Just a lot of DVD products installed on the bus, a step on the gas will be screamed audio speakers, sound and image are very poor, so when choosing car DVD navigation products to focus on the following:

First, sound quality

DVD is used to play music, so sound quality is very important good or bad. Therefore, before purchasing DVD be sure to ask before it sets output DVD machine is a few "V", or this machine and sound quality compared to other DVD machines. If the DVD machines and CD sound machine sound quality can compete with a ratio, price is of course where not cheap.

Second, image and DVD machine with the amount

DVD screen with analog and digital high-definition display screen 2. Simulation screen pixels are generally 240 or 480 * 240 * 240 pixels, which are generally high-definition screen 800 * 480 pixels or higher. In addition, a good DVD dual optical drive is the assigned amount, that is, DVD, CD two drives.

3, navigation accuracy and ease of use

Good DVD manufacturers will apply better navigation software, less easy navigation DVD navigation process crashes, or slow navigation, navigation accuracy is relatively poor. DVD navigation because a good use of the "dual-core" model, that is, the CPU uses two independent processing systems, so that no interference of two systems, navigation speed, high accuracy, easy to use.

For wholesale car dvd , GPS Navigators , car video , Portable GPS , car gps systems , roof car monitors , sun visor car monitors and Spy Gadgets , Car Gadgets about tamom.com and registration for a wholesale buyer account, visit http://www.tamom.com

Newman macro whole body of stainless steel film R90, always embodies the exquisite texture and delicate process of restrained luxury. In addition to materials research, R90’s button layout is also very characteristic, its main function keys are set in the front fuselage, looks clear, therefore, whether watching movies or playing games, can easily operate. At the same time, as its exquisite design of the metal material, like, R90 also features a 2.8-inch TFT true color of the 26 million color LCD screen, a touch of King exudes style, highlight the atmosphere, distinguished.

As a result of high-level decoding chip ANYKA3225 Newman R90 not only support AVI format video playback, you can also play and set 2 to 32x fast forward / rewind, the playback is to 25fps, its screen resolution and color brightness and performance is excellent, even in the performance of some high-speed scene is very clear and smooth. Thus, like in this summer watch "Pirates of the Caribbean", "Fantastic Four" and many other imported large friend, no longer under the scorching sun line up to buy movie tickets, can be downloaded from the Internet to a local watch; its built-in high-quality speakers, will be great to do the film are shown to cause dripping sound. At the same time, the machine is USB2.0 high speed interface, more suitable for large-capacity video transmission.

It is worth mentioning that Newman R90 is equipped with a 2 million pixel high-resolution camera, a camera function. Not only by adjusting the contrast, brightness, color photography degree and the picture size to achieve the best shooting results, select the leaflets, multiple burst or 5 to 30 seconds when the camera function in mind, to capture wonderful moments, close your digital cameras; the same time, using R90 can Xpress DV video filming, this way or whether it is family gatherings and outings with friends can be 11 when the interesting record. It also supports Mini SD card, are free to expand storage space for your blossoms shot, free catalog, no worries. In addition, R90 can also be connected to the computer, through QQ, MSN and other instant messaging nowadays a variety of popular software, video chat with you friends, emotions and more convenient!

R90 also supports MP3, WMA, and other audio format player, also supports the mobile music in MIDI polyphonic, multi-EQ sound free to customize. The R90’s unique FM FM function, can also receive a frequency between 87MHz ~ 108MHz/76MHz ~ 90MHz radio programs, gently point automatically search platform, and supports 20 station memory. R90 also has a strong game function, not only the built-in Tetris, hunting submarines and other traditional games, you can also download simulator games, including. FC (Nintendo), SFC (Super Nintendo) and other classic games, in the long journey , you can choose to listen to music with the R90, listening to the radio, play the game a variety of entertainment, with you all the way to a good mood. To join its multi-task function, but also lets you listen to music, read e-book side, or playing games, multi-entertainment mix, more exciting experience.

In addition to core functions to achieve the ultimate, the macro impact R90 Newman is everywhere reflected the additional features of its human characteristics. Not only supports JPG, BMP, GIF, PNG and other formats picture browsing, and can set them to boot off of the picture; also supports open, shut down music and video, to meet your individual needs.

It is reported that this powerful Newman R90 will be launched simultaneously across the country recently, I believe it will set off an immediate listing of audio and video improvisation recording new trend! Newman will continue to be guided by "product, brand, channel, service" Sword of the market square and people-oriented business philosophy to ensure the "P Plus harmonious" development of management concepts to provide users with high-quality digital fine.

For wholesale mp4 player, high capacity pmp gadgets, 8GB MP4 Players, 4GB MP4 Players, MP4 Player Watches, MP3 Players, Portable MP3 Players, MP3 Player Sunglasses, MP3 Player Recording Pens and cell phone, Digital Picture Frames, car video, Car DVD Players, Car Gadgets, about tamom and registration for a wholesale buyer account, visit china wholesale

A legion of marketers are handing out coupons for iPhone skins and other accessories. There’s some apprehension among some of those who are well back in the line about how long the activation process is going to take. We’ll see.

It would be easier to be bitter if Scoble wasn’t such a nice guy. It’s 15 minutes before Scoble and 29 other people are let in. The crowd, which numbers around 250 people, is whooping it up as they break down folding chairs, drink coffee, and talk about the new iPhone apps they want to buy.

SAN FRANCISCO–The perks of being a famous tech blogger include not having to stand in line all night for the latest gadget.

(Credit:
James Martin/CNET News)

Update 9:40 a.m. PDT: OK, it would have been easier to get pissed at the congenial Scoble when Apple’s doorman started letting the first batch of people inside the store and stopped at me. It was only a few seconds’ delay before they granted me access.

A jubilant Robert Scoble poses with his new iPhone 3G at the Apple store in San Francisco.

(Credit: U.S. Patent No. 5,205,473)

I actually have one of these sitting on my desk right now. It’s the corrugated, brown cardboard sleeve wrapped around my venti, no fat, no water chai latte. It insulates my hand from the hot liquid inside and allows me to walk from the barista to my
car without a wince or painful grimace.

So the question I ask, because admittedly I’m thankful for the protection offered by the corrugated-cardboard innovation of the ‘473 patent, is whether constructive notice is fair to the public and, if so, why is a patent owner who didn’t mark worse off than one who doesn’t have a commercial product to mark in the first place?

But many times, the patents behind products marked with patent numbers are not as easily understandable. For example, the notice on Adobe Reader v. 8.1.2 lists over 60 different patents. I’m pretty sure that most of those patents are far more complex than the ‘473 patent. But, assuming the numbers are properly listed, the law says that I and the rest of the public are on notice of whatever it is those patents cover.

What’s also debatable is why the law allows patent owners who don’t have a commercial product–and therefore are not able to mark (after all it’s hard to stick a patent number on a product you don’t have)–to recover past damages without having provided actual notice of their patent. Obviously, the seeing-a-patent-number-and-looking-it-up theory for constructive notice can’t apply in that situation.

The title of U.S. Patent No. 5,205,473 (the ‘473 patent in patent speak) is “Recyclable corrugated beverage container and holder.” If you’ve ever been to Starbucks, the drawing on the first page of the ‘473 patent probably looks familiar.

That means that if I got sued, I could be liable for things I did years before the lawsuit because I had notice. On the other hand, if there was no patent number listed on my coffee sleeve, the law may limit the patent owner’s right to recover damages for stuff that occurred prior to the lawsuit. Simply put, constructive notice is a big deal.

It’s a good idea and whoever came up with it got a patent. I know that because the number, “U.S. Patent No. 5,205,473″ is printed in neat, black text right on the sleeve. (There’s actually a second patent number as well.) The reason the sleeve on my coffee cup, and most other patented products, have patent numbers printed on them is something patent lawyers call “constructive notice.”

Under the law, the public is deemed to have constructive notice that something is patented if that something has a patent number on it. The idea behind the law apparently is that if one sees a patent number, one has the ability to look that patent up, read it, and maybe even understand what it says. For the corrugated sleeve, it was simple enough for me–albeit a little geeky–to take a look at the ‘473 patent and understand how the sleeve works to make the heat from my latte more bearable.

That’s why you see patent numbers listed all over the place. But is it fair? Reasonable minds could differ as to whether listing a slew of patents on a complex piece of technology (or even a couple of patents on a brown cardboard ring) really gives people notice of anything.

Update on Friday: Link added to Amazon Web Services support terms and costs.

The support service also casts Amazon more in the mold of traditional IT providers such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and Sun Microsystems, which all offer a variation on hosted computing.

Initially, Amazon aimed the hosted service at Web start-ups, but it’s signing on business customers too. BusinessWeek reported earlier this week that The New York Times and Nasdaq are now customers.

The paid support is a sign that Amazon’s hosted computing is ramping up to take on a broader swath of clients, including large businesses.

Right now, Amazon offers pay-as-you-go pricing for its hosted services. Customers pay for how much they use the service. To get support for technical problems, they need to go to free forums.

Looking to take on more demanding customers, Amazon Web Services on Thursday rolled out two paid-support plans that give customers access to its engineers to resolve glitches.

“Guaranteed support will also allow us to develop even more substantial applications using Amazon Web Services, knowing that Amazon is there to support us,” Paul Horvath, chief technology officer of health care form-processing company TC3 Health, said in a statement.

CNET will be updating its reviews of the 605 WiFi, 705 WiFi, and publishing a new review of the Archos TV+; as soon as the relevant software updates become available. In the meantime: what do you think? Do these imminent upgrades make the portables a worthwhile alternative to the iPhone/iPod Touch? And does the TVportation feature make the TV+ a true competitor to a TiVo/Slingbox combo?

(Credit:
Archos)

Streaming Web video is just one of several upgrades coming to the Archos line of video products.

Streaming video, audio, and podcast support: Also on the way to the 605 and 705 is the “Web TV and Radio plug-in.” Not to be confused with the old Microsoft “Internet on TV” set-top box, this $20 software upgrade will add dedicated streaming video and Internet radio support to Archos handhelds. The company promises support for more than 600 video streams, 9,600 Web radio stations, and 110,000 podcasts–just for starters. However, unlike the freewheeling Flash video options, this is a walled garden, so you’re stuck with the content providers that Archos aggregates. For instance: the BCAT (Brooklyn Community Access TV) station in the photo above is a New York-area public access station–not exactly HBO.

“TVportation” placeshifting: The Archos TV+ DVR is getting Slingbox-style placeshifting functionality. A downloadable plug-in (normally $50, but free if you register your Archos TV+ at the company’s Web site) available in May will add what Archos is calling “TVportation.” It’s a nice buzzword, but it basically means that the TV+ can stream your live TV programming to other Internet-connected devices, including (for starters) the Archos WiFi portables, Windows PCs, Windows Mobile smartphones, and Symbian smartphones. The viewing software will be free for those devices, and there’s no monthly fee associated with the streaming. (The Windows version of the software looked nearly identical to the viewing software for Hava placeshifting products, and an Archos rep confirmed that Hava was indeed contributing its software know-how.) The initial version of the software will only allow for the streaming of live TV and the ability to change channels; for now, you’ll be unable to access programs recorded on the Archos TV+, nor will you be able to manage your recording schedule.

Flash 9 video support: A free firmware upgrade available in May will enable the 605 WiFi and 705 WiFi to stream Flash 9 video. Using the built-in Opera browser, Archos users can go to any Web site using the latest iteration of Flash video (Hulu, ABC, CBS, YouTube, CNET TV–you name it) and watch the video of their choice. That’s a major advantage over the YouTube-only walled garden available on the
iPhone and
iPod Touch. (If you’re keeping score at home: full Flash support is on its way to Archos handhelds, while it remains unavailable on Apple’s flagship portables.)

Paramount Digital Entertainment partnership: Archos has inked a deal with Paramount, allowing selections from that studio’s movie library to be available on Archos video products. In addition to being added to Archos’ online Content Portal for purchase, future TV+ units will be sold with several dozen movies preloaded on the hard drive, where they can be unlocked (purchased) for instant viewing.

Thank you for your thoughts. I’m surprised your client feels that the Report does not pose a risk, given that it contains information my clients intended to keep confidential. It appears my clients are more cautious about disclosing vulnerability information than yours are. Moving forward, both the slides from our client’s intended presentation and the confidential Report are now publicly available. This constitutes more information than the students would have presented at their Defcon talk. Furthermore, your client reportedly does not feel that the security risk posed by the availability of this information warrants emergency measures. Finally, Defcon is over and the students did not give their talk. Under these circumstances, would your client be willing to stipulate to lifting the TRO at this time? While the protection it provides is now moot as to your client’s concerns, it continues to hang over our clients’ heads, making them uncertain what if anything they can say about their research and this case. Please let me know right away.

From: Mahony, leuan (BOS - X75835)
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 9:27 AM
To: ‘Jennifer Granick’
Cc: Cindy Conn; Kurt Opsahl; Marcia Hofmann; Mahony, leuan (BOS - X75835)
Subject: RE: CRITICAL INFORMATION: MBTA v Anderson et al

Jennifer:
We are unwilling to lift the TRO in the binary “on/off” manner you state, and respond more fully to your email as follows:
(A) Removing the TRO Is Not a Tailored Solution We are willing to discuss tailored solutions to the underlying problem, and have proposed a formal mediation process for these discussions. You have given no response to our proposal for mediation. You recall that I asked for a negotiated solution before the Saturday hearing. I confirmed these inquiries to you in email, and these emails are public record and freely available on the web. See http://www-tech.mit.edu/V128/N30/subway.html. You did not respond meaningfully to those requests, either.
(B) Misinformation Threatens To Cloud the Issues In following the DEFCON-related press, it is clear that a large amount of misinformation has been circulated concerning the meaning of the TRO, and related points. For example, you know, because Judge Woodlock asked you these questions in open court, that the primary concern was with the content the students might or might not supply to go with the literal expression embodied in the Presentation, as well as the Report. Press reports suggest that the TRO banned circulation of the paper materials themselves. You know this is incorrect.
Yet your email relies on this theme. We made it clear in our papers: based on the information we have (a large part of which you intentionally withheld from us until 4:38 AM Saturday morning) we do not know what your clients have done or are capable of doing. Their broad statements concerning “free subway rides for life” suggest they are capable of a lot. This is the concern. We would like to create an environment, immediately, where all parties can share the information they feel is warranted, in order to quantify and assess this risk. We would like to “re-do” the August 5 (or 4) meeting, but with more sensitivity, hopefully all around, as to the mutual stakes.
We think a mediated solution presents mutual benefits. The structure of non-binding mediation assures mutual benefits - or at a minimum a clear assessment of the alternatives to a negotiated solution. In a mediation process, for example, we would hope to discuss and obtain an understanding of the information, if any, the MIT Undgrads hold that might threaten Fare Media System security. We do not set preconditions on a mediation, however, as we stongly believe - again - that discussions between reasonable parties toward a resolution are preferable to an externally imposed resolution, where it is possible to avoid such an external resolution.
(C) We Are Very Sensitive To Your Clients’ Concerns Over The Restraint Finally, we believe we understand the point in your email that the TRO “continues to hang over our clients’ heads, making them uncertain what if anything they can say about their research and this case.” One goal with a mediated solution, working together, would be to reduce or eliminate uncertainty (to the extent uncertainty from a legal or practical perspective exists). Another goal of a mediated solution would be to determine other parameters of responsible disclosure under these circumstances. Yet another goal with a mediated solution might be to “make amends” on all sides, whatever that might mean here. There are countless examples from large to small of relationships that are polarized and entrenched-hostile because of bad choices by both sides shortly after the rift began. We would like to avoid this here, if possible. We think talking in a non-binding, professionally mediated environment is the best way to avoid further misunderstanding, and potential “bad choices.”
(D) Conclusion: Renewed Request for Mediation You request, in an “on/off” manner, that we now “shut off’ the TRO. This is traditional advocacy, where the goal is to “win all” and avoid “lose all.” With our mediation proposal, we look for, and are willing to accept, gradations between these poles. We believe - whether in light or not in light of recent history - that reasonable “win-win” solutions are available, if the parties meet and work through options. We ask that you confer carefully with your clients, and respond to our mediation proposal. We believe that mediation should commence as soon as possible. We have made this proposal to MIT counsel as well.
Let me know
leuan

Security researchers are paying close attention to this case because it could eventually set a precedent weighing their First Amendment rights to publish freely–against the desires of vendors to keep embarrassing and potentially explosive details secret.

In an e-mail message to EFF on Monday, Ieuan-Gael Mahony, a partner at the Holland & Knight law firm, wrote:

Second, EFF says, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act’s prohibition on the “transmission of…information” that may damage a computer was never intended to encompass a public presentation and was not written to do so. Third, the restraining order is an unconstitutional prior restraint; if the Supreme Court permitted the publication of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 over the heated objections of the Nixon administration, why should a student presentation not also qualify?

Dear leuan:

In an effort to lessen the sting of free speech complaints, MBTA’s attorneys now are asking O’Toole to reword the order to apply only to “nonpublic” information, recognizing that the presentation slides are circulating online. But they insist the rest of the order must remain intact because the agency is greatly “concerned with the core issue of immediate concern in this case–the security and integrity of its Fare Media System.”

EFF appears to have rejected the request for a mediation. EFF attorney Marcia Hofmann refused to answer our questions, saying only that: “We decline to discuss our ongoing communications with counsel for the MBTA. Our priority at this point is to ensure that the temporary restraining order is lifted…”

Jennifer:
We are considering your proposal. We are having a meeting of senior management on this and related issues this afternoon at 1:30 eastern. I will report our response as soon as it is complete.
I will continue to keep you posted,
leuan
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)

U.S. District Judge George O’Toole in Boston is scheduled to hear arguments at 11 a.m. ET on whether to modify or eliminate the temporary restraining order, which attorneys for the students characterize as a prior restraint in violation of decades of First Amendment precedent.

Best wishes,
Jennifer Granick
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415.436.9333×134
fax 415.436.9993
jennifer@eff.org

Dear Mr. Mahony:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is providing a legal defense to the MIT students–Zack Anderson, R.J. Ryan, and Alessandro Chiesa–plans on Thursday to ask O’Toole to dissolve the restraining order completely.

A different judge who was on duty on Saturday gave the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority an order prohibiting the students from discussing or publishing information that might let anyone “circumvent or otherwise attack the security of the Fare Media System.”

EFF has enlisted some high-profile academics to help it make the case that the restraining order is antithetical to security research. Carnegie Mellon University’s David Farber, Columbia’s Steven Bellovin, Berkeley’s David Wagner, and the University of Pennsylvania’s Matt Blaze are among the academics who signed a letter to the judge on Monday. It says:

From: Mahony, leuan (BOS - X75835)
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 11:37 AM
To: ‘jennifer@eff.org’
Cc: ‘cindy@eff.org’; ‘kurt@eff.org’; ‘marcia@eff.org’; ‘WMitchell@mbta.com’; ‘SDarling@mbta.com’
Subject: Re: CRITICAL INFORMATION: MBTA v Anderson et al

We are concerned that the pall cast by the temporary restraining order will stifle research efforts and weaken academic computing research programs. In turn, we fear the shadow of the law’s ambiguities will reduce our ability to contribute to industrial research in security technologies at the heart of our information infrastructure. We urge that you reconsider and remove the temporary restraining order issued on August 10, 2008.

From: Mahony, leuan (BOS - X75835)
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 3:36 PM
To: ‘jennifer@eff.org’
Cc: ‘cindy@eff.org’; ‘kurt@eff.org’; ‘marcia@eff.org’; JSwope@eadplaw.com; ‘WMitchell@mbta.com’; ‘SDarling@mbta.com’
Subject: RE: CRITICAL INFORMATION: MBTA v Anderson et al

This email is to follow up on my phone call to you of just a few minutes ago. As you know, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Chiesa provided your client MBTA with a confidential three page summary of their research and recommendations for securing the fare collection system. It has just come to our attention through third parties at the Defcon conference that plaintiffs have made this report publicly available on the court’s pacer website by filing the document as an exhibit. This confidential document contains the checksum information without which an attacker can not create a forged card. This information is highly sensitive, which is why my clients planned to withhold it from their presentation. We strongly urge you to take emergency measures to have it removed expeditiously.

Jennifer:
The MBTA and one of its vendors have completed review per your email, below. I’ll have results to you later today.
I’ll continue to keep you informed.
Thanks
leuan

EFF is offering three main arguments for its position: First, the Defcon conference is over and the presentation and separate analysis (PDF) have been widely circulated online (unfortunately for MBTA, a copy of the presentation was in the materials distributed to conference attendees).

The state of Massachusetts plans to ask a federal judge on Thursday to keep in place a restraining order that prevents three MIT students from publicly discussing vulnerabilities they discovered in subway card security.

For its part, the MBTA says it’s willing to negotiate. It’s offered to engage in “non-binding” professional mediation, without “preconditions,” as an alternative to proceeding with Thursday’s hearing. (See our related story).

From: Jennifer Granick
To: Mahony, leuan (BOS - X75835)
Cc: cindy@eff.org ; kurt@eff.org ; marcia@eff.org ; WMitchell@mbta.com ; SDarling@mbta.com
Sent: Mon Aug 11 00:26:42 2008
Subject: Re: CRITICAL INFORMATION: MBTA v Anderson et al

In a testy e-mail exchange with MBTA’s lawyer, EFF has suggested that he made a tactical error by filing both the presentation and the summary marked “confidential” as publicly available court exhibits. Read on for more details.

Thank you,
Jennifer
Civil Liberties Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
454 Shotwell Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415.436.9333 x 134
fax 415.436.9993
jennifer@eff.org

[Editor's Note: Below is the text of a e-mail thread between EFF's Jennifer Granick and MBTA attorney Ieuan-Gael Mahony. One topic is whether the EFF will agree to enter into nonbinding mediation, which MBTA would prefer. Another is MBTA's complaint about a "large amount of misinformation" circulating in the press. Any transcription errors arising from placing the e-mail messages into HTML format are ours, not theirs.]

MIT students Alessandro Chiesa, R.J. Ryan, and Zack Anderson show up at, but do not speak at, the Defcon conference in Las Vegas on Saturday.

“The TRO as initially granted restricted the students from providing true, publicly known, legally acquired information about the MBTA’s CharlieCards and CharlieTickets in violation of the First Amendment,” the EFF said in a legal brief. “The current TRO as the MBTA suggests that it be modified still restricts the students from providing true, legally acquired information about these cards This restriction also violates the First Amendment.”

(Credit:
Declan McCullagh/News.com)

On Aug 10, 2008, at 12:18 PM, wrote:
Dear Jennifer:
Let me address your email and phone call from yesterday, and also return to earlier discussions over a “moving-forward” relationship between the parties.
(A) Your Email First, we want to thank you for your concern. Second, as I indicated earlier today, the MBTA, along with a system vendor, has completed its review of your email, and re-reviewed the three page summary report attached as Exhibit 1 to Scott Henderson’s Declaration (the “Report”). This review does not alter the original assessment of the Report, provided by Mr. Henderson in his declaration. Yet it is the case that (a) the quantity and quality of information provided by the three page Report, standing alone, is less than (b) the quantity and quality of the information provided by the Report read in combination with the Students’ 87 page presentation entitled “Anatomy of a Subway Hack” (the “Presentation”). If the MBTA had been given the Presentation when first requested (or even at the time when the Presentation , we understand, was made available to DEFCON attendees), the “(b)” circumstance might have been avoided. In any event, the MBTA’s evaluators do not assess the risk of this information at the level you set in your email. The MBTA, with vendor support, has begun work on internal responses to the potential security risks at issue. It is our view that an internal, technical and personnel response is the best long-term solution. Accordingly, we do not share your view that legal “emergency measures” are required. We do not think that seeking court relief on this issue and at this point is appropriate. Again, thank you for your concern.
(B) Moving-Forward Relationships We can see from your clients’ statements in the press, and the EFF’s public statements, that the lawsuit generally, and Temporary Restraining Order in particular, do not from your perspectives represent a fair or balanced situation. From my first conversations with Marcia and Kurt, and then later with you, Jennifer, I stated my view that parties, acting reasonably, will invariably develop and implement a resolution of a dispute that is substantially better tailored to their interests than a resolution imposed on them by an external authority. We think we should continue discussions, to see if we can find a solution that is better tailored to all parties’ interests. In my view, Judge Woodlock, in his findings and rulings, directed the parties to work toward a solution perhaps more “creative” and “outside the box” than the standard “keep fighting in court over abstract issues while life goes by”. The goal would be to shift from an adversarial mode to a cooperative, discussion mode, if possible. We respect your clients’ continued statements that their goal remains to provide solutions to security risks. We propose formal mediation as the process for seeking a more optimal going-forward solution. We think we should reserve a full day, or perhaps two. We suggest that the mediation take place in Boston. Other issues, such as mediator costs, whether formal “written submissions” are exchanged, and the like we can discuss.
Let us know your thoughts.
Thanks
leuan

In a mediation process, for example, we would hope to discuss and obtain an understanding of the information, if any, the MIT Undgrads hold that might threaten Fare Media System security. We do not set preconditions on a mediation, however, as we stongly believe — again - that discussions between reasonable parties toward a resolution are preferable to an externally imposed resolution… There are countless examples from large to small of relationships that are polarized and entrenched-hostile because of bad choices by both sides shortly after the rift began. We would like to avoid this here, if possible. We think talking in a non-binding, professionally mediated environment is the best way to avoid further misunderstanding, and potential “bad choices.” … You request, in an “on/off” manner, that we now “shut off’ the TRO. This is traditional advocacy, where the goal is to “win all” and avoid “lose all.” With our mediation proposal, we look for, and are willing to accept, gradations between these poles.

O’Toole has until August 19 to extend the order in the form of a preliminary injunction or let it expire.

And as always, drop me a line or follow me on Twitter!

While many are applauding Gates’ call, others say that the role of business is making money, not curing societal ills. For those wanting to hear more on each argument, check out our point-counterpoint on the matter, with CNET News.com’s Michael Kanellos arguing that Gates is right, while Declan McCullagh says the Microsoft chairman is off-base.

According to Marketwatch, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced a May summit in London where business leaders will explore ways in which corporations can work to combat poverty.

It is common for the topic of the poor to come up at the gathering of the mega-rich known as the World Economic Forum. But the notion that businesses themselves are responsible, at least in part, for solving poverty has gained increased attention at this year’s forum, according to reports coming out of the Swiss ski resort town.

First, while Blue Coat grew up in Web caching, Packeteer’s strength has always been deep packet and protocol expertise. The two technologies complement each other quite well, covering the gamut from application to file access acceleration.

On another note, I want to issue a mea culpa to the folks who run the RSA Security Conference. In a blog last week, I relayed the multitude of complaints I heard from exhibitors about the prices they had to pay for things like cases of water, chairs, and tables. My blog may have inferred that the RSA Conference organizers were responsible for this highway robbery, but that is not the case. Actually, RSA only passes on the costs demanded by the Moscone Center, so the extortion lies with the venue and not the show itself. I apologize to the RSA Conference management team for the confusion.

The other thing Blue Coat gets is scale; competing with Riverbed and Cisco Systems demands deep pockets and feet on the street. Blue Coat gets bigger instantly. All in all, it’s good for Blue Coat, bad for second-tier WAN optimization folks.