EVERYONE need to read this thread in the link below, please post this other threads related to this, BTW it discusses that this is James Young is a HOAX read the last couple of posts
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=492330
Admins: Just talked with Microsoft being my profession and this was not sitting good with me since it was missing A. a contact phone number and for these cases it must also contain a Digital Signature with that being said they said it is fraud, I gave them the link here and they verified that they do not have a James Young employ and that the email extension [email protected] is not valid furthermore they said on there notices they will also have a phone number for the person(s) to call and correspondence is done through written. I will be receiving an email with the case number and contact information for the antipiracy case manager who verified the information and will forward it to the Admins here and at PPCGeeks as well. If one one the Admins here can PM there email addy so I can send the email to them for future verification on these types of notices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More info on the Ms Hoax please pass this info along to all sites and admins...
http://pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=7041
Microsoft Impersonator Sends Fraudulent Letters, Disrupts Community
Posted by Chuong Nguyen
March 13th, 2009 at 02:53 PM
It turns out that there may be an impersonator lurking around disrupting Windows Mobile communities. In response to an article that was posted this morning about Microsoft demanding that Windows Mobile 6.5 ROM images that were cooked unofficially be taken down, our own Microsoft MVP Adam Z. Lein spotted that the guy responsible for the letter to XDA-Developers may be a fraud, as was posted on PPCGeeks.
A similar hoax had occurred before at msmobiles in regards to Windows Mobile 6.5 screenshots. In the cease and desist letter to msmobiles, the gentleman claiming to be with Microsoft's legal department asked the site to remove screenshots of the forthcoming operating system
. The letter was sent after Microsoft had publicly announced and shown the very screenshots at Mobile World Congress 2009. According to msmobiles: "In any case, if it is genuine action on behalf of Microsoft, it is a case of extreme incompetence that this guy is showing because he is requesting removal of pictures of something that has been officially announced few days earlier." It should also be noted that pocketnow.com had posted screenshots and news of Windows Mobile 6.5 before, during, and after Microsoft's Mobile World Congress announcement and we did not receive a cease and desist letter.
The community over at msmobiles performed some additional investigations and found that the gentlemam, James Young, sent emails originating from IP addresses in London and not from Microsoft's corporate headquarters in Redmond, Washington, leading many to believe that he is not connected with the software giant. Additionally, emails were sent from [email protected], and not at a "@microsoft.com" email address.
Whatever the case may be, other forum members in our original post here at pocketnow.com made mention that only the Windows Mobile 6.5 cooked ROM made by ROM chef Da_G was affected and 6.5 ROMs for other HTC-made devices were seemingly okay.
i only hope it is a hoax
I f you read the links I posted you will see that some users and some who work for M$ verified that it was a hoax...
Thanks for this.
It has been raised in the Moderators Forum.
I'll closed this thread now because there are a few of them floating around, might as well keep the discussion focused.
Might I suggest that if this is found to be a hoax, the site admin (or a moderator maybe) will let you know. We would appreciate it if anyone who has had a takedown notice by the admin adears to it until further notice from xda.
Regards,
Dave
I'll re-open this thread for discussion.
Can I request that if Flar removed your ROM images / links that you do not re-add them until you here from Flar (or maybe a moderator).
The takedown notice for those images may be genuine.
Thanks
Dave
thank you Dave,
question, since this has affected several hosting sites, what would be the best way to get them to re-think there decisions ? To me I think is not going to be a easy task to do since they are now very unsure of where they stand..legally that is..I doubt the M$ is going to come right out and tell them "all is well"
Who ever this guy is..he hit a very tender spot and if it was not for a minor slip up this may not have been nipped in the bud as quick as it was..
I have unlimited bandwidth and file space to host...
I am just unsure of the "legality" of ROM images in the US on a file server.
If they are considered legit, and do not contain any illegal software in the ROM image itself, I would be more than willing to host on my 100MBit web server.
What a p*ss take but to be honest someone should have noticed the extension on the email address!!! Or even checked into it... "Just want to clarify not pointing the blame @ anyone"
I know now XDA has to do there research on this and comply with any thing that has happened till the all clear is called.
Just shame the ammount of disruption this has caused to chefs and users alike....
With regards hosting sites i think that they will be fines as i imagine the flagged ROMs were reported by the offender and most hosting sites do not have enough time to check every upload to there servers....
Not sure i got anything else to say except lets all get back to usual.....
stylez said:
With regards hosting sites i think that they will be fines as i imagine the flagged ROMs were reported by the offender and most hosting sites do not have enough time to check every upload to there servers... I have personally had to initiate a DMCA, send it, and follow up with individuals before, as well as removing illegal material from some of the websites our current and former clients have hosted.
Not sure i got anything else to say except lets all get back to usual.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can speak to that since I am a partner with a game and web hosting company. We do look at the individual files on the box to determine if the reported apps or media violates either our Terms of Service or any copyright laws. We also check into each "report" we get to determine if the report is legitimate, and we do investigate IPs and domains, to determine if they are valid.
In our arena, we do get gaming guilds who pretend to be official companies who try to get us to take down a competitors site or server.
We have also used copyright DMCA ourselves, and we do send email notification, but ONLY after a written certified letter is sent. The email is sent to the listed contact of the company and contains a copy of what was sent via certified mail.
We do this since we normally engage in unofficial conversation if someone has used our copy-righted material to save us money, as most of the time they use it without knowing they can't.
As far as the DMCA goes, we can send notice using our own attorneys, but we HAVE to hire local counsel to serve any legal action notice if we end up going that route. However, we do have a choice of mediation and litigation clause which allows us to use the laws of and conduct legal activity in the state our company is registered in. MS would have to do the same thing.
so when will roms be back? will everyone have to re post them therselves?
If it's truly found to be a hoax, I'd sure hate to be "James Young", or whatever his real name is. He may quickly become the target of thousands of hackers. I would imagine with the combined power of everyone effected, he could find himself with:
An Empty Bank Account
Homeless
Late Vehicle Registration/Stolen Vehicle
On the FBI's Most Wanted List/On MI6's Most Wanted List
His Face In Porn Movies/Beastiality Movies
A Failed Drug Test at Work
On People Magazine's Worst Dressed List
etc, etc...
More info from another thread.
By Dereth
this guy obiously has no life....
he sends these to the pirate bay all the time:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/ms-loveletter.txt
and read this email at the bottom it states the copyright on the email.
http://static.thepiratebay.org/sega_mail.txt
"IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and attachments are confidential
and may be subject to legal privilege and/or protected by copyright.
Copying or communicating any part of it to others is prohibited and may
be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use,
copy, distribute or rely on this email and should please return it
immediately or notify us by telephone. While we take every reasonable
precaution to screen out computer viruses from emails, attachments to
this email may contain such viruses. We cannot accept liability for loss
or damage resulting from such viruses. We recommend you carry out your
own virus checks."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell ya what this guy been everywhere!!!
Last month, Ars reported that Microsoft's Windows Media Audio (WMA) digital rights management protection had been cracked, and a program called FairUse4WM had been written that would strip DRM data from purchased audio files. Microsoft was aware of the workaround, but did not seem too concerned, merely stating that "we designed the Windows Media DRM system to be renewable, so that if such events occur the system can be refreshed to address them." Now it seems that the company has gone a little further than that, sending out cease and desist orders to web sites hosting the FairUse4WM program. According to the owner of the web site BG4G, the orders came in via e-mail.
The notices are of a standard boilerplate format, claiming that the sites are "offering unlicensed copies of, or is engaged in other unauthorized activities relating to copyrighted works published by Microsoft." The copyrighted works are Windows Media Player 10 and 11, and the unauthorized activities are listed as "offering 'Cracks' or 'Product Keys', intended to circumvent technical measures that control access to Microsoft's copyrighted works and that protect Microsoft's copyrights in those works."
The "Demand for Immediate Takedown" e-mail comes from a James Young, "Internet Investigator," who claims to be acting on behalf of Microsoft Corporation. The interesting thing about the e-mail is that it makes no mention of the DMCA, which is the one law that would make FairUse4WM (which does not contain any copyrighted code, portions of Windows Media Player, nor any copyrighted music files themselves) illegal. The DMCA contains provisions against programs that attempt to circumvent copy protection. It also provides a "safe harbor" for Internet Service Providers and web hosts that take down files in a certain amount of time (usually 10 to 14 days) after a warning letter has been received.
The DMCA is a US invention and applies only in the United States, but many companies have attempted to use it outside their country's borders. The notice advising web sites to take down the FairUse4WM program came from the domain Microsoft-Antipiracy.com, which according to DNS records belongs to Microsoft but is actually administered by the ISP Nildram Ltd, which is based in the UK (the web site itself redirects to a page on microsoft.com).
Microsoft has not commented on the takedown notices, but they would be consistent with the sorts of notices given to web sites hosting cracks for other media-related copy protection. In the case of FairUse4WM, the problem may be somewhat more urgent from Microsoft's perspective, as the subscription-based model used by many DRMed WMA online music stores allows downloading an unlimited number of songs, but they can only be listened to for as long as the subscription is active
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More reading regards this:
http://jamesholden.net/2007/04/25/microsoft-didnt-issue-takedown-notices-for-fairuse4wm/
Tell you what though there is a hell of alot of letters and some of them going back as far as 2004 from what i'm reading lets hope that XDA can nip this in the but...
this is all nice to be a freelance paid by M$ or ? black M$ funds haha. its way back to .... that this guy is scaring on the inet for them . SO XDA WHAT WILL BE RESPONSE TO ALL CLOSED THREADS
edit : i want my thread back restored from backup hehe red lines removed . WHEN ?
Use common sense, people! (Admins mainly)
IF Microsoft would have sent any of such letters, it would require you to remove ALL of their products, not just one - isn't it obvious?
I cannot imagine msoft asking xda to remove anything WM6.5 related, but not mentioning WM6.1 and WM6.0 ROMs and files
It's like Sony would have ask i.e. The Pirate Bay in a C&D letter to remove links to just 1 movie torrent and not mention links to all other Sony-owned movies present there.
I don't think it ever happened that way.
And letter coming from microsoft-antipiracy.com ? That's a no brainer LOL! It's as credible as if it would have come from microsoftsucks.org
Sure it's a hoax.
You've been pwnd
http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIs.aspx?domain=microsoft-antipiracy.com&prog_id=godaddy
http://msmobiles.com/news.php/8059.html
http://pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=7041
http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi?NoticeID=4780
http://brian.carr.name/mscompln.htm
F2504x4 said:
More info from another thread.
By Dereth
this guy obiously has no life....
he sends these to the pirate bay all the time:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/ms-loveletter.txt
and read this email at the bottom it states the copyright on the email.
http://static.thepiratebay.org/sega_mail.txt
"IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and attachments are confidential
and may be subject to legal privilege and/or protected by copyright.
Copying or communicating any part of it to others is prohibited and may
be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use,
copy, distribute or rely on this email and should please return it
immediately or notify us by telephone. While we take every reasonable
precaution to screen out computer viruses from emails, attachments to
this email may contain such viruses. We cannot accept liability for loss
or damage resulting from such viruses. We recommend you carry out your
own virus checks."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting... the confidentiality notice is often a sub mail server attachment, meaning its attached to the email as it leaves the companie's mail servers, not when it leaves the users outbox... There are universal clauses out there, but since this one matches pretty much 100% it would be safe to say that the company James Young mailed it from and this company are one and the same, or connected through a parent or something like that. Here is the one that my company attaches once the emails leave our intranet and go out:
This message w/attachments (message) may be privileged, confidential or proprietary, and if you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, do not use or share it and delete it. Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of <removed>. Subject to applicable law, <removed> may monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its networks/systems. The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. This message is subject to terms available at the following link:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
James probably worked there at the same company that sent the sony notice and got fired, so he's taking it upon himself. Maybe he got served a notice, and got mad that everyone else has it so he is sending out notices himself as a revenge plot... who knows... he has issues thats all.
Good news for xda developers :
http://www.duttythroy.net/component...crosoft-and-htc-say-ok-to-xda-developers.html
http://tweakers.net/nieuws/59043/microsoft-xda-developers-illegaal-maar-we-pakken-ze-niet-aan.html
Thanks and regards
I think everybody is well aware of the pain that software thieves like DavinciDevelopers and Chris Burchett is putting us through. Until Google cleans up their market policy and starts implementing some basic regulation, these robbers are going to continue stomping upon the intellectual property of the developers here.
As we all know, software thieves almost always exploit a very simple loophole: they delete signatures off the apks and then publish them to the Android market as a paid app under a different name, and everyone will be none the wiser. They make a quick buck from unsuspecting users who chance across the app and purchase it, and thus they profit off the labours of hardworking developers here. It matters little to them whether a thousand or a million users pass by their application page without choosing to install it, because every single user conned into paying for the app is a profit to them.
I strongly recommend that developers who publish their APKs here insert a pop-up into their application that appears on the first boot, stating very clearly that this app is freely published here (insert thread URL) and instructing the user to immediately seek a refund if he has paid for it, and to report the issue to Google.
In other words, probably something along the lines of:
PLEASE TAKE NOTE
This app has been freely published on XDA-Developers, and can be found at .
If you have paid for this app, PLEASE SEEK A REFUND IMMEDIATELY AND REPORT THE SELLER TO GOOGLE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Additionally, you might also want to insert this in the "About" section of the app, if applicable.
Software thieves may be capable of deleting signatures, but they can't remove app elements. With users alerted to these dishonest actions, they will not only distrust them but send a flood of complaints pouring into Google, and sooner or later they'll have to pack up shop and think of actually doing something productive for society.
I'm sorry if this has already been suggested, but given the severity of this issue, I thought that it would be important to highlight this to all developers in here and out there. Not everyone may be aware of the dangers making the dive into application development, and fewer still might actually think of doing something about software pirates and intellectual property thieves.
Remember, this is only a short-term measure to help starve these software thieves of their ill-gotten gains (and perhaps also to create awareness for you and your thread). It does not preclude the usage of other anti-piracy measures, and it could be circumvented by the more tech-savvy of the thieves. In the long haul, we will still need to get Google to overhaul its Android Market policy to respect the intellectual property rights of developers.
Mods, please feel free to delete this or lock this thread if I am repeating what others have already proposed.
Madrenergic said:
Software thieves may be capable of deleting signatures, but they can't remove app elements. With users alerted to these dishonest actions, they will not only distrust them but send a flood of complaints pouring into Google, and sooner or later they'll have to pack up shop and think of actually doing something productive for society.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wanted to point out that this is not true. I've also seen people say that the package name cannot be changed. That's not true either.
A skilled developer could often easily delete app elements (Using obfuscation like proguard is a good deterrent). A crappy one might still manage, pirates do (Sure they'll add bugs in the process, but they don't care because they don't have to deal with the bug reports, you do).
A non-malicious example of hacking the internals of an app is how I enable long-press of Search on the Droid X/2 in my HomeSmack app (https://market.android.com/details?id=com.teslacoilsw.homesmack). Motorola hard-coded long-press of search to launch com.google.android.voicesearch/com.google.android.voicesearch.RecognitionActivity. So my solution replaces Google's VoiceSearch.apk with a modified one where I renamed Google's RecognitionActivity to RecognitionActivityReal and created my own RecognitionActivity. I kept RecognitionActivityReal functional so VoiceSearch can still be used.
It'd also be possible for the theifs to upload using your app signature. The disadvantage of course is that they can't modify it at all, even in the future.
News from the Portal of XDA.
http://www.xda-developers.com/annou...addition-to-sharing-policy-on-xda-developers/
Posted August 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm by egzthunder1
We are going to deviate a bit from our regularly scheduled programming to let you know about an upcoming change in the rules in the XDA forums. As time has gone by, our site has grown by leaps and bounds from what it was a couple of years ago. With a membership base of over 4.5 million registered users and an average of 35-40 thousand people active at any given time, we need to ensure that this place can offer the best possible environment for all people, both experienced developers and people who come here looking to learn about mobile devices. Because of this reason, the rules of our site need to be amended from time to time to accommodate the needs and wants of such a large user base, but without losing our principles and forgetting what XDA was founded on in the first place.
Just a bit of background: XDA was a website founded by hackers and developers for hackers and developers. People coming here shared one common goal, which was to get more and more out of their expensive toys and they did so by reverse engineering, creating new code to expand the device’s capabilities, and doing things with hardware that most people cannot do (mainly due to lack of knowledge or technical ability). The site prospered to what it is today because these very same people knew that their collective ideas and efforts would yield more results if they collaborated by sharing what they knew with others. More often than not, this resulted in fantastic feats such as the original XDA online kitchen, the very first port of WM5 to the mythical HTC Blue Angel, and many more accomplishments that are stored in the depths of XDA’s forums.
XDA-Developers has always been a place for sharing knowledge. People spend countless hours on their projects and give back to the community in several different forms, either by releasing the complete work to the community, or by sharing its source and methods by which the work was conceived. The latter allows others to pick up the work and tweak it to improve it (think of the Linux kernel for this to make sense). XDA’s own foundation is much like that as well. However, often times, this concept of the sharing of knowledge gets confused with the concept of sharing everything. If you frequent our site, you will have undoubtedly come across a few threads were discussions about sharing are on going. Essentially, some people demand for work to be released or even think that they can take as they please without following rules already present on our site. Likewise, people sharing their work sometimes have rather bizarre ways of doing so, which has a bad tendency to develop in what we like to call “dev wars”.
We (administrators and moderators of this site) truly believe that intellectual property (IP) is a very important part of what is done on xda-developers. As such, we cannot and will not support any kind of action which forces a developer to share their work with others if the developer does not wish to do so. A developer of anything has rights over their work and as such he/she can choose to do with it as he/she pleases (give it away, share the source, burn it, give it to an orphanage, or eat it for breakfast). We support whatever decision is taken by its developer. Having said that, over the years people have found what can only be categorized as a loophole in our current sharing policy, and thus people are forced to do things in exchange for permissions to use certain pieces of work by others.
After a long deliberation with the entire moderator and administrator staff, we are implementing the following addition to our sharing rule (Rule 12) – revisions are in bold:
12. Using the work of others.
If you are developing something that is based on the work of another Member, you MUST first seek their permission, and you must give credit to the member whose work you used. If a dispute occurs about who developed / created a piece of work, first try to settle the matter by private message and NOT in open forum. If this fails then you may contact a moderator with clear evidence that the work was created by you.
Convincing evidence will result in copied work being removed. If there is no clear evidence you created the work then in the spirit of sharing all work will remain posted on the forums.
As an addition, developers have the right to hold exclusivity over their work for as long as it is deemed necessary by the dev or freely share it. However, if the work is claimed as exclusive, it must remain as such. No selective sharing will be allowed (ie allowing certain people to use it and not others). Should the dev decide to start sharing the work with others, the work automatically becomes fair game for all to use.
In regards to permissions, same rules remain for this but if permission was already given, unless there is a very valid reason, it cannot be revoked (same applies to major updates on the work). Under that same premise, permissions cannot be denied unless the work is exclusive or under severe circumstances.
In plain English: If you want to keep your work exclusive, go for it. However, if you are going to share your work, do it fairly.
These rules apply to all software posted on XDA (including but not limited to ROMs, RUUs, apps, games, kernels, themes, icons, etc) unless that software comes with a license that waives these rules.
The problem with the aforementioned permissions is that the rule never really stated anything regarding continuity or longevity of said permission. On top of that, selective sharing creates a massive problem on our site as it tends to give place to kanging (unauthorized copying and/or redistribution of work), fights between devs (so called “dev wars”), and tons of time wasted on investigations, which normally involves a large number of people from our staff. This needed to stop as it was reaching critical mass and high levels of anxiety were generated for no apparent reason on something that should be a hobby.
So, if you are a developer on this site and would like to keep your work as something exclusive, we encourage you to do it. If you would like to freely give it out so that others can use it and make it better, we encourage you to do it as well. However, we will no longer accept claims from anyone who picks and chooses who gets what. As stated in the rule, you either share or keep, but if you do share, do it fairly. Favoritism has created a great divide in our site and our community and it is only hurting development as a whole. People focus more on pointing fingers than they do on trying to create original work.
Permissions should still be sought as a matter of common courtesy, much like the original rule stipulated. However, unless a valid reason is provided, a simple “no, you cannot have it” will not suffice, especially if the work is being shared with others and permissions are denied out of spite.
Lets all work towards a new, rejuvenated XDA that is based on the core principles placed by the site’s founding fathers. Sharing of knowledge is what brought many of us together on this site and we should strive as a community to keep it that way. Please share your thoughts on this.
Thank you for reading.
Sincerely,
XDA-Developers Administration Team
Dear fellow developers,
I wonder how log will it take before we will unite and take some serious action against Google Play practices. Maybe you heard about banned apps and blocked accounts. I got my app blocked today and believe me that it is VERY frustrating experience.
I can write what is wrong with Google Play developer support, but others already done that better: androidofvirtue. com/dear-google-play-we-need-to-talk-about-a-few-things/
Long story short, I feel that Google is abusing its dominant position on the market by providing little to no service to developers. Developers has no other option for app publishing as manufacturers are pre-installing its market to almost every device. Users have no option as they do not have any good alternative available.
Google must listen to us, we are helping them to get money and they are treating us like criminals without any explanations, without possibility to defend ourselves and without possibility to use other and maybe more reasonable app market.
As I am from the EU I wrote an appeal to European Commission to investigate the Google market position regarding the competition advantage abuse. I really hate do do it but currently I feel that I ran out of options and I hate more to feel so powerless against Google ignorance and stupidity of its app removal policies.
If you would like to help then write an appeal too. Contact is [email protected]
They must hear us!
what app did you make and whats the reason they removed it
The app was intended for automatic connection to open hotspots and wifi password sharing. It was possible to enter password for some wifi when you connected to it and it was then shared with other users. This function was explicitly named in the name of the app, description and under the password box directly in application, therefore every user was sharing the password by his will and he was well informed what he's doing. It was intended for sharing of passwords for various public places, cafés etc.
The funny thing is, that the app got approved on Amazon which is also very strict, but obviously employs sane people.
The reason for banning is here:
REASON FOR REMOVAL: Violation of section 4.4 of the Developer Distribution Agreement.
After a regular review we have determined that your app interferes with or accesses another service or product in an unauthorized manner. This violates the provision of your agreement with Google referred to above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that they think that I was phishing the passwords or something like that. Or maybe it is not ok to connect to open wifi automatically. Or maybe they think that if somebody share password for some hotspot then other people are not authorized to use it, however I feel that if I share password then I am giving implicit authorization to other users.
Thats the worst part -I simply don't know what is wrong. Can I fix it by adding some policy agreement? Should I ask user for some explicit permission to share the password and authorization for other users to use it? Isn't it a bit crazy?
The whole thing is not about me or my app. I just spend like month of evenings to build it and catch all the bugs, I made worse investments. What I really don't like is the Google attitude. They are keeping their developers in uncertainty, they are threatening them and they are behaving like the worst essence of corporations. We just need alternative store to become strong enough otherwise Google will not listen to us.
talkGov Main Site
Google Play Store
Amazon App Store
*This app is targeted mainly for those in the US*
Given the current state of political affairs, it seems we are in a time where technology should be better used to help keep more people aware.
In comes **talkGov**, a politics based social platform. The main gist is to develop a way for people to stay up-to-date with active legislation. It seems people are only aware once legislation is passed, so bringing this data to the forefront seemed like an issue we need to tackle.
Currently, you can track **Executive Orders**, Bills in the **House**, and Bills in the **Senate**. For each of these, an anonymous chat room is created to discuss the issue at hand, you can cast your own vote, view the votes of others, as well as view more details on the legislation. We have also included an anonymous 'forum' feed, where you can create topics of discussions allowing for more in-depth conversations.
We have longer terms goals that include automating sending feedback to your given representative, as well as setting up to allow you to track legislation on a more local level (state, city, etc).
We have also set up a topic specifically for tonights **State of the Union** address!
Feedback would be greatly appreciated! I'm here to answer any questions as they pop up.