It's probably more like a glorified "keylogger"

A simple KVM box with one of those low powered credit card PC's fitted inside, stick in a rechargeable battery and wire it to draw power from the usb input, It sits there day after day recording key strokes and mouse movements with the odd screen grab. the on board PC then compresses it in to manageable chunks of zips, rars or tar's and waits for one of the gang to walk into the Bank at a busy time of the day. Then it sends it to a receiver via wifi in the crooks bag/pocket in the 10-20 mins he is waiting to get served. If one visit is not enough then they hand it over to another member who gets in line and waits for it to finish.

Or the power companies buy it by the truckload and "rent" it out to local consumers in areas they think is too costly for a proper infrastructure (Large Gas Pressure tank + Cube = lot cheaper than laying gas pipelines to backwood / middle of nowhere locations!) for inflated prices!

I forgot to add that I think only council already on retainer or on staff can be informed and advise the client/company regarding the court order.

But I'm not sure IANAL!

Think it's like the UK's "Super Injunction" where not only would you be breaking the law to talk about the case behind the court order but it would also be illegal to say you've actually received a court order in the first place. It can cover individuals or entire companies depends on how it's worded.

True but you just need a few organisations to jump on it with Pro Bono Lawyers to make it difficult for the government to walk over individual businesses.

They don't have to fight each and every order, just enough for the Judges to get annoyed at the Government overreach and to slap down the entire job lot!

If it was for 10,000 for specific conversation between specific address at a specific date/time then It's reasonable to comply.

But bureaucracy is not as fluid as you might imagine! Their is a reason places like the NSA and CIA go for specific or blanket warrants / Court orders rather than mass individual ones.

Partly because they don't KNOW who to target apart from a few isolated people already on their radar, unless they go for John Doe #1 all the way to John Doe #10,000 which would cause another 10,000 or so new court orders required once they get the actual names, then you'd be correct in thinking that Civil Liberties groups / EFF and other like mined organisations would have a field day tying them up in red tape, challenging each and every individual order.

Oh and i think Judges are beginning to hate mass John Doe#1 to # Court Orders anyway because of their over use by Copyright Trolls to gather User information from IP addresses.

Depends on what the Court order was for.

If it was for specific conversation between specific address at a specific date/time then It's reasonable to comply.
But if it was for Everything since the service started or between 2 dates (i.e. 1st Jan 2011 to 31 Dec 2012) or from that point onwards, then it's a fishing expedition and its reasonable NOT to comply without further legal council and possible injunction (if that's possible with this kind of court order!)

All the Lawyer needs to do is send a letter asking 3 questions.

1) Between what dates did the OP work (Person A) for the client ?
2) Between what dates did the new developer (Person B) take over work for the client ?
3) When was the first use by the company (in-house or commercial) of the specified code ?

If the answer to Q3 is in the range of Person A's time at the company and outside the range of Person B then matter solved.
If not then hard luck unless you have corroborating evidence that you created it (work emails / memos / Letters about the code from your boss to you.) ... ...
Then in that case only winner is the lawyer...

Where's Blue Thunder when you need it!!

Guess you didn't watch the video on the site then???
2:50+ into the video you get the offending statements

Here I made it easy for you:

http://youtu.be/jJN0B2RIIMI?t=2m50s

ermm... didn't a Town/city in the USofA a few years back try that once and was nearly sued out of existence by the local Telco?

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/08/09/12/2326251/telco-sues-municipality-for-laying-their-own-fiber

never found out how it ended though... ^_^

Dear sir /madam

I refer you to the reply given in Arkell and Pressdram

sincerely
>

Here's the history about the reply:
http://jackofkent.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/reply-given-in-arkell-v-pressdram.html

A tablet that will cure the raging hangover I'll be having in 12 hours time!!

Happy Hogmanay
Have a great start to 2013!! ^_^

Pass a law requiring incumbent ISP's (if they run a monopoly in the region) to provide competitors with access to their copper/fibre network at wholesale cost.
Also tag on an addition that each incoming ISP has to give the ISP they are buying from the same ability to buy bandwidth at cost from them as well. Stopping a single big player taking over multiple markets and force others out by sheer financial weight.

So competition and the ability to provide better/ value for money services in other area outside their usual network means less stagnation and fewer "single entity monopolies" in the country and the users win ^_^

How many Americans here own or have access to some type of firearm?
I'll take a rough guess of 70% of Americans on this forum have access to a firearm

(Feedback requested: Would you say that is an under or over estimation??)

OK now's the kicker!

How many of you are "PART OF A WELL REGULATED MILITIA"?
I'd guess around 10% (I'm including Ex/army and police as "militia style" entities)

So 60% of Americans here illegally own or have access to a firearm!

Read your 2nd amendment and correct me if i'm wrong...
it's not new laws you need. It's enforcing of current laws around the 2nd amendment!