<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Impulse Media Group Lawsuit Decision Explained</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained</link>
	<description>Internet Safety, Windows Updates, Internet News, and More</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 13:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained#comment-430437</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained#comment-430437</guid>
		<description>The FTC blew their case?  (What, another pun?) Is it really blowing the case if you don't have a case to begin with?  I thought you believed they lost unjustly until the end where you seem to agree that they had no case begin with.  Thanks to Anne, of course.  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The FTC blew their case?  (What, another pun?) Is it really blowing the case if you don&#8217;t have a case to begin with?  I thought you believed they lost unjustly until the end where you seem to agree that they had no case begin with.  Thanks to Anne, of course.  :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained#comment-413151</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 04:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained#comment-413151</guid>
		<description>Hey, very interesting post. Just wanted to help out and let you know that there is a small typo here: "the FTC coudn’t prove their case". Are you sure you wrote the CAN-SPAM act? aha jk.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, very interesting post. Just wanted to help out and let you know that there is a small typo here: &#8220;the FTC coudn’t prove their case&#8221;. Are you sure you wrote the CAN-SPAM act? aha jk.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tricia</title>
		<link>http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained#comment-412949</link>
		<dc:creator>Tricia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:05:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-impulse-media-group-lawsuit-decision-explained#comment-412949</guid>
		<description>I felt the exact same way as you about the fact that the jury would have WANTED to find Impulse Media responsible because of the nature of their business. I like your analysis. I'm hopeful that the case was so fact specific that it doesn't set a strong precedent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I felt the exact same way as you about the fact that the jury would have WANTED to find Impulse Media responsible because of the nature of their business. I like your analysis. I&#8217;m hopeful that the case was so fact specific that it doesn&#8217;t set a strong precedent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
