Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:And? (Score 1) 525

IANAL, and you are, but it seems to me that there are two issues here.

What is a reasonable estimation of damages?
Does the statutory damage award have to bear some resemblance to the damages.

Gore and Campbell appear to only address the second question. The first is still very open. I don't think either side is arguing that correctly. To me $21 is just as wrong as $675000(though possibly less damaging to society). The real answer lies somewhere in between, but both lawyers are arguing the interpretation most beneficial to them(probably cause that's their jobs). In my mind the judge should put damages at some estimated seeding ratio * number of songs * punitive multiplier. I think 10*21*3=$630 would be about right. That's enough to be a deterrent to most, but not enough to ruin someones life for a trivial offense.

Google

Submission + - Google services failure 1

banetbi writes: "It seems that there is a massive failure at Google. Twitter is abuzz with reports of all Google services failing. It seems the outage is pretty widespread as there are reports from the US, Canada, and South America."

Comment Re:Non-Story (Score 2, Insightful) 261

I'm particularly not crazy about stem cells being cultivated, and possibly embryos destroyed, for frivolous treatments.

I'm not particularly crazy about you not realizing that this has nothing to do with embryos even though the article summary(not even the article itself), mentions twice that the stem cells don't come from embryos.

Comment Re:Good for AT&T! (Score 4, Insightful) 165

First off, not only did you not RTFA, but you couldn't even read the headline. The whole point of the article is that AT&T is *NOT* going to turn off your service without a court order.

As far as them being jerks for sending you a letter, I would think you'd like the heads up that whatever you're doing(legal or not) is drawing the attention of the RIAA. This is about the best policy one could hope for from an ISP.

Privacy

Cambridge, Mass. Moves To Nix Security Cameras 366

An anonymous reader writes "Citing privacy concerns, the Cambridge, Mass. City Council has voted 9-0 to remove security cameras scattered throughout the city. 'Because of the slow erosion of our civil liberties since 9/11, it is important to raise questions regarding these cameras,' said Marjorie Decker, a Cambridge city councilor. Rather than citing privacy, WCBVTV is running the story under the headline 'City's Move To Nix Security Cams May Cost Thousands.'"

Slashdot Top Deals

The person who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.

Working...