No problem. Hawaii is also civilized.

iTunes (or the producers?) generally offer premieres and catch-up videos free of charge so people get into the series. It's not a bug, but it most likely is for a limited time.

You must be new here. Crop infringement isn't stealing.

The user did nothing wrong. They didn't solicit the data. Unless there's evidence to the contrary, they didn't use it for malicious activity. They may not even know they have it. They should not have to hire an attorney to protect their rights when they did nothing, let alone did nothing wrong.

The fact that the data was sent by electronic means shouldn't give the bank additional rights that they wouldn't otherwise have. If the bank had sent the data by fax machine or snail mail, should a court grant them a search warrant?

The bank is already in the wrong for sending the data, unencrypted, to an unsecured e-mail address. They can't undo their wrong by bringing court actions against innocent third parties (Google and the Gmail user) for the bank's mistake.

Nothing, if you're suing to protect people. (In fact, the judge has ordered the e-mail address in question to be redacted from all court records.) Everything, if you're suing to protect your reputation. It's fine to redact the information of the people involved. It becomes a problem when you're trying to keep the entire action under seal.

If you were on that list, I'd wager your actual reaction would be to remove your money and switch to a more trustworthy bank, and I'm certain that the other 1,324 accounts would feel the same way. Perhaps that's why Rocky Mountain Bank has gone to such great lengths to attempt, clumsily, to keep this a secret?

You're not the only person whose rights are being violated in this case. Somebody should be looking out for the Gmail user's too. (Google isn't - they won't fight a court order regardless of how ludicrous it is.)

Your information can be redacted without sealing the entire filing, and I have no objection to that happening.

I'm glad.

Here's what Rocky Mountain Bank should have done. (I refuse to allow them to be anonymous because that's clearly what they want, and they should be held responsible for their mistake.)

1. They should have e-mailed the 1,325 customers that had their data exposed.
2. They should not have sued Google in an effort to get the e-mail deleted.
3. They should not have tried to seal records in a lawsuit they filed to fix their mistake.
4. They should have trained their employees to understand that recalling e-mails doesn't work more often than it does.

Had they done this, this would not have been international news, and probably not even local news.

Yes, that's exactly what they're going to do.

They go live in the sense that anybody can view them, but visitors will have to go through extra effort - the new revision gets hidden in the history unless visitors know to look for them. That means that any editor who hasn't been blessed by The Powers That Be will need to wait before the vast majority of the public will see their contribution.

And, since new editors who want to contribute in a positive way are continuously finding their changes reverted by the wikelite, they will have even less incentive to stick around long enough to have the privilege of unfettered editing bestowed upon them.

I can't speak for Python and Perl (don't use them often enough), but PHP has a number of extensions that support bytecode caching, such as eAccelerator and APC. It's not pre-compiled, but it does mean that a given script only has to be compiled the first time.

The Macintosh platform is essentially completely open to application developers, yet the number of viruses and spamware that have been found on the platform in the last decade can be counted on two hands.

Since Apple can do it with their desktop, they should be able to do it with their mobile platform - especially since they have more people working on the latter.

Meesa think yousa have muy more funsa shootinin da oosa bee drives.

Wouldn't the spammer just pay the $10 using the same stolen credit card they're using to pay the monthly fee?

I could be missing the joke, but isn't said agency the NSA?

No, because of same-origin security - $EVIL_SITE's JavaScript can't read the location of the bottom frame.

As the parent said, if you don't register, you are not eligible to claim statutory damages, only actual damages.

Those are web clips - it's a mini-RSS reader that lives above the Gmail interface. If you don't use the feature, you can turn it off in Settings.