Robert A. Rosenberg 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (50) comment rss

  • On the post: So Few Spam Lawsuits Because Judges Don't Understand Technology?

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 11 May, 2010 @ 01:01pm

    Re: Re: I don't get it.

    Of course I think you should be able to opt out of junk mail, too.

    William -
    You CAN Opt-Out of Junk Mail but only on a per-sender basis. There is a USPS Form (I do not know the Form#) that you can file that states that "In Your Opinion" the mail being sent to you by the designated sender is JUNK MAIL and the USPS must either Not Deliver it or return it to the sender. Note that YOU not the USPS make the Junk Mail determination - The problem is that many of the officers at the branch (there is at least one per branch) who are responsible for this function refuse to follow the USPS regulations and block the mail.

  • On the post: New Hampshire Supreme Court Recognizes That New Media Can Be News Media

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 10 May, 2010 @ 04:50pm

    ... at least some courts are recognizing that not being "an established media entity" doesn't mean you can't be press.

    Query - If you are just starting out, how do you establish yourself as an "an established media entity" or do you automatically qualify if you have the same distribution/publishing method as someone who already qualifies as one? IOW: Do you automatically qualify just because you have started to publish a newspaper (and does the newspaper need to be done with dead trees not recycled electrons [ie: As a PDF document]). If the former then this makes any new technology not-eligible until some court puts the seal-of-approval on it (as just occurred in this case).

  • On the post: Google Wants Court To Say That Links To Music Files Don't Mean Google Is Infringing Copyrights

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 05 May, 2010 @ 08:37pm

    Re: Re: Re: TWICE in canada

    Anonymous Coward states

    "Hence the argument that there shouldn't be anything that is illegal to simply view. It's quite reasonable."

    Unless you ask the question "Illegal WHERE?". If I was in certain Middle East Countries, it would be illegal to look at sites showing women's uncovered faces, let alone the Sports Illustrated Swim Suit spreads (where you can see most of their bodies).

    Just because something is Illegal (or against someone's culture) does not mean that it must automatically be banned on the Internet.

  • On the post: Olympics Threaten ICANN, Saying Its Trademark Concerns Outweigh Any Benefits From New TLDs

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 25 Mar, 2010 @ 09:44am

    Atlanta Olympics vs. Olympic Diner

    When the Olympics was held in Atlanta a few years ago, the IOC tried to shut down a 30[?] or so year old Diner for being named Olympic Diner. They also tried to confiscate the Diner's Domain Name (even though the registration predated the organization of the Atlanta committee - let alone when the city was granted the rights to hold it).

  • On the post: Microsoft Exec Calls For 'Driver's License For The Internet'

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 05 Feb, 2010 @ 06:10pm

    Re: You need a DRIVER's license because

    "You cannot kill someone with your browser."

    Tell that to the mother of the girl who killed herself due to Facebook postings from a faked persona created by her rival's mother.

    While I agree with your claim in general, there are always exceptions.

  • On the post: Calling For An Independent Invention Defense In Patents

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 24 Nov, 2009 @ 09:12pm

    Independent Invention and the Telephone

    If this rule were in place at the time, the controversy between Alexander Graham Bell and Elisha Gray for the invention of the telephone would not have occurred. Both would have been granted the patent since they used different methods. You just have the hope that the leaking of Gray's submission to Bell's Lawyers (and their modifying of the Bell Submission to include Gray's Method) would not occur in a similar situation of independent invention.

  • On the post: Hulu Telling Sites To Stop Embedding So Much

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 24 Nov, 2009 @ 08:46pm

    TVGUIDE.COM Embeds

    TVGUIDE.COM does this for lots of shows. Is HULU going after them?

  • On the post: Zombie Spam Blacklists Return From The Dead To Make A Point

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2009 @ 08:52pm

    Re: Re: There's much more here than meets the eye

    When you make a spam filter that is perfect, go ahead and reject all the spam. Until then, if the two choices are putting everything in my inbox or sending suspected spam to a spam box ...

    There is a 3rd option - Put everything into the Inbox BUT flag the suspected spam so the user can see that you feel the message is spam. IOW: Any message that would be directed to the spam folder is still sent to the inbox but altered to show it would have been directed to the spam folder.

  • On the post: Speakeasy The Latest VoIP Provider To Block Certain Calls

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 03 Oct, 2009 @ 01:02pm

    Who is being Blocked?

    When Speakeasy is blocking the calls are they blocking specific numbers assigned to the Free Conferencing Services or are they blocking calls to the AreaCode+Exchange that is servicing the Service. In the first case, I do not see anything wrong since this is no different than blocking collect calls (or a 900 number since the calling phone company gets charged for the call and then passes the fee to the customer - ie: Bills Them). If it is a latter case (blocking the exchange) then unless the exchange is dedicated to the Free Services the normal customers of that exchange are being used as Human Shields to protect the Free Services. I should be allowed to contact any phone number I call and be connected. As I note, I am willing to exclude those that charge a fee to the Phone Company (as in the case of the Free Conferencing loophole) so long my other calls to that exchange are allowed to go through.

  • On the post: Appeals Court Says Patenting Basic Medical Diagnostic Process Is Just Fine

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 21 Sep, 2009 @ 09:09pm

    Re: Time to patent the method of safely ingesting dihydrogen monoxide

    Looks like time for a patent on a method of safely ingesting dihydrogen monoxide, along with a patent of testing for the presence of dihydrogen monoxide.

    For those unfamiliar with dihydrogen monoxide (also known as DHMO) and its dangers, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide.

  • On the post: Limited Selection, Walled Gardens, Unskippable Ads… What's The Benefit Of TV Everywhere Again?

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 21 Sep, 2009 @ 11:57am

    Re: Lets Just Shove A Roll Of Quarters In

    When I was a kid I was sitting in a restaurant with my family and the restaurant had a Jukebox. My mother just hated the music being played. She commented I wish I could throw a few quarters in that machine and buy a little silence.
    In fact, I remember some Jukeboxes where that was possible. Scattered though the records were ones with 3(?) minutes of silence (or it might have been "White Noise"). You selected them like any other record and when they arrived in rotation, there would be your requested silence before the music resumed (a longer period if there were no requests for any of the records between two Silence Record Requests).

  • On the post: Sneakernet, Pigeonet And The Meaninglessness Of Judging Broadband By Silly Stunts

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2009 @ 07:38pm

    Re: Burn Time

    Yes there is. You use RFC2549 in lieu of RFC1149. To send the data from Europe to the US, you start with the needed number of US Pigeons at your European Sending Site (use two times the total dataset size divided by the size of the Flash Cards to get redundancy or do the data as RAID packets). Put the Flash Cards on the pigeons and then transfer them to the US via a Virtual Tunnel (as documented by RFC2549) - ie: Stick them on a West Bound Non-Stop Plane to a US Airport need the Destination. Once there, set them loose and let them deliver the Flash Cards. You can also go Store&Forward by Pigeon'ing to the European Airport, tranship to the US, and the hand off to the US Pigeons (ie: Do a Pony Express hand off with one leg being via the Europe to US airplane connection).

  • On the post: Sneakernet, Pigeonet And The Meaninglessness Of Judging Broadband By Silly Stunts

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2009 @ 07:38pm

    Re: Burn Time

    Yes there is. You use RFC2549 in lieu of RFC1149. To send the data from Europe to the US, you start with the needed number of US Pigeons at your European Sending Site (use two times the total dataset size divided by the size of the Flash Cards to get redundancy or do the data as RAID packets). Put the Flash Cards on the pigeons and then transfer them to the US via a Virtual Tunnel (as documented by RFC2549) - ie: Stick them on a West Bound Non-Stop Plane to a US Airport need the Destination. Once there, set them loose and let them deliver the Flash Cards. You can also go Store&Forward by Pigeon'ing to the European Airport, tranship to the US, and the hand off to the US Pigeons (ie: Do a Pony Express hand off with one leg being via the Europe to US airplane connection).

  • On the post: Hollywood's War With Redbox Expanding To Netflix As Well?

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 15 Aug, 2009 @ 11:25am

    Re: Re: Does everyone pay a cut?

    maybe their agreement with the studios has a clause that the studios will prevent any other entity from renting DVDs to the detriment of Blockbuster.

    I have been in my local Brick and Mortar Blockbuster and they apparently DO have such a clause for some movie releases. There are some of these that are marked "Blockbuster Exclusive" by which I assume that they are either not available from other rental outlets or maybe are prereleases of DVDs that will later be released to the consumer market (ie: The official release date of the DVD is December 2009 but you can rent it from Blockbuster now starting in October 2009).

  • On the post: Hollywood Says Due Process Is Too Damn Slow

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 13 Aug, 2009 @ 09:36pm

    Re: French 5 minute trials

    "I'm amazed that the studios haven't picked up on the French plan of giving judges only five minutes to review any such appeal."

    Hopefully this would compel judges to quickly dismiss cases on the premise that there wasn't enough time for them to properly investigate both sides.

    Unfortunately if I remember correctly, France uses a system where you are presumed to be guilty and it is your task to prove your innocence. Thus with 5 minutes per case, you are almost automatically going to be found guilty due to the lack of to argue your case.

  • On the post: If AT&T Mobile Broadband Banned TV Streaming, Why Does It Allow MLB Streaming?

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 29 Jun, 2009 @ 05:08pm

    Re: Network Engineering

    Using Multi-Cast [MC] is not enough. It must be IPv6 (not IPv4) Multi-Cast. With IPv4 MC, the connection between the user and the MC Server is a Uni-Cast session. IOW: If 5 users on the same node (in this case Cell Tower) are getting the Video Stream, there are 5 copies flowing (and eating the Bandwidth). With IPv6 MC, there is ONLY ONE session and Video Stream and each user is authorized to receive it (since they have a MC IPN address that the session is being sent to). An analogy is that IPv4 MC is like listening to a CD with the Audio (each listener needs their own CD), while IPv6 is like hearing it on the radio (they just tune to the broadcast).

  • On the post: Court Says Anti-Malware Software Maker Immune From Lawsuit From Zango

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 28 Jun, 2009 @ 07:37pm

    Kaspersky and Spyware Blocking

    I do not use Kaspersky and thus do not know how it acts when it encounters something that it regards as Spyware.

    Here is my view however.

    First, as noted up-thread, the user must take a positive action to install it. Thus there is informed consent (unlike Zango which does a stealth install).

    Second, if I ask Kaspersky to unistall, it will, and the resulting system status is the same as if I had never installed Kaspersky in the first place (again unlike Zango whose installer does not fully clean up the system and leaves some code still running even after the user says to delete the program).

    Finally, and very important, I assume that when it detects what it classifies as Spyware, it INFORMS the user and offers the option of either blocking or allowing that "Spyware" program to run. IOW: While it has a database of Spyware programs, that database can be overridden so Kaspersky does not have the last say but allows the user once informed to tell Kaspersky to not block the program.

    To me so long as Kaspersky does not take unilateral action but just offers the block the program, Zango has no gripe beyond being labled as Spyware since Kaspersky can allow the program to run if asked to by the user.

  • On the post: Study Says DRM Pushes Users To Illegal Downloads

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 29 May, 2009 @ 11:16am

    Re: Re: ...

    If you paid for the game with a credit card, you can dispute the charge by saying that the product was defective (as it is) and the vendor refused you a refund.

  • On the post: BSA's Canadian Piracy Numbers Based On Hunches, Not Actual Surveys

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 27 May, 2009 @ 06:40pm

    Funny Statistics

    In response, Geist found out that no one in Canada was surveyed, and BSA (and IDC who created the report) simply made an educated guess, assuming the piracy rates weren't all that different than they were in past years.

    OK. Even if we assume/pretend that that the rate of piracy is stable, where did last year's (or the year before they stopped measuring it and just did a Cut and Paste of the prior year's figures) come from?

  • On the post: Movie Studios Continue To Demand Australian ISP Admit To Supporting Piracy

    Robert A. Rosenberg ( profile ), 18 May, 2009 @ 08:45pm

    Re: Torrent User's IP Addresses

    It is not even needed to do the download - All that is needed is to get the torrent file and extract the IPNs from it. By not doing the download they do not supply parts of the file so they are not distributing it. OTOH: Unless they are the ones who seeded it in the first place, they need to download it to verify that it is their file being transfered.

Next >>