<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Lockyer/Stevenson letter real?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/982/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/982</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:54:51 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/982/comment-page-1#comment-836</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:26:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-836</guid>
		<description>I respectfuly disagree. The tone adopted by the author bears the subtle mark of one familiar with the ploy of feigned incredulity in the face of disingenuous conduct.

In the prototype, an individual receives a letter full of threats, personal attacks, and abusive language from a well known bully. He then causes the letter to be made public and appends to it this comment: &quot;Dear Bully, I received this letter which said it was from you, but one look told me no man of intellect and integrity could ever have written such a mass of baseless, rude and foul garbage. If you would like my help in finding the lowlife who is signing your name to such disgusting swill, you shall have it.&quot;

I believe, and have no proof whatsoever, that P2PUnited knew darned well the letter was real when they got it. I&#039;d bet my dollars to your doughnuts it wasn&#039;t until after some clever team member thought to look for metadata that they were able to come up with the idea. Instead of sitting around and planning their dull, legally-competent response in anticipation of the eventual arrival of the official version of the letter, P2PUnited was able to take the initiative by publicly embarrassing the schnook for collaborating with the MPAA on the letter just prior to lending it his law enforcement imprimatur.

Personally, I think it was a very good move and -- probably -- the best that could have been made in the circumstances. Will it cause the other attorneys-general to give some thought to what might (given Lockyer&#039;s position as their association head) have otherwise been a rubber-stamp item? Maybe. I just hope it stays in the news as long as it can, so any potential signatories who carry the letter home from DC have a chance to find its dotted line less and less appealing as time passes. The chief law enforcement officer of a given state does not sign his name all that freely, especially if the industry maneuvering to get it is a less-than-meaningful presence on his boss&#039;s tax rolls.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I respectfuly disagree. The tone adopted by the author bears the subtle mark of one familiar with the ploy of feigned incredulity in the face of disingenuous conduct.</p>
<p>In the prototype, an individual receives a letter full of threats, personal attacks, and abusive language from a well known bully. He then causes the letter to be made public and appends to it this comment: &#8220;Dear Bully, I received this letter which said it was from you, but one look told me no man of intellect and integrity could ever have written such a mass of baseless, rude and foul garbage. If you would like my help in finding the lowlife who is signing your name to such disgusting swill, you shall have it.&#8221;</p>
<p>I believe, and have no proof whatsoever, that P2PUnited knew darned well the letter was real when they got it. I&#8217;d bet my dollars to your doughnuts it wasn&#8217;t until after some clever team member thought to look for metadata that they were able to come up with the idea. Instead of sitting around and planning their dull, legally-competent response in anticipation of the eventual arrival of the official version of the letter, P2PUnited was able to take the initiative by publicly embarrassing the schnook for collaborating with the MPAA on the letter just prior to lending it his law enforcement imprimatur.</p>
<p>Personally, I think it was a very good move and &#8212; probably &#8212; the best that could have been made in the circumstances. Will it cause the other attorneys-general to give some thought to what might (given Lockyer&#8217;s position as their association head) have otherwise been a rubber-stamp item? Maybe. I just hope it stays in the news as long as it can, so any potential signatories who carry the letter home from DC have a chance to find its dotted line less and less appealing as time passes. The chief law enforcement officer of a given state does not sign his name all that freely, especially if the industry maneuvering to get it is a less-than-meaningful presence on his boss&#8217;s tax rolls.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/982/comment-page-1#comment-807</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2004 07:27:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-807</guid>
		<description>While I agree with the staments of fact presented in the P2P United counter-letter, the tone and questioning of veracity makes them look like a bunch of idiots. Hire a PR firm and get back to coding.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I agree with the staments of fact presented in the P2P United counter-letter, the tone and questioning of veracity makes them look like a bunch of idiots. Hire a PR firm and get back to coding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
