Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Why DMCA take down notice? (Score 1) 134 134

The content in question is likely not designed to be injected to a webpage on-the-fly, it is a standard script line that could have been provided to static pages or some other CMS presentation. Airtel is the one who decided altering content delivered to their clients, which they do not own, was appropriate. Flash Networks is blameless here, it's their customer who misbehaved.

Comment: Re:Of course, it's likely copyrighted. (Score 1) 134 134

"They" who did the providing is Airtel, the 3G provider, and likely under a distribution agreement with Flash Networks, the copyright owner, for specific purposes. When the actual copyright owner (FN) found their content on GitHub, they sent the takedown. I think Flash Networks acted appropriately with the proper tool and, for once, the DMCA notification content is actually correct. Airtel are the ones who have things to answer for, not FN.

Comment: Re:Of course, it's likely copyrighted. (Score 5, Insightful) 134 134

If anyone else were to do this, it would be called "hacking his website" and the group responsible would (theoretically) be brought to justice. However, since it is an ISP, they get to call it "monetizing their service"

Even worse, this is a 3G network, so they're not just monetising, they're artificially inflating their customers' usage by forcing them to down content they didn't request on a service that is typically directly billed by utilisation.

Comment: Re:Why DMCA take down notice? (Score 1) 134 134

Every user of Airtel ... will get these files when they visit websites.

Exactly, which is why he would need to post to GitHub (or somewhere else) - not every person interested in or capable of analysing the code is a customer or Airtel (I know I'm not).

Comment: Re:DMCA even has power over GitHub? (Score 1) 134 134

DMCA has power over any site that hopes not to have to hire an army of reviewers and moderators just to serve user-generated content. The problem isn't necessarily with the copyright takedowns process, which in this case seems to be quite justified (it's copyrighted, clear) but when it is abused by censorious thugs and their lawyers.

This one seems pretty clear, user infringed copyright.

Comment: Re:Of course, it's likely copyrighted. (Score 2) 134 134

You can't just go posting other's source code on the web without permission. There are other, better ways to deal with this asshattery.

There are two parts here, neither of which alone add up to the combined outrage (though both spurious): 1) Company A writes code to inject ads to documents, and Company B decides to inject these into pages from other people's services. Whether B got permission from A for this exact purpose we don't know, but it could just as likely be embedded in pages B serve themselves. Note, the injection part here is suspect, but unrelated to the DMCA notice. 2> Owner of said code (Company A) blows his lid that company property is openly accessible at GitHub. and uses appropriate tools to deal with it.

If this is one party injecting their own code into a HTTP session without consent, then objecting to the subsequent source disclosure then fine, let rip, but the context here is critical, and without a view of the source we can't assume more than we know: This is a hostile act, intentionally modifying content in-transit, and more than just compressing JPEGs for mobile network consumption, it alters functionality and potentially the security of the user's device.

He is well within his rights to ask for help from all and sundry in determining the potential harm, especially if (as it appears, I tried and failed) the file can only be downloaded from Company B's network and anyone willing to assist would be unable if not a subscriber. The Net Neutrality rules in India back him up, but unfortunately for him the DMCA covers GutHub under US law. It does protect him from the asshatted letter that makes threats if he continues to exert his rights under Indian law. Flash Networks' conduct here is mixed, but Airtel is incredible, and so far they remain uninvolved and unthreatened.

Comment: Re:Why DMCA take down notice? (Score 1) 134 134

The owner is objecting to the user redistributing the file which is apparently subject to a license. In this instance GitHub (in USA) needs to apply their own laws in making the determination of fair use or exemption but I think the DMCA notice will stand - unless I'm misinformed there is no exclusion to DMCA for academic purposes as there is in India's safe harbour provisions.

Comment: Re:Of course, it's likely copyrighted. (Score 1) 134 134

No, they changed his web page to insert the URL, so only the URL becomes part of the document. The linked script it refers to retains its' own copyright which, in the absence of a copyright statement, could only reasonably be assumed to be the carrier that modified his blog's transmission.

+ - Fallout 4 Will be Skipping Xbox 360 And PS3

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: There's some sad news for those of you looking forward to playing Fallout 4 on your Xbox 360 or your PS3. Bethesda has announced that Fallout 4 will be a current-gen and PC exclusive game and that there will be no last-gen releases in the future. Bethesda global community manager Matt Grandstaff says of the old consoles, "the stuff we're doing will never work there."

Comment: Re:More hoops before travelling through USA (Score 1) 200 200

by leptechie (#49680155) Attached to: Judge: Warrantless Airport Seizure of Laptop 'Cannot Be Justified'

The moral of this story is: 1) The TSA and assorted related three letter agencies don't give a crap about due process or warrants anyways

The owner of the laptop had even been arrested previously and given testimony regarding his activities.

Ahem, TFA says Yang was arrested and provided testimony, Kim is the subject of this ruling. He never implicated himself in anything and it is only by reference from Yang that he was noticed and investigated. The part about the investigating officer having zero suspicion that he would actually be involved in criminal activity during his stay but only thought that if Kim might have this search would find it, as well as hopefully recording proof of Yang's comments and interactions. If this man was a threat, the fact he was not monitored in any sense of the word during his stay negates that.

Fishing expedition on a device that the agent clearly knew in advance would be a rich store of information using a procedure and supposed exemption that cannot be justified on exit from the country.

Comment: Re:Anthropometrics (Score 1) 819 819

A mildly useless suggestion. It's like standing at a stadium - you may get an initial benefit but if everyone does it, nobody benefits (and everyone's legs get tired). So there are a few seats that are superior at no extra cost, it does nothing for the overall level of misery.

The perversity of nature is nowhere better demonstrated by the fact that, when exposed to the same atmosphere, bread becomes hard while crackers become soft.

Working...