×

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!

Bitcoin Trademark Troll Now Sending Bogus DMCA Takedowns

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the my-claims-are-legit dept.

Bitcoin 120

An anonymous reader writes "A couple weeks ago, Slashdot wrote about a lawyer named Michael Pascazi, who was trying to trademark Bitcoin. Techdirt picked up on the story, including Pascazi's evidence of the trademark. Pascazi has now sent Techdirt a bogus DMCA takedown request over the post, claiming that the header and footer in his stationery, which appears via an embed on the story, violates his copyright. He appears to be claiming that simply posting any version of his stationery is a copyright violation. It's not clear if the content in question is even copyrightable, and if it is, how Techdirt's use isn't fair use."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

120 comments

LulzSec, Attack! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36815958)

3...2...1...

Re:LulzSec, Attack! (3, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816150)

I'm Michael Pascazi, and I'm SUING YOU because you won't acknowledge the DMCA take-down I sent you, after your continued violations regarding my PATENTED INSANITY HELMET!

Re:LulzSec, Attack! (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816788)

Actually, if you ignore a DMCA take-down notice, going to court to enforce it is the next step. Of course, suppressing publishing of legal documents based off the premise the letterhead it is printed on is copyrighted is pretty bogus, likely to be outright dismissed by the judge.

Re:LulzSec, Attack! (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816918)

That's the kind of thing that can lead to a litigant learning why it's a bad idea to irritate a judge.

-jcr

Re:LulzSec, Attack! (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 2 years ago | (#36819140)

Why would Lulzsec or Anon want to do anything about this?

The bitcoiners are getting an IRL trolling from this guy. I would have thought the Anon reaction would be to reach for the popcorn...

Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36815976)

He should be summarily executed as an example and to prevent such foolishness in the future. We don't need him polluting our gene pool.

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816024)

Today, in news, Michael Pascazi was launched into the sun by a unanimous vote of the worlds population, on charges of being a complete douche.

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (1)

Manos_Of_Fate (1092793) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816464)

Today, in news, Michael Pascazi was launched into the sun by a unanimous vote of the worlds population, on charges of being a complete douche.

If we make a habit of this, we probably have enough complete douches here to keep the sun going for a few million extra years. Not to mention what this would do for our population issues...

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 2 years ago | (#36819012)

Well, there goes everybody in the Senate and Congress. And the President. And all the governors and state representatives.

Now, who's up for running for office?

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#36819794)

Today, in news, Michael Pascazi was launched into the sun by a unanimous vote of the worlds population, on charges of being a complete douche.

If we make a habit of this, we probably have enough complete douches here to keep the sun going for a few million extra years. Not to mention what this would do for our population issues...

Assuming the average douche weights 80 KG and is consistent with the human body (10% hydrogen) that's 8 KG of hydrogen per douche, how long until we place enough fuel in the sun before the ratio of hydrogen to helium causes the sun well...

to explode (or at least eject some douche matter)?

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (1)

HermMunster (972336) | more than 2 years ago | (#36819832)

Techdirt knows how to deal with the guy. The only thing that they would be worried about is maintaining their safe harbor status, thus they'll react, probably not in the manner this obvious troll expects. I am sure they have been waiting on challenge like this. Mike Masnick isn't even surprised I'd expect.

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (1)

uxbn_kuribo (1146975) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816850)

Isn't "giving lawyers a bad name" akin to saying "Lord Voldemort is kind of a douche?"

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817274)

"Score:3, Insightful"
FUCK YOU WHOEVER VOTED

PS: Dear mods, please shut down slashdot.org. It has clearly went downhill and became a fucking Kotakulike. I loved slashdot.org back when I had dial-up and when slashdot.org had some semi-real journalism, but now the quality of posts and posters is utter shit.

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817552)

Hello? Mike, is that you?

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817556)

But his post is Insightful. Much more so than your baby rant there. Go fuck yourself.

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817576)

Hi Michael!

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817688)

Why is annonymous harrasing this guy?

Re:Gives lawyers everywhere a bad name. (1)

kpainter (901021) | more than 2 years ago | (#36819878)

He should be summarily executed as an example and to prevent such foolishness in the future. We don't need him polluting our gene pool.

Agreed. But as to giving lawyers a bad name, no he doesn't. Lawyers already have a more than bad name. IANAL, thank god!

Not news (1, Funny)

YodasEvilTwin (2014446) | more than 2 years ago | (#36815986)

Arrogant and dumb person does arrogant and dumb things: Show at 11.

Re:Not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816026)

Is this a meta-comment?

(captcha is selfsame)

Re:Not news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817526)

obviously his pattern recognition skill are da shit. Have some fun with it like the rest of us eh Yoda?

Fraud (2)

sentientbeing (688713) | more than 2 years ago | (#36815996)

This is just simple fraud. Surely.

Re:Fraud (4, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816094)

Worse than simple fraud, it is wilful abuse of the DMCA provisions for takedown notices. This is no simple businessman who might not understand the technical details of the DMCA -- this is a person whose profession is the practice of law -- someone who should know better and is expected to know better. I'd like to read the next story about him being disbarred.

Re:Fraud (5, Interesting)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816286)

You know what would be hilarious? If a legal fund to get him disbarred was set up and it took bitcoin donations. If it were to be successful he would be defeated by the very thing he sought to control.

Re:Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816898)

And it would be genuinely ironic, for a change :-)

Re:Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817904)

You must be a tv writer

Re:Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36818732)

Lets do this. Anybody got a domain that fits?

Re:Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817978)

Since judges are just glorified lawyers and the Bar associations are run by judges/lawyers, it will be a cold day in hell before this asshat is censured, let alone disbarred....

Re:Fraud (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816132)

Yes. So please show me how your great judicial system works fairly now. Show me how this person will be punished. Oh, he will not? Really?

Re:Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817658)

This is just simple fraud. Surely.

Which one: bitcoin or the lawyer? ;)

StationEry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816006)

Editors: Pls2splchk, kthxbai. In this case it should be stationEry. This idiot troll isn't going anywhere (pun intended).

Re:StationEry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817326)

I lol:ed. Literally.

Re:StationEry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817966)

"Editors: Pls2splchk, kthxbai. In this case it should be stationEry."

Right, because a spell check would somehow flag "stationary"??

Stationary stationery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816010)

Stationary stationery.. The stationery that doesn't go anywhere.

Stationery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816046)

Learn to spell.

Meta Voting on Humanity (2)

DreamArcher (1690064) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816106)

Once you hit -10 you instantly die. Same with meta voting on driving. Every car has a heads-up display and you can instantly vote other drivers up or down. At -10 your car turns off. PS, I patented both of those already.

Re:Meta Voting on Humanity (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816304)

As someone how used to race to see how fast we could get new account to +50, and then aack down to zero I suspect your ideas would be subject of abuse.

Deal with this the slashdot way... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816116)

Time for Slashdot to deal with this ourselves.

Someone get and post his address, then everyone send him all the junkmail you can.

If it works for spammers, trolls should enjoy it too.

Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816210)

Pascazi Law Offices PLLC
1065 Main Street, Ste. D, Fishkill, New York 12524 U.S.A.
Ph: +1 845.897.4219 / Fax: +1 845.468.7117* E-mail:Info@pascazilaw.com*

Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816502)

Anonymous is not your personal army.

Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816674)

Anonymous is not your personal army.

Not an army, but we are legion.

Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816744)

Slashdot is also not the place which shall not be named.

Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36820260)

Anonymous is not your personal army.

How the fuck is going against an asshole a PA request? Oh, yeah, it isn't, idiot.

Let him drown in a sea of coupons.

Re:Deal with this the slashdot way... (1)

cozzbp (1845636) | more than 2 years ago | (#36817100)

*Immediately starts mailing all Pizza Hut and KFC coupons to Pascazi*

Yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816120)

Does this mean no more /. bitcoin stories? How do I support this guy?

Re:Yay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816154)

I hear he takes donations in bitcoin.

Re:Yay (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816170)

By shoving your cock up his gaping ass.

HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Freak (16973) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816234)

A trademark, according to US law, has to be an adjective. Hence "Band-Aid brand bandages". He's using it purely as a noun "Bitcoins are..." His trademark can be easily struck down on that basis alone. Ironically, using a trademark as a noun is exactly the thing that depreciates the trademark as a protectable entity. (Again: See Band-Aid. They fought and fought to make sure that people not just call all bandages "band-aids", because using their trademark as a noun instead of an adjective is what dilutes it.)

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (1)

JustSomeProgrammer (1881750) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816562)

I'm not entirely sure that this is 100% correct... after all I think the Google Search Engine still owns the trademark on Google but no one says Google Search Engine. This could be said as Bitcoin Virtual Currency.

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816974)

Using trademark as an adjective is more of a well stated guideline to protect trademark rather then an absolute rule. And google did at one point fear loosing their trademark and attempted to "correct" people who was using google as a verb. (They would lose trademark is google became synonymous with general searching rather then searching with google).

http://www.webpronews.com/google-losing-fight-for-its-name-2007-05

It seems while google being used as a verb stayed within using google hence why trademark is kept.

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816648)

Parent is a moron. Windows is a registered trademark and is not an adjective.

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816840)

From this page [microsoft.com]:

"Microsoft trademarks should never be used in the possessive or plural form. They should be used as a proper adjective followed by an appropriate descriptor."

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#36820634)

From this page [microsoft.com]:

"Microsoft trademarks should never be used in the possessive or plural form. They should be used as a proper adjective followed by an appropriate descriptor."

Does that mean it is doubly illegal to say "I installed both my copies of Windows"?

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816888)

Windows Operating System. Windows describes a type of operating system, hence an adjective. While it can be used as a noun, most companies avoid it (though windows doesn't have this issue due to no competition creation windows clones). Trademark names must describe the name of a product, not type. If that name becomes synonymous with the type instead, it's no longer under trademark protection.

Hence, get your facts straight before you call people a moron.

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (2)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#36817130)

Windows Operating System.

Nope [uspto.gov]. Sorry boyo:

Word Mark MICROSOFT WINDOWS

It is not a mark for "Windows Operating System" as you falsely claim.

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817672)

Microsoft trademarked Windows operating system. Microsoft would not be able to sue a company for copying/using their trademark by installing an opening in a wall fitted with glass panes, commonly known as a window.

People also tend to dilute trademarks by using them as nouns, like Band-Aids or Kleenex, rather than their full name Band-Aid bandages or Kleenex tissues or their generic names of bandages/tissues. This is why you see these companies fight so hard to attempt to prevent dilution of their trademarks, if they don't they could lose their trademark protections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_dilution

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817742)

Also see the long Trademark fight between Apple Corps (The Beetles) and Apple Computers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

Re:HAHAHA! He's not even using the Trademark right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817032)

Bitcoin brand bitcoins?

So sue them. (4, Informative)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816256)

1.Sue them, for filing a false DMCA claim.
2.Collect damages - monetary losses and legal expenses.

http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/Internet-Law-and-Intellectual-Property-Articles/Consequences-of-filing-a-false-DMCA-Takedown-Request.shtml [aaronkellylaw.com]

Stop whining, and put your money where your mouth is, people.

Re:So sue them. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816760)

What money? No single entity controls Bitcoin. And none should. It's always about money in that stupid country over there. No wonder it's falling apart.

Re:So sue them. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817066)

1.Sue them, for filing a false DMCA claim.
2.Collect damages - monetary losses and legal expenses.

...

Stop whining, and put your money where your mouth is, people.

That would work great for Techdirt, the recipient of the takedown notice, but people can't just go around filing lawsuits when someone does something they don't like. You need to have standing to sue. You need to have been harmed by someone before you "put your money where your mouth is."

Re:So sue them. (1)

spikenerd (642677) | more than 2 years ago | (#36817196)

Geeks suing a lawyer--Great idea! And let's hire a bunch of lawyers to write software and configure firewalls!

Re:So sue them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36820240)

Geeks suing a lawyer--Great idea! And let's hire a bunch of lawyers to write software and configure firewalls!

What exactly are you trying to say? There's no way I can parse this that doesn't mean "nonsensical" or "non sequitur".

Law exists to mediate disputes in a civilized way, that's the entire point (preventing the need for vigilantism). If you're saying that the law is a waste of time and the rules which slap a fine on anyone for abusing DMCA take-downs don't matter then you're advocating for just finding where this guy lives and burning his house down instead.

Re:So sue them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36820454)

... and get repaid in the form of a bitbucket full of bitcoins at fair market value (ahem).

Name and Shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816260)

Can someone drop a line to Anonymous. This seems like just the sort of thing they should handle.

Trademark is marked 'DEAD' at USPTO now (2)

whiteboy86 (1930018) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816296)

Went to USPTO to see it with my own eyes. The record in question is currently marked as "Abandoned July 7, 2011" and effectively DEAD - the trademark seams invalid. Could somebody elaborate, doesn't this only mean that the trademark is in some limbo stage before it goes "live" or something?

Re:Trademark is marked 'DEAD' at USPTO now (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816500)

Pascazi abandoned his attempt to trademark Bitcoin in the US because the US is a "first-to-use" country, the first person to use the term in commerce gets the mark. He's continuing his efforts in "first-to-file" countries where the first entity to file for the mark gets it.

Yes, trademark is dead, as of July 7, 2011 (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816814)

The applicant explicitly abandoned the trademark "BITCOIN". They formally abandoned it on July 7 via the USPTO's online system, and immediately followed up with express mail. [uspto.gov] This is quite unusual. They'd only filed the application on June 30, and the USPTO hadn't even replied yet.

It's dead.

Disbar (3, Interesting)

PickyH3D (680158) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816348)

All involved lawyers should be disbarred. Not only for the initial, in-bad-faith filing, but also for abusing the legal system with in-bad-faith DMCA letters.

Re:Disbar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816504)

I second the vote. These guys should be upholding the law, not wasting taxpayer money with frivolous claims.

"The Talking Asshole" personified. (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816456)

Where to start.... *looks* Ah fuckit. I can't even begin pointing out what's wrong with this without getting into a dissertation on trademark and copyright law. This guy that sent the letters is obviously a "talking asshole" or what is called (in technical terms) a "cartooney." You find them everywhere on the 'net and if you go through life never being impotently threatened by idiots like this, you aren't trying hard enough. (You get extra points if you get cartooneyed by a "lawyer" in Italy defending the "honor" of a porn website)

It's things like this that makes me think that, some day down the road, victims of moronic vexatious litigants are not going to bother with court anymore to rectify shit like this, but rather just have the asshole in question killed outright. And I would stand by and watch the entertainment and approve.

--
BMO

Re:"The Talking Asshole" personified. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817432)

Hey, I like the sound of your keywords "The Talking Asshole". It goes well with http://michaelpascaziscammer.com.

Re:"The Talking Asshole" personified. (2)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#36819344)

I didn't invent the term.

It was William S. Burroughs that did.

The Man Who Taught His Asshole to Talk

(aka âoeThe Talking Asshole Routineâ from Naked Lunch)

William S. Burroughs

Did I ever tell you about the man who taught his asshole to talk? His whole abdomen would move up and down, you dig, farting out the words. It was unlike anything I ever heard.

This ass talk had sort of a gut frequency. It hit you right down there like you gotta go. You know when the old colon gives you the elbow and it feels sorta cold inside, and you know all you have to do is turn loose? Well this talking hit you right down there, a bubbly, thick stagnant sound, a sound you could smell.

This man worked for a carnival, you dig, and to start with it was like a novelty ventriliquist act. Real funny, too, at first. He had a number he called âoeThe Better âOleâ that was a scream, I tell you. I forget most of it but it was clever. Like, âoeOh I say, are you still down there, old thing?â

âoeNah I had to go relieve myself.â

After a while the ass start talking on its own. He would go in without anything prepared and his ass would ad-lib and toss the gags back at him every time.

Then it developed sort of teeth-like little raspy in-curving hooks and started eating. He thought this was cute at first and built an act around it, but the asshole would eat its way through his pants and start talking on the street, shouting out it wanted equal rights. It would get drunk, too, and have crying jags nobody loved it and it wanted to be kissed same as any other mouth. Finally it talked all the time day and night, you could hear him for blocks screaming at it to shut up, and beating it with his fist, and sticking candles up it, but nothing did any good and the asshole said to him: âoeItâ(TM)s you who will shut up in the end. Not me. Because we dont need you around here any more. I can talk and eat and shit.â

After that he began waking up in the morning with a transparent jelly like a tadpoleâ(TM)s tail all over his mouth. This jelly was what the scientists call un-D.T., Undifferentiated Tissue, which can grow into any kind of flesh on the human body. He would tear it off his mouth and the pieces would stick to his hands like burning gasoline jelly and grow there, grow anywhere on him a glob of it fell. So finally his mouth sealed over, and the whole head would have have amputated spontaneous â" (did you know there is a condition occurs in parts of Africa and only among Negroes where the little toe amputates spontaneously?) â" except for the eyes, you dig. Thats one thing the asshole couldnâ(TM)t do was see. It needed the eyes. But nerve connections were blocked and infiltrated and atrophied so the brain couldnâ(TM)t give orders any more. It was trapped in the skull, sealed off. For a while you could see the silent, helpless suffering of the brain behind the eyes, then finally the brain must have died, because the eyes went out, and there was no more feeling in them than a crabâ(TM)s eyes on the end of a stalk.

--
BMO

will this count as strike? and you will pay $35 (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816586)

will this count as strike? under the new ISP copyright plan and you will you have to pay $35 to clear your name from the this BS?

Another vapid Bitcoin story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816622)

Can we get rid of the Bitcoin stories until something actually interesting happens? (Like "gains widespread adoption" or "is forbidden by the government" or something of that scale.)

Re:Another vapid Bitcoin story (2)

geekd (14774) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816702)

Actually, it's a copyright abuse story. The bitcoin part is just incidental.

Re:Another vapid Bitcoin story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817788)

Like being reported upon by CNN International? That's at least widespread coverage.

Oh and yeah, that just happened today. The hordes are coming.

Sound like a job for... more stationery! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816684)

Someone needs to send this d-bag a nicely formatted stationery letter with a good preamble and all that, with simply the words "Get f---ed." as the body of the message.

Nobody better touch my BitFinger! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36816772)

Anyone wanna give BitCoin the BitFinger?

Shakespeare almost had it right. (1)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816786)

But it's not appropriate or necessary to kill ALL the lawyers.

Re:Shakespeare almost had it right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36818386)

Shucks, people do things that are not appropriate or necessary all the time.

/. needs a "Number of days since last BTC story" (2)

sirwired (27582) | more than 2 years ago | (#36816838)

Slashdot needs a "Number of days since last BitCoin Story" thing on the homepage, kind of like those "Number of Days Since Last Accident" signs at some factories.

I can't imagine we'd need more than three bits (unsigned) to express that value.

Re:/. needs a "Number of days since last BTC story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817960)

I don't understand the outright rejection of bitcoin for no apparent reason by some slashdotters. It really is the perfect topic: p2p, crypto-anarchism, distributed protocol...

Re:/. needs a "Number of days since last BTC story (1)

localtoast (611553) | more than 2 years ago | (#36818136)

That's a good idea. They should do it for each category and also include an "average number of days between stories". I felt like we were overdue for a Bitcoin story.

Scamming a scam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817188)

Ouch!

Is this the guy? (1)

cvtan (752695) | more than 2 years ago | (#36817558)

From http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2006/02/6222.ars [arstechnica.com] : "So who is this Michael Pascazi? He was once president of a firm called Fiber Optek, which in 1999 won a US$4 million contract to construct a fiber-optic infrastructure along from Hartford, Connecticut to Springfield, Massachusetts. Fiber Optek attempted to purchase the failed Global Crossing company in 2002 before going bankrupt itself, a victim of the dotcom implosion. Pascazi went on to study law. He also claims to be starting a biotechnology company, although details about this are scarce."

Come on (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36817846)

This is Techdirt we're talking about here. They seem to think that they can ignore copyright law [techdirt.com] whenever it suits them:

Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 12th, 2011 @ 8:14pm

You make a couple of references to US Copyright Law and the DMCA, another US invention. Surely any copyright on these photos, whether it be held by the UK Daily Mail or Caters, is under United Kingdom jurisdiction. Do you feel TechDirt is complying with UK Copyright Law in terms of Fair Use?

Doesn't matter. We're a US site. Based in the US. Hosted on US servers. Targeting a US audience. The only law that matters is US law. Should there be an attempt to enforce this under UK law, we have the SPEECH Act that protects us from foreign rulings that go against US rulings on such things. UK laws and a UK court have no jurisdiction over us.

Bitcoin has a topic icon on frontpage already? (1)

kingbilly (993754) | more than 2 years ago | (#36818148)

It took years to get Slashdot to add an Ubuntu logo so that stories didn't have to use the Debian one. Why does bitcoin get fast-tracked?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...