of copyright, where patent law prohibits competition in many, many areas that simply cant be worked around.

  • On the post: Why It's Important Not To Call Copyright Infringement Theft

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 14 Sep, 2010 @ 08:08pm

    Re: Re: Once again, this is about a distinction frequently not made

    ok, so... 15 "stolen" songs is petty theft. Not a 300 trillion dollar offense. I'll call it theft if you can except that reality.

  • On the post: How Social Mores Can Deal With 'Unfair' Copying, Even In Absence Of Copyright

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 12 Sep, 2010 @ 09:18am

    Re: Re:

    is a photographer an "artist"?

  • On the post: Microsoft's Patent On Fast Shutdowns Shows Why Windows Is So Slow To Shut Down

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 02 Sep, 2010 @ 09:54pm

    Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!

    I'm happy you finally admit that people are patenting ideas... Thats a big step for you, I know. Everyone, a round of applause for Darryl's breakthrough!

  • On the post: LucasFilm Skips The Jedi Mind Trick And Just Straight Up Sues 'Jedi Mind'

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 23 Aug, 2010 @ 01:19pm

    wait, what?

    How is this a slam dunk? I mean if they don't own Jedi ... that's like the red baron suing red robin?

  • On the post: Why Debates Over Copyright Get Bogged Down: Conflating Use With Payment

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 21 Aug, 2010 @ 03:23pm

    Re: Re: Copyright

    yyyyeah, I honestly didn't know they wanted to "control how I listen to music"... I thought I just purchased a license to be bound by fair use? I seriously always thought, that DRM was just some experiment that went tits up in 03. Why do they even want it? Most everyone, would rather pay more for DRM free music, so they can copy it to their non-apple devices when they get them. I just always presumed that the industry figured that out, and that DRM was some Jobsian Megalomania issue. Interesting... So, who controls the rights? Apple, The recording company, the publisher, a separate "digital" publisher and the Artist? There are a lot of legacy entitlements to feed off of 99 cents.

    I'm just curious BTW... I don't see how this can work out for everyone. From a business standpoint, it seems that most of those relationships are like "pimps" middle men, that should be eliminated when craigslist gave prostitutes a way to sell their "wares" without standing on street corners. hmm, I guess the difference is, pimps don't have a lobby.

  • On the post: Why Debates Over Copyright Get Bogged Down: Conflating Use With Payment

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 21 Aug, 2010 @ 03:03pm

    Re: Re: Re: Copyright.

    "What we have right now, is actually very sad. It denies inventors the right to make money on their own intellect."

    Think about it, (I) conceive -> toil -> (finally)create -> publish -> hire support-> hire developers -> draw up designs for the next version -> fire everyone so I can pay lawyers to defend myself from several companies that contact me in sideways insinuations that I'm violating their "Intellectual Property", which covers everything ever developed that accesses a database. What's worse, they don't even come out and say it! Because it's triple the 200 bijillion dollar award, if they succeed in playing those smarmy little word games. Yeah, I'd say that's denying a creator the ability to profit from his work. Having idea Monopolies is a far, far greater crime against upward mobility, than just copying an instance of my work. They're not PREVENTING me from selling the next copy, or threatening to take something away from my existing customers. (Who are also liable for the same bijillian dollar claim.) How the hell am I supposed to know who has what IP, everyone has EVERYTHING locked. You HAVE no choice but to infringe just by opening up the compiler, you infringe on a number of patents held by (big company, small acronym, with oceanic color in its namesake title).

  • On the post: Why Debates Over Copyright Get Bogged Down: Conflating Use With Payment

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 21 Aug, 2010 @ 11:00am

    Re: Copyright.

    "That is what created the Technological quality of life that we have today."

    Even if that were the case, how do you accredit whats happened in the last 20 years with patents, to the state that the software and other technically innovative industries today?

    See, it went the wrong way... rather than extending more and more IP protections to an ever broader scope, they should have reigned in IP, to encourage competition. What we have right now, is actually very sad. It denies inventors the right to make money on their own intellect. That, as you eloquently put it, is a crime.

    On that point we agree.

  • On the post: Patent Office Back To Approving Pretty Much Anything

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 20 Aug, 2010 @ 05:04pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    But hey, seriously.. though we may disagree, you have conducted your self with grace and composure.

    Kudos

  • On the post: Patent Office Back To Approving Pretty Much Anything

    Shadow Six ( profile ), 20 Aug, 2010 @ 05:00pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Ok, you and I did the exact same thing, I went the other way though. Seeing how crazy the system has gone, it makes me wonder if I should have went the other route. Not for profit as much as activism. Anyway, I'm just saying that, much as you just pointed out. Very Often, especially, at the turn of the century, the lingo was made up on the spot. No one at the USPTO really knew what they were doing. It was impossible actually, since the field of technology advances at light speed. Which is why we need relief from 20 year monopolies over concepts. They HAVE let lots of bad patents through. I don't speculate vis-a-vis their motive.

Next >>