Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Anecdotal (Score 1) 362

by robwmc (#35901442) Attached to: iPhone and Location: Don't Panic
I know that Google sure uses this info. How do you think that they can tell you what the condition your street that you travel on is in (as in green red or yellow)? Every smart phone that uses Google maps contributes to this. With their history of accidentally collecting data on wifi networks, who knows what else they are doing with this.

Comment: Re:Popcorn Hour (Score 1) 516

by robwmc (#33461622) Attached to: Video Appliance For a Large Library On a Network?
I've had a popcorn hour A110 for a couple of years and can say hands down that it way out performs an Apple TV running Boxee. It can handle everything from avi to wmv and does it pretty well. It even has a bit torrent client. You can stream from a network share or copy the content to the hard drive. I'm not sure what the bit rate limits are on each format but it does a good job decoding many different formats. I'll agree that the streaming from the internet is a little quirky. They used to have a youtube channel but it no longer works. For the price, it is a good solution and there is a pretty strong community behind it.
The Courts

+ - How should I have responded to RIAA lawyer? 10

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's lawyers are a bit jumpy these days since their standard "making available" boilerplate was rejected by the Court in Interscope v. Rodriguez. But I still never expected, when I initiated a dismissal motion in Elektra v. Schwartz, that they would be reaching out to me , of all people, for help. But so they did, asking me "in the interest of efficiency... what precisely Defendant contends is lacking from Plaintiffs' Complaint for Defendant to consider it sufficient. Perhaps Plaintiffs may be able to satisfy these alleged deficiencies and spare both parties additional and unnecessary motions practice." Unfortunately my response was not very helpful; I couldn't think of anything better than to say, more or less, that "Plaintiffs have no case whatsoever against Ms. Schwartz, and their case against her was frivolous in its inception. Accordingly, there are no facts they can allege that will satisfy the plausibility standard." On reflection, I'm feeling kind of guilty that I didn't give them a more creative, and helpful answer, and I thought to turn to my friends at Slashdot, who are (a) almost always helpful, and (b) always creative. What would you have said?"
The Courts

+ - Motley Fool:"RIAA's Day in Court Nearly Over&#

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The Motley Fool investment web site claims that"the music industry's lawsuit crusade against defenseless college students and housewives appears to have hit the skids". It says "Some lawsuits have proven ridiculous from the outset, targeting computer-illiterates and dead people, or accusing grandmothers of downloading gangsta rap. Others have been dismissed for a lack of evidence against the purported file-sharers. Nearly every standard weapon in the recording industry's legal arsenal has been proven ineffectual at best, and unconstitutional at worst." At least one commentator noted with interest that these observations emanate not from a socially conscious blog but "a hard-core commercial web site discussing stocks, investing, and personal finance"."

Techdirt: Another Day, Another Smackdown By A Judge Against The RIAA->

From feed by techdirtfeed
In the early days of the RIAA lawsuits, it seemed like judges just took the RIAA's word on things, but that's long since changed as lawyers defending those accused have become more sophisticated -- often realizing that the RIAA research tactics were questionable, the evidence they had was quite flimsy and the system was guaranteed to accuse all sorts of innocent people without much support. As this has happened, judges have become increasingly skeptical of these RIAA lawsuits and those who haven't done anything wrong actually (finally) have a decent chance of pointing out that the RIAA's evidence is wrong. And, in fact, judges are increasingly pushing the RIAA to pay the legal fees of the people they falsely accuse. In the latest such decision, a judge has smacked down the RIAA and ordered them to pay the legal fees in the case of Tanya Andersen. You may recall that the RIAA had accused Andersen of copyright infringement a few years ago -- and then continued to pressure and intimidate her long after it became quite obvious that Andersen clearly was not guilty of what the RIAA was accusing her of doing. The RIAA eventually dropped the case, but Andersen wanted her legal fees paid (separately, she's also suing the RIAA, claiming their investigation techniques are illegal).

The ruling from the judge on paying the legal fees is well worth reading, as it suggests yet another judge is sick and tired of the RIAA assuming that it can just throw up some flimsy evidence and then bully people into paying:

Copyright holders generally, and these plaintiffs specifically, should be deterred from prosecuting infringement claims as plaintiffs did in this case. Plaintiffs exerted a significant amount of control over the course of discovery, repeatedly and successfully seeking the court's assistance through an unusually extended and contentious period of discovery disputes. Nonetheless, after ample opportunity to develop their claims, they dismissed them at the point they were required to produce evidence for the court's consideration of the merits..... this case provides too little assurance that a prosecuting party won't deem an infringement claim unsupportable until after the prevailing defendant has been forced to mount a considerable defense, and undergo all that entails, including the incurring of substantial attorney fees.

Link to Original Source
The Courts

+ - Florida Judge OK's Claims Against Record Companies->

Submitted by NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) writes "A federal judge in Tampa, Florida, has ruled that an RIAA defendant's counterclaim against the record companies for conspiracy to use unlicensed investigators, access private computer records without permission, and commit extortion, may move forward. The Court also sustained claims for violations of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act as well as a claim under Florida law for deceptive and unfair trade practices. The decision (pdf) by Judge Richard A. Lazzara in UMG v. DelCid rejected, in its entirety, the RIAA's assertion of "Noerr Pennington" immunity, since that defense does not apply to "sham litigations", and Ms. Del Cid alleges that the RIAA's cases are "sham"."
Link to Original Source

panic: kernel trap (ignored)

Working...