Website users legally changing names to match usernames
— it’d be nice to write “Wax Pancake” on my tax forms #Subjecting today's children to yesterday's gaming classics
— “I’m sure everyone who made this game is dead by now.” #Lady Liberty and the Three Impossible Dreams
— 101-chapter fan-fiction epic, a Buffy/Harry Potter crossover set during the American Revolution #Bit Spirit, new BitTorrent client
— Powerful manager for serving/downloading multiple BitTorrent files #Cubs Fan
The Smoking Gun unmasked the name of the Cubs fan that interfered with a foul ball in Tuesday night’s Cubs game, and the Chicago Sun-Times printed far more information. The entire world now knows his name, age, employer, Little League team, and neighborhood. They also published a neighbor’s name, Ron Cohen, which exposes the fan’s home address, as well. A quick glance in Usenet shows that he has a long posting history, so we even know his likes and dislikes. (Update: It’s not the same Steve Bartman… Thanks, Jon.)
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t he still considered a private person? And doesn’t the Chicago Sun-Times article tangibly endanger his life? I’d love to hear from someone familiar with privacy law. Is he considered a limited public figure by appearing in a public place and trying to catch a foul ball? I’d say he has a decent case against the Smoking Gun and the Sun-Times for negligence.
At any rate, he’s rapidly turning into the net’s newest celebrity. The Photoshop remixes are coming fast and furious… I’ve compiled a list of them below. (My personal favorite.)
Update: DPS notes that SteveBartman.com/org/net domains have all been registered in the last few hours.
Danny O'Brien on Foo Camp and the death of the private register
— Also: Andrew Orlowski pokes fun at us #St. George, Patron Saint of Photo Opportunities
— Strange caption… Is he appearing on BET and the Food Network? #Sony may drop PS2 price to $99 in mid-November
— Target in-store advertisements reveal possible price cuts #Paypal Challenges BitPass
Paypal has frozen the account of micropayment service BitPass. Scott McCloud, one of their advisors and its most prominent user, stated that Bitpass was given seven days to provide Paypal evidence that their service isn’t a violation of the U.S. Patriot Act. Is this because Paypal is genuinely concerned that Bitpass could be used for money laundering, or are they interested in shutting down a potential competitor?
Scott reported this information at this O’Reilly’s Foo Camp over the weekend, and doesn’t appear to have hit the web anywhere yet. Please let me know if you find any more information about this story.
Update: Abe Burmeister spoke to Bitpass and confirms the report.
October 14, 2003: Paypal employee Patrick Breitenbach posted a comment on my site, stating that Paypal reactivated the Bitpass account this morning. Patrick said that Paypal didn’t intend to disrupt payment process, and claimed the decision to suspend their account was unrelated to competitive issues. Though the End of Free points out that their Senior Manager for Biz Dev is speaking a micropayments conference next month.