Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

1 - Court seems to quick to grant Microsoft control of the domains

2 - No-IP statement that they have an open channel with Microsoft executives but never (never?) received a complain from MS about any malicious activity is doubtful (sure MS can produce evidence to the contrary)

3 - What was the urgency and how was this presented to the judge? Personally I don't feel the urgency to use a takeover maneuver in this case, but is there information that shows the impact of not acting was too great?

4 - Our governments are so inept at fighting cyber-crime that instead of sending the request to a govt-regulated cyber-security unit they had to trust Microsoft's with the enforcement? That's sad.

Like others, I am uneasy but thankful to MS. Just wish more details would be shared.



> - Our governments are so inept at fighting cyber-crime that instead of sending the request to a govt-regulated cyber-security unit they had to trust Microsoft's with the enforcement? That's sad.

If this were true, I could sleep easier at night. I doubt it - the judge in question was probably just paid off or otherwise influenced to give MS just insane power, while probably being ignorant of networking in the first place.

I can't think of a software problem that is best served through the violent arm of the state.


> the judge in question was probably just paid off or otherwise influenced

That's a hell of an accusation.


I guess you haven't been reading comments and articles on Slashdot, Groklaw and even HN over the years. Such wild accusations against MS are the norm.

If you want a good chuckle, read this "article" and comments.

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/02/16/2259257/draconian-dr...


I know MS's reputation, and I remember when it was much worse.

I just expect more out of HN than "M$ is is buying judges with l00t."

No evidence, no simple argument, just "I don't like it so they must suck and do evil."


'influenced' could just be fast-talking


True, but that's not really the tone of the post. Accusations of bribery and calling court orders the "violent arm of the state" means he's lost benefit of the doubt.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: