vipnerd
-
Posts
2,442 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by vipnerd
-
-
I'll be there for sure this Sunday
:D ... Austin is the most underrated DJ in Miami IMHO ... Sundays @ Jazid musical format suits Austin's sounds ... wait 'til the nite develops and you will hear some of the funkiest and techiest sounds you can find in Miami ... hands down
Will love to hear him play with Oscar Fonseca soon
:eek:Vip
-
Originally posted by pod
Guys with bigger wallets? Yeah sure, but you know what they're out for...they're not giving you drinks for your health.
LMAO!
:laugh: -
Originally posted by mrmovement33
just to think of infusion "live" along with adam freeland. damn that would be simply amazing. then throw in evil nine. now that's an evening i wouldn't miss. i am still kicking myself for missing their set during conference. but i was so dead from the radio 1 bbc party at opium. and sasha & digweed @ space 34 the thursday before they played. great to read some of my brothers & sisters who love break-beats with funky prog have appeared and are speaking their minds.peace
Progressive breaks will keep coming to the right venue Abe ...
-
Originally posted by digital7
thanx for the kind words Marco. Friday night was fantastic! It was the best night out in awhile... what can I say? Infusion does it once again.
d
Glad you had fun Digital ... expect some nice surprises in the next few weeks ...
-
Originally posted by Shadowz
ignorance abounds all over. some of you people need to do your homework instead of talking all the time. blah blah blah..
when was the last time you were in crobar on a saturday? that place is fucking stuffed with the best looking girls in miami and cedric throws it hard and is on perfect point with the crowd, besides he drops crazy shit from robbie rivera, murk, etc. alot beside producing his own tracks too- what more do you want? he plays great sets, more impressive than i thought he would be these days- and the only reason i was thinking that way is because i had not been in there on a saturday night in a long, long time.
the only shit that someone could talk about crobar is that it is a bit commercial due to having clubs in NY & Chicago, and has now become sort of a brand.
commercial it may be- but cedric gervais is the exception. i have been really impressed the last times i have gone in the past few months. that main floor grooves and gets down 110% and it is packed til close- rare in miami anywhere these days. they have to kick everyone out at 5am! now, a year ago, crobar did not have that vibe that it has picked up of recent. it's worth checking out if you have not been lately.
oh and if you don't look good or aren't dressed well- they may leave you standing on the sidewalk for a while- hence the good crowd inside... so i know why some people may not like it. and oh my god!!! - you might have to pay to get in !!!
i agree more guest dj's would be great. and matas- have to agree with your point about re-entry- we all need to be able to sneak out and have a smoke break to fire the night up a little
Well ... nice to finally see SOMEONE officially posting here for Crobar ...
Two things to keep in mind ... for the sakes of a great club gone down hill ...
1) Start looking for fresh new faces that have and/or can create a following ... and I'm referring to DJs here ...
2) Get some of that great talent booked again ... how many times can you bring down JW? ... and then noone else for sooooo long?
Your image gave you the $$$$$$ ... even more so than location ... heard from direct sources that "working there was no longer what it used to be ... very Hialeah crowd now" (no pun intended) ...
How do you change this? ... it is more difficult to correct a bent tree once it's grown ...
Your door was always your IMAGE ... Teresa is a KOOL KAT ... with the right door people you will get those "floaters" on Washington Ave. ...
But to get the locals ... those who filled with vibe the main dance floor and ... the "A"" list that filled your VIP (no pun intended again)
... you will need more than just free admission ... free drinks ... you NEED to give them a quality product ...Surely you can fill a Saturday night there ... the idea is to get the 'Cream of the crop" clubbers once again ... and for this you need a musical director with BALL$ to decide was is the best interest for your club ...
I think you know what I mean by now ... good luck ... I still LOVE CROBAR ...
PS: Who are you?
Vip
-
Originally posted by fostech
thanx Marco....... I new you'd like it. It took me a while to make a promo.....so this is it. I only had 8 copies last fri. Next friday I'll have more @ Lime Bar.
Nice party last fri. anywayz.... stayed till the lights came on.
Oscar.
Good luck Friday Oscar ... teach IB some "taste" in music
:D -
Originally posted by mrmovement33
i could not believe it. infusion @ nerve this past friday was even better than sasha & digweed @ space34. my favorite set of 2003. the live performance was spectacular. full of energy and passion deep, dark, dirty, breaky, and twistedly funky.
Agree w/u once again ... Infusion's performance is in my top 3 so far for this year ... together with S&D at Space 34 ... IMO ... Jonathan Lisle's is up there with them too ...
-
Originally posted by mrmovement33
the day was friday march 23, 2001 the day that i discovered what 'feeling the vibe and feeling the club" was all about. "after groovejet ofcourse" it was the therapy party at crobar for wmc. the location was crobar. i will never forget this evening with talent like anthony pappa, slacker, max graham, dj remy, and timo maas. last year i was able to catch talent @ crobar the likes of sander kleinenberg, satoshi tomiie, james zabiela, parks & wilson & quivver, and oh, i forgot to mention these two guys called chris fortier & steve porter....wow.....what a shame that crobar has gone down the drain like it has. i really do wish that crobar re-establish itself as a super-power in the dancing scene. but as for now, i wouldn't go to crobar if u paid me. i think it's whack. cedric is a downer. he can not even stand next to some of our local talent like dj roland, jon cowan, michael louis, ariel baund, stryke, need i continue???? oh, i almost forgot jimmy t. but it's all good. because with the opening of nerve and the talent that is coming down this year to this club will have me going somewhere else to dance my arse off than space34.
peace
Agree w/you 100% Abe ...
-
Originally posted by biznation00
Thanks to all the heads that came out & big thanks to cooljunkie for teaming up with Space in making another memorable event.
The Allstars night never dissapoints & the vibe & crowds just get better & better. Big thanks to the djs & big thanks to their supporters who make the night that much better.
Miami Allstars Rock!!
Sorry couldn't make it Biz
... run "out of gas" after Friday -
Originally posted by saleen351
how come i'm not listed under "sobe celebs"?
:mad: ... You're the Chairman of the Board 
... and "Ft. Lauderdale Celebrity" -
Oscar ... f***ing congratz bro ... I heard the promo you gave me at Infusion ... it is COMPLETELY my cup of tea ...
Great tracks ... mixed smoothly ... deepy ... soulful ... techy ... funky ...
Honestly pal ... I can only see good things for you in the 2nd half of '03 ... Limebar has one amazing DJ as resident ... and Crobar has already noticed it ... heard from a friend that last Friday you opened up for Juan Mejia in TRUE FORM ... Could this be the be the type of comeback Crobar needs ... and which we have been talking about the past few days? ... I believe so
Keep it up bro ... we'll support you ALWAYZ ...
-
Happy B-day pal ...
Will we celebrate 2nite @ Jazid?
-
Originally posted by rcrespo
he played a year or two ago on a Wednesday at Crobar I believe. I'll be there regardless I haven't heard the man solo in like 3 years.
At least 2 years ... maybe James can help us ...
-
Originally posted by livin42nite
vip if im not too tired from visiting my sister and niece again maybe 2nite at jazid.
Klit ... I'll be @ Jazid for shizzy ... Domingo Castillo is a WON'T MISS for me ... check my sig
Vip
-
Originally posted by rcrespo
digweed @ back door would be in the vip or in the main room ala sasha .. in the vip would be a more intimate set
I think Ramon in would be downstairs ... how long is it since Digweed played a non-WMC set in Miami?? ...
Plus ... that Phazon would be tuned to perfection for Diggers ...
-
Originally posted by brwneydtrouble
VIPNERD, how come I still haven't met you?
You tell me ... Miss
-
Originally posted by lolahotass
So who are you CrobarMiami CP poster? I was talking to someone last night that has inside info on Crobar, and they don't know who you are........... So do you work there or what?
Don't know who he/she is either ... but Digweed is coming to Back Door Bambi ... (direct source )
:D -
P:M Sessions resident DJ Austin Leeds on now!!! ... awesome mix ...
Sunday June 15th at 2:00 pm in the mix on www.U4EA.be/FM :
Austin Leeds (Bedrock, Saw Recordings)
-
Originally posted by rcrespo
THIS IS TONIGHT .. I WANNA SEE YOU ALL OUT THERE!
I'm there
-
I have very few things to add to Friday nite ... INFUSION simply blew all of us away ...
Thank you to Jcbliss for a great event ... it is a pleasure to work with you ...
... and to the venue ... Nerve ... a true music niche ...Thank you to all the Cpers who came out last Friday nite to support great music ...
Lola ... you're the f***ing bomb!!
Saleen ... I was 100 pts. bro
Hogster ... I guess Saleen is Batman? (j/k)
Ramon ... this one was specially for you
Joetheamazing ... thanx for showing love to our events
Laliux ... Told ya bro ...
Digital7 ... same as Ramon
Shroomy ... your one kool kat bro ...
Pod ... Can't wait for those pics ...
Illuminaughty ... nice to know it is you
Cooljunkie ... Thanx for the help bro ...
Norahmiami ... Can't stop thanking you ...
Mr.Movement33 ... Pleasure to meet you
Milano ... You and your friends are very kool peepz ...
Sobeton ... Thanx for the kind words ... this is only the beginning
Obby ... Thanx for the CD and for supporting
Fostech ... Congratz on the Crobar gig and thanx for showing love
Arturoantunes ... Sorry for the cover ... everyone paid last nite
JimmyT ... Where is my CD?
Josh Mox ... Always glad to see you ...
Limesobe ... My highest respects sir ...
Spacious ... Sorry for the AC situation ... but glad you came
Livin42nite ... didn't meet you ... next time
Raincrysobe ... Did you pay cover?
Ekitel ... Thanx for supporting ...
Bigtallgeoff ... Proton is part of us bud
I might have forgotten someone
... Thanx also to some of Sobe's celebs ...
Carmel Ophir
Alex Omes
Russell
Chris Duque
Mono Henao
Robert North
Michael Castner
Nicole kaufman
Cedric Gervais
Hopefully this coming week we'll have some AMAZING news for you all ...
Peace ...
Vip
-
Originally posted by nexusgroove
You're about to lose your ability to use TiVo, your firewall, and keep your
privacy. This bill has secretly passed the Florida legislature and will become
law once Jeb Bush signs it in a few weeks! Did you know this???
Florida State "Super-DMCA" Legislation:
MPAA's Stealth Attack on Your Living Room
Fred von Lohmann
Senior Intellectual Property Attorney
fred@e...
Recently, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has been pressing
states to enact new legislation aimed at criminalizing the possession of what
they call "unlawful communication and access devices." These measures represent
an unprecedented attack on the rights of technologists, hobbyists, tinkerers
and the public at large. In essence, these proposals would allow "communication
service providers" to restrict what you can connect to your Internet connection
or cable or satellite television lines.
These measures represent a stealth effort to dramatically expand the reach of
the federal Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which has already put fair
use, innovation, free speech and competition in peril since being enacted in
1998.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) strongly opposes these state
"super-DMCA" bills as unnecessary and overbroad. The proposed bills represent
the worst kind of special interest legislation, sacrificing the public interest
in favor of the self-serving interests of one industry.
Resources
For the latest news about the status of the various bills, as well as updates
about what you can do to share your views with state legislators, check EFF's
"Super-DMCA" Action Center page. Another excellent resource is Professor Edward
Felten's page on these bills.
Background
The MPAA's state lobbyists have been stealthily pushing these state super-DMCA
measures since at least 2001. Even before these activities crossed activists'
radar, six states (Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania and
Wyoming) had already enacted them into law. Similar bills have been introduced
and are currently pending in Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia,
Massachusetts, Tennessee and Texas.
The bills are generally offered as amendments to existing state criminal laws
relating to signal theft, that is, getting cable television without paying for
it. Since these signal theft laws vary from state to state, the super-DMCA
proposals also vary in their wording.
Nevertheless, all of the proposed bills appear to be derived from a single
"model bill" developed by MPAA lobbyists and thus share common traits. First,
they would all impose a new ban on the possession, development, or distribution
of a broad array of "communication" and "unlawful access" devices, along with a
ban on devices that enable anonymous communication. All the bills also create a
new right to bring civil lawsuits to enforce these provisions.
The definitions used in the bill are absurdly broad. The bill protects
"communication services," which includes any "service lawfully provided for a
charge or compensation" delivered via electronic means using virtually any
technology. This would include every wire in your house for which you pay a
fee, including your telephone, cable TV, satellite and Internet lines. This
category also sweeps in any Internet-based subscriptions services, including
digital music services such as pressplay, MusicNow, or Rhapsody.
The super-DMCA bills would regulate the possession, development and use of
"communication devices" and "unlawful access devices." A "communication device"
is virtually any electronic device you might connect to any communication
service. The definition of "unlawful communication device" is somewhat
narrower, sweeping in any device that is "primarily designed, developed,
.possessed, used or offered. for the purpose of defeating or circumventing" a
technological protection measure used to protect a communication services.
The proposed bills generally prohibit four categories of activity:
1.. Possession, development, distribution or use of any "communication
device" in connection with a communication service without the express
authorization of the service provider.
2.. Concealing the origin or destination of any communication from the
communication service provider.
3.. Possession, development, distribution or use of any "unlawful access
device."
4.. Preparation or publication of any "plans or instructions" for making any
device having reason to know that such a device will be used to violate the
other prohibitions.
These proposals dramatically expand the power of entertainment companies, ISPs,
cable companies and others to control what you can and can't connect to the
services that you pay for. If enacted, they will slow innovation, impair
competition and seriously undermine a consumer's right to choose what
technologies they use in their homes.
These Bills are Unnecessary
Why is this additional law needed? The MPAA has circulated a "one-pager"
explaining in vague terms that additional measures are necessary to "update"
existing state laws to address the problem of "Internet piracy" and "cable
theft." Copyright infringement and cable service theft, however, are already
clearly prohibited under existing laws, both state and federal. The federal
laws include traditional copyright infringement, as well as the DMCA, the
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), and prohibitions on illicit cable and
satellite descrambling equipment. There are a variety of existing state law
remedies, as well, including laws banning signal theft and computer intrusion.
Providers of communication services can also bring breach of contract actions
if their customers violate any restrictions included in their subscription
agreements. In short, state super-DMCA measures are redundant and unnecessary
as penalties for Internet copyright infringement or cable service theft.
The MPAA has failed to identify any specific problem that the proposed bills
reach that is not already addressed by existing law. In fact, when asked by
Massachusetts legislators why an additional law was needed, a representative of
the MPAA could only answer, "I don't know. The lawyers tell me we need this."
It is telling that state law enforcement personnel, the very people who enforce
the existing cable theft laws, have not called for or supported the super-DMCA
proposals.
All Things Not Expressly Permitted are Forbidden
Whatever their intended target, state super-DMCA bills represent an
unprecedented intrusion into the living rooms of law-abiding citizens, giving
communication service providers unilateral control over what you can connect to
your home entertainment systems.
Under existing law, those who have legitimately purchased communication
services (e.g., cable TV, satellite, or broadband Internet services) are free
to connect whatever they like to the wires they pay for, so long as they do not
violate any otherwise applicable law. So, for example, you are free to connect
a new TV, PC, VCR or TiVo to a cable television connection that you pay for.
Similarly, you are free to connect a Wi-Fi wireless access point to your DSL
line in order to share your broadband connection among several computers in
your house. This freedom has encouraged technology vendors to compete and
innovate in response to the demands of consumers.
The proposed super-DMCA statutes reverse this traditional rule. Under these
statutes, you would not be entitled to connect anything to your cable,
satellite, or DSL line without the express permission of your service provider.
The model MPAA bill accomplishes this by making it a crime to possess a device
to "receive . transmit, [or] re-transmit" any communication service without the
"express authorization" of the communication service provider. The various
pending state bills include similar language.
This provision would make you a criminal for simply connecting a TV, PC, TiVo
or VCR (all of which can "receive" communication services) to the cable TV line
in your living room without your cable company's permission. It could also make
you a criminal for connecting a Wi-Fi wireless gateway (which can "retransmit"
Internet traffic) to your DSL or cable modem line without the permission of
your ISP. The shift proposed by these bills is radical: all technology that is
not expressly permitted becomes forbidden. This would give communication
service providers unprecedented control over the home entertainment and the
technology marketplace. For example, your broadband ISP could force you to use
only certain brands of computers, or force you to pay extra if you wanted to
connect more than one computer to your DSL line. Cable and satellite TV
services could forbid you from using a TiVo, or could charge you extra to
connect a VCR to your TV.
Bolting on the "Intent to Defraud"
In the face of mounting criticism from several quarters, the MPAA has offered
to modify its proposal to reach only those who act with an "intent to defraud"
a communication service provider. Rather than addressing the underlying
problems with the measure, however, the "intent to defraud" revision merely
further muddies the waters.
First, it is critical to note that this "intent to defraud" language has not
been incorporated into all of the bills that are currently pending before state
legislatures. Moreover, it is too late to include this limitation in the state
statutes that have already been adopted.
While the revision addresses some concerns, it leaves many legitimate
activities hip-deep in legal quicksand. For example, what if a subscriber to
the MusicNow digital music service connects an analog cassette deck to her PC
in order to record streaming music for later playback in her car's cassette
deck? The fine print in the MusicNow subscriber agreement purports to forbid
subscribers from making any copies without authorization. Has she acted with an
"intent to defraud" MusicNow? What if HBO begins broadcasting a notice before
every episode of the Sopranos, forbidding HBO subscribers from recording the
program? If, notwithstanding this prohibition, a subscriber connects a TiVo in
order to record the program for later viewing, has he acted with an "intent to
defraud" HBO?
To take a third example, what if a researcher signs up for the pressplay
digital music service in order to evaluate the digital rights management
technologies being used by the service. Notwithstanding the fact that the
pressplay user agreement forbids reverse engineering, the researcher engages in
otherwise legal reverse engineering in order to develop tools that allow him to
test the security of the service, and subsequently publishes his results in an
academic journal. Has the researcher acted with an "intent to defraud"
pressplay?
Each of these activities raises unsettled and controversial questions at the
nexus of federal copyright and state contract laws. The proposed super-DMCA
statutes, however, constitute a sneaky, self-serving attempt by one industry to
legislate an answer to these important questions under cover of dark without
public interest input. Bolting on an ambiguous "intent to defraud" qualifier
does not redeem this flaw.
Attacking Anonymity
Another provision of the various state super-DMCA statutes that has attracted
considerable attention is the ban on devices that "conceal . the existence or
place of origin or destination of any communication." At a time when consumer
privacy and the constitutional right to anonymous speech are under attack from
a variety of sources, this provision is particularly misguided.
A simple ban on devices capable of concealing communication would make a wide
range of multi-purpose tools illegal. Widely-used home networking equipment
could be banned because it often includes "network address translation" (NAT)
and firewall features that incidentally conceal the origin and destinations of
Internet communication. Some forms of encryption for email and web traffic
might fall within this provision. The use of "virtual private networking" (VPN)
software by corporations to secure communication with off-site employees would
also be swept up by this provision. Products like Anonymizer that aim to
protect the privacy of Internet users against advertisers like Doubleclick
might also be imperiled. Perhaps recognizing the absurd overbreadth of this
provision, the MPAA has offered to revise the language in its model bill to
apply only where "such concealment is for the purpose of committing a
violation" of the prohibition on connecting a device without the express
authorization of a communication service provider.
Although this change represents a step in the right direction, it does not
adequately address the failings of the provision. For example, as noted above,
the ban on connecting unauthorized devices to your broadband DSL connection
could reach home networking equipment that was not authorized by your ISP. By
installing a $50 Linksys router that includes NAT and firewall functions, you
could be liable for "concealing" communication even under the revised MPAA
language. Employees who use VPN software to access their corporate network
without the express authorization of their home ISPs would also run afoul of
even the revised provision.
A Chill on Computer Security Research
The proposed legislation will also chill legitimate computer security research.
Security researchers advance their science by testing existing security systems
for weaknesses. By discovering, documenting and reporting these weaknesses,
security researchers teach vendors how to improve their systems, as well as
warning customers when those systems are compromised.
Unfortunately, the proposed state "super-DMCA" bills will chill legitimate
research in two ways. First, these measures make it unlawful to develop or
possess the tools that security researchers need in order to carry out their
work. Researchers often design their own software tools in the course of
carrying out their research and must distribute these tools to their colleagues
in order to enable peer-review of research results. These tools, moreover, may
be designed for the sole purpose of breaking the security systems that are
under examination. As a result, these tools would be banned by the proposed
state statutes, which lump all tools "primarily designed" to circumvent any
protection system into the category of "unlawful communication devices." Early
experience with the DMCA suggests that computer security research has already
suffered at the hands of overbroad and poorly drafted legislation. The proposed
state super-DMCA statutes will only exacerbate this problem.
Second, the statutes interfere with a researcher's ability to publish the
results of her research by banning the distribution of "plans or instructions"
for making an "unlawful access device." By describing the weaknesses of a
security technology, and describing research in enough detail to enable peer
review, researchers could well run afoul of this prohibition. This creates an
unnecessary burden on the free speech rights of researchers and the
publications that seek to disseminate their work. This provision also
represents a substantial expansion beyond the boundaries of the DMCA, which
reaches only "technology," stopping short of "plans or instructions." In a
country where the First Amendment protects the publication of bomb making
plans, it seems particularly unwarranted to crack down on the publication of
information regarding computer security.
Although the "intent to defraud" limitation may ameliorate these harms to some
extent, for the reasons noted above, this last minute addition raises as many
questions as it answers. Legal ambiguities in this context will only chill
security researchers and their institutions from engaging in sorely needed
research activities.
A Threat to Innovation and Competition
As discussed above, the proposed state super-DMCA proposals forbid a consumer
from connecting anything to a communication service without the service
provider's express authorization. This creates an enormous opportunity for
anticompetitive conduct. Broadband ISPs, for example, could require that their
subscribers use only a particular brand of PC or operating system. AOL could
effectively ban its subscribers from using any instant messanging software
other than its own. Cable TV providers could limit subscribers to using only
certain brands of VCRs and could ban TiVo in favor of their own proprietary PVR
technologies. This outcome would be particularly ironic in the face of the
FCC's decade-long effort to encourage the development of open, interoperable
standards for cable-compatible televisions.
These scenarios are not far-fetched. Recent experience with the DMCA makes it
clear that companies will not hesitate to use new legal protections in order to
rid themselves of competition. For example, Lexmark recently invoked the DMCA
in an effort to eliminate the aftermarket for Lexmark laser printer toner
cartridges. A leading garage door opener maker has also invoked the DMCA in an
effort to eliminate a competitor in the market for universal garage door
remotes.
Recognizing the importance of interoperability, Congress included a reverse
engineering exception in the DMCA. The MPAA's proposed state super-DMCA
measures include no such exception, making them an even more severe threat to
competition and consumer freedom of choice.
Transferring law enforcement from public to private hands.
The proposed state super-DMCA statutes transfer considerable new enforcement
powers from law enforcement authorities into private hands.
Each of the pending state bills starts from an existing state penal law
provision, extending its reach by adding a civil cause of action to what was
previously a criminal statute. In other words, the bills authorize private
parties to sue in addition to local district attorneys. This change alone has
important consequences. When enacting criminal statutes, legislatures are often
willing to adopt broad and ambiguous language that they might not accept in a
civil provision, counting on the discretion of a district attorney (who is
often an elected official) to prevent abusive application of the law. Private
parties are not subject to these institutional checks. In addition, where a
criminal statute is involved, the state must prove its case "beyond a
reasonable doubt" and courts must interpret statutes narrowly. In civil cases,
in contrast, a private party can prevail under the more lenient "more likely
than not" standard and there is no similar policy of narrow interpretation.
Before new legal enforcement powers are delegated into private hands, prudent
policy-makers should ask whether these new powers are justified and whether
they can be too easily abused to the detriment of the public interest. Here,
the MPAA has made virtually no showing that these additional powers should be
transferred from the state into private hands.
Dangerous Remedies
The proposed state law measures impose a variety of unreasonably one-sided
remedies on defendants.
Remote Downgrades. The MPAA's proposed model bill authorizes a court to order
"the remedial modification.of any communication or unlawful access device.that
is in the.control of the violator." When coupled with an "auto-update" feature,
this provision could empower state courts to order technology companies to
force "downgrades" on consumers nation-wide. For example, TiVo retains the
ability to upgrade remotely the software on all TiVo units. AOL, Microsoft and
Apple also provide automatic upgrade functionality in their software, aimed at
giving customers the latest security and feature upgrades. If state court
concludes that these vendors have the power to "control" their software, the
court would have the power to order the "downgrade" of devices in homes
nation-wide (and perhaps world-wide). Bestowing this remedial power on a state
court would be unprecedented.
One-Sided Attorneys' Fees. All of the proposed bills include one-sided
"fee-shifting" clauses authorizing a court to force a losing defendant to pay
for the attorneys of the prevailing plaintiff. One proposed measure, in fact,
goes so far as to automatically require that a losing defendant pay the
attorneys' fees of the victorious service provider.
These provisions are not reciprocal, however. When a service provider wins, it
can collect attorneys' fees, but an innocent defendant is never entitled to a
reimbursement of fees. This is remarkable, when you consider that in most cases
the communication service provider will be a large business, while the
defendants are likely to be individuals or small businesses with limited
ability to defend a lawsuit.
Automatic Injunctions. The proposed state bills include provisions that would
effectively entitle plaintiffs to automatic preliminary injunctions, without
having to satisfy the traditional requirements of showing actual damage,
irreparable harm or an inadequate remedy at law. Especially where software,
instructions and plans are concerned, each of which has been recognized as
protected expression under the First Amendment, this sort of automatic
injunction threatens constitutional interests.
Abusive damages. The proposed state bills would also give prevailing plaintiffs
the right to demand "statutory damages" in an amount ranging from $1,500 to
$10,000 for each prohibited device. These statutory damages would apply even if
a plaintiff were unable to prove that it had suffered any actual damage at all.
The bills also create enhanced criminal penalties based on the number of
prohibited devices and creates a separate offense for each device and for each
day that a person violates any provision.
Multiplying remedies by the number of devices is an approach that quickly leads
to absurd results in the digital context. Where software is concerned, the
number of copies has no necessary relationship to the harm suffered by a
service provider. For example, if a security researcher were to publish a paper
that included software held to be an "unlawful access device," and that paper
were downloaded by only 100 academic colleagues, the researcher would face
damages of at least $150,000. Similarly, because the proposed statutes
criminalize mere possession of an "unlawful access device," a researcher could
face serious penalties simply for installing a tool on several computers in his
own research lab. The number of devices simply has no necessary relationship to
the harm involved, and thus should not be the basis for a penalty multiplier.
What You Can Do
These bills are often whipping through state legislatures with very little
opportunity for public comment. MPAA lobbyists are presenting the measures as
"consensus" bills, suggesting that no one opposes them. Even a few concerned
letters from constituents can upset this lie, leading a state legislator to ask
questions.
Please take a moment to express your opposition to this measure to your state
legislators, should it be introduced in your state.
Did you omit a paragraph? ...
:blank: I printed it for my bathroom reading ...
-
Originally posted by crobarmiami
Now we are Talking, Loving all the feedback.
Digweed will be at Back Door Bamby Soon, I know that.
Cedric Has been tearing it up lately, Thursday Nights in The Vip Room is one of the bests night at Crobar.
As far as Friday goes, Edgar V was there on the 13th with a crazy fashion show which got a little out of hand. Look to see him there.
Dirty Vegas (Not alot of people's style here but new talent) Had Crobar filled to the Max.
You will see all types of djs in the near future, especially with Back Door Bamby.
We just hired Russ back to the marketing department and he has told me personally that he wants to bring back what Crobar once had when it first opened which is a more personal appeal. Its early but can gurantee you, that there are gonna be some crazy fun nights at Crobar, Like old.
From your mouth to God's ears ...
:D ... BDB w/JD :eek:Leave Cedric with Thursdays ... and get a different DJ for Sats ... you guys would pack the place anyhow ... To attract those clubbers Russ is talking about means changing what you guys have been doing wrong lately ... and this means (no offense to CG) change ... he had his time at Crobar ...
You want the old Crobar spirit back ... it needs respect ... and respect starts by being UNIQUE ... loyalty follows respect soon after ... that was how I started this thread btw ...
-
Originally posted by saleen351
vip very well put, but certainly wrong...
Look at space...
Perfect example of what euro trash does to a club. After a while and without a balance roster of local resident and euro trash, the club becomes a haven for big events, and thus on the nights they don't have them booked they get killed. IMO space is royaly fucking up but screwing og out of sets. As much as I like the allstar event, it doesn't focus on og and roland enough, thus hurting the club.... Look at this board, only a hand full go out to hear oscar, most other times it's for big events only..
There is no real solution, but i'd like a club to have balls and book big name djs, but they don't tell anyone about it, so people who show up, and look up and bam! a nick warren is in the booth, and the cell phone barage begins....
just my 2 cents...
see yous tonight!
It's all good Saleen ... what worked for Crobar in the past still would work today ...
We are not asking for big djs every week ... but it NEEDS to get mixed up with some talent ... if not the result is the Crobar of today ... which is not even a shadow of the past ...
If you have big events ... you will again have 'screening' at the door ... just like b4 ...
When you funnel in the crowd ... the result is the Crobar of 2001 ... when you party with "that" crowd ... it makes you want to come back ... even for the local residents ... it is a 'game' in which Crobar used to come second to none ...
Anyways ... I don't want to sound like telling them what to do ... they knew better than anyone else how to do it ...
Their 'decline' came not so long ago as for them not to realize when it was ... **tries to remember when that french DJ started**...
One last thought ... which I consider the rule of thumb for any club with a dance floor ...
You first fill that dance floor with the best vibe and best music ... the growth starts there ... and floods over to your VIP ... it is a pretty basic equation ... to grow it inversely (like many clubs have pretended to do in the near past) is going against the stream ...
C ya 2nite bro ...
-
Originally posted by saleen351
typical miami euroooooooo trash begging...
Crobar is more profitable ever since they got rid of the euro trash.. My sources tell me, they did 2000 at the door last sat night....
Then factor in the 10k savings in dj and another 5 in promotions and all the bs with a big name dj, thats like 15 - 20 grand savings a week!
Crobar i hate your club, but as a business major in college, you guys are doing exactly what you need to do, to keep costs down, and make profits....
The analogy of the bent tree applies to you too bud
... I won't get in the argument of "euro-trash" ... I drive a BMW Now ... w/out the use of a calculator ... 2000 x $20 (minimum diference in spending power of the different crowds we are talking about) **eyes roll upwards trying to find answer to multiplication interrogant** ...
Saleen ... I don't need sources to tell you that Crobar was criticized by some for their arrogance at the door ... that translates to 2500 walking in ... and another 1000 were never admitted ...
It is that selectivity that permitted Crobar to attract the A-list to their VIP ... and to have the main dance floor with the best looking girls ...
... and this was Friday and Saturday ...Bodies that don't ring the register at the door (comps in order to fill the club) ... and that consume less at the bar ... are not a loss ... it is revenue not made ... If it takes 10K to produce an extra 40K ... you know your math ...
If I'm not mistaken ... Crobar's 1st year was in the neighborhood of $22M ... that is roughly 400K a week ... our infamous New Times published this data a couple years back ...
If a club in Sobe can do it ... that is Crobar ... but the name along won't do it no more ...
:D 
:eek:
:laugh: 
... run "out of gas" after Friday 
:mad: 
... and "Ft. Lauderdale Celebrity" 
Attn. Digital7 ...
in Miami
Posted
Who is the hottie in the pic?
