<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Elliott C. Back &#187; Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://elliottback.com/wp/category/law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://elliottback.com/wp</link>
	<description>Internet &#38; Technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:59:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>iStockPhoto Offers Copyright Liability Insurance</title>
		<link>http://elliottback.com/wp/istockphoto-offers-copyright-liability-insurance/</link>
		<comments>http://elliottback.com/wp/istockphoto-offers-copyright-liability-insurance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 04:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Elliott Back</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Graphics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Photo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elliottback.com/wp/?p=3227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stock photography wholesaler iStockPhoto has a new gimmick in its bid to provide the web with a source of affordable decoration: lawsuit immunity.  That&#8217;s right, any stock photo you purchase will come with guaranteed protection of $10,000 against intellectual property disputes.  So you can buy photos from iStockPhoto for $1-$27 per photo, use [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stock photography wholesaler <a href="http://www.istockphoto.com/">iStockPhoto</a> has a new gimmick in its bid to provide the web with a source of affordable decoration: lawsuit immunity.  That&#8217;s right, any stock photo you purchase will come with guaranteed protection of $10,000 against intellectual property disputes.  So you can buy photos from iStockPhoto for $1-$27 per photo, use them according to the terms of use, and be protected from litigation:</p>
<blockquote><p>iStock is about to offer a new &#8220;Legal Guarantee&#8221; on its entire collection.   On Sept. 16, any video, image or audio file purchased and USED CORRECTLY by the customer, will automatically be guaranteed against any copyright or moral right, trademark and other intellectual property dispute, up to $10,000.  Although common for traditional stock houses, a legal guarantee has not been standard in microstock because of the low prices.</p>
<p>Although these situations have always been extremely rare at iStock, if a client really needs added insurance, an Extended Legal Guarantee up to $250,000 in coverage can be purchased for 100 credits.</p></blockquote>
<p>As the <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-10352991-264.html">CNET article mentions</a>, a credit will cost around $1-$1.50.  The caveat here is that you must carefully follow the <a href="http://www.istockphoto.com/license_comparison.php">license  terms</a>, which are complex.  For example, for use on the web, you are restricted to a maximum resolution of archaic 800&#215;600 and in a single location (webpage).  For items you wish to resell in any way, purchasing an extended license for 125-150 credits is necessary.</p>
<p>For more information, please see <a href="http://www.crunchbase.com/company/istockphoto">CrunchBase&#8217;s iStock Photo</a> entry!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://elliottback.com/wp/istockphoto-offers-copyright-liability-insurance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>T-Mobile Early Termination Fee Class Action Lawsuit</title>
		<link>http://elliottback.com/wp/t-mobile-early-termination-fee-class-action-lawsuit/</link>
		<comments>http://elliottback.com/wp/t-mobile-early-termination-fee-class-action-lawsuit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 04:34:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Elliott Back</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cellphone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deals & Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elliottback.com/wp/?p=3106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just got a great postcard in the mail.  This last year I was charged a $200 early termination fee by T-mobile, after Wendy had to cancel her plan and move back to Shanghai.  Now, there&#8217;s a class-action lawsuit which is promising to refund $125 of the contract fee!  Awesome!!
A proposed Settlement [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just got a great postcard in the mail.  This last year I was charged a $200 early termination fee by T-mobile, after Wendy had to cancel her plan and move back to Shanghai.  Now, there&#8217;s a class-action lawsuit which is promising to refund $125 of the contract fee!  Awesome!!</p>
<blockquote><p>A proposed Settlement is pending in a class action entitled Milliron v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., No. 08-04149(JLL) (ES) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The lawsuit alleges that T-Mobile violated state and federal laws by charging customers a flat-rate early termination fee (&#8221;ETF&#8221;) in its wireless telephone service contracts.  You are part of the lawsuit if you are a current or former T-Mobile wireless subscriber who paid or were charged a flat-rate ETF from July 23, 1999 to February 19, 2009, or if your contract for service included a flat-rate ETF from July 23, 1999 to February 19, 2009. </p>
<p>If you can prove you paid a flat-rate ETF, or T-Mobile&#8217;s records indicate you paid a flat-rate ETF, you may submit a Claim Form and receive up to $125. </p></blockquote>
<p>You can go visit <a href="https://etf-settlement.com/">ETF-Settlement</a> to read the details, and/or apply for a claim.  I already did, as I received a postcard in the mail.  However, if you meet the class-action criteria (pretty much anyone screwed by a T-mobile early termination fee), you should also fill out the form.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://elliottback.com/wp/t-mobile-early-termination-fee-class-action-lawsuit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MacWorld MacRumors Live Feed Hacked</title>
		<link>http://elliottback.com/wp/macworld-macrumors-live-feed-hacked/</link>
		<comments>http://elliottback.com/wp/macworld-macrumors-live-feed-hacked/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:14:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Elliott Back</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hacking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elliottback.com/wp/?p=2941</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was watching the MacWorld 2009 Apple Keynote live when a message appeared in the feed&#8211;&#8221;STEVE JOBS JUST DIED&#8221;&#8211;surprising everyone.  In a few minutes, the MacRumors feed was full of coordinated hacked spam:

Highlighted is the beginning of the spam
MacRumors apologized for the incident: &#8220;Our MacRumorsLive keynote coverage was hacked today, inserting inappropriate content into [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was watching the <a href="http://macrumorslive.com">MacWorld 2009 Apple Keynote</a> live when a message appeared in the feed&#8211;&#8221;STEVE JOBS JUST DIED&#8221;&#8211;surprising everyone.  In a few minutes, the MacRumors feed was full of coordinated hacked spam:</p>
<p><a href="http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/macworld09.jpg"><img src="http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/macworld09-450x365.jpg" alt="" title="macworld09" width="450" height="365" class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-2943" /></a><br />
<small>Highlighted is the beginning of the spam</small></p>
<p>MacRumors <a href="http://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/06/macrumorslive-hacked/">apologized for the incident</a>: &#8220;Our MacRumorsLive keynote coverage was hacked today, inserting inappropriate content into the text and photo feeds. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to restore our services.&#8221;  However, it was simply negligence on their part for having a control panel which was publicly accessible rather than some kind of nefarious hack.  One of the nicer 4chan readers took this screenshot of it before it was taken offline:</p>
<p><a href="http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/macrumors-admin-panel.png"><img src="http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/macrumors-admin-panel-450x168.png" alt="" title="macrumors-admin-panel" width="450" height="168" class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-2946" /></a></p>
<p>See also <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/06/when-livestreams-go-wrong/">When Livestreams Go Wrong</a> and <a href="http://zip.4chan.org/g/imgboard.html">4chan&#8217;s /g board</a> where the chaos originated.  Hopefully this will teach bloggers and web startups to pay more attention to the security of their websites, as hacking websites is growing more and more popular with savvy internet pranksters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://elliottback.com/wp/macworld-macrumors-live-feed-hacked/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Motorola Aura Contract Illegal?</title>
		<link>http://elliottback.com/wp/motorola-aura-contract-illegal/</link>
		<comments>http://elliottback.com/wp/motorola-aura-contract-illegal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:44:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Elliott Back</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cellphone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elliottback.com/wp/?p=2849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was reading Motorola legal tie to pull pricey Aura phone off eBay, and it struck me that some scary stuff is going on if you are going to have to spend $2000 on a phone, only to never be able to resell it:
A source close to the company told Register Hardware that in order [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was reading <a href="http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/11/03/motorola_aura_contract/">Motorola legal tie to pull pricey Aura phone off eBay</a>, and it struck me that some scary stuff is going on if you are going to have to spend $2000 on a phone, only to never be able to resell it:</p>
<blockquote><p>A source close to the company told Register Hardware that in order to maintain Aura&#8217;s glow of exclusivity, buyers will be required to &#8220;sign into a contract that states they can&#8217;t sell it on eBay&#8221;.  The source added that if an Aura owner wants to sell their phone after they&#8217;ve bought it then they&#8217;ll only have one option: to sell it back to the manufacturer.</p>
<p>Presumably, each Aura sold will carry a unique id number, possibly above and beyond an IMEI code, that&#8217;ll be linked to a specific buyer. So should you shirk your contractual obligations and offer your handset for auction, then Motorola’s legal department will come knocking on your door.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/motorola-aura.jpg"><img src="http://elliottback.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/motorola-aura-450x263.jpg" alt="" title="motorola-aura" width="450" height="263" class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-2852" /></a></p>
<p>I would think that reselling <em>your own</em> phone would be covered by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine">first sales doctrine</a> or consumer protection laws.  What do you think?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://elliottback.com/wp/motorola-aura-contract-illegal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nathan Williams, Daniel Tumat accused of murdering NZ teen John Hapeta</title>
		<link>http://elliottback.com/wp/nathan-williams-daniel-tumat-accused-of-murdering-nz-teen-john-hapeta/</link>
		<comments>http://elliottback.com/wp/nathan-williams-daniel-tumat-accused-of-murdering-nz-teen-john-hapeta/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:03:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Elliott Back</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Computers & Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://elliottback.com/wp/archives/2008/08/25/nathan-williams-daniel-tumat-accused-of-murdering-nz-teen-john-hapeta/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Normally I&#8217;d be uninterested in the story of how three New Zealand teen allegedly murdered 14 year old John Hapeta in New Zealand.  According to the New Zealand Herald, &#8220;Two men charged with the murder of 14-year-old John Hapeta allegedly armed themselves with a revolver-style pistol and a claw hammer when they went to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Normally I&#8217;d be uninterested in the story of how three New Zealand teen allegedly murdered 14 year old John Hapeta in New Zealand.  According to the <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&#038;objectid=10529028">New Zealand Herald</a>, &#8220;Two men charged with the murder of 14-year-old John Hapeta allegedly armed themselves with a revolver-style pistol and a claw hammer when they went to his house looking for drugs and cash. John Hapeta was celebrating his friend’s 15th birthday at his home in Justamere Place, Weymouth, when the attack occurred. Police allege the three went to John&#8217;s home on August 12 with the intention of robbing what they thought was a &#8216;tinnie&#8217; house. The draft police summary of facts said Tumata and Williams pulled black bandannas over their faces and walked up to the house, confronted a man and allegedly shouted, &#8216;Where’s the drugs, where’s the drugs?&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>The story now becomes interesting when <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080825/0836392081.shtml">Judge David Harvey bans online mention of the accused&#8217;s names</a>.  No one is sure why print media (which is searchable, through interfaces like Lexis Nexus) gets special treatment here.  I certainly disagree, and I&#8217;m free to publish whatever I&#8217;d like, as a journalist, including the names of the accused.</p>
<p>Anytime anyone wants to suppress totally free speech, I say RESIST!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://elliottback.com/wp/nathan-williams-daniel-tumat-accused-of-murdering-nz-teen-john-hapeta/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
