It seems hard to imagine that the woman expected her delicates to stay completely private when she hung them up for the entire world to see.

So the solution to excess spending is to outfit every single vehicle with expensive sensors to take an excessive amount of unnecessary measurements?

You mean to tell me that the free "hacking" tool released to 15 year old kids doesn't take security precautions??

Black on slightly-less black is so easy to read.

Right or wrong, if you kill him becomes a martyr. What a surprise that Sarah Palin didn't think before she spoke.

When we realize the government has inadequate security we leap together in unison and scream, "Why didn't they fix that loophole before??" But when someone tries to raise awareness about the need to take preventative measures on a large scale, all of a sudden it's "lulz silly journalist." Also, the author is not even a journalist. His name is Ram Mohan, "Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer at Afilias, a global provider of Internet infrastructure services including domain name registry and DNS solutions. "

Next week's headline: "Eight year old's patent invalidated over prior art."

Good point

An individual can usually file a suit for just about anything. Attorneys, on the other hand, are usually held to a higher standard. Look up "malicious prosecution"

That is the definition of malicious prosecution.

Filing a suit against an attorney who is informing citizens of their Constitutional rights? Absolutely ridiculous. The attorney who filed this suit should be disbarred.

The scary thing is that a District Court did this. District Courts are local - there are 94 of them in America. On what authority can a local court take down a global website? Just shop around until you find a district that signs the papers.

The Supreme Court has already decided that prejudgment seizures of property are unconstitutional if not accompanied by notice and a hearing on the merits. See: Fuentes v. Shevin I don't see why this wouldn't apply to domain names as well. Wonder how long it will be before this statute gets challenged.

Uhm, the bacteria only holds the information we already have. It doesn't magically hold information that hasn't been created yet. How exactly do traditional notions of intellectual property become meaningless again?

File a "Citation of Prior Art." It's very easy to do, and anyone can do it. Next, file a Request for Reexamination. There are two kinds of reexaminations: Ex Parte (which means you submit the request and the fee, and then your personality responsibilities are terminated), and Inter Partes (which means you have a say throughout the entire re-examination). The latter is more expensive. Here is a link that may help you get started: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2200_2210.htm#sect2210 Since your work was listed as prior art, you are going to have a very tough time ahead of you. That designation means that before the patent was granted the examiner looked at your work and said "IBM's invention was not obvious from the prior art." If you are unable to cite your own work due to it already being cited in the patent, you could try citing the work that predates yours by twelve years (and also mentioning your previous work as well). [Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, and I am not a patent agent. I'm not giving you any legal/non-legal advice, just some ideas that you might want to talk to a patent attorney/agent about.]