Re: Wired on Secrecy Power Sinks Patent Case
At 09:14 AM 9/20/2005, Tyler Durden wrote: Very interesting CPunks reading, for a variety of reasons. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68894,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1 Of course, the fact that Lucent has been in shit shape financially must have nothing to do with what is effectively a state-sponsored protection of intellectual theft and profiting by Lucent (merely keeping the tech under wraps would have been possible in a closed-doors session. Remember that connectors can easily cost $50 per or more, so these guys were really ripped off and Lucent probably made out quite well.) [Cross posted from another list] Ian G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I don't understand about that case is that the precedent already exists. If a defendent declines to defend by supplying documents then the judge does not force them to do so in a civil case, instead the award goes against them. What is not clear is why the judge awarded in the favour of the government. By not supplying files, they clearly indicated they were using the patent. And even that wasn't ever in doubt. He should have just awarded summarily for the patent owners and that would have been that. And, it was only for a measly half million. By saving a half million in patent fees, Lucent and the USG have reduced their reputation for fair dealing, had the whole case blow up in their faces and now we're all poking around looking for how the patent was used by the _Jimmy Carter_
Rejected posting to ACCMAIL@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
You are not authorized to send mail to the ACCMAIL list from your cypherpunks@MINDER.NET account. You might be authorized to post to the list from another of your accounts, or perhaps when using another mail program configured to use a different e-mail address, but LISTSERV has no way to associate this other account or address with yours. If you need assistance or if you have any questions regarding the policy of the ACCMAIL list, please contact the list owners at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---BeginMessage--- ûöåÉ.Ù3PTy-Ôòøüt?-!f¡]êøÅ/eì/x Ò`¿ôO!FÀPbqw].É.UeÌÊt4zè¥úýü óËÍê¶$$rɲÄñîìÇ®wúÙ2ßT'Õ: Kùyl8N Dª2ÂWãJ¥1Û©ñ0jü¨æA8GÄkD«±P¡ Óµ|þá!8¶PM GJ÷È_dH?ï¡ü³ nþKê¹*÷0¾jÑLÜýÓõëÑ)b®gö¼ün3Ìe8Pã.¦½Ã¯sÊM»31#¢.:CÍ,ªÈ±vIùN¨~j÷»J Ë8jÁÆål¥ÙánwûèEl9½SL´OCÞZÔÙ/ùTNÜ]ßÞªRy×H`Ás³ªEhd× -- To contribute to the discussion, email to accmail@listserv.aol.com To unsubscribe, email to the *admin* address [EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE ACCMAIL as the message body. To get the latest version of the ACCMAIL FAQ, send a blank email to accmail.faq.en `AT` szs.net (replacing `AT` with @ to form a proper email address). -- ---End Message---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [Politech] Are geeks being targeted as terrorists? [fs]]
- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh declan@well.com - From: Declan McCullagh declan@well.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:29:16 -0700 To: politech@politechbot.com Subject: [Politech] Are geeks being targeted as terrorists? [fs] User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716) Original Message Subject: Geeks being targeted as terrorists Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 16:18:04 -0400 From: Richard M. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Declan McCullagh' declan@well.com Hi Declan, It appears that there is a growing group of geeks who are being singled out as terrorists. Although suspected or charged with terror-related crimes, these folks in many cases were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, have quirky hobbies, or showed poor judgement. Attached is a list of articles about these individuals and their alledged crimes. Richard M. Smith http://www.ComputerBytesMan.com = Suspicious behaviour on the tube http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1575411,00.html Cape pilot wages battle over FBI's 'No Fly' action http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/capepilot23.htm In N.Y., Case Of Germs Shifts From Bioterror To Moral Error http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16281-2004Jun29.html Man Charged Under Patriot Act for Laser http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=385589 Agents search homes of bioterror expert [Kenneth M. Berry] Actions in N.Y., N.J. part of anthrax investigation http://tinyurl.com/c6fnu Patent 6,710,711 - Method for identifying chemical, biological and nuclear attacks or hazards, Kenneth M. Berry http://tinyurl.com/3p6jj Scientist in plague vial case set to appear court http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Southwest/01/15/missing.plague/ The Hunting of Steven J. Hatfill Why are so many people eager to believe that this man is the anthrax killer? by David Tell http://tinyurl.com/8ac2m Man wrongly linked to Madrid bombings sues Names Ashcroft, Justice Department, FBI; challenges Patriot Act http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/04/mayfield.lawsuit/ ___ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) - End forwarded message - -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE signature.asc Description: Digital signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [Politech] White House supports forcible DNA extraction from Americans by cops [priv]]
- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh declan@well.com - From: Declan McCullagh declan@well.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 02:36:51 -0700 To: politech@politechbot.com Subject: [Politech] White House supports forcible DNA extraction from Americans by cops [priv] User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716) We discussed this here weeks ago: http://www.politechbot.com/2005/09/13/more-on-dna/ http://www.politechbot.com/2005/09/10/federal-dna-database/ --- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/23/AR2005092301665.html Bill Would Permit DNA Collection From All Those Arrested By Jonathan Krim Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, September 24, 2005; Page A03 Suspects arrested or detained by federal authorities could be forced to provide samples of their DNA that would be recorded in a central database under a provision of a Senate bill to expand government collection of personal data. The controversial measure was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week and is supported by the White House, but has not gone to the floor for a vote. It goes beyond current law, which allows federal authorities to collect and record samples of DNA only from those convicted of crimes. The data are stored in an FBI-maintained national registry that law enforcement officials use to aid investigations, by comparing DNA from criminals with evidence found at crime scenes. [...remainder snipped...] ___ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) - End forwarded message - -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE signature.asc Description: Digital signature
We can reject John Roberts and this is THE WAY we can get it done [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Million Email March to Stop John Roberts TAKE ACTION NOW at http://www.trotn.com Thousands and thousands of your fellow citizens are speaking out right now to oppose the nomination of John Roberts as chief justice of the Supreme Court. They are telling our senators that they don't want a justice who won't let us see any of his memos for the last 20 years. They are telling them they don't want a justice who tried to hide his leadership role in the extremely reactionary Federalist Society. They are telling them the most unpopular second term president in history does NOT have any mandate to appoint his own personal crony to such a position of absolute power. And they need to hear from you too. The question we must ask ourselves is this: If YOU had the power to cast the deciding vote on John Roberts, would you vote your conscience on principle or not? That is how you need to tell your senator they must vote as well, because you DO have that power. We are the American people, and our representatives we elected are there to listen to us and want we really want Especially if you are from Vermont or Wisconsin you must immediately contact Leahy, Feingold and Kohl and tell them they got it WRONG on Roberts in the judiciary committee and they need to correct their error. We already have a president who is incapable of ever admitting or correcting any mistake. We don't need that from our senators too. But whatever state you are from it is important for you to use the action form below to send a personal message to both your senators at one time, plus you can send a letter to the editor of your nearest daily newspaper, all with one click http://www.trotn.com Who were the self-appointed media pundits who dared to tell us Roberts was a done deal before the hearing even started? Who co-ordinated the corporate media campaign that poisoned our minds with the words of defeatism and submission? Indeed, who has unwittingly collaborated with the right wing talking points merchants by speaking those words of betrayal and resignation out of their own mouths? Why NOT demand what we really want? We are the people of the United States. We don't have to settle for less than we really deserve, a true mainstream justice who will rule fairly for all the people, not just on behalf of a minority of corporate crony friends. How dare anyone tell us Roberts is the best we can hope for. The best we can hope for is what we are BRAVE enough to demand as is our RIGHT by the mandate of our numbers speaking out. TAKE ACTION NOW at http://www.trotn.com or to get no more simply email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Instant Pleasures
Want a BIG (P)-(E)-(N)-(I)-(S) to bang the ladies? I am sure you do We ship our product in discrete packaging so your lady(s) won't know, but they will FEEL the difference in 1 week. Get Bigger Now! http://thisisarealtaco.com Don't want a bigger (P)-(E)-(N)-(I)-(S)? http://thisisarealtaco.com/b4/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [IP] China Tightens Its Restrictions for News Media on the Internet]
- Forwarded message from David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:49:32 -0400 To: Ip Ip ip@v2.listbox.com Subject: [IP] China Tightens Its Restrictions for News Media on the Internet X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Begin forwarded message: From: Dewayne Hendricks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: September 26, 2005 11:40:25 AM EDT To: Dewayne-Net Technology List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Dewayne-Net] China Tightens Its Restrictions for News Media on the Internet Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Note: This item comes from reader John McMullen. DLH] From: John F. McMullen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: September 25, 2005 10:58:53 PM PDT To: johnmac's living room [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Dewayne Hendricks [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: China Tightens Its Restrictions for News Media on the Internet From the New York Times -- http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/26/ international/asia/26china.html? ex=1285387200en=38ac65b7be2e2b9bei=5090partner=rssuserlandemc=rss China Tightens Its Restrictions for News Media on the Internet By JOSEPH KAHN BEIJING, Sept. 25 - China on Sunday imposed more restrictions intended to limit the news and other information available to Internet users, and it sharply restricted the scope of content permitted on Web sites. The rules are part of a broader effort to roll back what the Communist Party views as a threatening trend toward liberalization in the news media. Taken together, the measures amount to a stepped- up effort to police the Internet, which has become a dominant source of news and information for millions of urban Chinese. Major search engines and portals like Sina.com and Sohu.com, used by millions of Chinese each day, must stop posting their own commentary articles and instead make available only opinion pieces generated by government-controlled newspapers and news agencies, the regulations stipulate. The rules also state that private individuals or groups must register as news organizations before they can operate e-mail distribution lists that spread news or commentary. Few individuals or private organizations are likely to be allowed to register as news organizations, meaning they can no longer legally distribute information by e-mail. Existing online news sites, like those run by newspapers or magazines, must give priority to news and commentary pieces distributed by the leading national and provincial news organs. This restriction on the ability of Web sites to republish articles produced by the huge array of news organizations that do not fall under direct government control seems intended to ensure that the Propaganda Department has time to filter content generated by local publications before it can be widely disseminated on the Internet. The new rules are the first major update to policies on Internet news and opinion since 2000. The foremost responsibility of news sites on the Internet is to serve the people, serve socialism, guide public opinion in the right direction, and uphold the interests of the country and the public good, the regulations state. Although Chinese authorities have already effectively unlimited powers to control the gathering and publication of news, the Propaganda Department has sometimes struggled to censor information about delicate developments before it circulates on the Internet. About 100 million Chinese now have access to the Internet. Though the government closely monitors domestic content and blocks what officials consider to be subversive Web sites from overseas, savvy users can obtain domestic and overseas information that never appears in China's traditional news media. By the time officials have decided that a topic might prove harmful to the governing party's agenda, an item about it has often already been posted or discussed on hundreds of sites and viewed by many people, defeating some traditional censorship tools. Experts who follow the Internet say one of the most significant changes is the ban on self-generated opinion and commentary articles that accompany the standard state-issued news bulletins on major portal sites. Weblog at: http://weblog.warpspeed.com - You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ - End forwarded message - -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Wired on Secrecy Power Sinks Patent Case
At 09:14 AM 9/20/2005, Tyler Durden wrote: Very interesting CPunks reading, for a variety of reasons. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68894,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1 Of course, the fact that Lucent has been in shit shape financially must have nothing to do with what is effectively a state-sponsored protection of intellectual theft and profiting by Lucent (merely keeping the tech under wraps would have been possible in a closed-doors session. Remember that connectors can easily cost $50 per or more, so these guys were really ripped off and Lucent probably made out quite well.) [Cross posted from another list] Ian G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I don't understand about that case is that the precedent already exists. If a defendent declines to defend by supplying documents then the judge does not force them to do so in a civil case, instead the award goes against them. What is not clear is why the judge awarded in the favour of the government. By not supplying files, they clearly indicated they were using the patent. And even that wasn't ever in doubt. He should have just awarded summarily for the patent owners and that would have been that. And, it was only for a measly half million. By saving a half million in patent fees, Lucent and the USG have reduced their reputation for fair dealing, had the whole case blow up in their faces and now we're all poking around looking for how the patent was used by the _Jimmy Carter_
