|Without adequate security, you|
never know who might be about
to drive off with your car ...
The Carolina-Paterson article was a short and blog-friendly version of a longer paper on the subject that you can read in full here.
The IPKat and Merpel, after due consideration, both thought that Birss J's ruling raised an issue that was important enough to merit a sidebar poll, so they composed one: here's what 101 of our readers thought of the matter:
- The chilling effect of this ruling is bad for freedom of speech and bad for the public’s right to know 23 (22%)
- Volkswagen are acting as Trade Secret trolls, exercising their rights in an abusive manner 9 (8%)
- It’s just a random ruling on its own unique facts and is of no precedental significance at all 9 (8%)
- The researchers are acting irresponsibly and deserved to be stopped from publishing their work 13 (12%)
- Loss of freedom of expression is a small price to pay for protecting drivers’ interests 8 (7%)
- I happily admit that I don't know enough about cryptography and this security system to assess the risk of publication in this case 39 (38%)