I agree. People need to have their opinions aired, but they should have some respect for other users regarding offensive language - profanity, racism, etc.Johnny f*g know it all wrote: ...Giorgio is right about keeping the threads open, people do need to vent, it makes them feel better. You might hear some ugly things said, but believe me that's a decision that he'll get credit for.
Earlier in this thread, I already apologized for that sarcasm under the rather intense atmosphere at the time. A "lot" of people (no names) said things that might have been said in a better way or not said at all. You can search the thread for the apology -- I'm kind of tired and trying to finish up here and get to bed before daylight, unlike last night. ... I also said that with regard to Windows, I know the dangers but take appropriate precautions -- one of which is, uh.... oh, I'll bet you can guess!Guest wrote:maybe he's using *$Script filter with ABP.Tom T. wrote:You're punishing yourself, not Giorgio, regardless of whether he is "right" or "wrong". Good luck running around the Net without proper screening of executable content --This is unnecessary, I could say the same to you about Windows with malware and virus.Tom T. wrote: -- perhaps you will use IE too? G/L.
Aside from being "forced" to view Giorgio's ads (I'm not saying that's right - or wrong - for the sake of this discussion), what economic or other damage did you suffer? How much money did it cost you to see Giorgio's ads? As for injunctive relief, the developer has already redressed the grievance and said it will not happen again, so the injunction seems superfluous -- I don't think you'll get it. Also, if you did in fact have any legal knowledge, as I do, you'd know that in citing statutes, just a section number isn't enough. First of all, what country? The developer is in Italy, and where are you? Second, if in the USA, are you citing United States Code? XX USC XXXX is the proper format (15 USC 1483, e. g.). If not Federal law, then State law? Which state? Citation invalid on multiple grounds, sorry.Guest wrote: § 1030. Fraud and related activity in connection with computers
(5)(A)(i) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
g) Any person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of this section may maintain a civil action against the violator to obtain compensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief. A civil action for a violation of this section may be brought only if the conduct involves 1 of the factors set forth in clause (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) of subsection (a)(5)(B). Damages for a violation involving only conduct described in subsection (a)(5)(B)(i) are limited to economic damages.
I'm not being sarcastic here, I'm being perfectly serious. Don't quote law unless you know what you're doing; cite only applicable statutes in the applicable jurisdiction; and cite them properly.
As regards your damages, I'll put in a word with Giorgio and have him refund your purchase price for NoScript. Have a great day.