If this ruling stands, I wonder if **AA will start pushing for IPv6. It'd be their best interest to eliminate NAT to protect their new revenue stream of suing their consumers. Years of technical arguments never got traction, but maybe a Judge just kicked us over the hump.

Something or other about the ends not justifying the means.

Jumping Jesus on a Pogo Stick No!

I want my ISP doing as little as possible. I want to be able to drown it in a bathtub if I need to. I want out from behind nat and dns-redirections. I want symmetric connectivity and a modem that works like a goddamn switch and doesn't need some fake ass install disk to get connected. The last thing I want is my ISP "managing" connections or getting used to the feeling of managing connections. That includes throwing other jackasses off their networks for being part of a bot net. Especially if the ISPs are the ones determining what a bot net is. Decentralized command and control sounds a lot like onion routing networks, bit torrent clouds, and irc. I'm "A Big Fan" of all three, and there is no way ISPs won't abuse this power. This isn't a public safety issue, this isn't a push for something sane like QOS, this is a big fat fucking power grab based on fear uncertainty and doubt. So no, sweet jesus no.

P.S: Stop being a pussy and setup a Tor exit node. You can limit the destinations to a white list, so theres pretty much no reason not to.

Your heart's in the right place, and I understand your frustration, but as a receiver of gpl software you don't have much of a standing. The company you speak of is infringing copyright by not distributing the source code with the binaries. Since you are not the copyright holder there isn't much you can do. You need to notify the copyright holder and hope they take action. Being pesty may get them to comply, but it's more likely it will take litigation to convince a company to look into their legal standing in the matter. If the copyright holder doesn't have the resources to fight the infringement, urge them to sign copyright over to the free software foundation.

As always, the fsf has said this better....
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/why-assign.html

In downtown Lowell that is exactly what they do. The meter people walk around with a wireless tablet that tells them which spots have been paid for, and prints a ticket for overdue spots. The system works fairly well until someone leans on the signpost and bends the number plate. If that person is nice enough to try to straighten the plate back out, the weakened metal breaks in some sort of accidental Luke Jackson act of defiance. Then a parking official comes by and puts a "No Parking, Out of order" sign on the pole. Can't park here son, no way to tell which two spots come between 155 and 158.