CYBER CRIME - BE SMART - BE SAFE - AND - LOOKOUT FOR WEB SITES THAT PREY ON UNSUSPECTING, POTENTIAL VICTIMS ...

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/cyber/cyber

Key Priorities- Computer Intrusions- Innocent Images: Online Predators- Anti-Piracy/Intellectual Property Rights- Fraud: Internet Crime Complaint Center

Initiatives & Partnerships- Cyber Action Teams- Computer Crimes Task Forces- Identity Theft- InfraGard: Protecting Infrastructure- National Cyber Investigative Joint Task Force- National Cyber-Forensics & Training Alliance- Strategic Alliance Cyber Crime Working Group

Cases & Takedowns- 2,100 ATMs Hit at Once- Operation Phish Fry- Dark Market- More

Wanted by the FBI- Cyber Crime Fugitives- Crimes Against Children Fugitives

Cyber Threats & Scams- Threat Overview: Speech- E-Scams & Warnings- Common Internet Frauds- Internet Crime Reports- National Cyber Alert System- Peer-to-Peer Networks - Social Networking Sites

Protections- Report a Cyber Incident- Get Educated on Internet Fraud- How to Protect Your Computer- Parent's Guide to Internet Safety

More Resources- Cybercrime.gov- National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace (pdf)- Project Safe Childhood- Secret Service Electronic Crimes Task Forces

I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have ...

I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong ~ Abraham Lincoln

The Spider and the Fly poem by Mary Howitt

Step into my parlour?" said the Spider to the Fly,
'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy;

The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I've a many curious things to shew when you are there."

Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "to ask me is in vain,
For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again."

"I'm sure you must be weary, dear, with soaring up so high;
Will you rest upon my little bed?" said the Spider to the Fly.

"There are pretty curtains drawn around; the sheets are fine and thin,
And if you like to rest awhile, I'll snugly tuck you in!"

Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "for I've often heard it said,
They never, never wake again, who sleep upon your bed!"

Said the cunning Spider to the Fly, " Dear friend what can I do,
To prove the warm affection I 've always felt for you?

I have within my pantry, good store of all that's nice;
I'm sure you're very welcome -- will you please to take a slice?"

"Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "kind Sir, that cannot be,
I've heard what's in your pantry, and I do not wish to see!"

"Sweet creature!" said the Spider, "you're witty and you're wise,
How handsome are your gauzy wings, how brilliant are your eyes!

I've a little looking-glass upon my parlour shelf,
If you'll step in one moment, dear, you shall behold yourself."

"I thank you, gentle sir," she said, "for what you 're pleased to say,
And bidding you good morning now, I'll call another day."

The Spider turned him round about, and went into his den,
For well he knew the silly Fly would soon come back again:

So he wove a subtle web, in a little corner sly,
And set his table ready, to dine upon the Fly.

Then he came out to his door again, and merrily did sing,
"Come hither, hither, pretty Fly, with the pearl and silver wing;

Your robes are green and purple -- there's a crest upon your head;
Your eyes are like the diamond bright, but mine are dull as lead!"

Alas, alas! how very soon this silly little Fly,
Hearing his wily, flattering words, came slowly flitting by;

With buzzing wings she hung aloft, then near and nearer drew,
Thinking only of her brilliant eyes, and green and purple hue --

Thinking only of her crested head -- poor foolish thing! At last,
Up jumped the cunning Spider, and fiercely held her fast.

He dragged her up his winding stair, into his dismal den,
Within his little parlour -- but she ne'er came out again!

And now dear little children, who may this story read,
To idle, silly flattering words, I pray you ne'er give heed:
Unto an evil counsellor, close heart and ear and eye,
And take a lesson from this tale, of the Spider and the Fly.

Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force Announces Results of Largest-Ever Nationwide Operation Targeting Investment Fraud

“With this operation, the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force is sending a strong message,” said Attorney General Holder. “To the public: be alert for these frauds, take appropriate measures to protect yourself, and report such schemes to proper authorities when they occur. And to anyone operating or attempting to operate an investment scam: cheating investors out of their earnings and savings is no longer a safe business plan - we will use every tool at our disposal to find you, to stop you, and to bring you to justice.”

December 09, 2010

Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force Announces Results of Largest-Ever Nationwide Operation Targeting Investment Fraud

Please go to link and read this ~News release: "Attorney General Eric Holder announced the results of Operation Broken Trust, a nationwide operation organized by the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force to target investment fraud.

To date, the operation has involved enforcement actions against 343 criminal defendants and 189 civil defendants for fraud schemes that harmed more than 120,000 victims throughout the country.

The operation’s criminal cases involved more than $8.3 billion in estimated losses and the civil cases involved estimated losses of more than $2.1 billion. Operation Broken Trust is the first national operation of its kind to target a broad array of investment fraud schemes that directly prey upon the investing public."

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/December/10-ag-1390.html

AVOIDING TRUST SCAMS - ALWAYS ASK THE ADVICE OF AN ATTORNEY ~ It's the scam artist that takes your money - Most Attorney Consultations are "Free"

AVOIDING TRUST SCAMS

The Castleman Law Firm
A Professional Corporation

5870 Stoneridge Mall Road, Ste. 207
Pleasanton, California 94588
(925) 463-2221
Fax (925) 463-0328

There are good trusts and there are bad trusts. Good trusts are part of a process used by legitimate estate planners and their clients to control the disposition of assets, avoid probate, reduce administration costs, save estate taxes, and preserve family wealth for future generations. This article is not about the good trusts. It is about bad trusts.

There are two main categories of bad trusts: scam trusts and mill trusts.

Scam Trusts

What are scam trusts? These are so called "trusts" or "contracts" that are promoted by scam artists who claim that their documents and plans will allow individuals and, in some cases businesses, to avoid or significantly reduce all taxes, including income taxes. The promoters also claim that their plans, for which they charge a hefty fee, will make your assets unreachable by creditors. They often use a complex structure that involves the "irrevocable" transfer of your assets to one or more business or trust entities controlled by you. The promoters claim that the arrangement will significantly reduce or eliminate not only estate taxes but also income taxes. Scam trusts are marketed through high pressure seminars, by door-to-door salesmen, and on the Internet. In some cases, they are recommended by well meaning but poorly informed CPA's, financial advisors, friends, or business acquaintances. The marketing techniques can be very persuasive, and are aimed at all classes of people. I have seen doctors, dentists, accountants, and financial advisors fall for the hype.

How can you recognize them? Remember the following four tests:

The "Name" Test: The name of the trust is often a hint that something is amiss. The scam trusts have a variety of forms and names such as: "Constitutional Trusts," "Pure Trusts," "Common Law Trusts," "Unincorporated Business Associations," "Asset Protection Trusts," "Business Trusts" (not to be confused with legitimate Massachuset Business Trusts), and "Family Trusts" (not to be confused with legitimate revocable family trusts).

The "It Seems Too Good To Be True" Test: If the trust is promoted as one that will reduce or eliminate your personal income tax, watch out. Almost all of the scam trusts purport to allow a person or a family to arrange their assets and business affairs in a manner that will avoid or substantially reduce income taxes, change nondeductible personal expenses into deductible business expenses, or redirect all, or most of, a person's ordinary income into retirement savings.

The "Authority Approval" Test: The promotional materials that are used to help sell scam trusts often contain incorrect references to the Constitution, as well as references to court cases that have been overturned or changed by statute. They often cite scripture. The promoters of these fraudulent trusts often incorrectly associate the names of prominent families, such as Kennedy or Rockefeller, with the trusts that they are trying to peddle. Here is part of an actual sales pitch written by a scam trust purveyor:

You can LEGALLY avoid excessive taxation in order to build a financially secure estate; dramatically reduce your liabilities; gain the ultimate in personal and business privacy; and eliminate all the estate and inheritance taxes plus probate costs. This previously "secret" method has been successfully utilized by the nation's wealthiest families: the Rockefellers, the Hunts, the Kennedys and others, plus leading oil and industrial companies. All of these have demonstrated that it is a POSSIBLE, LEGAL, and EFFECTIVE solution to avoid estate shrinkage. First, this is possible because the United States of America is founded on the principle that the peoples' unalienable rights are originally received directly from our Creator! This is why we acknowledge our country to be a "NATION UNDER GOD" ("of the people, by the people, and for the people").

Embodied in this principle is the "Key" to total protection of your personal and business assets - the Constitution. It recognizes our inalienable rights by the use of the Law of the land by which we protect our freedoms, and our property.

The "Dumb Advisor" Test: In almost all cases the promoters of scam trusts will caution you against having your CPA or attorney review the documents that the promoters want to sell to you. They often say that CPA's and attorneys simply do not understand them, or have a vested interest or bias against them.

What is wrong with scam trusts? BEWARE!

Trusts and business arrangements that are marketed as a way of avoiding all or a substantial amount of income tax are almost always illegal. These are classified as "abusive arrangements" by the IRS. Any person who creates one of these trusts will, when caught by the IRS, have to pay all back taxes owed, interest, and serious penalties. Criminal sanctions will be imposed upon all who participate in the promotion of abusive trusts. A transfer of real estate to a scam trust may result in a reassessment by the county appraiser resulting in significantly greater property taxes. Once you have entered into a scam trust, and perhaps transferred title to some or all of your assets, it can be very expensive to undo the arrangement.

STAY AWAY FROM SCAM TRUSTS.

Mill Trusts

Now, let's consider mill trusts.

What are mill trusts? I define a mill trust as a generic "one size fits all" document ostensibly designed to avoid probate and save estate taxes. Often the producer of the document is not a lawyer, but may claim to have the document either "created by," "reviewed by," or "approved by" a lawyer.

How can you recognize mill trusts? Again, there are four tests

The "Lack of Counsel" Test: Proper estate planning requires substantive individual legal counseling. Mill trusts are usually produced after the "client" has filled out a simple form questionnaire (often of the "check the box" type). The client is usually given very little counseling. Often the mill trust client meets only with a "paralegal," a CPA, or a financial advisor, but not with an attorney who specializes in estate planning.

The "Limited Purpose" Test: Mill trusts are often prepared solely for the purposes of avoiding probate and/or saving estate taxes. No consideration is giving to protection in the case of incompetency, planning protective distributions for descendants, or tailoring distributions for families with children or grandchildren of different marriages. No consideration is given to integrating life insurance and retirement funds with the dispositions provided for in the trust documents.

The "Lack of Funding" Test: Most mill trusts do not work because they are not properly funded, meaning that assets are not transferred into the trust. The client is usually given no help in effecting the transfers. As a result, the majority of mill trusts are not properly funded. When a trust is not properly funded, it does not work.

The "Cheap" Test: Mill trusts usually range in cost from $350 to less than $1000. What you get is what you pay for--not very much.

What is wrong with mill trusts?

Although mill trusts are not burdened with the illegalities of scam trusts, they are usually a waste of money and not suited for proper estate planning. An unfunded mill trust is a waste of money because assets not transferred to the trust will not be controlled by the trust terms and may have to be probated. Many mill trusts contain provisions which can actually result in increased estate taxes. People who prepare mill trusts almost never take into consideration retirement assets and life insurance proceeds. A failure to integrate retirement fund and insurance policy planning with the overall estate plan can lead to increased taxes and ultimate distributions that are inconsistent with your goals.

Proper estate planning requires consideration of your specific needs and family goals. When done correctly, much can be accomplished. When done incorrectly, much may be lost.

Read More Articles at this Law Firms Web Site: http://www.castlelaw.com/scamtrust.htm

Rags to Riches to Rags: Millionaires Who Go Bust ...

It's easier than you think to lose a fortune. But some say they're better off.

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Even before he turned in his lucky ticket, William Post had a hunch that winning the $16-million Pennsylvania Lottery jackpot was going to bring him a heap of trouble. He just didn't know how much.

"With my family, (I knew) they were going to do anything to get the money," said Post, 63, who won big.

As it turned out, anything included a younger brother who was arrested for hiring a hit man to kill Post. Other siblings, said Post, pestered him until he agreed to invest in various car and restaurant business deals. He says he never saw a dime of it back.

But that wasn't the end.

"I had more lawsuits than you could shake a stick at," said Post.

A former girlfriend sued Post for failing to share winnings. Meanwhile, courts held his money in escrow until Post's debts were settled. Eventually, he auctioned off his winning ticket to pay his bills. All in all, Post says he figures he received about $2 million, part of which he used to buy his three-bedroom Pennsylvania home.

It's about the only thing he has to show for the Lottery winnings. All the money is gone. Legal fees and taxes ate much of the money, says Post. But he's also admitted that he went on a spending spree, too.

Post now lives on $450 monthly Social Security payments and food stamps. He spends much of his day watching classic movies on television. But Post isn't complaining. Now that the money's gone, people leave him alone. His house is quiet.

He's content.

"I've got peace of mind and you never realize how valuable it is until you lose it," he says. "I'm a Roman Catholic so I know that rarely a rich man goes to heaven. The way I see it, I've got a good shot."

He's not the first to lose it all. As it turns out, Post is in good company among lottery winners gone bust. One New Jersey woman even won two lotteries -- for a total of $5.4 million -- but blew threw it all on spending, gifts and gambling. Uncommon? Not really.

Two out of three lose or spend all their winnings within five years, said Stephen Goldbart, co-director of the Money, Meaning and Choices Institute in San Francisco.

Most lottery winners spend all their winnings because they don't make careful plans to save or invest it, he notes.

"The average American lives paycheck to paycheck," he adds. "So when they come into sudden wealth, they have to learn the financial ropes" of planning.

But lottery winners aren't the only ones who botch sudden wealth. Lately, Goldbart and his colleague, Joan Invursky DiFuria, have been counseling dot.com whiz kids who made millions -- then lost it all -- when the tech bubble burst. While many spent their newfound fortune on lavish parties, fancy cars, homes and other toys, most of their money was paper wealth invested in just one or a handful of dot.com stock.

"They didn't protect themselves against change and they didn't diversify," said DiFuria. "It was unexpected that they'd make so much so quickly, and it was unexpected that they'd lose so much so quickly."

For many, the sudden loss packed a bitter punch -- creating pressure to earn new fortunes. Others are stuck in the soul-searching phase, wondering where to now and how to apply their skills toward a meaningful line of work. Still, others adjusted surprisingly well, said DiFuria.

She remembers the day she met with one woman in her late 20's who had just learned that she owed more than $500,000 in taxes on stock options she exercised but never cashed in.

"She had a great attitude," DiFuria said. "She said, 'You know, the money never seemed real to me. I'm a little relieved. My friends won't be pointing at me anymore.' When she drove to work in her new car she felt great because everyone else had one. But when she returned to her middle-class neighborhood, she felt uncomfortable. She felt isolated."

Peter Grandich never felt isolated when he had millions. On the contrary, he loved what money could buy -- a spacious mansion in New Jersey, two race cars, five race horses and lots of time on the golf course.

"I was addicted to the game," said Grandich, a high school dropout who made his fortune on Wall Street. (His first break came when he was a warehouse manager and a security guard told him about a stock tip. Grandich used $7,000 of his family's wedding money and made $20,000).

Grandich eventually became a broker, but because he hated cold calling, he started a newsletter to keep himself busy at work. Again, luck was with Grandich when he moved clients out of the market before it collapsed in October 1987. His bearish call secured Grandich's reputation as the dropout/whiz kid who made good. Grandich was quoted in national papers and appeared on television -- living the good life. He calls it his "arrogant days."

"I was playing golf, making deals. I probably gave more money away in gifts and parties than I dreamed of making when I was a warehouse manager," he said.

Hubris finally got the better of him in 1997, when Grandich had his own firm and, among other things, was raising money for various mining companies. That was when the Bre-X gold mining scandal exploded. Bre-X, a small Canadian mining company, had wowed investors around the world when it claimed to have tapped the world's biggest gold mine deep in the Indonesian jungle, but the find turned out to be a massive hoax. The scandal put a chill on Grandich's business. But instead of calling it quits, he used his own money to prop up his failing deals.

"I lost 75 percent of what I had in less than a year," he recalls. "Some people get suckered by their own actions, their own greed -- that was me."

Grandich was so depressed he even considered suicide, but then worried he wouldn't be able to afford the care if he permanently injured himself. Filled with despair, he started looking for answers.

He drove to Barnes & Noble.

Grandich planned to buy a book on business strategies -- or mental health. But he ended up picking up a Bible. By his own estimates, 25 percent of the Bible's passages dealt with money.

It was a sign. And it led him to start Trinity Financial, Sports & Entertainment Co. -- a financial services business. Grandich's partner is Lee Rouson, the former New York Giants running back and a Christian leader with Sports World Ministries.

The duo now aim to help their clients -- who include players in the National Football League -- make informed, Christian-oriented financial decisions.

As it turns out, there are plenty of young football players who, like Grandich, have made then lost fortunes. In fact the NFL estimates that 78 players have been defrauded at least $42 million in the last three years. In response, the NFL Players Association this year launched a rigorous screening and certification program, with input from the Security and Exchange Commission, for financial advisers who want to register to work with the union's members, including players and coaches. (Note: anyone can call himself a financial planner, so whether you're a star athlete or a weekend warrior, choose your adviser carefully. For some guidance, see the Money lesson on hiring a financial planner.)

Meanwhile, Grandich sees a bright future for himself and his clients.

"I can manage their money but I won't throw up all sorts of big numbers," he says. "They won't have high reward, but they won't have high risk either. If they like the idea of turning $20,000 into $100,000 in five years, I'm not the right person."

Grandich pauses. "I had a tremendous home. I gave away $150,000 one year. I was like a kid in a candy store. But I don't think I had one-tenth the fun [that] I'm having today."

CNN

Search Engine Abusers and Offenders Three-Way Linking, Pagejacking and Cloaking ...

Like French pigs trained to hunt the most elusive truffles, new generation search-engine ranking programs can usually sniff out even the most cleverly concealed scheme of this type and instantly punish offenders.

Search Engine Abusers and Offenders Three-Way Linking and Pagejacking and Cloaking

Cloaking a practice done by black hat SEO's to display key word stuffed pages to Search Engines and a different page to actual users.

Pagejacking is referred as to copy others web page and put forward it to the illegal search engines by telling it as your own. To a certain extent pagejacking includes page cloaking.

Pagejacking is almost as the pinching copyrighted contents.

You have two websites, redwebsite.com and bluewebsite.com. I have one site, qrs.com. You offer to link bluewebsite.com to qrs.com in return for me linking qrs.com to redwebsite.com.

Sounds like a pretty good idea, true or false?

Sadly, false. We say sadly, because so-called three-way (3 way) links can frequently make a lot of sense from a marketing perspective. Unfortunately, from the point of view of a search-engine ranking program, especially Google's, they frequently look like nothing more than an attempt to spam the system and skew the page rankings.

The problem is that three-way linking has become an increasingly popular ploy among search engine cheaters. In fact, the number of three-ways implemented solely in an attempt to unfairly hype site rankings has become such a high percentage of all three ways that companies like Google have been virtually forced to take steps to end the abuse and protect the integrity of their returns. Why have many webmasters trying to play fast and loose with search-engine rules turned to three-way linking? Primarily because the search engines - particularly Google, have caught up with their abusive reciprocal-linking practices.

Since the earliest days of the Web, legitimate, ethical and relevant reciprocal links have been - and still are - the most powerful way to generate traffic to a website. Good links generate direct qualified traffic from compatible linked sites and can also improve your site's search-engine ranking to bring in even more hits.

The problem is that first-generation search-engine analysis programs simply counted the number of links on a site and gave a better rating to those with the most links. The results of early search engine programs lack of sophistication included the link farm, full duplex automated linking networks, free for all links pages, and other bad practices designed to flood a site with random links having nothing to do with the site's content and of absolutely zero value to the site's visitors.

Responding to this abuse, search engine crawlers were re-programmed to actually analyze links - to follow them and see if they are relevant, to pay attention to whether buckets of two-way links are being poured into a site all at once, to check whether link content is fresh or stale. Stymied in their attempts to beat the ranking odds with phony two-way linking schemes, some operators have turned to three-way linking to generate bogus one-way links. Here's how they work it.

Scenario One: A person with an e-commerce site they want to promote, let's call it UpTheSearchEngines.com, buys a bunch of domain names and erects websites for all of them. He than creates one-way links from the more or less bogus sites to UpTheSearchEngines.com, the site he's trying to spam Google with. In theory, Google's analysis program will see all the links from these supposedly independent sites to UpTheSearchEngines.com and think "Wow, something good must really be happening at UpTheSearchEngines.com, I'd better give it a top-ten ranking." In practice, the analysis program will deduce that most of the sites pointing to UpTheSearchEngines.com are part of an incestuously linked in-house network of sites running off a single domain address and controlled by the same person. Having determined this, the ranking program will usually punish the offender with a reduced ranking.

Scenario Two: Someone approaches you and says, "Let's do some reciprocal linking, you put up a link to my UpTheSearchEngines.com site and I'll give you one link on each of my three other sites, ILoveSearchEngines.com, IHateSearchEngines.com and WhoNeedsSearchEngines.com." This sounds enticing, here's a person offering you three links for the "price" of one. What's really going on here? What's probably going on is that the generous webmaster with the three-for-one proposition is trying to create links to UpTheSearchEngines.com without putting up any reciprocal links from UpTheSearchEngines.com to your site or other partner sites. Again, the goal is to trick searches engines into thinking UpTheSearchEngine.com has a degree of popularity and importance far beyond that indicated by its legitimate links, keywords, metatags, and traffic statistics.

The reasoning goes like this: If all these other sites are linking to UpTheSearchEngines.com without getting anything - even a link - in return, UpTheSearchEngines.com must be a fantastic site and should get a high rank. Scenario Two, like Scenario One, works a lot better in theory than it does in practice.

Like French pigs trained to hunt the most elusive truffles, new generation search-engine ranking programs can usually sniff out even the most cleverly concealed scheme of this type and instantly punish offenders.

As with so many issues relating to search engine rankings, what we really know about how Google and other engines handle both legitimate three-way linking and deliberate three-way abuse attempts is more a matter of conjecture, circumstantial evidence and anecdotal tales of horror than it is of hard facts. In particular, little is known about the direct effect of three-way linking on those sites at the reciprocal ends of the triangle - in the above example, that's "you" the person who "bought" the three-for-one linking deal.

According to some search engine optimization experts, search engines only take punitive action against sites benefiting from the one-way links, others contend that even the sites providing the links can be down-rated at least slightly by participating in the practice.

Frankly, it probably doesn't matter. Three-way linking of the types described above is almost certainly going to diminish your Google page ranking at least slightly because it invariably produces both forward and backward links that have little or no relevance to the content on your site. And content, relevant content, is, especially as far as Google is concerned, king. In fact, there is only one place in which good quality, highly relevant onsite and linked content is more important than it is in Google's virtual brain and that is in the flesh, blood and neural pathways of your customers' and potential customers' hearts and minds.

Considering the heavy opaque veil cloaking so many search-engine operations, it's probably best to view three-way linking with the same degree of skepticism you'd apply to any new strategy alleged to produce substantial search engine gain without any of the pain associated with upgrading your site and its contents.

The reason to be skeptical is evident: When it comes to linking and search-engine rankings, discretion is by far the better path of valor. Getting away with cheating is not nearly as easy today as it once was and getting caught can be very expensive in terms of reduced search engine-generated traffic.

continues ...Search Engine Abusers and Offenders Three-Way Linking, Pagejacking and Cloaking ...page 2

This is a Test: 'Bad People' ~ God Put Them There Just For Us ...

Well then, God brought this person into my life over a year ago - July 2009 when she first invested and started hitting the forums under many user names. Many friendships have been sabatoged by her on the way. Should someone say something? Hmmm .. that's the dilemma.

This is a Test: 'Bad People' - God Put Them There Just For Us ...

In every one of our lives there are people who mess with our minds and hearts. Believe it or not, God put them there. They're there for our benefit.

This is no crazy talk. It can be backed up biblically via examples from Joseph to Jesus. Although the Apostle Paul talked about his "thorn in the flesh," that "messenger of Satan" that was sent to buffet him (2 Corinthians 12:7-10), he too knew full well that the truth is God allows these people and challenging situations in our lives for our betterment.

This is Wonderful News

We are not at all very apt at seeing the silver lining to our very near and resplendently dark thunder clouds, are we?

We will most usually struggle to see the 'good news' in people who've set their hearts and minds against us, to expose or depose us. But, if it wasn't for these people we wouldn't have the opportunities to meet the challenges that God knows we can meet. We'd miss vital growth junctures that are part of our God-willed destiny. We can see it as God forming us via eternal discipline.

The writer of Hebrews hit on this very point:

No discipline is enjoyable while it is happening - it's painful! But afterward there will be a peaceful harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way.

~Hebrews 12:11 (NLT).

The point is we have to allow ourselves to be trained in this way. It comes natural to no one.

An Exercise in Execution

We cannot get better at spiritual practice without applying it. We need to get our minds and hearts involved in the practice of new ways of living if we're to master them.

Perhaps this exercise in question - seeing a nemesis as someone sent from the very hand of God - is best accomplished in spending some time reflecting over the role one of these people has played, and is indeed playing in our lives perhaps now.

This is the practice, it is hoped, toward spiritual enlightenment whereby God might tip into us some level of his own holy revelation. We might consequently begin to see the overall purpose of this evil against us in conforming from it, goodness.

Examples

If someone is bullying us our opportunity is to learn how to respond in assertiveness, and not match their fire with our own aggression, or submissive behaviour.

If another person has betrayed our trust our opportunity is to practice forgiveness, and learn classic lessons about trust, as well as learning some sense of empathy for why there was a betrayal in the first place.

If we've been disappointed by a lack of opportunity we're now given the opportunity to work through the present issues and develop resilience and patience. It's also an opportunity to reassess goals.

There is always a silver lining and we're blessed to seek vision of it.

Stepping back and understanding that this is an emotionally unbalanced person should create a feeling of empathy.

unknown author

What does the Bible say about lying?

Col 3:9-10
9 Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self with its evil practices, 10 and have put on the new self who is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him
Lev 19:12
12'And you shall not swear falsely by My name, so as to profane the name of your God; I am the LORD.
Prov 25:18
18 Like a club and a sword and a sharp arrow Is a man who bears false witness against his neighbor.
Zech 8:17
17'Also let none of you devise evil in your heart against another, and do not love perjury; for all these are what I hate,' declares the LORD. "
Prov 14:5
5 A faithful witness will not lie, But a false witness speaks lies.
1 Kings 22:16
16 Then the king said to him, "How many times must I adjure you to speak to me nothing but the truth in the name of the LORD?"
Prov 19:5
5 A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who tells lies will not escape.
Deut 19:17-19
17 then both the men who have the dispute shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges who will be in office in those days.
18 And the judges shall investigate thoroughly; and if the witness is a false witness and he has accused his brother falsely,
19 then you shall do to him just as he had intended to do to his brother. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
Rev 21:8
8 "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."
Prov 19:9
9 A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who tells lies will perish.
Prov 24:28
28 Do not be a witness against your neighbor without cause, And do not deceive with your lips.
Ps 58:3
3 The wicked are estranged from the womb; These who speak lies go astray from birth.
James 3:14
14 But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your heart, do not be arrogant and so lie against the truth.
Ex 23:1
1 "You shall not bear a false report; do not join your hand with a wicked man to be a malicious witness.
Prov 12:19
19 Truthful lips will be established forever, But a lying tongue is only for a moment.

The Tragedy and Lives Affected by Financial Fraudster, Bernie Madoff ! Madoff’s Eldest Son Found Dead in Suicide

Link ~ The Man Who Knew

December 11, 2010

Madoff’s Eldest Son Found Dead in Suicide

Mark Madoff, the older of Bernard L. Madoff’s two sons, was found dead in his Manhattan apartment on Saturday, the second anniversary of the day his father was arrested for running a gigantic Ponzi scheme that shattered thousands of lives around the world.

“Mark Madoff took his own life today,” Martin Flumenbaum Mark Madoff’s lawyer, said in a statement on Saturday. “This is a terrible and unnecessary tragedy.”

One city official said that the first notification, via 911, was at 7:27.18, on Saturday morning, and the call was for a, “possible suicide.” The call came from a fourth-floor, private house at 158 Mercer Street – a 13-story building.

Deputy Commissioner Paul J. Browne said the body was discovered by the victim’s father-in-law. “He came there this morning,” said Mr. Browne said.

Mr. Browne said that the victim’s “two-year-old son was asleep in an adjoining bedroom.”

Mr. Browne added: “Apparently, the son-in-law had indicated that someone should check on the child; had made some notification to the wife that he should check on the child.”

Mr. Browne could not immediately say what time Mark Madoff made that notification or say if investigators believe it was part of some plan.

Mr. Browne said the body was hanging by its neck, from a pipe in the living room ceiling. A black dog leash had been used, he said.

Since Bernard Madoff’s arrest, all the members of his immediate family have been the targets of a battery of civil lawsuits filed initially by victims of the Ponzi scheme and later by the bankruptcy court trustee pursuing assets for those victims.

The trustee’s lawsuit, filed last year, sought to recover approximately $200 million that the family received in salaries, bonuses, expense-account payments and gains in their own investment accounts at the Madoff firm. More recently, the trustee, Irving H. Picard, filed a new lawsuit in London that named Mark Madoff, 46, along with other directors and executives of the Madoff affiliate there, Madoff Securities International, Ltd. It was aimed at recovering profits and payments the defendants received from that subsidiary, on whose board Mark Madoff served.

These lawsuits are pending, and will not necessarily be derailed by Mark Madoff’s death. Typically, the litigation would continue against the estate of any deceased defendant, as was the case when Jeffry Picower, one of Bernie Madoff’s largest investors, died in October 2009.

Mr. Madoff had worked at his father’s brokerage firm since his graduation from the University of Michigan in 1987. A number of Mark’s oldest childhood friends from Roslyn, N.Y., invested with Madoff and lost their savings in the fraud. This destroyed those relationships and caused Mark great pain, says a person close to the family who requested anonymity.

The steps that led to his father’s arrest began when he and his brother, Andrew, confronted their father over his plans to distribute hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses to employees months ahead of schedule.

That led to a private conversation on Dec. 10, 2008, in which Bernard Madoff told his sons that their entire lives — all the wealth and success the family seemed to possess — were based on a lie. His apparently lucrative money-management business was nothing but an immense Ponzi scheme, and it was crumbling under the relentless pressures of the financial crisis of late 2008.

Mark and his brother immediately consulted a lawyer and were advised they had to report their father’s confession to law enforcement. They did so, and the following morning their father was arrested at his Manhattan penthouse.

The public fury over the stunning crime — whose losses Bernard Madoff himself estimated at $50 billion — was not limited to its mastermind. Mark Madoff, his mother and his brother were all the subject of constant media speculation. Some blogs repeatedly predicted their imminent arrest, and many articles speculated that they had been involved in their father’s crime, or at least were aware of it.

But charges have not been filed against any of the immediate family members, and their lawyer has said publicly that neither Mark nor his brother has ever been notified by prosecutors that they were the subjects of a criminal investigation.

A person close to Mark Madoff said he had been increasingly distraught as the anniversary of his father’s arrest approached, and he had been upset at some recent news coverage speculating that criminal charges against him and his brother were still likely.

Mr. Flumenbaum, in his statement, called Mark “an innocent victim of his father’s monstrous crime who succumbed to two years of unrelenting pressure from false accusations and innuendo.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/business/12madoff.html?_r=1&hp

The Man Who Knew

And the Biggest Scam Artist of All, Bernie Madoff

read stories about Madoff @ http://www.topnews.in/people/bernie-madoff

Knowledge is Power ~ Protect yourself from cyber crime ~ Educate yourself ...

Over the last 18 months, an ominous change has swept across the Internet. The threat landscape once dominated by the worms and viruses unleashed by irresponsible hackers is now ruled by a new breed of cybercriminals.

Cybercrime is motivated by fraud, typified by the bogus emails sent by "phishers" that aim to steal personal information. The tools driving their attacks and fueling the blackmarket are crimeware - bots, Trojan horses, and spyware. Introduction to Cybercrime & Crimeware Podcast (mp3 / xml) Download Cybercrime Booklet (PDF)

The Internet is a big part of our lives nowadays. As part of an average day, we log onto the Internet for shopping, banking, social and business networking, applying for jobs, researching genealogy, finding old friends, downloading music, taking a course, you name it, if we need to receive or send information, the Internet offers some avenue to help you do the task.

As usage of the Internet becomes more widespread, Internet crime has also risen. It's become incredibly important we take preventative measures to protect our safety. Identity theft is on the rise and this is another important factor we must consider. With each piece of information transmitted or stored online, there is a risk of falling victim to a crime. Currently some of the biggest trends we have to protect ourselves against are hacking, stalking, fraud, phishing, social engineering, theft, spreading Malware and harassment.

There are several ways you can proactively safeguard yourself from falling prey to cyber crime. Here are a few tips:

*Get educated. When arming yourself against cyber crime, it's important to become aware of the risks. By educating yourself on current illegal trends, you can better understand ways you can reduce the risk of becoming a target. Awareness is the strongest weapon you can obtain to protect yourself against cyber crime.

*Use vigilance. It's a good idea to always be vigilant when sharing personal information over the Internet. It's important to make sure you only share minimal, if any, personal information with people you do not know. Be conscientious of what information share even if you think you are being careful. Often criminals will talk with their victims for long periods of time, piecing together bits of personal information until they have a complete profile. People you associate with or meet online may not appear to be who they say they are, after all one never knows who is really sitting at the other end of a network connection.

*Be careful with passwords. Do not ever enter passwords or personal information on links you received in email since emails can be spoofed and/or used to "phish" for information. Always go to the business or organizations website directly by using the URL and make sure the web page has been secured; if it has been, it will indicate "HTTPS" instead of "HTTP" in the URL and you will see a small padlock icon on the lower left hand side of your screen. Never give out your password to anyone online or even by a telephone request. Valid organizations have policies which state a member of their agency will never ask for a password. Also change your password frequently and make sure it's a strong one, a strong password contains both letters and numbers; it's a good idea to create one which is easy for you to remember but hard for someone else to guess and/or use a software program to try and crack.

*Protect your computer. It's also important you invest in installation of anti-virus, spy-ware and firewall software. There are many programs available that you can download for free, or you can purchase a proprietary one. There are several good websites available that can advise you on how to select the right one for you.

One well-known website is C-Net.com, and can be accessed at: http://www.download.com/Antivi rus-Firewall-Spyware/?tag=dir.

*Use caution with e-mail. Be careful of downloading attachments from email. Many viruses, Trojans, and other damaging files can be included in e-mail attachments. Before downloading a file, try to verify the person who sent it to you has indeed sent you a file, as often Malware is sent via an infected persons address book and the person has no idea they've sent you an infected file if they've fallen victim to Malware. Also, do not download files or click on links to websites from people you do not know.
*Read privacy policies. Another tip is to read privacy policies of any online entity you conduct business with. Be aware of what is done with your personal information once you do share it with a company or organization. While most of the businesses you work with are legit, occasionally a partnering organization may sell data to a third party undesirable business you may not want your information shared with. Most of the time you can opt-out of your information being shared if you take the time to read privacy policies.

Using the Internet is fun, educational and useful. Taking precautions while online will significantly reduce your risk of becoming a victim of cyber crime. Always remember that it's better to be proactive, hesitant and cautious than spontaneous, as impulsiveness on the Internet often leads to trouble. If something or someone seems or sounds too good to be true, it usually is!

http://us.norton.com/cybercrime/index.jsp

Lucy ~ You got some splainin to do ~ Interference with Commerce - Web techniques are damaging to the legitimate businesses ..

Digital Technology Law Journal

The Spider’s Stratagem on the Web: Hunting and Collecting Web Users

Morris Averill* Visiting Lecturer University of Western Sydney This article discusses: the traps for consumers browsing the World Wide Web or engaging in electronic commerce (ecommerce), including the privacy implications on being on the Web; the possible legal responses available to Web users or government regulators are considered; as well as Web site operators who consider that some Web techniques are damaging to their business.

Introduction

1. The so-called ‘tech-wreck’ of April 2000, (the ‘correction’ in share values of technology companies listed on the NASDAQ, and other stock exchanges), can be attributed to investors realising that profitable e-commerce would be more difficult that many had imagined. Several commentators have suggested that e-commerce business models based on the premise ‘build the Web site and users will come’ were little more than a modern day cargo cult mentality.[1] The difficulty of attracting visitors to Web sites, has resulted in World Wide Web technology evolving sophisticated techniques of attracting, even capturing, Web users. [2]

2. The development of sophisticated Web site design techniques may have been pioneered by the developers of adult content and gambling sites, however mainstream e-commerce sites are adopting the techniques. At the benign end of the spectrum (but still irritating for some Web users) is the use of ‘pop-up ads’ - at the more aggressive end of the spectrum, is the use of ‘spawning’ and ‘mouse-trapping’ being used to capture Web users at a Web site.

3. Some techniques are criminally motivated scams to extract money from unsuspecting Web users by causing the Web user to incur an astronomically high telephone bill by re-routing their connection to an Internet Service Provider (ISP) via an international call rather than a local call or to send computer programs to the user’s computer in order to search for credit card and other banking information.

4. The legal implications of the exchange of data between the computers of the Web users and Web sites are considered in this article. In particular, the consumer privacy implications of the exchange of data between a Web user and a Web site.[3] The difference between ‘data’ and ‘personal information’ should be acknowledged when considering the exchange between the computer of a Web user and a Web site.

5. “Data” is defined as “information output by a sensing device or organ that includes both useful and irrelevant or redundant information and must be processed to be meaningful.”[4] In the context of an exchange between the computer of a Web user and a Web site, there is an exchange of digital data which is processed by the computer programs operating each computer resulting in the presentation of Web pages and interactive changes to screen display on the Web user’s computer as the user navigates through the Web site.

6. “Personal information”, as defined in the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)[5] is information or opinion that can identify a person. The exchange of data between the computer of the Web users and a Web site may not, of itself, identify an individual. However the Web has created the ability of Web sites to track users and profile their browsing behaviour

7. In the study by Cyveillance, Inc[6] dated December 2001, many of the techniques listed about are described in their list of 10 objectionable Web techniques.

1. Spawning & Mouse Trapping

8. ‘Spawning’ is a way of programming a Web site so that the new browser windows are automatically launched, faster than the user can close them, when a user attempts to exit a site.[7]

9. Poor Web design and coding can result in a re-directed page entering the browser history[8] resulting in the user being unable to retrace their recent browsing history. However, ‘mouse trapping’ is a deliberate choice of the programmer. ‘Mouse trapping’ is a way of programming a Web site so that the ‘Go To’ command shows only the URL of that site and every click on the ‘Back’ button and ‘Close’ command, still leaves the Web user at the same site.[9] The consequence of which the Web user is trapped at the Web site. The usual buttons to escape from a Web site do not function so that the Web user is prevented from leaving – except by shutting down the connection to the Internet.

10. ‘Spawning’ and ‘mouse trapping’ can be combined with the launch of advertisements that do not have visible controls so that the only way to exit, apart from shutting down the computer, is to click on the advertisement. These techniques are often associated with ‘page jacking’ and are a product of the online pornography industry.[10]

11. In 2001 the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) obtained injunctions against John Zuccarini[11] in respect of his practice of ‘domain name mimicry’ (obtaining domain name registrations for misspellings of well known names) and setting up Web sites using those domain names which using ‘mouse trapping’ to force viewers to see endless ad pages. The basis of the injunction being the practices of John Zuccarini amounting to unfair competition and unfair business practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act (US).[12]

2. Page-Jacking, Redirecting & Spoofing Pages

12. ‘Page-jacking’ results in users of World Wide Web sites being re-directed to other sites chosen by the page-jacker.[13] The reason ‘page-jacking’ is carried out is to increase the number of Web users ‘hitting’ the site to which the Web users are re-directed. This will have the effect of artificially inflating the number of ‘hits’ on the site with advertising being sold at a higher rate based on the false perception that the Web site attracts a high number of voluntary users. Web site owners may pay the page-jacker a fee for re-directing Web users to a Web site.

13. The page–jacker copies pages from a popular site and posts the copied pages on their own computer server. The copied pages are re-programmed to re- direct Web users to specific sites. The copied pages continue to be indexed on search engines using the same key words as used in the original site. A Web user making a search will have the fake site displayed in the search results. When the Web user ‘clicks’ to that site they are re-directed to the site chosen by the page-jacker.

14. The consequence of ‘page-jacking’ is that the owner of the legitimate site loses the potential customers and their reputation suffers as the kidnapped Web user assumes the content at the re-directed site is that of the owner of the legitimate site.

15. ‘Page jacking’ is a technique primarily used to increase traffic to the Web site to which the Web users are redirected. However more sophisticated Web design techniques have been developed with the use of ‘spoof pages’ which are ‘seeded’ with trade marks (‘metatagging’) for the purpose of maximising the likelihood that the ‘spoof page’ will appear high on a search engine’s list of results[14] . The ‘spoof page’ being combined with the use of ‘doorway’ or ‘re- direct’ techniques to take the user to some other site, often a pornographic site.[15]

16. The FTC, together with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC),[16] has taken action against persons involved in ‘page jacking’ in FTC v Carlos Periera d/b/a/ atariz.com.[17] Final settlement with one defendant, and default judgments against two others, were obtained on 12 February 2000.[18]

17. Techniques related to ‘page-jacking’ can be used to make a political statement; an example being the report by Robert Lemos[19] that Mr. Racine, the defendant, admitted to tricking VeriSign subsidiary Network Solutions into giving him ownership of the aljazeera.net domain. Racine then redirected visitors from that Internet address to another site. Technically known as a ‘redirect’, the Web users that wanted to go to www.aljazeera.net - as well as the English- language site, english.aljazeera.net - to be redirected to the content hosted on NetWorld's servers where the US flag was displayed.

3. Misleading Links

18. Mislabelling links is the false labelling of hyper links that send the Web user to an unintended destination.[20] A misleading link may be the result of poor Web design and coding. However if the mislabelling is intentional, liability may arise under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) for ‘misleading or deceptive’ conduct or under fair trading legislation.

4. Home-jacking - Changing Home Pages or Favourites List

19. ‘Home-jacking’ is the result of Web design techniques which allow the unauthorised substitution of the ‘home page’ so that when the user next launches their browser, instead of the user’s selected home page coming up on screen, the selected Web site appears.[21] A digital file can also be inserted into the user’s computer so that the selected Web page appears in the ‘favourites’ list in the Web browser program.[22]

20. The unauthorised inserting of data may be a criminal offence under sections 477 (1) or (2) of the Cybercrime Act 2001 (Cth)[23] or under section 308D of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).[24] That is, provided there is no consent of the Web user so that the insertion of the data which changes the ‘home page’ or ‘favourites’ is clearly unauthorised, with the necessary intention or recklessness as to the impairment of the functioning of the Web user’s computer browser software.

Some Web sites overtly ask the Web user if they wish to change their home page, if this option is selected the user is clearly consenting to the change. However with a covert change it can be argued that the unauthorised inserting of a digital file into the Web user’s computer is a criminal act.

21. However the level of ‘impairment’ of functioning of the computer may be disputed, with a de minimus argument that changes to the ‘home page’ or ‘favourites’ falls below what could be considered to be damage to the functioning of the computer.

22. The need of the Web user to replace the ‘home page’ setting or remove files inserted into the ‘favourites’ file can be argued to be ‘damage’ to the computer. Causing damage when computer programs are removed from a computer or interfered with has been considered in Cox v Riley[25] & R v Whitley.[26] R v Whitley involves the prosecution of a ‘hacker’ under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (UK). The prosecution had to establish that the defendant had caused damage to tangible property contained on the computer disc. Counsel for the defendant argued that there was no damage to tangible property. However, in considering that argument, Lord Lane CJ stated that it contained a basic fallacy:

“What the Act requires to be proved is that tangible property has been damaged, not necessarily that the damage itself ‘should be tangible’… The fact that the alternation [to the metallic particles on the disk] could only be perceived by operating the computer did not make the alternations any the less real, for the damage, if the alternation amounted to damage, any the less within the ambit of the Act.”

5. Spyware - unauthorised, or unknown, software downloads

23. The development of ‘parasite’ business models[27] results in software programs being supplied as an ‘add on’ or ‘plug-in’ to a primary software program[28] . The developer of the primary software program (usually made available to the user without cost) has a business model of generating money from parasite software or generating income from advertising revenue from ‘pop-up ads’. The users of such a business model would naturally choose other descriptive phrases to describe their technology and may be aggrieved at the use of pejorative terms to describe their technology. The Gator Corporation, a developer of ‘pop-up’ widow technology,[29] has alleged trade libel, false advertising and tortuous interference claims, against others using the term "spyware" to describe the Gator technology.[30] The Gator Corporation prefer to describe their technology as providing “contextually relevant advertisement[s]”.

24. Legislatures are beginning to respond to public concern about intrusive Web techniques, with commentators suggesting that the legislatures are also responding to the conflicting results of litigation in US federal courts over whether Web techniques, such as ‘pop-up ad’ software infringes intellectual property rights or unfair trade practice legislation. [31]

25. The State of Utah enacted the Spyware Control Act (2004) which, as stated in the general description of the statute:

Prohibits spyware from delivering advertisements to a computer under certain circumstances;
Requires spyware to provide removal procedures;
Allows a website, trademark, or copyright owner to bring an action to enforce the requirements.

26. The Spyware Control Act[32] defines ‘spyware’ in a Subsection 4 beginning the extensive definition describing the ambit of the software techniques that are being regulated: monitoring software,[33] that reports back to a remote computer or delivers obtrusive ‘pop-up ads’ (without making appropriate disclosure to the Web user):

“Except as provided in Subsection (5), "spyware" means software residing on a computer that: (a) monitors the computer's usage; (b) (i) sends information about the computer's usage to a remote computer or server; or (ii) displays or causes to be displayed an advertisement in response to the computer's usage if the advertisement: (A) does not clearly identify the full legal name of the entity responsible for delivering the advertisement; (B) uses a federally registered trademark as a trigger for the display of the advertisement by a person other than: (I) the trademark owner; (II) an authorized agent or licensee of the trademark owner; or (III) a recognized Internet search engine; (C) uses a triggering mechanism to display the advertisement according to the Internet websites accessed by a user; or (D) uses a context based triggering mechanism to display the advertisement that partially or wholly covers or obscures paid advertising or other content on an Internet website in a way that interferes with a user's ability to view the Internet website”

read much more @ http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/DTLJ/2004/1.html

Get The facts ~ The Bottom Line About Multi-Level Marketing Plans [PDF]

The Bottom Line About Multi-Level Marketing Plans [PDF]

http://business.ftc.gov/documents/inv08-bottom-line-about-multi-level-marketing-plans

APPENDIX B: CYBERCRIME GLOSSARY ..

APPENDIX B: CYBERCRIME GLOSSARY

Link ~ http://cybercrimeglossary.netfirms.com/

Cyber Crime Justice - How and Who and Where to report a crime and DMCA Action ... cyber

What is a "ripper"? ~ with a bit of research and as suspected ...

Using browser known as ripper. what is ripper? found this link with following comments ~

link- http://forum.yola.com/yola/topics/site_rippers_and_how_i_can_stop_them?from_gsfn=true

What is "Rippers 0" browser? Should I block them?

Comment from person 1. looked up site rippers on a search ... Not very nice things. I see the possibility that a site ripper could really mess up several things Also it appears to be something that would infinge on copyrights Bigtime. And these things are permitted? What kind of protection is there? The whole world is going crazy and evil ...

Comment from person 2. I've been searching and this is a good explantion of site rippers. "There are many dishonest webmasters that download the entire sites of their successful competitors, just change some images and texts and have "their" site up and running in less than a day without any effort " However, it looks like any preventative measures will cost you money. If your site has already been ripped "stolen" you have an uphill battle getting it removed if it has been duplicated elsewhere on the interenet. (not true see law below).

read more

@http://forum.yola.com/yola/topics/site_rippers_and_how_i_can_stop_them?from_gsfn=true

Also came across this - DMCA Law

DMCA Action - A General Guide to Taking Action Against Site Rippers using DMCA Law!

Your website is up and business is good. Your traffic is steadily rising and people are starting to pass around your link in blog posts, via email, forums and other forms the global internet community use to pass around website information. Then one day, you encounter your first experience with a "site ripper". It normally happens by opening your email program and finding an unread message with the subject line of "Look what I found!" or "I think your site was stolen". You pray its spam as you move the mouse pointer to that bold title while the anxiety starts to kick in. You click and scan the body of the message, reading the sometimes helter-skelter details of how he or she found a site that looks identical to yours.

At the end of it all, you find two links: One is your website, the other leads to a near duplicate of your layout except the banner may have a few changes and the domain name in the browser link field is different. Guess what? You've been ripped, and your world will never be the same.So now what are you supposed to do? After the fits have subsided and you admit to yourself that spending thousands to track the offender down and beat them with a cudgel isn't very realistic, it's time to look at laws designed specifically for your protection, and best of all, the initial stages don't cost you a monetary penny.

The DMCA, or Digital Millennium Copyright Act, is an American Act created and passed by the US Congress on October 12th, 1998. A couple of weeks later on October 28th, our favorite cigar toting US President, Mr. Bill Clinton, signed the Act into law. So, does this mean that DMCA law is exclusive to the US? Yes and no. You see, the DMCA was designed to implement the treaties that were signed in December of 1996 at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Geneva conference, which of course is a global organization. The DMCA simply addresses additional issues with matters related to the WIPO treaties.

Here's an overview of what the DMCA does:

- Makes it a crime to circumvent anti-piracy measures built into most commercial software.- Outlaws the manufacture, sale, or distribution of code-cracking devices used to illegally copy software.- Does permit the cracking of copyright protection devices, however, to conduct encryption research, assess product interoperability, and test computer security systems.- Provides exemptions from anti-circumvention provisions for nonprofit libraries, archives, and educational institutions under certain circumstances.

In general, limits Internet service providers from copyright infringement liability for simply transmitting information over the Internet.- Service providers, however, are expected to remove material from users' web sites that appears to constitute copyright infringement.- Limits liability of nonprofit institutions of higher education -- when they serve as online service providers and under certain circumstances -- for copyright infringement by faculty members or graduate students.-

Requires that "webcasters" pay licensing fees to record companies.- Requires that the Register of Copyrights, after consultation with relevant parties, submit to Congress recommendations regarding how to promote distance education through digital technologies while "maintaining an appropriate balance between the rights of copyright owners and the needs of users."- States explicitly that "[n]othing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use..."

Did you catch what I pasted in bold? That's right folks... if you can prove that material you created is being used on a website that is not under your control, the company hosting the website is OBLIGATED BY LAW to remove that content. In fact, if the person who stole this content has profited in any way from your stolen property, you can even sue for damages and infringement, but that's getting ahead of ourselves. If you want to read the rest of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, you can find a full digital copy at The Library of Congress.

Read full article @
http://www.pixel2life.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=20185

*** Number 76.195.112.218 - 76-195-112-218.efw.com - browser Rippers 0

August 26, 2010 76.195.112.218 - Browser Rippers 0

Visit Length 59 mins 30 secs

______ 2nd time

7th December 2010
76-195-112-218.efw.com
IP Address
76.195.112.218 (moron Edit Label)
Country United States
Region Texas
City Arlington
ISP
Efw
Returning Visits 173
Visit Length

Browser
Rippers