Naughty Curiosity!!!

It seems that Curiosity, the Mars rover, thought no one was looking, so....

Adding A Trackpad, or (Jail)Breaking iBad

As a reward for surviving his operation in 2010, we gave Dalai, Jr. one of the original iPads. He never really took to it, preferring his laptop instead. Even so, in  those heady, early days of the iPad, I was quite certain it would become THE radiology accessory, as seen in this cartoon which I made even before the iPad was released, and then this one after it was out. Later, I wrote an early review of the radiology viewing software then available. Some of my comments in that piece were rather prescient, especially those concerning the eventual increase in screen-resolution.

My son's iPad ultimately languished in a drawer for several years. On a lark, I dusted it off and used it for a teleprompter with the proper app (dvPrompter), which worked very well. It occurred to me that perhaps it was time to revisit the iPad, and maybe even pop for the iPad 4, with the Retina Display I had correctly predicted, and the Lightning connector which I had not foreseen.

The closing paragraphs of my software review referenced Apple's potential to redefine the PC world (in the more generic sense), with tablets taking over from laptops and desktops. This hasn't quite happened. It is rather ironic that Microsoft itself ran with the idea...right into a brick wall. The Latest and Greatest Windows, version 8, tries to add a touch interface and some flashy graphics to the venerable GUI. But it isn't selling, as noted by Yuval Rosenberg in the Fiscal Times:

Windows 8, meanwhile, hasn’t won over consumers since being launched in October, accelerating the popular shift away from PCs. Microsoft looks to have a flop on its hands – and one that, despite Ballmer’s talk of devices and services, remains very much at the heart of the company’s strategy. "At this point, unfortunately, it seems clear that the Windows 8 launch not only failed to provide a positive boost to the PC market, but appears to have slowed the market," IDC’s Bob O'Donnell said in releasing the quarterly data. IDC’s data doesn’t include tablets or the new wave of laptop-tablet hybrids, so the slump in Windows-based computing may be slightly less pronounced than its figures show, but rival tracking firm Gartner found an 11.2 percent decline in year-over-year PC shipments so Windows 8 clearly hasn’t helped turn the tide.

The new operating system, designed to enable touch screens, has failed to win over users accustomed to the old user interface, or UI. Plus, PCs with touchscreens are still expensive compared to tablets. "While some consumers appreciate the new form factors and touch capabilities of Windows 8, the radical changes to the UI, removal of the familiar Start button, and the costs associated with touch have made PCs a less attractive alternative to dedicated tablets and other competitive devices,” O’Donnell said. “Microsoft will have to make some very tough decisions moving forward if it wants to help reinvigorate the PC market."

And therein lies the problem. I came to the conclusion independently, but CNet's Scott Stein stated it better than I could in a 2012 article, "Why My iPad Can't Replace My Laptop:  It's The Trackpad":

Adding a keyboard to an iPad, like the Logitech/Zagg Keyboard Case for iPad 2, solves the problem of text entry. That's great for when you have to write a long essay, or are working on a chunk of your Great American Novel, or just want to jot down some notes. It's not so great when you have to edit a document, or create a blog post with embedded links, or do simultaneous Web research and writing. To do anything more than text entry and a few other commands, you'll have to reach up and touch the iPad's screen, which isn't exactly ergonomic or time-efficient when you have the iPad propped up and a keyboard attached. In fact, it's downright awkward.

This is why touch-screen laptops haven't taken off. No one wants to touch a screen while typing on a keyboard. I want a trackpad when I work, or even a mouse. Touching the screen makes no sense in "laptop" mode. I'd rather use the iPad as a straight-up tablet, which brings me back full circle and defeats the purpose of the keyboard.

So, the key to high-level iPad happiness is a keyboard and a pointing device. Several keyboard cases exist, and work well. There are all sorts of Bluetooth trackpads out there as well, but they don't work with the iPad as yet...because they aren't supported by the IOS (operating system). But, there is a way...

You've probably heard of jail-breaking an Apple product, and I won't bore you with the details. Suffice it to say that with the proper software, one can take control of one's iPod, iPad, or iPhone, freeing it from the shackles of the iTunes store, not to mention the Kupertino Kops and their vision of exactly how your interface should behave. In my research, I found that there IS software to allow the use of a Bluetooth mouse or trackpad with an iDevice...IF it's jailbroken.

Legal opinions in the past few years have declared that it is not illegal to jailbreak the Apple progeny, (but it is of course illegal to then download software for free that should be paid). If you jailbreak, you will void Apple's warranty, but, well, my old iPad 1 is waaaaaay out of warranty...

So I did the deed. I jailbroke my son's iPad.

Once processed, the only initial change to be seen is the appearance of a new app named Cydia, which one could think of as the iTunes Store of a jailbroken, parallel universe, or perhaps a Bizarro world (any Superman fans out there?) Navigating Cydia is an experience somewhat less refined than browsing the iTunes store. The interface is cruder, and not for the faint of heart. To be honest, I felt sort of dirty being there, like wandering through an Earth-Fare and being the only customer without Birkenstocks. But it works, and once you get the hang of it, there is a tremendous amount of stuff that will transform your iWhatever into something the late Steve Jobs would probably haunt you over if he could.

Aside from the various downsides of not being able to upgrade to the latest IOS until the mad geniuses out there upgrade their jailbreaking software, and losing the warranty, there isn't too much of a downside. BUT, if you were expecting everything to be free, you would be sadly mistaken.  So...I have yet to spend the $5 for the Bluetooth software. But I will. Eventually.

What I envisioned is a keyboard case for the iPad with a trackpad built in, something like this:

The Crux "Loaded" clamshell iPad case, prototype pictured above, was to have transformed your iPad into a mini-laptop for the small fee of $250. But for whatever reason, Crux seems to have dropped the project. Probably because the small fee of $250 was a little steep for the purpose. Add the cost of a souped-up iPad and you've about hit the $1,000 minimum price of an 11" MacBook Air:

15, 13, and 11 inch Macs, image courtesy Anandtech.com

Personally, I'm thinking the Air would be the better choice after all. I wonder if you can jailbreak an Air...

In the meantime, the Android world does have trackpadded options; Stein cites this Asus Transformer:

Credit: Scott Stein, Josh Miller/CNET

While the radiology apps for Android is not yet as numerous as for IOS, some do exist, and in fact Calgary Scientific's ResolutionMD is the first to receive clearance from the FDA for diagnostic reads.

In the meantime, I'm just going to wait for the iPad 5, before making any purchase decisions.  The '5 is said to be thinner and more powerful then ever before. I wish I could say that about myself...

The Final Four And Other Unfairness

While I'm not that much of a sports fan, Mrs. Dalai and I bid successfully on tickets for the Final Four offered by one of our favorite charities, Camperships For Nebagamon, and so we got to tick one more item off of our bucket list. (Still to come, not necessarily in order: Superbowl, college and professional baseball World Series, visits to Giza and the pyramids, Angor Wat, the Terra Cotta Soldiers in China, African Safari, Paris, Scotland, Ireland. And while I've been to Israel, Hawaii, and Australia, Mrs. Dalai hasn't, so our shared list includes these spots as well.)

Courtesy Kevin B. Cox, www.sbnation.com

I won't begin to analyze the Final Four semi-final and final games, as most any one of you out there could do a far better job of it than I. Still, we thought Michigan had a stronger performance against Syracuse than Louisville did against Wichita State, and we were a little surprised by the outcome of the final game. While we had no dog in the fight, as USC (our USC, not that usurper in California) has never made it into the Final Four, we did favor Louisville out of sympathy for the injured Kevin Ware.

There is nothing like seeing a sport played at the highest levels, even for someone like me who doesn't really appreciate the finer points of the game. I was somewhat surprised that the President, who is a very big fan of the game, didn't show for the finals. Mr. Obama does get all the nuances, I'm sure. But everyone understands this: there will be a winner and there will be a loser in each and every game. And no one seems to have much of a problem with that. It is accepted that in competition, the outcome is determined by some magical melange of luck, skill, timing, phase of the moon (the tides might affect the spin of the ball, you know), and Heaven knows what else. The Wolverines, while disappointed, haven't been quoted as saying that the Cardinals had some unfair advantage. Rick Snyder, the Governor of Michigan, who sat about 20 seats away from us, isn't calling Greg Fischer, the Mayor of Louisville, to chastise him over the loss, and request an equalization of the points scored.

Clearly, we all understand the concept of winning and losing, and the implied fairness therein. But somehow that feeling doesn't seem to translate into real life, which is essentially a series of competitions that pit one of us against another in some form or fashion. I had to compete with other applicants to get into college, then medical school, then residency, then to find a job. You could say I "won" these clashes, and others lost. My salary might therefore be higher than someone else's. The general feeling, at least among approximately 53% of the population, give or take a percent, is that somehow this is not fair, and my largess must be equalized. I must be forced to pay my fair share, although no one has bothered to define what my fair share really is, not to mention what makes this fair in the least. Fair has become the purview of the majority, and as the old saying goes, democracy lasts until the public realizes it can vote itself stuff from the public coffers. Which the public expects to be filled by the "winners" of society giving back points (I mean money) that was earned, well, fairly.

Was it fair that Louisville beat Michigan? From my vantage-point in section 116, about 40 rows up, I think so. But there are those who attribute the win to bad calls such as the foul called on the block pictured above. If we go there, however, we have to postulate some sort of bias on the part of the officials; otherwise, it's rather safe to assume an equal number of bad calls for each team. And maybe that is the origin of the fairness thing. All men (and women) are created equal, but the second we draw our first breath, that equality diverges into a zillion different directions. The outcomes of our various endeavors simply cannot be equal, and this angers a lot of people. It just isn't fair, they cry. But I say this: it wouldn't be at all fair to FORCE equality where it doesn't belong. Someone who is smarter and/or more clever than I am deserves to make more money and have more toys than I do. It's that simple. And that trickles down to those who had the luck to be born to those with those skills, in my humble opinion. Again, it is NOT the job of the government to equalize the outcome, only to remove impediments to the success of anyone and everyone with the ability to achieve it.

Congratulations to the Louisville Cardinals, who played hard and deserved their win and title, even with the unfair loss of Kevin Ware. I guess to be fair, Michigan's Trey Burke should have volunteered to have his leg broken as well, eh? That would have leveled the playing field... Fair is fair, after all.

Did You Ever Wonder...

Mark down Thursday, May 23, on your calendars...that's the date of the next AuntMinnie.com Virtual Conference, and your favorite Doctor Dalai of PACS will have a supporting roll:

"Did You Ever Wonder...Some Musings On What Radiologists REALLY Want Out Of PACS"

Dr. Sam Friedman, the self-proclaimed "Dalai Lama of PACS" shares his (occasionally tongue-in-cheek) views on PACS and how it works (or doesn't) in the hands of the average radiologist. Developed by visionaries and co-opted by Information Technology, PACS had great potential to revolutionize the daily grind of the radiologist, but can just as easily thwart any attempt at efficiency. It would be nice if those who wrote the software actually asked what PACS should do. Did you ever wonder just what that is? The next few moments should cast some light on this mostly-ignored subject.

I hope you will find the entire conference, and my presentation in particular, interesting and informative. I do, however, need your help. Please contact me at doctordalai(AT)gmail.com, and let me know what YOU think! What does your PACS do that you like, and what features do you detest? If you could make your own PACS interface, what would it include? All ideas will be read, and the best will be rewarded with a free mention on this very blog!

Seriously, I would be very grateful for your thoughts on PACS. send them to me at

doctordalai(AT)gmail.com

Thank you!!!!

Merge Re-Refinances

While it's not yet up on Merge's website, the company has sent out a press release to those of us on their  email list announcing a new "Tender Offer" and "Consent Solicitation". Here it is:

Merge Healthcare Announces Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation for 11.75% Senior Secured Notes Due 2015

CHICAGO, April 2, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Merge Healthcare Incorporated (Nasdaq:MRGE), a leading provider of clinical systems and innovations that seek to transform healthcare, today announced that it has commenced a cash tender offer (the "Tender Offer") for any and all of its $252,000,000 outstanding aggregate principal amount of 11.75% Senior Secured Notes due 2015 (CUSIP Nos. 589499AB8 and 589499AA0) (the "Notes"). The purpose of the Tender Offer is to improve Merge's financial position by refinancing its indebtedness outstanding under the Notes at a lower interest rate.

In connection with the Tender Offer, Merge is soliciting consents (the "Consent Solicitation") to effect certain proposed amendments to the Notes and the indenture governing the Notes (the "Indenture") that would eliminate substantially all of the restrictive covenants and certain events of default contained therein, would release all of the collateral securing the Notes, would shorten the minimum redemption notice period required for Merge to redeem Notes from thirty days to three business days prior to the redemption date, and would modify certain other related provisions contained in the Indenture. The Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation are being made pursuant to an Offer to Purchase and Consent Solicitation Statement dated April 2, 2013 (the "Offer to Purchase"), which more fully sets forth the terms and conditions of the Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation.

{snip}

As described in the Offer to Purchase, the "Total Consideration" for each $1,000 principal amount of Notes validly tendered and related consents delivered at or prior to 5:00 p.m., New York City Time, on April 15, 2013 (such date and time, as the same may be extended, the "Consent Expiration Time") and accepted for purchase will be $1,066.96 per $1,000 principal amount of such Notes, which includes a consent payment of $30.00 per $1,000 principal amount of such Notes (the "Consent Payment").

{snip}

The Tender Offer and Consent Solicitation are conditioned upon, among other things, (a) the receipt of tendered Notes from the holders of at least two-thirds of the aggregate principal amount of the outstanding Notes (excluding any Notes owned by Merge or any of its affiliates), (b) receipt of funds from certain refinancing transactions, on terms and conditions acceptable to Merge, in an amount sufficient to enable Merge to purchase the tendered Notes, make the Consent Payments and pay related costs and expenses, and (c) certain other general conditions, each of which is described in more detail in the Offer to Purchase...

Now, I'm no financial genius, as my wife the accountant will tell you. But adding up the numbers, it looks like Merge is offering 6.7% on the purchase of the note, but then taking back 3% in "consent payment" thus yielding 3.7%. But the holders of Merge's debt were to be paid over 11% when the $200 million + in notes were originally tendered in 2010. They might not be very happy about the lower rates.

I'm a firm believer in refinancing, having done so on my home loan several times over the years to take advantage of prevailing interest rates. But I have to be a little worried about this consent business. One could read this as ways to get out of the note's provisions...that couldn't possibly be the case, now could it?

Oh, well.  It was suggested to me years ago that GE was funding Merge's purchase of AMICAS to piss me off, a thought I dismissed at the time. Now that GE has finally come up with a usable GUI, their Universal Viewer, one wonders if they might decide to just squash Merge/AMICAS out of existence altogether. But I'm being paranoid, right? While Merge is a scrappy company run by savvy people, no one ever got fired for picking GE.  Just sayin'...    ;-{)}

The Apple Of My iEye: iVision

With all the hype about Google Glass and Pebble watches, it would appear that Apple has been left far behind in the innovation game. Nothing of this caliber seems to be coming from the magical workshops of Cupertino.

Until today, that is. Secret documents leaked from Apple's headquarters indicate something quite revolutionary, a product that will firmly plant Apple back at the top of the heap for years to come.

If it were up to me, I would want something that would encompass everything I want and need to do during the day into one neat package. It seems that Steve Job's ghost has heard me, and the result is to be called iVision.

PatentlyApple.com, a site that monitors Apple patents, strangely enough, documents some of the technology behind the new miracle:

This image from the patent application shows us the optical projection approach to delivering images to both eyes. The technology can be modified such that the screen transparency can be modified, and thus the display can either be projected over reality, or seen as the exclusive image, creating a virtual-reality experience for 3D movies, games, and the like.

Processing for this first version will have to be off-board, as the power and communication ability required for this ambitious product is too great to be contained in any headset that might possibly be acceptable to Apple's hipster customers. Thus, a souped up iPhone, tentatively labeled the iPhone5V, will connect to iVision via Bluetooth. Control will be via an advanced version of Siri that actually recognizes your commands.

It is, of course, the superimposition of virtual on top of real that will be iVision's big selling point. Various functions will be controllable by iPhone5V apps. Pedestrians and tourists will of course want the site-labeling that Google Glass already offers, and certainly iVision will outdo this:

I'm assuming that the iPlace app will have extended capabilities, perhaps connecting with the appropriate databases to provide local information:

iVision will have tremendous applications in the medical realm. A virtual display of PACS, called iPACS, assuming Apple can buy back that trademark, will free us from our workstations. For the surgeons, iOperate will provide step-by-step assistance:

The most exciting app of all, to those (over 18 years old, please) with no lives, will be iStrip:

Simulation courtesy of oskarlewis.com

What? You were expecting more of a surface view? We'll have to adjust the settings....

Of course, Apple won't stop with iVision. The logical progression of all this is something more personal, more internal...iSight!

Image courtesy cnet.com

Based on the ground-breaking work on artificial vision at MIT, iSight will indeed be an implanted optic replacement, able to interface directly with the user's brain, bypassing Siri. Expect a version for early (and brave) adopters sometime in 2015.

Oh, yes...I completely forgot to show you the iVision wearable device.  Here it is!

This glimpse of the future is available only on this particular day. Have a good one.

Takedown Breakdown

My previous post about a page takedown due to a supposed DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) violation attracted a comment:

I am going through the appeal process regagrding D360 threats myself. My hosting provider did lock down my entire site and I am working to get it back up. D360 contacted me and I responded immediately and removed the state map images for the U.S. that one of my researchers found through Google Images, and in our rush to complete a project last Fall 2012, it went without proper review as to the origins of those maps. An honest error on our part, admittedly, but these asshats are in this to suit people and are not interested in simple resolutions. I have had my site at godsownparty(dot)com for over 5 years without ever experiencing this type of aggressive attack over an unintentional error. When my site returns...guess who I am writing about?

And this comment attracted another comment (which was posted three times as the author, whom I would have thought was quite web-facile, had trouble understanding Blogger.com's controls):

This Anonymous person's name is Leah and she's pretty upset at her website begin down. Destination360 filed a DMCA complaint on her website because they took 3 maps on 3 separate articles. Example: http://www.destination360.com/maps/arizona-map.gif Its pretty clear there's a copyright and who owns it right? Her webhost was pretty heavy handed in their response but we have no control over that. She's now posting nasty anonymous comments on our Google+ acct. Why not just take responsbility for your actions and move on? Because its the internet and people can be anonymous.

To which I answered, in comment form:

Dear Local Trips/Destination360: Thank you so much for sending the same comment three times. I guess it never hurts to be certain you were heard, but you do apparently believe in taking responsibilities for your actions... When you file a DMCA complaint, as you seem to enjoy doing quite often, it causes undue havoc and pain upon people who were really not trying to harm you. In my case, I credited your photo to your site. Had you left it alone, you might have generated additional business, as the Hunter post is one of my most popular. The credited link could have drawn in more people to your site. And even if you don't want additional traffic to your illustrious site, you COULD have simply contacted me and asked nicely for me to take down the image. I would have done so, but had I refused, it would THEN be the proper course of action to file the DMCA. With your petty behavior, you now inspire people like me and Leah to let others know, and not only do you not gain any traffic, you lose potential customers and viewers. Is it worth that? And by the way, as noted in the post, I've found duplicates of your photos and your copy elsewhere...who stole what from whom?

To which Dan Taylor, the principle (and I have to admit superb photographer of Destination360.com) answered:

Dalai, Obviously that wasn't the intention to post multiple times, feel free to delete extras if you care. The commenting confirmation on this has something to be desired. I cannot comment on your specific instance regarding DMCA but we're fine with someone filing a DMCA on Destination360 we hire all our writers and content is run through copyscape so our work is vetted. Thanks for allowing us rebuttal on this issue.

And I responded:

Here's a rebuttal for you...why are you at Destination 360 being such BUTTS about this? WHY couldn't you simply contact me, which you can see is quite easy to do, and ask NICELY for me to remove the image in question? WHY did you feel it necessary to go straight to a DMCA filing? DO you possibly grasp that this just works against you in the end? Probably not.

Dan has the last word to this point:

Sorry but in order to process DMCA's you must follow certain procedures. Most people taking images are doing it for profit "traffic theft". On occasion innocent users get caught in this. Its impossible to determine who this is without significant work on our part. So the only way we can effectively and legally process these is to send to the website user email adddress and webhost. In the case of the Leah incident she had her whois hidden as private so we had no way. We sent 5 emails over the course of one month. I doubt you will understand our position but if you were in our shoes you might. In all fairness you say easily contact you. In looking at http://doctordalai.blogspot.com/ I cannot find anyway to contact you on this blog. I must go back to my dayjob. Cheers! 

Well, Dan, old friend, you really should consider putting in that "significant work", as you might be taking away the livelihood of others. My blog exists mostly for my own amusement, but other people actually depend on theirs for a living. I notice Destination360.com produces something under $200/day in advertising, which may or may not be enough to keep you in Nikon D800's without your day job. "Leah's" site isn't back up even yet, so I don't know if this is something that generates food-money for her or not. Would you be at all sorry for your actions if it did? Was her goal actually traffic theft? Mine certainly wasn't. If by that term you mean using the photos in question to divert web traffic from your site to mine, well, I guess that practice does exist.  However, I seriously doubt it represents the majority of people who use your photos, ESPECIALLY those who do so and give you credit for them as I did. With the crediting link, YOU, Dan, and your illustrious site, get FREE advertising. The "Doctor Hunter" post was one of my most popular. I used the photo of the hunter to represent my friend the hunting doctor, and it had nothing to do with anything on D360.com. Nothing but upside for D360 to just leave it and me alone.

There's a punch line here...the photo in question wasn't taken by Dan or anyone else associated with Destination360.com...it was a STOCK PHOTO from iStockphoto.com.  So I bought the rights to use it myself, and it's back up on the Doctor Hunter post:

Order Summary
File: #1162020
XSmall
Standard License (Included) Order number: 19731992

Please save this invoice/receipt as a record of your purchase.



iStockphoto LP, Suite 200 - 1240 20th Ave SE
Calgary, Alberta T2G 1M8 Canada

Now, isn't that interesting? How did they know my use of the photo was not kosher? Well, I made it easy for them by posting the credit right there by the picture. It's also possible to check the source of a download by examining the EXIF data of the photo. In this case, the version I borrowed from D360 mentions their website, and that from iStock contains their info, and that is perhaps another way to search. (I will of course assume that D360 licensed this picture either from iStock or in another legal manner.)

It's pretty clear that my friend Dan is trolling the 'net looking for photos (and maybe text) that match the content of Destination360.com, without bothering to find out the origin of the material. To be fair, I had not properly obtained permission to use the photo in question (which I have now), and in MY case, D360 truly did have the right to file the DMCA action. BUT, this isn't always the case with Dan and company, as he himself admits above, and some others like "Leah" will suffer. Others have had similar amusing experiences as this blog post and attached comments will illustrate:

My frustration at GoDaddy has gone to a whole other level this week.

I used to be a loyal GoDaddy customer from day 1. I hosted over a hundred websites, including 3 dedicated and 2 virtual servers, had all my domains through there all purchases through my reseller account which was also doing very well. Needless to say I feel I am a pretty reliable source to be giving a GoDaddy review.

Over the last 2 years, my loyalty to GoDaddy has been steadily dwindling. It wasn’t the customer support that was steadily getting worse, or the constant mistakes in billing….it wasn’t even the malware attacks that prayed on server vulnerabilities, infecting over 87 of my wordpress sites that they stubbornly insisted to the bitter end, wasn’t their fault.

But the nail in the coffin for me, was finding out that GoDaddy does not enforce their own terms to protect our servers, and that anyone with an email has the power to take your server down.

Scary right? Its the truth and here is what happened.

Recently one of our Dedicated Servers was suspended because of a Copyright Complaint. No notice, no warning…nothing. One minute its up and the next its down.

There is no way to contact the Copyright department by phone. You can only contact them through email. And they are the only one with the power to restore your server. You are supposed to receive an email notifying you as to why the server was taken down but since most of us with dedicated servers also host our emails on the server, that did not happen in our case.
So we had to send them a request by email to find out why our server was suspended and they took their sweet time responding. Nearly 5 hours later we got an email with a complaint that was attached from www.Destination360.com who claimed an image we had on the site was theirs and they swore under penalty of perjury to that fact. They provided a link of the image on their own site, and then one that showed it on our site. That was it.

Our first issue was to get the server restored. And in order for us to do that we had to follow this list of things which included swearing under penalty of perjury that we would remove the image immediately. I found that interesting considering you can’t remove the image when the server is down. We responded with the things they asked us for, and told them we would remove the image as soon as they put the server back up. But we kept getting rejected with an auto response referring us to the terms and instructions. I just continued to submit the same response and the 4th time it was accepted. FINALLY, After 12 hours of being down and waiting for responses, we were told we would be restored. But it didn’t happen and when we called to see why, we found out they went home and we would have to wait until the next morning!

Eventually they got the server back up. Total down time, 20 hours, just long enough to lose traffic from a breaking news story linked to on drudge, affect the sites ranking and lose advertisers.

I decided to now look into this situation that caused all this which was the copyright violation claim. Imagine my surprise when I searched the image in question on tineye.com, to find out that the image was in fact owned by IStock photo. Further research showed we had a license for it.

So why was Destination360.com filing complaints about images they don’t own? And how was this claim validated by GoDaddy? Can anyone claim copyright infringement and just take down a website? Does GoDaddy just yank your website, no questions asked?

It seems so, how else could this have happened when clearly the accuser did not own the image and could not have provided proof of such.

SO the questions is, does GoDaddy just automatically suspend service when they get complaints and then sort out the details later? Because that seemed to me like a very dangerous power to give to someone who wants to take a site down. There had to be something that prevents false claims or malicious intent.

I called an talked to a manager named Chris to ask this very question. Chris assured me that although they wont make the decision who is right and who is wrong when the complaints are received, they do make them follow a strict complaint submission protocol and will verify the complaint before they suspend. They admit they take action swiftly but they do not just suspend all sites that get complaints arbitrarily.

I checked out the rules for submitting a copyright complaint. To my surprise, the complaint that Desintation360 provided did not provide the necessary information to have a valid complaint according to the terms of GoDaddy.

So how was that claim aloud to pass as valid? Can anyone just lie and say we stole their image and take our server down?

But even more surprising is that they do NOT ask you to provide proof of some kind of documentation of the actual copyright when making a complain. Which means if someone has malicious intent, all they have to do is swear that they believe you have violated their copyright (even if no such copyright exists) by using something of theirs on your website, and GoDaddy will suspend the website. No questions asked.

I contacted ISTOCK who immediately called me, concerned and provided us with proof for GoDaddy, that we were within our rights to use that image. My goal was to not only show GoDaddy the claim was not valid but to show we had the right to put the image back up.

I immediately emailed that to GoDaddy the license and letter from ISTOCK, along with several requests for a manager to review this situation. I was very concerned that our server was not safe, and wanted to know why the complaint was allowed to be escalated to server suspension and how they thwart malicious intent, if they are not asking for any kind of proof. Chris the manager said they do look into these things first. But clearly that didn’t happen here. So what happened?

I expected someone to email me back. But we got nothing but automated responses containing instructions on how to get our server back up which proved they were clearly not even reading our emails considering the site had already been back up for 2 days.

When I finally did get a response from someone named Michelle, she asked me why the image was still up when we promised to remove it. That concerned me again considering it wasn’t up and hadn’t been for 2 days. But even worse was that we had provided our license for the image and should have been able to put it back up anyway. SO no one was even looking at our emails and documentation. GoDaddy didn’t care that we were wrongly accused.

Hey wait, aren’t they supposed to be on our side?

After providing her with a link to the images 404, and again asking how we can document with GoDaddy that this claim was not valid and did not comply to their terms and asking to be allowed to republish the image, she responded asking us file a counter claim.

So we did. She responded to tell us that the server would need to be suspended until the court date.

Wait….court date? What court date? I thought we were just providing you with information about why the complaint was not valid so we could put the image back up and not get in trouble for it. Apparently there is NO way to do this. There is no way to disprove a bogus claims with GoDaddy and NO way to hold someone accountable for false claims under penalty of perjury without taking them to court. And the best part is that godaddy supports you through this process by taking your server down until it is resolved, something that is not mentioned in their terms.

In the end, we never got a call or email responding to our concerns, nothing assuring us it wouldn’t happen again, nothing explaining the situation, nothing acknowledging the proof we had the rights to the image, nothing assuring us that they do look into claims before yanking servers and sites. Just Nothing.

Oh and I emailed Destination360 several times to tell them about their mistake and how it affected our website. Guess what I got from them? Yep. Nothing.

So what does all this mean to you? It means your GoDaddy server and website is vulnerable. And until GoDaddy decides to listen to its customers and better protect them, this is not going to change anytime soon.

I certainly don’t intend in staying around to find out.

Share this post !

Reply

June 26, 2012 at 3:42 pm


I, too have had the same issue with this malicious company Godaddy. On the 25th of this month, June 2012 they took my site down after they received the same complaint of a copyright violation from the same company destination360.com They simply emailed Godaddy and said we stole one of the photos from their site. We did not steal anything, as the photo was licensed by Istock. Godaddy never contacted us and just immediately took our site and hosting down. After they did they emailed us. And by violating our contract with them, Godaddy, they ruined our online business.

I will look into filing a lawsuit against Godaddy and against destination360.com for libelous and false claims.

Godaddy must actually believe they are too big to fail…they are wrong. Once a company reaches success, like GM and thousands of other companies, they treat their customers like dumb ignorant cash-cows.

Reply

June 26, 2012 at 4:14 pm


Email me and I can give you the name of the manager at ISTOCK who has been dealing with Destination360 already about this issue. ISTOCK is NOT happy as it harasses their customers and I am sure they will be concerned to hear this is still occurring. I will be sure to email my contact there and let her know.

You have a valid reason to pursue legal action as in order for them to take down your server, they have to swear under penalty of perjury and since they have done it more than once and have already been warned about it, it is not longer something they can claim is an oversight. I am happy to provide you with details of our situation for your court case if it helps.

Reply

May 21, 2012 at 4:36 pm

http://www.destination360.com had our site removed for using an image of a windmill we had a legal license from istock to use! It was a huge problem for us and took us nearly a week to resolve. Worse yet, we also could not put the image back up as godaddy did not seem to care that we had a license, and said they would take our site down if we put the image up. So we paid for a license we can’t use. Your site is about godaddy, but it seems to me the real problem is istock! In other words, if you buy an istock license you are at risk from a company who has decided they own images that they don’t and will have your site taken down? Your article is a year old, it is unacceptable that istock has not fixed this issue. They need to take action against Destination360. Suspend their account!

I don’t understand what Destinantion360 has to gain by doing this? Do they really think that they own these images??

Dan, buddy, pal, mate, friend...THIS is what your blind shotgunning accomplishes. For every real case of "traffic theft" you eliminate, you cause a boatload of grief for several more innocents.

Not that you really care, but IF you and Destination360.com want to be a good citizens of the web, Cease and Desist from your belligerent practices outlined above. Yes, it is your right to pursue those who actually ARE trying to steal your customers (although I'll bet you don't get much revenue from the vast majority of those viewers who might be so enticed anyway), but you should have the common courtesy to find out BEFORE you go, ummm, gunning for them. You are doing nothing more than turning away potential visitors to your site. You are firing a shotgun into a crowd which you think might contain someone who ripped you off. This is not the way to win friends and influence people. Not at all. In fact, Dan, you posted something on your own forum about "besstpicturesof.com" which I won't reproduce as you might get upset. The gist of the post was that "image scrapers" are trolling for your content and using it as an easy source of revenue. Really, Dan? Are the dozens of little piss-ant blogs out there that you have prosecuted (under pain of perjury) REALLY using your content for revenue? Certainly, a site that DOES do this deserves the full weight of your wrath, the rest of them, the rest of us, probably not.

Since you are quite concerned with Internet piracy, as we all should be, by the way, you might be glad one of your images was lifted to be used in a talk about...Internet piracy.  The image of the Mexican Caribbean is yours. Have fun prosecuting the Hong Kong police.

There are a lot of sites dedicated to travel beyond D360.com. I'll be visiting those, and not yours. I urge my readers to do the same. THIS is what your behavior brings you, Dan. Yes, mine is a small blog with few readers. But they have friends, and the friends have friends...

Next time, send the perpetrator an email, a common courtesy which you didn't afford me. Most of us out there will do the right thing. Unlike those who indiscriminately file DMCA notices.

Dalai Speaks! No One Falls Asleep!

I had the honor of speaking to the South Carolina Radiological Society Annual Meeting yesterday. Clearly, the organizers wanted to intersperse some entertainment and low-brow amusement into the schedule of academic presentations, and I was more than happy to oblige.

My talk was a revamped version of what I said at RANZCR in 2010, updated appropriately to reflect the few areas of improvement I've seen since then.

Because the presentation computer was a Dell running Windows Vista (I guess someone actually bought a copy), two video clips that were supposed to be part of my PowerPoints didn't work. So, if anyone who attended the meeting actually was motivated to check them out, here they are...

The Scope of the Project

This fanciful piece is inspired by the rigidity of the IT mentality...

Dalai's PACS Fix

This is how I would handle some of the PACS problems I encounter...if I could.

Now here's something that will shock the pants off of some out there.  After my talk, I was approached by one of the participants who asked me if I had time for "some advice".  I naturally assumed he was going to tell me how awful a speaker I was (I used my old iPad 1 for a teleprompter). But no, on the contrary, he thanked me for the talk, and proceeded to ask which of a restricted list of PACS vendors he should consider. Here's the shock...WITHIN the constraints under which he was operating, I felt the best choice was.....

Wait for it.....

Agfa.

You're welcome.