Comment Reality (Score 1) 297
Cruise missiles are more of a robot then a drone is. Fact is drones are just remotely piloted planes. The problem isn't their existence but there misuse.
Cruise missiles are more of a robot then a drone is. Fact is drones are just remotely piloted planes. The problem isn't their existence but there misuse.
The Slashdot is bad. It tracks users just like about every other site on the web.
OMG location based features know our location!!!!! Who would have thunk it.
nope android users aren't dumb at all. Hey clueless they're your wireless carrier. If your phone is on they are tracking you! Do you think when you make calls they have no idea what phone is connecting to there network? It doesn't matter what phone or what carrier if you connect they know where you are. It's part of the connection protocol and can never be turned off. And unless your VPNing they know every site you visit.
No valid copyrights involved here.
My question is where and what authentication happened. It sounds to me (maybe wrong) that the fraud was to access the local network and once there access to JSTOR was open. Is it wire fraud to lie to get into a club and use their free WiFi?
Nope the communication has to cross state lines.
The law actually differentiates between the two. Finacial data crime. Random data not neccasarly.
It is if you're doing it to gain access to a computer that otherwise doesn't want you accessing it.
Nope still not illegal. Has to be a government or "protected computer" used for commerce.
Such things can be used as evidence that not only did Swatz break the law, but that he did so intentionally. Also the first two bits, the changing of the MAC address and providing a false email address might become supporting evidence for the argument asserting wire fraud.
Can't convict on wire fraud for access to the network as it did not cross state lines. An element of the crime.
Actually no it's not a crime. There are other required elements under the current law. I'm not sure that in this we are even talking about a "protected computer" as defined by the law.
If this was a local copy of the archive I don't think he broke any laws at all and the Feds have no jurisdiction. If the MIT computer has connected to and retrieving info from a JSTOR server it much more complex. Is accessing a system that gets info from another the same as connecting to it directly?
Wire fraud requires that it cross state lines. It seems he only accessed from withing the building.
Beyond that I'm not sure they can make the case that his false statements are material as the service was provided for free to anyone.
Actual this is correct. Simply using someone else's property is not theft. It only becomes theft or more accurately conversion if the owner is denied his use of the property. That's why with IP it's civil infringement and not criminal theft. Copying something does not deprive the owner of the original of its use.
It's not an IP case as there is no IP. The originals are not copyrighted and a scan of a page is a mechanical copy of industrial information. There is no artistic content therefore there can be no copyright.
Do the Feds even have jurisdiction here. He accessed only from within the network at the physical location from what I can see. Therefore he accessed no telecommunication infrastructure and did not operate across state lines. Does the federal government have any authority here. Seems to me that this should be a state case as I don't see this as a copyright case but as a theft of service case. JSTOR has no valid copyright claim here. The originals are not copyrighted and by definition a scan of a page can not be copyrighted. There is no "art" here. Anyone could scan the same page and get pretty much the same result thus any copyright claim is invalid.
Well let's see.
Nether company creates there own games. EA buys them and Zynga steals them.
Both companies steal from their users it's just that EA does it $50 at a time while Zynga does it $.50 at a time.
Both companies treat gamers like crap.
EA abuses the hell out of professional developers while Zynga abuses the hell out of people that think they are developers.
(sorry Zynga workers but my dog writes better code)
EA uses huge expensive marketing campaigns of BS while Zynga just spams you until you give in.
EA often ruins good games after taking them over. Zynga often ruins good games after copying them and flooding the market with their version.
EA actions makes you hate them. Zynga's actions make you hate yourself.
All in all the world would be better off if neither existed. But the tie breaker goes to EA as we would actually miss their games.
Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.
