So, when I ping pokerstars.com and it returns 77.87.179.116 here because my upstream DNS server still has the entry cached, that's somehow a misunderstanding on my part?
Regardless of whether it's legal or not - seizing the domain doesn't shut down the site, and doesn't prevent people from accessing it... which is perhaps why it's a story here.
Actually, could you please point me to where you found your definition of "gamble"? I tried looking it up and pretty much none of the definitions I found reference "skill".
It's interesting - some of my coworkers, upon reading this news, immediately logged into their FullTilt and Pokerstars clients - and found that their money was still in there.
If the client programs are even using the domains to access the sites, they will continue to work as long as DNS caches are intact.
At this point, since I work in a shop full of software developers, they're probably just gonna add pokerstars.com to their hosts file and continue on their merry way... which is pretty amusing. I guess they'll be stuck playing with other smart people, maybe online poker will become more challenging ;)
The conspiracy theorist in me wants to suggest we'll see more of these botnets now, infecting machines belonging "people of interest" - and th FBI will receive court orders allowing them to "take control" of said botnets and "clean them up" ;)
Removed a piece of malware from a bunch of machines - wow... what good samaritans right?
Not likely. The machines are probably infected with multiple pieces of malware (such is generally the case with machines like this), and the owners have learned nothing from this exercise.
Notification and Education should be the proper solution - not "let us clean this up for you without your knowlege".
Yes, the technicalities here are what I was most interested in seeing...
Because technically, he located and distributed the key to their DRM, which would suggest it wasn't entirely "circumvented" (insomuch much as holding the shift key down while you put a DRM-infested audio CD cancels the auto-run from running). Poorly-implemented DRM should not be protected as such. Now, on the other hand, since it did take significant effort to locate this key - it's arguable that he was attempting to circumvent it.
On the other hand, he also was not (allegedly) attempting to circumvent it for purposes of copyright infringement - does that then make the DMCA null/void in this case?
As he mentioned in response to many angry comments in his blog - the settlement terms are confidential, and he cannot discuss them. He tries to point out that the permanent injunction is not the full settlement terms, but only the court-related portion.
So, we really don't know what Sony is obligated to do here as a result of the settlement (if anything).
I'm just suggesting that a lot of people have come to the conclusion that "Sony won" but we don't really know that for sure.
Yes, the public docket only appears harsh, but basically they're just saying: you can't hack any of our stuff now.
As for the actual settlement, apparently the details are confidential. Per geohot's blog, he cannot discuss them, but assures people that he has fought for their rights.
On the post: Weird Al Denied Permission To Parody Lady Gaga... Releases New Song For Free Anyway [Updated]
Re: Re: That's Not True
You can see his sarcastic plug about that here:
http://www.weirdal.com/alnewsfeed.shtml
On the post: Details Of Apple's Lawsuit Against Samsung Revealed; And It's Even More Ridiculous
Re:
On the post: Details Of Apple's Lawsuit Against Samsung Revealed; And It's Even More Ridiculous
Trademarks on individual icons?
I can understand if your icon contains a logo... but beyond copyright protection so nobody blatantly rips off your artwork, seriously?
On the post: RIAA Lawyer In Limewire Lawsuit Recommended As A Federal Judge
Re: Re: Re: Are IP lawyers more biased? Or, should we ban all lawyers from becoming judges?
On the post: RIAA Lawyer In Limewire Lawsuit Recommended As A Federal Judge
Re:
Reminds me of this:
Fletcher: Your honor, I object!
Judge: Why?
Fletcher: Because it's devastating to my case!
Judge: Overruled.
Fletcher: Good call!
On the post: Righthaven Tells Judge Handling All Its Colorado Cases That He's Wrong
Re:
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
Re: Re: DNS caching?
Suck it, I know how DNS works.
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
Re: Re: DNS caching?
So, when I ping pokerstars.com and it returns 77.87.179.116 here because my upstream DNS server still has the entry cached, that's somehow a misunderstanding on my part?
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
Re:
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
Re:
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
Re:
Much like the stock market...
On the post: Feds Seize Poker Websites; Founders Indicted
DNS caching?
If the client programs are even using the domains to access the sites, they will continue to work as long as DNS caches are intact.
At this point, since I work in a shop full of software developers, they're probably just gonna add pokerstars.com to their hosts file and continue on their merry way... which is pretty amusing. I guess they'll be stuck playing with other smart people, maybe online poker will become more challenging ;)
On the post: FBI Hijacks Botnet, With Court Order... Then Issues Kill Signal To Millions Of Computers
Re: All I can say is Holy Crap!!!
On the post: FBI Hijacks Botnet, With Court Order... Then Issues Kill Signal To Millions Of Computers
This did little to help the owners
Not likely. The machines are probably infected with multiple pieces of malware (such is generally the case with machines like this), and the owners have learned nothing from this exercise.
Notification and Education should be the proper solution - not "let us clean this up for you without your knowlege".
On the post: Geohot Supporters Angry He Settled With Sony
Re: Re: Re:
If I point out how poor your security is, did I commit a crime?
If I produced a key that happens to fit the lock on your house, but I didn't use it to commit a crime, am I punishable by law?
On the post: Geohot Supporters Angry He Settled With Sony
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Geohot Supporters Angry He Settled With Sony
Re:
Yes, the technicalities here are what I was most interested in seeing...
Because technically, he located and distributed the key to their DRM, which would suggest it wasn't entirely "circumvented" (insomuch much as holding the shift key down while you put a DRM-infested audio CD cancels the auto-run from running). Poorly-implemented DRM should not be protected as such. Now, on the other hand, since it did take significant effort to locate this key - it's arguable that he was attempting to circumvent it.
On the other hand, he also was not (allegedly) attempting to circumvent it for purposes of copyright infringement - does that then make the DMCA null/void in this case?
On the post: Geohot Supporters Angry He Settled With Sony
Settlement terms aren't completely known
So, we really don't know what Sony is obligated to do here as a result of the settlement (if anything).
I'm just suggesting that a lot of people have come to the conclusion that "Sony won" but we don't really know that for sure.
On the post: Sony Settles PS3 Jailbreaking Lawsuit Against Geohot
Re: Looks like a win for GeoHot
As for the actual settlement, apparently the details are confidential. Per geohot's blog, he cannot discuss them, but assures people that he has fought for their rights.
I guess time will tell, or a leak ;)
Next >>