RuhigMan
@comerica.com |  reply to sobriquetnet
Re: Cudows SHADOW GEEK
If the law offers no prohibition toward an attack on me, it can not offer a prohibition on me defending myself. |
|
th34
join:2004-12-02
Houston, TX
| reply to sobriquetnet
Except that in this instance, your not going after their brother or sister, but the culprit, or culprits. And yeah, you damn well better believe it, if the authorities could not or would not bring them to justice, then going after them by ANY means necessary is fine by me. |
|
BoredofSpam
@209.161.x.x | reply to sobriquetnet
We're not talking about murder here. We're talking about Internet abuse. Is it ok for you to have to waste time in a huge company to find our which email is good and which are useless?
Don't mix apples and carrots... |
|
Talon88
The One
join:2003-08-13
Toronto
 ·Bell Sympatico
2 edits | reply to sobriquetnet
:::
Ths answer is yes if the law cannot kick the
person to the jail. He can do it & I can do
it as well....! 
:::
said by sobriquetnet:
>>
If someone murdered your sister/brother/partner/dog, would it then be ok for you to murder theirs?
--
[=Talon88=]
»DI-624 Firmware update w/ Crash Recovery Step by S --
»[Info] Some Clue about DI-624 Reboot |
|
sobriquetnet
@com.au
| reply to EoverMC2
>>Personally, I think ANY time someone intentionally take's
>>another's resources (computer time, disk or bandwidth)
>>against the owner wishes they've stepped over the line.
>You've just scored a point against your own argument - this
>is EXACTLY what spam does to my computer.
You're missing the point......... "ANY time" someone takes another's resources. It doesn't matter if they did it to you first.... it's still going too far.
If someone murdered your sister/brother/partner/dog, would it then be ok for you to murder theirs? |
|
EoverMC2
@insightBB.com | reply to ShadowGeek
Good POINT BVD |
|
ShadowGeek
@bellsouth.net
| reply to dalesplace
Re: It's still DDOS
>Personally, I think ANY time someone intentionally take's another's resources (computer time, disk or bandwidth) against the owner wishes they've stepped over the line.
You've just scored a point against your own argument - this is EXACTLY what spam does to my computer. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to dalesplace
said by dalesplace  :Hmmm ... sounds like you would also have to support RIAA and their goofy pet senator's bid to do the same to P2P users. After all, the P2P user D/L'ing a copyrighted work is breaking the law. Therefore, slowing down/blocking their computer is a substitution instance of your argument. The problem here is that the RIAA is not law enforcement... They have no authority, legally, to act as enforcers of copyright law. That right is specifically allocated to the government...
As well, the problem is that the RIAA does not differentiate between pirates and future customers... I can understand if they took out people who specifically pirate, but they problem is that they also want to eliminate users who download and then buy if the music is good (like myself).
As much as I like the idea of making the spammer's like miserable, I think this method is inappropriate. Personally, I think ANY time someone intentionally take's another's resources (computer time, disk or bandwidth) against the owner wishes they've stepped over the line.
You do, of course, recognize the parallel between this and what spammers are doing every time they send out SPAM, right ? As a server administrator and as a person who does IT work, the truth is that WE foot the bill for them because they send out mail we don't want, but are forced to deal with. And spam filters do cost money and time to setup and maintain.
--
SHUTUP!
Viva La Fee' Verte! |
|
dalesplace
join:2000-09-14
Cleveland, OH
1 edit | reply to bmn
Hmmm ... sounds like you would also have to support RIAA and their goofy pet senator's bid to do the same to P2P users. After all, the P2P user D/L'ing a copyrighted work is breaking the law. Therefore, slowing down/blocking their computer is a substitution instance of your argument.
As much as I like the idea of making the spammer's like miserable, I think this method is inappropriate. Personally, I think ANY time someone intentionally take's another's resources (computer time, disk or bandwidth) against the owner wishes they've stepped over the line. |
|
