HuckleCom (690630) writes "Many years ago when I was 15 (22 now), I entered a project for a pay-for-news site with a 'client'. There was no signed or written contract (There was a quote, which later meant nothing because the scope of the project changed). I eventually finished the project and had moved across the US in the process where I finally received payment. After many years of free support, and even some free hosting — I instructed the client to pay for their hosting and I would transfer the site to the new server. This request was never met, so I pulled the plug on the site and archived the files. Yesterday, I received a demand letter from an attorney requesting I send the code, data and content to the client. I was threatened with court seeking personal property seizure and/or wage garnishment with no monetary amount mentioned. I am fine with sending the data/content. But the code itself contains a few 'trade' secrets and redistributable code. My understanding is that the code belongs to me, the author under US copyright law. Is it reasonable to require monetary reimbursement to give ownership of all the site code? How would this case go over in a court?" Link to Original Source top
HuckleCom (690630) writes "It comes as no surprise to most of us to learn that lots of tweets are pointless babble.
According to Pear Analytics — "pointless babble" accounted for 40.55 percent of the total number of messages sampled (2000 random samples).
Conversational messages — defined by Pear as tweets that go back and forth between users or try to engage followers in conversation — accounted for 37.55 percent.
Pear said tweets with "pass-along value" — messages that are being "re-tweeted" or passed on by users to their followers — accounted for 8.70 percent.
Self-promotion by companies was next with 5.85 percent, followed by spam with 3.75 percent.
It said tweets with news from mainstream media publications accounted for 3.60 percent.
Pear said it planned to conduct the study every quarter to identify trends on Twitter." Link to Original Source top
HuckleCom writes "Imagine this situation: A massively distributed worm that connects to random P2P services and downloads and shares various music files gets installed on your machine.
The RIAA finds out and sues you right?
This brings up a good question: Do we expect every citizen of the internet to be responsible for their own security — what happens if Microsoft hasn't released a 'hotfix' to alleviate the hole for a month or more? (often the case).
Does the RIAA and it's likes have to back off because people not all security experts? Would this harbor in the dawn of responsibility for owning a computer connected to the internet?" top
"Did you know that the Command Prompt tool found in Vista's System Recovery Options doesn't require a User Name or Password? And that the Command Prompt provides Administrator level access to the hard drive? For multiple versions of Windows? All you need is a Vista Install DVD and you're all set to go.",
From the Blog: "There's a new bug reported in the way Firefox handles writes to the 'location.hostname' DOM property. The vulnerability could potentially allow a malicious website to manipulate the authentication cookies for a third-party site."
From what I can recollect, this seems to be the first vulnerability discovered in the actual current version of Firefox — at least for a good long time." top
HuckleCom (690630) writes "The retail version is not even out the door yet, but Microsoft is already starting to prepare the first major update for its new Vista operating system, according to a letter the company sent this week to business customers.
Windows Vista Service Pack 1 "will be a standard service pack that will include security updates, hotfixes, as well as limited other changes focused on improving quality," according to the letter, which Microsoft sent to customers enrolled in its Technology Adoption Program. You can read the details here." top
HuckleCom writes "In light of the seemingly ongoing subpoenas from the RIAA and MPAA, who have the finger pointed at a person behind a computer working a P2P program and in light of ongoing Windows vulnerabilities, I ask this question:
What would happen in the rise of a virus/worm/trojan that would tap into BitTorrent trackers or use raw connections to different P2P networks and download random music and video?
It seems we don't sue people for taking a fraction of a part of a DDoS attack through unknowingly installing a virus.
Could the release of something like this be the end of RIAA/MPAA lawsuits because individuals may claim inadvertent downloads?"