If you stay here to attend a wedding and leave us a negative review on any internet site you agree to a $500. fine for each negative review.
If you have booked the Inn for a wedding or other type of event anywhere in the region and given us a deposit of any kind for guests to stay at USGH there will be a $500 fine that will be deducted from your deposit for every negative review of USGH placed on any internet site by anyone in your party and/or attending your wedding or event (this is due to the fact that your guests may not understand what we offer and we expect you to explain that to them).
Category: Ignorant or unreasonable
Minority Astroturf Group Gets Comcast-Affiliated News Site To Remove Article About Minority Astroturfing On Net Neutrality
The key to the story, not surprisingly, was that the minority groups that are heavily funded by the giant broadband troika of Verizon, AT&T and Comcast apparently think that true net neutrality would be a disaster for the minority community — while the groups not funded by those corporate giants believe that more open and free internet devoid of fast and slow lanes is a good thing for the minority community.
Reporter Lee Fang had written a similar article for Republic Report, touching on some of the same points about the disagreements between these groups. That story got syndicated to a bunch of other sites, including Salon, and some others wrote about it. One site was NewsOne, which describes itself as being a news site “for black America.” They had a blog post that discussed the Salon story and quoted heavily from it. That story no longer exists, taken down thanks to complaints from the same group it criticized.
So, where did the article go? Well, it just so happens that NewsOne is owned by Radio One, a company that is closely tied to Comcast. So, there’s a bit of a conflict there already. Fang called up NewsOne and was told that the order to take it down “came from corporate headquarters.”
Scholastic Turns Purchased Childrens Books Into Nothing At All
According to Scholastic’s 2012 press release, Storia (the DRMed ebook collection currently affected) allowed students and teachers to purchase ebooks and share them with up to 10 family members/students via its proprietary app. (The app is the DRM. Scholastic purchases don’t work outside of it. To quote its now-vanished FAQs page: “Storia eBooks are designed with unique learning features and enrichments that make them readable only while using the Storia eReading app.”) It also included enhanced content to encourage readers to dig deeper into unfamiliar subjects and allow teachers to connect with downloaded books via Smartboards and other computers. All in all, not a terrible product and one that comes from a particularly trusted name in academic publishing.
That’s all coming to an end now.
UK Woman Denied Passport Because Her Name Might Infringe On Disney’s Copyright
Her namesake may be able to travel across galaxies in Star Wars, but Laura Matthews from Southend – whose middle name is Skywalker – isn’t even able to get on a budget airline to the Med.
The 29-year-old added the middle name by deed poll in 2008, “for a bit of a laugh”, and recently tried to renew her passport, complete with her new name and the signature L. Skywalker. Her application was refused, with the Home Office telling her it “will not recognise a change to a name which is subject to copyright or trademark”.
Who Cares If Ireland Is Another Country, Of Course DOJ Can Use A Warrant To Demand Microsoft Cough Up Your Emails
A NY judge has ruled against Microsoft in a rather important case concerning the powers of the Justice Department to go fishing for information in other countries — and what it means for privacy laws in those countries. As you may recall, back in April, we wrote about a magistrate judge first ruling that the DOJ could issue a warrant demanding email data that Microsoft held overseas, on servers in Dublin, Ireland. Microsoft challenged that, pointing out that you can’t issue a warrant in another country. However, the magistrate judge said that this “warrant” wasn’t really a “warrant” but a “hybrid warrant/subpoena.” That is when the DOJ wanted it to be like a warrant, it was. When it wanted it to be like a subpoena, it was.
Microsoft fought back, noting that the distinction between a warrant and a subpoena is a rather important one. And you can’t just say “hey, sure that’s a warrant, but we’ll pretend it’s a subpoena.”
Max Mosley Sues Google For Still Finding Photos He Doesn’t Like
Oh Max Mosley. The guy who’s basically guaranteed that the press keeps writing about the “sex party” pictures involving him and five sex workers that were leaked to the press years ago. Mosley has basically dedicated his life to reminding the public about those pictures by fighting a ridiculous war to blame everyone for those pictures existing on the internet. He’s actually won a few lawsuits against Google, in which the company has been told to do the impossible: make the photos of him disappear. Now he’s decided to sue the company yet again, this time in the UK (he’s already sued in France and Germany). Mosley’s really big win over the original newspaper, News of the World, was mostly over the fact that they called it a “Nazi sex party” and he insists that the party wasn’t Nazi-themed (an area of some sensitivity, as Max’s father was friends with Hitler).
This case is not directly related to the recent “right to be forgotten” situation in the EU, but might be considered a close cousin of it. It’s still based on the ridiculous assertion that the fact that some of these pictures are still online can be blamed on Google. Mosley, apparently, is not big on understanding how the internet works. And he’s not above stretching the rulings in the courts:
His lawyers said the case concerned “the ability of individuals within the UK to enforce their rights against the large corporations that control access to the internet”. The statement added: “It seeks to compel Google to stop gathering and publishing images that the English high court decided in 2008 were unlawful in the landmark privacy case Mosley v News Group Newspapers.”
Keith Alexander: I’m Worth $1 Million Per Month Because I’m Patenting A Way To Stop Hackers
The Keith Alexander story just keeps getting more and more bizarre. Almost immediately after retiring from the top position at the NSA, where he oversaw the total failure of the NSA’s supposed “100% auditing” system, allowing Ed Snowden (and who knows how many others) to escape with all sorts of documents, Alexander announced that he had set up a cybersecurity firm — with the ridiculously Hollywood-ish name of IronNet Cybersecurity. A month ago, it was revealed that he’s going around asking banks to pay him $1 million per month for his “expertise.” That caused a few to wonder if he’s selling classified info, because really, what else could he offer?
Alexander has a new answer: Patents! Yes, Keith Alexander is claiming that he has an amazing new anti-hacker technique that is brilliant and wonderful and deserving of at least nine patents.
When fact is stranger than fiction…
For about $12, Sprint will soon let subscribers buy a wireless plan that only connects to Facebook.
For that same price, they could choose instead to connect only with Twitter, Instagram or Pinterest—or for $10 more, enjoy unlimited use of all four. Another $5 gets them unlimited streaming of a music app of their choice.
UK Government Report Recommends Ending Online Anonymity
It’s not a true “real names” proposal — as the idea is that web services would be required to collect real names at signup, but then could allow those users to do things pseudonymously or anonymously. But, still, their actions could then easily be traced back to a real person if the “powers that be” deemed it necessary.
Latest Abuse: Feds Reading Emails Between Prisoners And Their Lawyers
Inmates’ calls to or from lawyers, however, are generally exempt from such monitoring. But across the country, federal prosecutors have begun reading prisoners’ emails to lawyers — a practice wholly embraced in Brooklyn, where prosecutors have said they intend to read such emails in almost every case.
The issue has spurred court battles over whether inmates have a right to confidential email communications with their lawyers — a question on which federal judges have been divided.