Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RightHaven Lawyer Says Browser Ate His Homework

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the wanna-see-you-in-chambers dept.

The Courts 91

J053 writes "Wired Magazine reports that Righthaven attorney Shawn Mangano's excuse for being a day late with his explanation as to why the litigation factory made 'dishonest statements to the court' was that his web browser upgraded and he could no longer attach PDF files to his submissions. Yeah, right ..."

cancel ×

91 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Obama Post (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638594)

My legal advisers have informed me that this post does not constitute trolling.

Re:First Obama Post (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639442)

Modded Troll. How can I mod a mod Funny? Metamoderation should have a way of doing that.

Re:First Obama Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640124)

Modded Troll. How can I mod a mod Funny? Metamoderation should have a way of doing that.

Don't. It'd be like standing up and saying "Oh! I get it! It's funny because I thought you said "Where's the soap" but you said "wears the soap"! Hah!"

My Balls Are On Fire. (0)

SpongeBob Hitler (1848328) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639598)

That is all.

Re:My Balls Are On Fire. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639630)

Put 'em out when they're medium-rare. I'm off to get some BBQ sauce and beer.....

And I'd have gotten first post ... (2)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638598)

... but my browser ate my post!.

Seriously, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy - but it does point out the problem with browsers that, at startup, make you wait while they ping their mothership to check for updates when all you want to do is surf for 5 minutes.

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (3, Interesting)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638624)

That is presuming if it happened at all. I'm getting this funny feeling Righthaven is some low-brow shysters who conned some dumb-ass newspaper types out of their money. The whole thing is unbelievably badly constructed, it's just got to be a fraud.

That's why the judge is so p***ed off (5, Informative)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638682)

Righthaven was suing for copyright, when they weren't the owners of the copyrighted material. You can't "hive off" the right to sue to a 3rd party like Righthaven. Righthaven lacked standing, and should have known they lacked standing (after all, if you're a bunch of lawyers suing over copyrights, you should at least know copyright law, right?)

The way each suit should have proceeded was that the rights-holders hire Righthaven to sue on their behalf; this makes things harder for Righthaven in court, since then they rights-holder has to be involved at every step - something that drives up the cost of each suit. Righthaven wanted to do this stuff in bulk, un its own name, without crossing each T and dotting each I, and it doesn't work that way.

Then there was the sloppy casework ...

The judge was not amused at what looks like a fraud upon the court, and has been kicking Righthaven in the nads ever since.

Re:That's why the judge is so p***ed off (2)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638956)

Yeah... gee willickers Batman....

If only your logic applied to Deeds of Trust and proving that you have the mortgage note maybe then hundreds of thousands of people would not have had their homes stolen from them.

Same issue. Mortgage companies literally come into the courts with bulk requests and as long as the Deed of Trust was attached the judges were rubber stamping them according to the law. You could not even argue legal standing without filing an additional lawsuit naming the mortgage company as the defendant, precluding all possibilities of a counter claim in the same court case.

For years and years and years now that same concept, the rights-holder involved at every step, has been bypassed to increase the speed, efficiency, and lower the costs of securitizing mortgages at the extreme detriment of the home owners.

If only judges would start standing up more en masse and say enough is enough with crazy attempts like this where legal standing was questionable in the beginning.

Don't get me wrong, hearing that Righthaven got its ass handed to them is good news for the day, but hardly as a huge of a win if true legal standing was required for the real crisis.... the housing clusterfuck of the last 3 years.

P.S - I did have a home stolen from me. Two financial institutions both claimed I needed to be paying them and they took over the mortgage. Still involved with a fraud investigation, but still lost the house. It did not matter that I tried to explain to the judge that I had no way of knowing which entity was the correct one to pay since they both had the power to foreclose on me in two different court cases. Explain that BS.

Re:That's why the judge is so p***ed off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640690)

I hope you get a lot of money out of the "other" one.

Re:That's why the judge is so p***ed off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642272)

P.S - I did have a home stolen from me. Two financial institutions both claimed I needed to be paying them and they took over the mortgage. Still involved with a fraud investigation, but still lost the house. It did not matter that I tried to explain to the judge that I had no way of knowing which entity was the correct one to pay since they both had the power to foreclose on me in two different court cases. Explain that BS.

I'm calling BS.

The legal remedy was to make the payments to the court in escrow. That stops all foreclosure proceedings.

Unless, of course, you were in default to begin with.

Sounds like you were just trying to weasel out of paying and are trying to blame others.

Re:That's why the judge is so p***ed off (4, Insightful)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642338)

Righthaven wanted to do this stuff in bulk, un its own name, without crossing each T and dotting each I, and it doesn't work that way.

No, the newspaper group/company was involved in this highly and the real plan was that they wanted to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted to sue and try to get money the way Righthaven's been doing, but... they wanted to avoid any financial liability to themselves in the process. So they provided seed money to setup Righthaven, and then setup an agreement where they only gave Righthaven the right to sue for their copyrights. The newspaper company kept ownership of the copyrights, and if Righthaven's scheme failed, then the newspaper company couldn't be hit with sanctions and/or lawsuits because Righthaven did the suing, not them, honest!

But it's not working out that way for them. Righthaven seems to be run by lawyers who got their bar license from a Cracker Jack box who have committed numerous and serious mistakes. Failing to reveal that the newspaper company had a pecuniary interest in the lawsuits is getting them into major, major trouble, as is not actually owning the copyrights. And at least one person that Righthaven targeted has filed a counter-suit against both Righthaven AND the newspaper company. Personally I hope the counter-suit gets to go forward and that more of those targeted join in and go after the newspaper company too. This whole thing appears to have been their brainchild, not Righthaven's founder, and they were deliberately trying to game the courts.

Re:That's why the judge is so p***ed off (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642902)

and then setup an agreement where they only gave Righthaven the right to sue for their copyrights. The newspaper company kept ownership of the copyrights

... which is what I said ... and that the judge is cheesed off because Righthaven, not owning the copyrights, doesn't have standing to sue.

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

Dhalka226 (559740) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640472)

Honestly, I believe it (or something like it) happened.

They may be bad lawyers. They may be ambitious, ambivalent to the harm they cause others, out only for themselves and their pocketbooks.

In fact, that's why I believe it happened. This judge is pissed, and at some point self preservation has to kick in. Why antagonize him further? When a judge is considering beating you all about the courtroom with his gavel, I don't see how anybody with a functioning brain puts that off. They may be bad, unscrupulous lawyers, but they were at least smart enough to get into and through law school and pass the bar exam. I don't see them as stupid people. I don't see them as willing to risk their careers for... what? Cheap thrills? Two weeks of drunken partying before they realize they had an assignment due?

I don't get that.

Con-artist have more pride (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36641600)

I disagree that a poorly constructed gambit indicates an intentional con. Con-artists are, as the name implies, artists. They take pride in their craft and their success hinges on making a very creditable and believable case.

No, this type of shabby scheme has to be the result of overly bright young lawyers believing they have found a loophole they can exploit and then talking each other into groupthink until they can no longer objectively evaluate the legal issues on their own merits.

 

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (2)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642006)

Righthaven was a corporation formed by one or more newspaper companies in order to sue for copyright infringement without directly tying their names to the lawsuits. This strategy failed because the newspaper companies id not actually transfer the copyrights to Righthaven. This was some newspaper owners trying to be copyright trolls without getting the bad publicity that goes with tat.

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638986)

What browsers do that?

I use Safari, Firefox 4 and 5, and Chrome on Mac OS and Chrome on Win 7, none of them make me wait while they ping their mothership to check for updates.

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639148)

Both firefox and opera do it under linux, firefox does it under windows (haven't checked the others).

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

SockPuppetOfTheWeek (1910282) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641782)

That's ridiculous. I know for a fact that I've opened Firefox on computers with no active internet connection, so whether or not it attempts to "ping the mothership" it certainly doesn't make you wait around while it does it. Or if it does, it happens so fast that nobody would notice the delay, which would invalidate your point anyway.

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641888)

Your "I know for a fact" just makes you out to be a dumbass. First, I never said it does it every time. Second, there's no reason to try if it doesn't see a connection to the net. Third, you probably don't have a bunch of extensions running, or you would have gotten warnings.

Don't even bother trying ... you need to preserve those remaining brain cells.

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

SockPuppetOfTheWeek (1910282) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642048)

No, my "I know for a fact" meant that I don't feel like exiting Firefox and disconnecting from the net to try it out, but I'm sure I've done it in the past. And frankly you just came across as a jerk. What the hell?

First - fine, it doesn't do it every time? In that case, I'm not exiting Firefox and disconnecting from the net to try it out repeatedly. But I'm still sure I've never noticed it.

Second - the way you typically check for a connection to the net is by attempting to ping the mothership. Six one way, half a dozen the other.

Third - which extensions throw warnings if you're not connected to the net? I'll remember not to install them.

My method of killing brain cells is, and has always been, booze. Thanks for your concern. ~

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639452)

none of them make me wait while they ping their mothership to check for updates.

Maybe they don't MAKE you, but they pop up the suggestion to upgrade and make doing so the default and imply not doing so is dangerous..

Re:And I'd have gotten first post ... (0)

sconeu (64226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639800)

IE9 fucks up Outlook Web Access.

I'm guessing that's what happened.

Adobe License (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638602)

I hope that he purchased a license from Adobe for the right to publish PDF files!

Re:Adobe License (2)

SplatMan_DK (1035528) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638736)

I hope that he purchased a license from Adobe for the right to publish PDF files!

Since PDF, also called ISO 32000-1:2008 [wikipedia.org] , is an Open Standard, and has been for many years, why would he need to purchase a license???

- Jesper

Re:Adobe License (2)

Groo Wanderer (180806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638904)

For the same reason you need a license for things covered under fair use perhaps?

          -Charlie

Re:Adobe License (1)

ArtemaOne (1300025) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642560)

Perhaps not. It is an open standard, you can use it as a user all you want. I haven't used Adobe's software to view PDF files in years. That company's offering is horribly bloated and virus susceptible.

Patents too (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638984)

Since PDF, also called ISO 32000-1:2008 [wikipedia.org] , is an Open Standard, and has been for many years, why would he need to purchase a license???

Aren't the MPEG-4 specs also published as a standard by ISO? Granted, that's patents, not copyrights, but lawyers still like to use the confusing blanket term "intellectual property" for both.

Might be true, but irrelevant. (1)

Xaositecte (897197) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638608)

The interface changed, he's "not a tech person" and couldn't figure it out for a day.

I'm willing to believe it's the truth, that he's an idiot, but it's not a valid excuse for anything.

Re:Might be true, but irrelevant. (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639106)

I'm willing to believe it's the truth, that he's an idiot, but it's not a valid excuse for anything.

Heh. "I know what a bunch of computer industry terms mean, I'm not an idiot!"

Re:Might be true, but irrelevant. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640462)

And the info has been on my ISDN-Harddrive for the longest time, just my SCSI-Modem didn't want to transit it properly!

Re:Might be true, but irrelevant. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642204)

Definitely not a valid excuse. This is why those quaint things like paper and bike messengers exists.

Its your fault. (5, Insightful)

hedgemage (934558) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638650)

I'm getting my MBA and many of my profs do everything digitally from accepting research papers, to sending out syllabi to arranging meetings via e-mail.
One thing that I have learned, especially when giving a presentation is that if anything goes wrong, its your fault.

Powerpoint doesn't work? Its your fault. Didn't embed that YouTube video correctly? Its your fault. Your laptop can't talk to the projector? Its your fault. The Projector doesn't work? Its your fault.
If you aren't professional enough to have your research paper backed up on a thumbdrive, a second laptop for your group presentation, or even /gasp!/ a paper copy, ITS YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.

Welcome to being a professional in the 21st century, where using technology is necessary, but knowing what to do when it fails is smart.

Re:Its your fault. (3, Informative)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638710)

Powerpoint doesn't work? Its your fault. Didn't embed that YouTube video correctly? Its your fault. Your laptop can't talk to the projector? Its your fault. The Projector doesn't work? Its your fault. If you aren't professional enough to have your research paper backed up on a thumbdrive, a second laptop for your group presentation, or even /gasp!/ a paper copy, ITS YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT. Welcome to being a professional in the 21st century, where using technology is necessary, but knowing what to do when it fails is smart.

in the 20th century, you had to k ow how to change the build in an overhead, brought transparencies (your "slide deck") as a backup to PowerPoint in case the laptop or projector died (and had someone flip through the slides as you went so they were current if you needed them) and brought hardcopy.

It's always been YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.

As a side note, when I did a presentation in our MBA's presentation seminar (how to do a presentation) the lecturer was surprised when, after he said, "the projector build just went out - what do you do?" I turned of the overhead, opened the top, slide the bulb select lever and turned it back on and went on. I think he was disappointed that I ruined his "teaching moment" by not being a moron, though I guess moron / MBA is considered redundant on /.). I learned early on in my career to get there in time to see how the projector work, where the light and thermostat controls are so you are ready when it's showtime.

Re:Its your fault. (0)

petteyg359 (1847514) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638742)

Most morons know the difference between a build and a bulb. You have to give the morons some credit for not being a moron like yourself.

Re:Its your fault. (1)

SplatMan_DK (1035528) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638810)

Powerpoint doesn't work? Its your fault. Didn't embed that YouTube video correctly? Its your fault. Your laptop can't talk to the projector? Its your fault. The Projector doesn't work? Its your fault. If you aren't professional enough to have your research paper backed up on a thumbdrive, a second laptop for your group presentation, or even /gasp!/ a paper copy, ITS YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.

Hmmm... sounds an awful lot like you're quoting Guy Kawasaki's [guykawasaki.com] The Art of the Start [kobobooks.com] without proper referencing ... ;-)

- Jesper

Re:Its your fault. (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639164)

Time collapse in 4:30--

Article about trolling copyright has a respondent to a post on the article that trolls copyright. Circular halo logic complete. Implosion pending. Please step away from your computer.

Re:Its your fault. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639202)

But it's not my computer. I'm at the public library.

Re:Its your fault. (1, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639826)

Doing a quick Google search it appears CM/ECF is not compatible with Firefox 4, 5, or IE 9. Neveda is in a servre financial housing crises still and the government probably is using old versions of the software too as a result.

I wish people were not so self defensive and quick to blame, point fingers, or sue. Shit happens and maybe if we were not so harsh to judge others we would not be so self defensive. Just because some MBA professor is an a**hole does not mean everyone else should be one too. In other cultures outside of North America people do not act like that and life is much less stressful.

I am not saying it is ok for things to happen if you are a professional, but things do happen. I believe the lawyer. I found this [wordpress.com] and another link which is a PDF file that I wont link which explains acrobat issues with IE 9.

Many of us are quick to blame that it is his fault, are probably the same techies who advise users to accept Windows Updates. In addition, recommending Firefox can cause the problem too if the user sees a box saying please upgrade. Infact, the upgrade from Firefox 4 to 5 is automatic. Any of you recommended Firefox over IE? Then you have no right to judge him. How should a non web developer know that plugins break between browsers?

I am sure things out of your control happen all the time like your car not starting before an important meeting. Does that mean you need to be fired? Come on. This issue does show a problem with browsers and intranet sites and it needs to be addressed. This guy is a professional yes, but he is a legal one and not an I.T. one.

Re:Its your fault. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640188)

In other cultures outside of North America people do not act like that and life is much less stressful.

It's less stressful until you need to get something done, like build a house, send your kids to school, get a passport, etc. and you need to wait for hours and start bribing people to get them to get moving.

That's if the "other culture" isn't prone to the occasional coup or genocide, as many of them are.

I am sure things out of your control happen all the time like your car not starting before an important meeting.

But it's not "out of your control". If the meeting is important enough, you rent a hotel room next door and get there a day before.

Re:Its your fault. (2)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640322)

Doing a quick Google search it appears CM/ECF is not compatible with Firefox 4, 5, or IE 9. Neveda is in a servre financial housing crises still and the government probably is using old versions of the software too as a result.

I wish people were not so self defensive and quick to blame, point fingers, or sue. Shit happens and maybe if we were not so harsh to judge others we would not be so self defensive. Just because some MBA professor is an a**hole does not mean everyone else should be one too. In other cultures outside of North America people do not act like that and life is much less stressful.

It's likely not some MBA professor making up the rule, certainly when I was at university it was drilled into us in no uncertain terms that university-wide policy was very clear - computer failure was NEVER an acceptable reason to ask for an extension or extenuating circumstances. You're a grown adult, you're meant to account for this sort of possibility and be able to come up with some sort of plan B.

Re:Its your fault. (2)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641228)

OK, then replace "fault" with "responsibility" and Registered Coward v2's point still stands. When a judge has told you to do something, it's your responsibility to get it done, even if you didn't directly cause the delay. So his laptop didn't work. He couldn't use a flash drive to move the document to a desktop and send it from there? Or have his IT guy (either on-staff or their usual contractor) do it for him? Or simply call the judge or clerk, explain the situation, and beg for an extension to fix the problem?

Regardless of how legitimate or not the excuse is, it's the lawyer's responsibility for addressing it appropriately. He didn't. And that's part why no one here has sympathy for him.

Re:Its your fault. (1)

drolli (522659) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640522)

Yes. thats exactly right. Restrict the tools to the ones which work. Always have your presentations as pdf or/and bitmaps with you, if its not you own laptop. Also have them with you if you have them on you own laptop, in case it fails.

Re:Its your fault. (1)

DiEx-15 (959602) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641206)

I'd mod you up if I could

Firefox 5 (2)

Archwyrm (670653) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638670)

I knew forcing everyone to upgrade from Firefox 4 to Firefox 5 was a bad idea. This lawyer is obviously an innocent victim!

Re:Firefox 5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638872)

If he was using Firefox, I'd almost say the judge should just accept the excuse, since there's a chance that the random and unnecessary update really did break a plugin or extension and prevent him from uploading using whatever their system was.

But then the article points out that the system works with any major browser, and that if he was using Firefox, he'd likely have a working IE or Safari (depending on platform - he's a copyright troll, so no chance he's using Linux).

I'm still pissed off enough at Mozilla over Firefox 5 that I kind of wish it were true. Especially if he doesn't get away with it. Then I'd still have a story to point to for Firefox 5 screwing someone over, but it would be funny, because he deserved to be screwed.

Re:Firefox 5 (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639962)

Are you kidding? This is a benefit! Now if only we can get Windows to crash for lawyers on the next version, our planet will be saved!

Re:Firefox 5 (0)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640968)

Are you kidding? This is a benefit! Now if only we can get Windows to crash for lawyers on the next version, our planet will be saved!

Microsoft Windows Save-the-Planet Release - "Windows ain't done until the lawyers won't run!"

Or just have some nice hackers write up a virus that, if the current document looks like it's in a legal format and full of legalese, silently insert a bunch of tourette-isms in it on saving.

Let the judges sort it out :-)

Hmmm... (1)

Mister Transistor (259842) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638728)

Yeah, Right. - haven?

Why so skeptical? (1)

LowneWulf (210110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638780)

Murphy's Law doesn't distinguish between good intentions and sleazy trolls. Haven't any of you ever had a hard drive crash a day before a major project was due?

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638806)

Because he certainly couldn't use Internet Explorer, Chrome or Safari to finish the job, right?

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638924)

He literally may have no idea there are other browsers in the world. I've met people with multiple PhD's that didn't know that. It used to surprise me, the first couple of times, but now I just assume people aren't that knowledgeable about computers, no matter what other qualifications they have, until they prove otherwise.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638992)

For technology, in my experience, the better educated they are, the more clueless they are

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640480)

It's narrowing the field of education. More and more people know more and more about less and less. I guess the end would be that everyone knows everything about nothing.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639014)

But were those PhDs working in an web based field?

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639388)

That doesn't surprise me - getting a PhD involves knowing a great deal about a specialist subject. Getting more than one tells me that the person likes concentrating on one thing and tuning other stuff out. I would expect such a person to have even more gaps in their knowledge than average, whether web browsing, car maintenance or sports trivia.

Doesn't matter. (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639554)

His job requires a computer. He should thus know something about computers.

Re:Doesn't matter. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640492)

I bet he does. I can see how the job interview [youtube.com] went...

In other words, it's easy to BS your boss into believing you know something if he himself is completely clueless.

SanityInAnarchy: See this link... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640910)

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2282088&cid=36639318 [slashdot.org]

I really don't appreciate you talking behind my back either, but see that, & we can discuss it there...

APK

Re:SanityInAnarchy: See this link... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36641450)

Better than talking to your face, you fat stupid moron.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640058)

Windows update automatically upgrades IE8 to IE9 without a user prompt these past few weeks. That is problematic as IE 9 has more in common with chrome and firefox than IE 8 so many intranet apps expect the non standard quirks of jscript and css box models. IE 9 being good is its major problem.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638878)

Only when my paper wasn't finished on time.

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638892)

Nope. Some of us take care of our hard drives.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639108)

So - what, exactly, do you do to "take care of our hard drives"?

Personally, I don't do anything. My machine is plugged into a UPS, to protect from power surges. That's it. Ext4 file system does it's own maintenance, I don't even defrag. So, how can I improve my hard drive's life expectancy?

Hard drives do die, just like any and all other hardware devices. The only way to ensure that you don't lose data, is to BACK UP THAT DATA! And, repetitive redundancy is a good thing, when it comes to backups.

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639476)

SMART monitoring. (Or, old-school style, just making a note on your calendar for X months since you put it in service.)

When your drive starts looking a little old, you pull it from workstation service (where a failure could mean up to a day's lost work, plus a little downtime while restoring backups -- putting you a day late for that court deadline) and put it on your media center (where a failure means no movies while you retorrent everything, rerip DVDs, restore from a stack of BD-Rs, or whatever else applies in your case).

That's really all you can do as far as the drive's concerned. Sometimes a drive fails early with no warning, and then you're SOL since your last backup -- which, like you said, is your main line of defense, and had better be frequent and redundant.

Of course, it would behoove a lawyer to be aware of his expected recovery time from random failure events, and stay that far ahead of the deadline.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639566)

Believe it or not, a lot of people treat their computers pretty badly, especially laptops and especially work computers. Simply keeping the computer in a corner without ever moving it, on a USP, in a location where there are no wild temperature fluctuations etc, that's already going to make a difference to the longevity of any component, including HDs. Other factors that matter: powersaving features and head parking might be buggy or badly set up on the OS, and if the disk is kept full nearly all the time, then it's likely that most of the reading/writing will overuse a small part of the disk.

Now, since we're talking about a lawyer, he probably IS using a laptop, probably IS carrying it with him all over the place, and probably IS NOT technically inclined (euphemism). I'd say his behaviour alone is likely to be an important factor in the longevity of his HD.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639730)

So - what, exactly, do you do to "take care of our hard drives"?

I like to come home with my hard drive's favorite flowers every night. It's the little things that show it I still love it after all these years together.

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638902)

Because IE updates through windows update so it can't be that due to timing. And it's highly improbable that a program designed to work for all browsers would rely on white-listing rather then checking if version is greater then (after all, things don't break randomly with updates unlike the old IE support). Also if he's using an alternative browser, he could have easily fall back to IE.

In any case, it would be easy to check and confirm but my money is that he's using a lie above what he already lied about. After all, he probably thinks it won't be checked and he's probably right due to the hassle.

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639334)

OK, the update to his computer made it incompatable with the system he needed to upload his documents. Note that he didn't say that his computer ctashed, only that he couldn't upload the document. Even my kids know how to save their documents to a flash drive and go to another computer. I personally don't beleive that anyone who can graduate from law school is so inept that he can't do what my high School kids can do.

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639856)

This is not an email program. All PDF documents must be submitted in the intranet app so if the javascript for IE 9 is not compatible iwth the Javascript for IE 8 then it might not load all the way. I am not a web developer but I do plan to become one and this is a major issue with IE 9. An intranet or website will see IE in its user agent and feed it outdated javascript assuming it is IE 6 to IE 8.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

Catnaps (2044938) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640138)

So press the Compatibility button. While there's no guarantee of it working, it's not exactly difficult.

Re:Why so skeptical? (1)

lucian1900 (1698922) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641488)

Yes. And I immediately used the backup hardrive for my OS and the offsite backup for the project code. I know it's hard to be this disciplined, but it really pays.

Re:Why so skeptical? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642888)

If it wasn't backed up, it wasn't that "major."

Lawyers (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638858)

It's the 98% that give the other 2% a bad name.

can we please just do them and call it done? (1)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638914)

Can we please just line up owner(s)/officer(s) of Stevens Media and and those of Rightshaven up against a wall and shoot them all in the head, then call it done? These people are nothing more than parasites/thugs, and should be treated as such.

Lynx (1)

cela0811 (1901860) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638920)

Maybe he was using Lynx.

To paraphrase ... (1)

Tjp($)pjT (266360) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639226)

Ignorance of the technology is no excuse ...

Righthaven = RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639238)

Does the RIAA own the copyright for the works that they have sued for on behalf of Sony, EMI, etc.?

Re:Righthaven = RIAA (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642042)

Does the RIAA own the copyright for the works that they have sued for on behalf of Sony, EMI, etc.?

You actually capture the difference in your question. The RIAA sues on behalf of Sony, EMI, etc.. Righthaven sued on behalf of Righthaven, while the newspapers still owned the copyright.

No paralegal? (4, Insightful)

Scutter (18425) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639316)

Are you kidding me? Mr Big Shot lawyer is the ONLY ONE in his law firm with a computer? He doesn't have a single para working for him that knows how to work a web browser and can submit it for him? No partners who can submit (or at least lend him their computer)? I am 100% on the side of the MBA commenters in this thread. If you can't get it in on time, IT'S YOUR DAMN FAULT. FIND A WAY TO DO IT. Mail it, fax it, sneaker-net it, just get it in. "My browser ate it" is a lame-ass excuse and his censure should be doubled as a result of shoveling that plateful of crap at the court. He had two weeks to submit it and he waited until the last second before trying. His excuse is 100% pure weapons-grade bolognium.

Re:No paralegal? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639840)

In this recession many laywers have been rightsized and it is becoming quite common not to hire paralegals to save on costs. A good one costs at least $45,000 a year minimium and if you only make $90,000 a year that would cut your pay in half to the same level as the paralegal! This does not factor in increased taxes or healthcare costs which are growing unsustainable huge.

I believe healthcare costs alone explain why millions are out of work. It is just very expensive to hire an American.

I think he worked for many hours on the document and tried to perfect it at the last minute when he got the surprise. The CM/ECF software is the only way a court will accept the document and this guy got screwed. My hunch is he had Windows update put IE to 9 and listing to us geeks he always says yes to auto updates.

IE 9 is getting a lot of pissed off users in addition to Firefox 5 users. Acrobat is known to be flakely with Firefox 5 too and it is a mess. Like I told the MBA guy, shit happens and yes browsers never had been this much of a problem. They are upgrading too quickly and the last time this happened during the IE and Netscape wars we did not have intranet/cloud apps yet so it was no biggie like today.

Re:No paralegal? (1)

Scutter (18425) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641008)

I think he worked for many hours on the document and tried to perfect it at the last minute when he got the surprise. The CM/ECF software is the only way a court will accept the document and this guy got screwed. My hunch is he had Windows update put IE to 9 and listing to us geeks he always says yes to auto updates.

It's NOT IE9's fault. It's HIS fault for not leaving himself adequate time to deal with technical problems.

Re:No paralegal? (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641246)

In this recession many laywers have been rightsized

When you don't have enough staff on hand to handle perfectly non-catastrophic situations, you've blown past "rightsized" into the realm of "gottengreedysized".

Re:No paralegal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36641756)

Ha. Well, my browser NEVER opens a PDF. Download like any other file, you fucking moron. Opening a PDF is just begging to be hit by a drive-by PDF exploit. What's this, my browser downloaded a PDF that I didn't expect to download? No problem... just delete without opening. But if I was you (or this idiot lawyer), I'd already be pwned.

Re:No paralegal? (1)

lolcutusofbong (2041610) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642054)

If he's using a Mac and Safari, there's literally no way to do that, since the entire windowing system is built on top of PostScript, so PDFs open automatically in basically everything.

it happened to me too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639364)

Not that I believe most of what Righthaven says ... but it happened to me too. I had some kind of issue saving PDF's when I upgraded to IE9. I think I unistalled the browser Acrobat plug-in and loaded the regular Acrobat program and had the browser open the application automatically. Then I was able to save the files like I did before the upgrade.

well... (2)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639846)

I happen to have witnessed personally that Firefox 5 cannot run the PDF Forge toolbar while 4 could. I just ran into that problem at my work for the few firefox users. So it is technically possible considering the huge coincidental timing of that.

WELL... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36641298)

So it is technically possible considering the huge coincidental timing of that.

But that still makes it HIS FAULT. It really don't matter if the technical issue is real. His job, his fault.

Re:well... (1)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642370)

I happen to have witnessed personally that Firefox 5 cannot run the PDF Forge toolbar while 4 could. I just ran into that problem at my work for the few firefox users. So it is technically possible considering the huge coincidental timing of that.

If he had Firefox, and was using Windows (most likely) he also had Internet Explorer to fall back on. What are the chances that both browsers would stop working with the filing system on the same day? Not looking good is it? Why didn't he try using a colleague's PC instead? Odds are getting even lower here aren't they? There's just too many ways he could have gotten around this that it's very, very hard to believe. Plus, Righthaven's not exactly got a good track record of respect for the courts, which is why they were having to file this response in the first place. So, you'll have to forgive us if we fail to give them the benefit of the doubt, they've kinda lost all credibility a long time ago.

Pure BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36641950)

So his browser choked. Waah. He could have:

  • Printed-as-fax to the clerk of the that court.
  • Print to paper, then fax it.
  • Print to paper, hire a courier service.
  • Printed it and hand delivered it.

I mean damn ... I'm as lazy as they come but when it comes to Serious Shit I learned (the hard way) that "They" have their deadline and you need to have another one: An earlier one. Appears this dummy is learning that old adage about a day late and a dollar short. I suspect many dollars shortage is in his immediate future.

Happened to me to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643260)

But I accepted it as my own damn fault and took a zero. I'll be alright. Anyway, to avoid future problems, can anyone recommend a remote desktop program? I want to be free and manage to get around my NAT router.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>