jdc’s Techdirt Profile


About jdc

jdc’s Comments comment rss

  • Dec 1st, 2014 @ 7:55am

    Hmm. There is an aspect to this that may have been overlooked.

    If memory serves, there has been more than one case where a DMCA takedown notice has been sent for content uploaded by the actual copyright holder's representatives. It would be extremely ... appropriate ... for those repeat offenders to be taken completely offline. I wonder how the RIAA et. al. would react as various recording companies get booted due to repeat infringement.

  • Nov 4th, 2014 @ 1:33pm

    Re: Regarding 'when'?

    I learned a long time ago that the ugliest thing in the world is a mirror. After all, a mirror shows you your own flaws and no one likes to see their flaws..

    Sounds to me like Midgette is a pretty darn good mirror for Dejan Lazic.

  • Aug 30th, 2014 @ 12:38pm

    The Noke looked good for a short while.

    But unfortunately, the first thing I noticed upon it being used is that it has a single locking shackle (the shackle has only 1 notch in it). Single locking shackles are used for low security locks.

  • Aug 18th, 2014 @ 8:37am

    Re: tab

    So, are you claiming that everyone needs to run their own email server? After all, the third party doctrine means that google, yahoo, hotmail, etc. need to disclose your email to the authorities without requiring a warrent. And email is pretty much an essential element of modern society.

  • Aug 5th, 2014 @ 3:31pm

    Re: Re: Amtrak app

    Not sure if they're lying.

    They say they won't automatically collect the information.

    The person complaining about the app says that it wants permission to send messages to his contacts in his name without his approval.

    I'd say that sending the messages in his name doesn't imply collecting information on his contacts and storing said information on an Amtrak controlled server.

  • Aug 4th, 2014 @ 2:56pm

    Re: The Streisand Scale

    Not sure about the INFINITY mark. After all, Carrion did finally stop his lawsuits. Also dealing with INFINITY is rather ... difficult. After half of INFINITY is still INFINITY.

  • Jul 30th, 2014 @ 12:22pm

    Re: Re:

    With modern books, there's no reason at all for OCR and editing of OCR errors. After all, the book is created with a word processor.
    Looking at some publishers.
    Baen Books: "Electronic submissions are strongly preferred."

    Tor Books: They want submissions via email as "should be in something approximating standard manuscript format and be sent as *.doc (not docx), *.rtf, or plain-text attachments."

    Pan MacMillan India: They want book proposals to be emailed. If you don't use email, the following quote applies "Hard copy proposals are not preferred and will not be returned, so please retain a copy."

    Seems to me that electronic copies are the preferred media for new book submissions. After all, it's rather easy to change formats and layouts. And electronic typesetting is the current standard. OCR is just for handling older books that are being republished in the electronic age.

  • Jul 29th, 2014 @ 4:02pm

    Gotta love the message.

    To quote you:

    "With its budget, informants, national security letters, subpoenas, advances in surveillance tech, etc, the FBI has the jump on far less organized and less powerful criminal enterprises."

    I agree wholeheartedly. The FBI is a far better funded criminal enterprise with far more capabilities and tools than the other less organized and less powerful criminal enterprises.

  • Jul 28th, 2014 @ 3:06pm

    My main issue is ...

    fairly simple. Yes, one can get into a lot of technicalities as to what is copying and such. And frankly, the copying of data in order to see if it meets the collection criteria is a technical necessity. The real question is
    "Is the data being examined stored for an unreasonable length of time?" With unreasonable being pretty much anything over a couple of seconds MAX. So NSA would be permitted to sniff all the traffic over the backbone and filter it for legal material and store that legal material. But anything else is forgotten within seconds. And such a method would fit the diagram done by the EFF presentation. But unfortunately, the NSA isn't doing that. What it looks like the NSA is doing is intercepting the data and storing it for an indeterminate length of time for future queries. And THAT is unacceptable.

  • Jul 16th, 2014 @ 10:11am

    Even with the DA not prosecuting ...

    the people arrested are being screwed over big time.

    The problem is the arrest itself. When an officer arrests someone that information is then send onward to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) as well as being stored locally. So even though the DA doesn't prosecute the person arrested, they still have a record in a national database about being arrested. And that little record can definitely stand in their way for future employment.

  • Jun 26th, 2014 @ 8:53am

    Know the history

    Let's see. In the United States copyright started with a 14 year term that could be renewed for another 14 years. Later extended to 28 years with a 14 year renewal. Seems more than long enough to encourage new works while giving the artist plenty of time to exploit his or her exclusive control of the material.

    Now it's life of the author plus an additional 70 years. Quite frankly, that's insane. Why so much time? Especially when you consider that communications today is so much faster and easier than it was back in the early 1800's and that progress is so much faster.

  • May 22nd, 2014 @ 3:58pm

    Re: Isn't there any other way?

    The problem Blizzard has is the exploit reveals to the cheaters information that they shouldn't have. And unfortunately, that information is needed to be available on the computers of all the players. Blizzard for quite a while has been attempting to use technical measures to detect cheating and to make cheating more difficult. Some measures are:
    1. Encrypting the data stream between the players and the servers.
    2. The Warden program (which in itself raised a nasty publicity storm since what warden did was look for processes running on an user's computer looking for programs and window titles indicative of known cheat programs).

    And what would happen is that the cheat providers would analyze what warden was doing. Then make changes to the cheat that would bypass warden. In turn Blizzard would take note of the new cheat, modify warden to detect it and so forth and so on. As for the encrypted data stream, well it's easy enough for a cheat program to either look at the memory image of the player's program to get the data needed directly, or to extract the encryption key.

    Basically, Blizzard is stuck in a continuous cycle of cheat, counter-measure, counter-counter-measure, counter-counter-...-counter-measure, etc.. So they're going after the cheat providers via the legal system. And yes, they're distorting copyright quite severely.