My company had open enrollment for all benefits this month... our premiums for medical insurance went down and our coverage went up.
What does anecdotal evidence prove? Nothing by itself.
No, this is not just the famous side-comment of "when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Copying a song you bought is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy' " as said by the Sony/BMG chick. This is an actual lawsuit.
This disgusting trend brought to your attention courtesy Engadget."
I was browsing SCO's website trying to figure out development tool options for SCO OpenServer 5.0.6 (I know, I know) and stumbled across this.
It describes one of the three options for OpenServer 5.0.7 as:
PennPIRG has learned that AT&T/Cingular recently began blocking phone numbers on its wireless service used by consumers to access free conference call services, such as those provided by Free Conference Call.com. The telephone giant has argued that calls to free conference call services are resulting in millions of dollars in losses to the company due to re-routing and termination fees, and has sued free conference call services and local phone companies in Iowa over the fees.
The article goes on to state that the free conference call service being blocked competes directly with Cingular's conference call service, and that this is the type of anti-consumer action we can expect on the internet if Net Neutrality is not mandated."
"Wheeling, IL — February 20, 2007 — Judge Charles P. Kocoras granted e360's motion to enter its judgment against Spamhaus in the U.S. District Court of Northern Mississippi. e360 made the motion because spamhaus.org, a domain and asset owned by Spamhaus, is registered with Tucows, Inc. Tucows was previously served with a court order at its offices in Mississippi to freeze the domain. This ruling is significant because it enables e360 to ask the court to execute on the writ and transfer ownership of spamhaus.org to e360."
"The court's ruling today is an important step in defending the rights of legitimate marketers," said Dave Linhardt, e360's President and Founder. "Amazingly, Spamhaus continues to believe it can operate above the laws of the United States. Based on Mr. Linford's refusal to comply with the permanent injuction, it is my opinion that Spamhaus is nothing more than a vigilante, cyber terrorist orgainzation with a dangerous God complex."
When I see stuff like this, I so thankful to be Canadian. Something like this would booted from the courts for wasting their time.
Why doesnt one or more companies try to support spamhaus or launch suit against e360 for its known involvment in known spamming operations (Microsft etc)?
Is anyone standing up against e360 or supporting spamhaus against them?? Or better yet force e360 to justify it actions in the media as to its previous spamming operations."