I like this - dslreports.com

funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC ·Verizon Online DSL ·Skype	reply to NormanS Re: I like this said by NormanS : In the case that my ISP cut off my Internet over the allegation of committing an illegal act, I'd have my attorney in touch with their legal department: Assuming that I actually have "clean hands". Assuming your ISP is also clean... -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL What you do at Christmas does not matter so much; What counts are the Christmas things you do all year through.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-12-20 11:42:37 ·
NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA ·Pacific Bell - SBC	reply to heliox said by heliox : A private organization alleging something to another private organization about my online behavior, is absurd. It is not. It is the basis for spam complaints, and other abuse complaint; and the reason why Abuse Departments exist. If there is anything illegal going on, the ***a should get a subpoena for my usage records, and file suit with me. Indeed. If there is an allegation of illegal activity, the matter should be brought to the attention of legal authorities. In the case that my ISP cut off my Internet over the allegation of committing an illegal act, I'd have my attorney in touch with their legal department: Assuming that I actually have "clean hands". -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-12-20 02:15:58 ·
NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA ·Pacific Bell - SBC	reply to KrK said by KrK : said by NormanS : I used to run the night shift of a convenience store. We provided a "service". Does that mean I did not have the right to eject a certain person? Acting very suspicious in the vicinity of my liquor display. Been there, done that. As have I. However, I had the support of my "suits" in my case. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-12-20 02:09:03 ·
NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA ·Pacific Bell - SBC 1 edit	reply to heliox said by heliox : If you suspected or caught me doing something to harm your store - yes. Your analogy is so flawed, it's laughable. It is not an "analogy", it is a fact of law. And I did order a suspicious fellow out of my store. (Twice, actually; once under the circumstances I outlined, and once for making threats to a women who came onto the premises in a distraught state. Had to call 9-1-1 in the last case). If you saw me buying a screw driver, rope and tape, and thought I was going to go rob someone - absolutely not. If I had solid reason to believe that selling you certain merchandise would facilitate a crime, I certainly could refuse to make the sale. I have refused to sell certain merchandise to certain individuals; and not been reprimanded for it. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE. So what. Do an Internet search on "citizen's arrest". -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-12-20 02:08:04 ·
KrK Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK ·AT&T Yahoo ·AT&T DSL Service ·Cox HSI	reply to NormanS said by NormanS : I used to run the night shift of a convenience store. We provided a "service". Does that mean I did not have the right to eject a certain person? Acting very suspicious in the vicinity of my liquor display. Been there, done that. Sad thing is, if you do throw someone out, they call Corporate and complain (and lie their asses off) and you find out OH, you didn't have the right to do jack squat You're responsible for the inventory loss, but you're also not allowed to "inconvenience" a thief. Gotta love suits. -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-12-20 01:52:19 ·
heliox Rcp's Love Deep Breathing Premium join:2000-11-28 Irvine, CA clubs:	reply to TKJunkMail Wrong... It's always at least a civil matter (a tort). 17 U.S.C. 501(b) details the mechanisms by which an owner of a copyright may file a civil suit, and 28 U.S.C. 1338 expressly refers to civil actions arising under the copyright act. However, under certain circumstances, it may also be a federal crime. A copyright infringement is subject to criminal prosecution if infringement is willful and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain. 17 U.S.C. 506(a). If the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, during any 180-day period, of 10 or more copies having a retail value of more than $2,500, the offense is a felony; otherwise, the offense is a misdemeanor. 18 U.S.C. 2319. www.stason.org -- "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have" Thomas Jefferson
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-05 06:22:52 ·
heliox Rcp's Love Deep Breathing Premium join:2000-11-28 Irvine, CA clubs:	reply to thevorpal So do I. A private organization alleging something to another private organization about my online behavior, is absurd. If there is anything illegal going on, the ***a should get a subpoena for my usage records, and file suit with me. The way I see it, COX doesn't like 1) hassle 2) bandwidth usage It is so much easier to send a couple letters, and flip a switch. -- "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have" Thomas Jefferson
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-05 06:20:18 ·
heliox Rcp's Love Deep Breathing Premium join:2000-11-28 Irvine, CA clubs:	reply to NormanS If you suspected or caught me doing something to harm your store - yes. Your analogy is so flawed, it's laughable. If you saw me buying a screw driver, rope and tape, and thought I was going to go rob someone - absolutely not. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE. -- "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have" Thomas Jefferson
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-05 06:14:43 ·
TKJunkMail Enjoy the sun Premium join:2002-03-03 Avalon, NJ ·Sprint Mobile Broa.. ·Comcast	reply to ReneM said by ReneM : Since when is copyright infringement a crime? Since the Congress made it so and when the President signed the bill.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-03 12:06:42 ·
ReneM join:2003-07-18 Cockeysville, MD	reply to hottboiinnc Since when is copyright infringement a crime?
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-03 12:04:46 ·
Jason Levine Premium join:2001-07-13 USA	reply to NormanS That was the part I was questioning. Does Cox immediately give you a strike when the DMCA request comes in? Or do they wait until you don't file a counter-notice? If it is the former, then you could have someone who gets two legitimate strikes against them taken offline because of a third, bogus strike. If it is the latter, then their system is more acceptable. -- -Jason Levine Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar and/or a photo book. Shooting For A Cause
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-03 09:38:00 ·
NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA ·Pacific Bell - SBC	reply to Jason Levine Wouldn't you file a counter notice? There is a Cox web page with the instructions for filing one. You basically challenge the assertion by the record label that they have given Cox accurate information; swat the ball back into their court. The thing is, don't ignore the letter; especially if the complaint has incorrect details. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-03 01:08:40 ·
NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA ·Pacific Bell - SBC	reply to thevorpal But the DMCA does provide for you to contest the notice. And if you do contest the notice, I am reasonably sure that will force the **AA's hand; either put up (sue), or shut up. I should think that Cox would consider a response from their user challenging the DMCA notice as a "counterstrike". Well, they should consider it as such. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-03 01:04:45 ·
NormanS Premium,MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA ·Pacific Bell - SBC	reply to willp1 said by willp1 : They do not have the right to police themselves. They provide a service they are not police. I used to run the night shift of a convenience store. We provided a "service". Does that mean I did not have the right to eject a certain person? Acting very suspicious in the vicinity of my liquor display. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-03 00:56:15 ·
wifi4milez Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace join:2004-08-07 New York, NY ·Verizon FIOS ·Sprint Mobile Broa.. ·RoadRunner Cable ·BroadVoice	reply to thevorpal said by thevorpal : Actually if you look at your post, you have proved my point. Again, in most cases you will not be subject to arrest for disorderly conduct as you have broken no law and have simply gone against the rules of the bus/train. Only if you refuse to disembark from the bus/train are you then subject to disorderly conduct, as THAT is an offence. This is my point. You eat on the bus, and someone complains (The copyright holder) to the conductor. The conductor complies with the rules, asks you to stop eating, and calls the police when you become disorderly (Passing along the DMCA request) The police arrive and cite you for disorderly conduct (The copyright holder presents evidence and sues you in civil court) That is why this is a major issue, by COX acton on its own initiative, it cuts out the legal protections that were enacted because DMCA complaints in and of themselves do NOT carry any legal weight as evidence of wrongdoing. Yawn, you dont listen very well. You are going to try and twist this any way you can to support your point, even when its clear you are incorrect. I am done here. -- If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. -Ronald Reagan-
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-02 16:40:16 ·
hwy419 join:2008-10-01 Moody, AL	reply to thevorpal Permitting infringement on copyright through your network is not illegal. But you should at least treat others as you would have them treat you. Would you like it if others were facilitating infringement on your own copyrighted materials? How would you feel if someone diminished your network profits and livelihood? I believe network admins have an ethical duty to prevent such activity on their networks. Permitting infringement violates the spirit of anti-infringement laws.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-02 16:39:12 ·
Jason Levine Premium join:2001-07-13 USA	reply to thevorpal Exactly. It is a very important procedural step, but it is a step nonetheless. And it is a step that is often abused by copyright holders or people who don't like criticism. (e.g. the recent Olympics DMCA requests over the fact that their logo appears for a millisecond on a protest video on YouTube.) If Cox is taking users offline for merely receiving these requests, they are opening their users up to abuse by overzealous copyright holders (going beyond normal rights protections) and/or by people who can't take criticism. Any of their users who speak out will get a flurry of DMCA requests and Cox, following the 3 Strikes policy, will take the user offline. Critic silenced! In the legal world, this is called a SLAPP lawsuit and is illegal. Cox could effectively be making "eSLAPP-ing" standard policy. -- -Jason Levine Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar and/or a photo book. Shooting For A Cause
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-02 16:38:45 ·
thevorpal join:2007-11-16 Alexandria, VA	reply to Jason Levine Not only that, but remember that a DMCA request in and of itself is not evidence of any wrongdoing, but merely a procedural step.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-02 16:31:51 ·
thevorpal join:2007-11-16 Alexandria, VA	reply to wifi4milez Actually if you look at your post, you have proved my point. Again, in most cases you will not be subject to arrest for disorderly conduct as you have broken no law and have simply gone against the rules of the bus/train. Only if you refuse to disembark from the bus/train are you then subject to disorderly conduct, as THAT is an offence. This is my point. You eat on the bus, and someone complains (The copyright holder) to the conductor. The conductor complies with the rules, asks you to stop eating, and calls the police when you become disorderly (Passing along the DMCA request) The police arrive and cite you for disorderly conduct (The copyright holder presents evidence and sues you in civil court) That is why this is a major issue, by COX acton on its own initiative, it cuts out the legal protections that were enacted because DMCA complaints in and of themselves do NOT carry any legal weight as evidence of wrongdoing.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-02 16:30:01 ·
thevorpal join:2007-11-16 Alexandria, VA	reply to hottboiinnc said by hottboiinnc : if you weren't encouraging illegal behavior you would be doing the same thing as COX. you'd be shutting these people off. Instead you keep giving them service and allow them to do it. I sincerely hope that you are being sarcastic with that comment.
	to forum · permalink · · 2008-10-02 16:14:14 ·


Sunday, 06-Dec 10:44:28	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole page compression OFF