Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:nothing new under the sun (Score 1) 446 446


The Krebs article linked in TFS mentions as much.

"We're on the doorstep of [confirming] who we believe is the culprit, and unfortunately that may have triggered this mass publication," Biderman said. "I've got their profile right in front of me, all their work credentials. It was definitely a person here that was not an employee but certainly had touched our technical services."

Comment Poor analogy (Score 1) 88 88

Did eBay tell you which item to list and when to list it? Did eBay set the price? Did eBay dictate that you couldn't be in your pajamas when you listed the item? Did eBay refuse to let you sign up because the item you wanted to list was old and looked like a piece of junk? Did eBay structure their platform so the only way your items get bids is if you spend 50 minutes of every hour logged in to eBay?

Comment Re: Now if only Slashdot would get rid of video ad (Score 2) 327 327

The cynic in me wonders whether that was calculated marketing sleaze as opposed to laziness, maybe they're targeting people who try searching for Game of Thrones. The various app stores all have auto-suggest, so you start typing in "game of" and get other suggestions including Game of War.

Comment Copyright trolls going down is a good thing (Score 2) 91 91

Hi Ray, nice to see the NYCL moniker around here again. I have a few questions if you're willing.

First, you indicate that a judge has denied discovery due to several factors, one being that an IP address does not identify any particular individual. Can you speak to the weight or breadth of this specific Court's opinion here, in layman's terms? I see references to the Eastern and Southern districts of New York, might this decision influence cases outside of those jurisdictions?

Second, this business of "if the Motion Picture is considered obscene, it may not be eligible for copyright protection." I've read about certain cases where the Court stated that obscenity has no rigid definition, but "I'll know it when I see it." Does that have any bearing on the Malibu case? Was this some kind of completely outrageous pornography, where any community standard would likely find it to be obscene, or was it just run-of-the-mill porn? Would it matter either way? Would the opinion have likely been the same if the case involved a blockbuster Hollywood film instead of a pornographic and potentially obscene film?

Lastly, I'm curious whether or not you've kept up with developments in the case regarding Prenda Law, and how you might compare this case to that one, if at all. I try to read Ken White's PopeHat blog every once in awhile to see how poorly the Prenda copyright trolls are faring. It doesn't look good for Prenda, and I wonder if you would put Malibu in the same proverbial boat.

Comment Re:One sided. (Score 2) 210 210

Granted the BBB has used the same AL business model for a century and is still un-sued. I expect they get away with it by never having any money, that can't be AL's method.

The BBB has been sued plenty of times. My understanding is that Angie's List has never turned a profit. They're both scams in my opinion.

If all else fails, lower your standards.