- AMD [e]
- Apache [e]
- Apple [e]
- Ask Slashdot [e]
- Backslash [e]
- Book Reviews [e]
- BSD [e]
- Developers [e]
- Entertainment [e]
- Features [e]
- Games [e]
- Geeks in Space [e]
- Hardware [e]
- Idle [e]
- Intel [e]
- Interviews [e]
- IT [e]
- Linux [e]
- Meta [e]
- Mobile [e]
- News [e]
- Oracle [e]
- Politics [e]
- Polls [e]
- Science [e]
- Search [e]
- SF.net Auth [e]
- Taco Hell [e]
- Technology [e]
- The 2000 Beanies [e]
- ThinkGeek [e]
- Vendors [e]
- YRO [e]
Stories
Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system
7255424
submission
+- P2P Injunctions - Lawyers Pretended to Be Police-> on Tuesday November 24, @08:44PM commodore64_love
Submitted
by
commodore64_love
on Tuesday November 24, @08:44PM
commodore64_love writes "In May of this year, anti-piracy group SGAE made a visit to Juan Colone of Spain, who was running two P2P trackers. They SGAE visitors included a lawyer, a computer expert and a clerk, purporting to be officers of the court and handing-over what appeared to be a warrant. They searched through Colone's house looking for evidence and computers, and then obtained an injunction from a Spanish court to take-down Colone's P2P trackers.
Today the court reversed its initial decision, allowing the trackers to be restored to operational order, and dismissing the collected hard drive evidence. “As I said in the hearing: how can it be that an interchange between a Polish and an Argentinian would be registered in [Colone's] hard disk if not even a single bit passes through my client’s website? I explained to the judge how P2P networks function and he was convinced that this evidence is impossible and useless, so he annulled the previous resolution held by the same court.” said defense lawyer Javier de la Cueva.
What is troubling is that the court initially allowed illegally-collected evidence to be the basis for seizing a private citizen's personal property. Where is due process?"
Link to Original Source
Today the court reversed its initial decision, allowing the trackers to be restored to operational order, and dismissing the collected hard drive evidence. “As I said in the hearing: how can it be that an interchange between a Polish and an Argentinian would be registered in [Colone's] hard disk if not even a single bit passes through my client’s website? I explained to the judge how P2P networks function and he was convinced that this evidence is impossible and useless, so he annulled the previous resolution held by the same court.” said defense lawyer Javier de la Cueva.
What is troubling is that the court initially allowed illegally-collected evidence to be the basis for seizing a private citizen's personal property. Where is due process?"
Link to Original Source
Read More...
0 comments
6988262
submission
Comments: 3 +- NYT disables Firefox "right-click web search"-> on Friday November 13, @10:55AM Anonymous Coward
Submitted
by
Anonymous Coward
on Friday November 13, @10:55AM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicenlightenment.gif); width:65px; height:65px;
enlightenment
An anonymous reader writes "It worked last week, but alas no more. The Old Gray Soul-Stealer has done it again. Presumably in search of more revenue to support an antiquated medium (newspapers), and somewhat ironically, nytimes.com appears to have disabled a feature that I use a lot in Firefox. Highlight some text on a web page, right click the highlighted text, and the context menu contains an entry labeled "Search Google for..." which will, as stated, search Google using the highlighted text. This is incredibly handy when, for example, I want to map an address or find the definition of a word.
What does this have to do with nytimes.com? Well, nytimes.com has a similar feature that is specific to the nytimes.com website. Highlight some text and a small blurb containing a question mark will be displayed. Click on the "?" icon, and a popup window displays search results for the selected text. Unfortunately, the search results are focused on NYT (and partner) content. You have the option of performing a web-wide search, but defaults to a NYT "Reference Lookup" search.
The problem: Highlighting text on a nytimes.com article displays the "?" icon, but now deselects the highlighted text, thus preventing me from using my own search methods. When reading nytimes.com, I used to have a choice about which search I wanted to use; both the Firefox context menu and the NYT "?" icon were displayed. Today I noticed that this is no longer the case; nytimes.com has disabled the context menu in favor of its own revenue generating approach.
I find it both ironic and sad that NYT has decided to limit the newer and more relevant media format (nytimes.com) in order to raise money to support and older, less relevant format (tree-killing).
Keep in mind that I am not anti-NYT, and I know that Google is quickly becoming the new "evildoer that will end the world with its capitalist-track mind. I don't care if Google or NYT gets the revenue, I just want robust search results and don't want to be stuck in the middle of a revenue war.
While this isn't quite on the scale of the market wars between IE/Netscape, AMD/Intel, or Apple/Microsoft, will this form of "revenue redirection", as picked up by other web content generators, ultimately prevent Google from financing plans for world domination?"
Link to Original Source
What does this have to do with nytimes.com? Well, nytimes.com has a similar feature that is specific to the nytimes.com website. Highlight some text and a small blurb containing a question mark will be displayed. Click on the "?" icon, and a popup window displays search results for the selected text. Unfortunately, the search results are focused on NYT (and partner) content. You have the option of performing a web-wide search, but defaults to a NYT "Reference Lookup" search.
The problem: Highlighting text on a nytimes.com article displays the "?" icon, but now deselects the highlighted text, thus preventing me from using my own search methods. When reading nytimes.com, I used to have a choice about which search I wanted to use; both the Firefox context menu and the NYT "?" icon were displayed. Today I noticed that this is no longer the case; nytimes.com has disabled the context menu in favor of its own revenue generating approach.
I find it both ironic and sad that NYT has decided to limit the newer and more relevant media format (nytimes.com) in order to raise money to support and older, less relevant format (tree-killing).
Keep in mind that I am not anti-NYT, and I know that Google is quickly becoming the new "evildoer that will end the world with its capitalist-track mind. I don't care if Google or NYT gets the revenue, I just want robust search results and don't want to be stuck in the middle of a revenue war.
While this isn't quite on the scale of the market wars between IE/Netscape, AMD/Intel, or Apple/Microsoft, will this form of "revenue redirection", as picked up by other web content generators, ultimately prevent Google from financing plans for world domination?"
Link to Original Source
Read More...
3 comments
6386715
submission
+- Yahoo Settles Advertiser Class Action-> on Tuesday October 13, @06:39AM gateur
Submitted
by
gateur
on Tuesday October 13, @06:39AM
gateur writes "After years of fighting, Yahoo has finally agreed to settle a class action suit filed for their resale of click advertising to disreputable sites. As expected, Yahoo claims they have settled only to move past the matter and refuses to admit to their unsavory past actions. As one of those members of the class who lost thousands of dollars to click fraud promoted by Yahoo through their partner sites, I wonder whether the $4 million they must pay the law firm will cause them to mend their ways. After all, the loss of a sufficient number of advertisers to make their ad platform financially viable didn't seem to do the trick."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Read More...
0 comments
6219705
submission
+- Eleven (11) Years of Google: A Look Back-> on Saturday October 03, @07:54PM antdude
Submitted
by
antdude
on Saturday October 03, @07:54PM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicgoogle.gif); width:104px; height:38px;
google
antdude writes "PC World (five pages; one print page) shares the eleven (11) years of Google's history — "Google has come a long way in its eleven-year history, from its humble beginning as a Stanford University research project in 1998, to the global, multi-billion dollar online presence Google enjoys today..."
Seen on Digg."
Link to Original Source
Seen on Digg."
Link to Original Source
Read More...
0 comments
It is not best to swap horses while crossing the river.
-- Abraham Lincoln
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.