EFF Press Release
File-sharing has enabled music fans from around the world to build the largest library of recorded music in history. While this should be cause for celebration, large record labels have spent the last three years attacking peer-to-peer (P2P) technology and the people who use it. But neither user-empowering technologies nor consumers' desire for easy access to digital music are evil. Targeting technologists and users is not addressing the real problem.
The problem is that there is no adequate system in place that allows music lovers access to their favorite music while compensating artists and copyright holders. It's time to start addressing this problem head on. In the past, we've used a system called "compulsory licensing" to reconcile copyright law with the benefits of new technologies like cable television and webcasting. This approach has drawbacks, but it's certainly better than the direction that the recording industry is taking us today.
Artists and labels are already making money from the Net without suing their fans:
* Wilco
* Janis Ian
* They Might Be Giants
* Matador Records
* Beggars Banquet
We need to face the fact that copyright law currently is broken. It is making criminals out of music lovers and technologists. College students are being sued, ISPs are being forced to rat out their customers, some members of Congress are calling for college students to be jailed for file sharing, the list goes on and on. But there are more than 60 million people in the United States alone who use file sharing--more than the number of people who voted for our current President. If we all band together and stand up for our rights, we can change the law.
* We recently won the Morpheus case (MGM v. Grokster), the first major court victory in the fight to save P2P.
* EFF members in every Congressional district in the United States helped defeat the Berman "P2P Vigilantism" Bill in 2002 by sending thousands of letters to Congress via our online Action Center.
* We are working to establish fair legal protections for privacy by helping ISPs like Verizon stand up to the recording industry .
* Lawmakers have, with our help, proposed legislation that would protect the anonymity rights of Internet users, including file- traders.
* EFF is trying to move the debate forward by educating peer-to-peer users with a national ad campaign and educational resources like this page.
* We are working with ISPs and attorneys to protect the civil liberties of Internet users with a service called SubpoenaDefense.org.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has been protecting your rights to use technology for over a decade. When Congress considered legalizing vigilante attacks on the computers of P2P users, we helped thousands of people contact their legislators, and the measure was defeated. Large record companies have been trampling privacy on the Internet, but EFF has been helping ISPs like Verizon stand up for their customers. We recently won a major legal victory for the makers of Morpheus, a popular file-sharing program.
http://www.eff.org/share/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bit Torrent in the Spotlight
File Sharing Tech Takes Center Stage
Karl Bode
Over a month ago, we wrote about the latest craze in filesharing, Bit Torrent; a technology that has since exploded in popularity. At the time of our initial report, many people had never heard of the technology. Many still haven't, but in just over a month, the usage of that application has exploded and can be seen everywhere. Several websites are now up (and stable) offering a myriad of guides to what's being shared out there. So what's so great about Bit Torrent? What's so different about it from any other filesharing application?
First, there's no searching services built into Bit Torrent. When you find a file, you're nearly guaranteed that it's going to contain the content you asked for. You very rarely (if ever) fall victim to the corrupted/fake file syndrome that you see on many other peer-to-peer programs, eliminating a major headache. There are, however, a few file-sharing applications (E.G. Shareaza) out there that will search for torrents, as well as many other popular file- sharing extensions, but you eventually fall victim to falsification of files again.
Secondly, BT rewards those who upload while they're downloading. As soon as you start downloading a part of your file, you immediately begin to start uploading what you have to other people around the internet. This means that files can be shared faster, because you don't have to wait for someone to have a completed file in order to download from them. There are ways to disable the uploading, but in situations where available upload bandwidth is limited, Bit Torrent will give the uploaders greater priority on their downloads than the leechers.
Some large websites, especially those distributing linux and linux components, have adopted the Bit Torrent technology. This has vastly increased download performance while decreasing bandwidth costs at the same time. Now, much smaller sites have the ability to spread their files across the internet without having to worry about hundreds and thousands of dollars of bandwidth charges each month. Even some IRC channels have been using BT to distribute their files. The anime scene was one of the first to start distributing files and so far it's been a huge success. More people can be served, and they can be served much faster.
Our filesharing forum has helped dozens of users to get online with Bit Torrent.
The technology's creator, Bram Cohen, says that his "attempts to promote BitTorrent for any specific purpose basically failed", but that he hopes the technology can still find a viable place on the internet. Cohen addressed several questions, including his feelings on piracy, in a recent Slashdot Interview.
So far the technology sounds great; but what's the catch? Many people still love the simplicity of a one-two click/GUI based search technology. There's no doubt that Bit Torrent requires a little more technical knowledge than many of the other filesharing applications. Also, as is being discussed in our forums, Bit Torrent doesn't make you invulnerable from the large agencies that try to crack down on copyright infringement and piracy.
You're just as likely to receive your fair share of attorney nasty-grams if you choose to downloaded pirated content. There's certainly no doubt that a good chunk of the files that are distributed are of the illegal type, but there is certainly a lot more practical and legal uses for it then most other file-sharing applications.
Bit Torrent doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon, and as more people use it, the technology should improve. This is one of the few file-sharing applications that provides a higher quality of performance for everyone as its user base increases.
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/29907
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Buyer Beware
eBay Security Chief Turns Website Into Arm of the Law
Jonah Engle
Speaking at a conference this winter on Internet crime, eBay.com's director of law enforcement and compliance, Joseph Sullivan, offered law- enforcement officials extensive access to personal customer information.
Founded in 1995 as a niche site for collectibles, eBay quickly grew into one of the Internet's largest websites, currently boasting 69 million daily visitors, who place an average of 7.7 million bids each day. The company, now valued at $29.6 billion, has become synonymous with online shopping, and is rapidly expanding overseas.
The talk, "Working with Law Enforcement," was delivered at the CyberCrime 2003 conference in Mashantucket, Connecticut. Sullivan, who left the Justice Department to become senior counsel for rules, trust and safety at eBay last year, told the audience of law-enforcement officials and industry executives that he didn't "know another website that has a privacy policy as flexible as eBay's," seemingly meaning that eBay acts particularly quickly to grant law enforcement extensive access to user information without regard to established legal procedures that protect individuals from civil rights abuses by the state.
Brags Sullivan, "If you are a law-enforcement officer, all you have to do is send us a fax with a request for information, and ask about the person behind the seller's identity number, and we will provide you with his name, address, sales history and other details--all without having to produce a court order." (eBay itself goes further than this, employing six investigators who are charged with tracking down "suspicious people" and "suspicious behavior.")
Seventy percent of eBay customers, as well as a significant portion of the rest of the online commercial world, make their purchases using (eBay- owned) Paypal, which provides clearing services for online financial transactions. Through Paypal, eBay has access to the financial records of tens of millions of customers. "If you contact me," said Sullivan to assembled law-enforcement authorities, "I will hook you up with the Paypal people. They will help you get the information you're looking for.... In order to give you details about credit-card transactions, I have to see a court order. I suggest that you get one, if that's what you're looking for."
Sullivan even offered to conscript eBay's employees in virtual sting operations: "Tell us what you want to ask the bad guys. We'll send them a form, signed by us, and ask them your questions. We will send their answers directly to your e-mail."
The attack on Internet privacy, like all civil liberties, has been growing since September 11 in the form of the Patriot Act and other federal and state- based legislation. Many provisions in the new laws undermine online privacy, and are in keeping with eBay's information-sharing policies. The Patriot Act allows ISPs to voluntarily hand over all "non-content" information to law enforcement without the need for a court order or subpoena. It also expands the category of information that law-enforcement figures can seek with a simple subpoena (no court review required) to include, among other things, IP addresses and credit card and bank account numbers.
While Sullivan's statements are the most extreme examples of the blurring between law enforcement and private corporations, eBay is not the only large online companies to have diluted its customer-privacy provisions. Traditionally, it was standard practice not to reveal customer information to third parties; now, however, Internet companies are making exceptions for the government. And massive online vendors from Travelocity to Amazon are using vague language to give themselves virtually complete discretion as to what customer information they will turn over to law-enforcement officials. Whether there will be a consumer backlash against these relaxed privacy policies remains to be seen.
If so, then companies like eBay may have to question their current willingness to become quasi-private law-enforcement agencies themselves. In liberal democracies it is assumed that criminal investigation and law enforcement are the sole domain of government. But the trend in the United States, as evidenced by eBay, among many companies, now sees huge private-sector commercial entities becoming, in effect, agents of law enforcement. It's an arrangement between government and the private sector, which Kozlovski calls the "invisible handshake"--Internet companies promise to open their files to law enforcement, while law enforcement insures that citizens stay in the dark. This new relationship raises crucial questions regarding civic life in the United States, and our rights as citizens and consumers. According to Sullivan, "when someone uses [eBay's] site and clicks on the 'I agree' button, it is as if he agrees to let us submit all of his data to the legal authorities..." Is this more than we bid for?
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030707&s=engle
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OGG For Neuros Bows
Jack Spratts
OOG Vorbis files can now be played for the first time on a portable “MP3” style player. That player, the Neuros, has the needed hardware to decode the more complex OGGs, considered by many serious listeners to be of a much higher quality than the more popular MP3s. This firmware release is for testers, but anyone can participate. In the works for months, final release originally scheduled for March has not been announced.
Instructions and download
here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Copying Troubles A Hiccup For Linux Festival
Richard Wood
CD duplication company Software Images has refused a request to copy 500 Linux software CDs for a Linux Installfest this Saturday, because of concerns the job would breach a contract with Microsoft and infringe intellectual property rights.
New Zealand Open Source Society member Eden McKee approached Software Images to have a CD replicated containing Linux variant Knoppix and Microsoft Office competitor Open Office.
But when he arrived with the materials last week, Software Images declined to do the job. Society president Peter Harrison then made a separate request for Software Images to do the work.
Correspondence obtained by the Herald shows Harrison was told by Software Images' account manager Dean Baker that "your content will be no problem to replicate".
But he then backtracked, saying there may be an issue due to a "replication agreement" with Microsoft.
On Thursday he said the replication was not a problem, but Software Image's e-fulfillment services (if they were required) could not be offered.
Yesterday Software Images declined to do the job, citing intellectual property concerns.
When questioned by the Herald on Friday, Software Images chief executive Allan Morton said his company's wariness of Linux was due to legal action between SCO and Linux over intellectual property issues.
"[The media] has made us aware that there is litigation around this software."
Morton said it was the customer's obligation to show they had the necessary rights and his company could only replicate "properly licensed and owned intellectual property content".
Harrison said the SCO lawsuit was not about copyright.
"There are no allegations that there are any copyright violations in Linux," he said, adding that the Open Source community was committed to making sure intellectual property rights were respected.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...toryID=3510183
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CanOnline Global Media, Inc. Announces Copy- proof CD Release
Prepares Entertainment Industry for New Content Protection Technology and New Revenue Opportunities
Press Release
CanOnline Global Media, Inc. ('CanOnline'), through its operating division KaOzz Entertainment Group ('KaOzz') today announced a distribution agreement with the Seattle based rock group, Underride. Utilizing a proprietary content protection technology and distribution method, KaOzz will revolutionize the distribution of copyrighted content and the associated revenues generated by the sale of original creative material.
Saturday, July 12, 2003, KaOzz and Underride will introduce the World's First Digital Copy-proof CD(SM) at a music industry event at the infamous "Whisky a Go-Go" in Los Angeles, CA. During the "Cruefest 2003" event, Underride will distribute encrypted copies of its first album, "Horsepower Kills," in anticipation of the upcoming August 4, 2003 Peer-to-Peer (P2P) release of its new Extended Play CD, "No Tomorrow," mixed and produced by the famed rock producer, Toby Wright. Utilizing the Company's patent pending Security Protocol Integration technology (SPi(TM)), Underride's music releases will be protected from unauthorized copying and redistribution in an online environment.
SPi(TM) is the first release in a series of new technologies from CanOnline to be offered under the brand "KaOzz Unleashed(TM)." The technologies under this brand are designed to protect digital content from copyright infringement and preserve "fair use" while opening access to new revenue opportunities for artists, distributors, music labels and other content owners. SPi Certified(TM) content will be released directly into Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing environments and tracked throughout all generations of distribution while offering every user the opportunity to listen and buy music using the KaOzz Digital Distribution Network(TM).
This release may contain forward-looking statements on reasonable management expectations of certain events and projections. These forward-looking statements involve a high degree of uncertainty and inherent risks. Therefore subsequent results after the date this news was released may vary and such variations may be material.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...2003,+09:05+AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Morpheus Responds To Recording Industry's Legal Threat Against Internet File Sharing Users
Press Release
StreamCast Networks Inc., the developers of the popular peer-to- peer file-sharing software, Morpheus, today announced its support of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) initiative, "Let the Music Play." When visiting the
www.morpheus.com website or opening the Morpheus peer-to-peer application, users will be able to send an instant and automatic e-mail message to their Congressional Representatives demanding to keep file-sharing legal and to change the US copyright law so that artists get paid. This action is in response to the Recording Industry Association of America's recent decision to legally prosecute thousands of peer- to-peer file sharing users.
"We do not condone copyright infringement, but we will not sit idly by and watch the recording industry trample on the rights and privacy of individuals," said Michael Weiss, CEO of StreamCast Networks. "While the recording industry calls file-sharers pirates, we have a much stronger name for them -- VOTERS -- and we will do whatever it takes to help them have their voices heard."
Additionally, an updated version of the Morpheus file-sharing software is being prepared for release next week. Morpheus 3.2 will provide users with increased security and anonymity to protect users privacy.
"Today, more U.S. citizens use file-sharing software than voted for President Bush," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Fred von Lohmann. "Congress needs to spend less time listening to record industry lobbyists and more time listening to the more than 60 million Americans who use file-sharing software today."
The Morpheus peer-to-peer file sharing software product allows millions of people to connect directly to each other and to search, share and download all types of digital media files, including audio, video, games, images, software and documents as provided by the owners of their creative works, as well those available in the public domain. Over 112 million copies of Morpheus have been downloaded by users making it the third most popular downloaded software in the history of the Internet according to CNET's download.com. Morpheus is available as a free download at
www.morpheus.com.
http://www.mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=53925
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Consumer Alert: Copy Controls Crackdown
Battle rages on several fronts, but technology offers answers for both sides.
Frank Thorsberg
Multimedia lovers find themselves caught in a digital vise these days, as Hollywood tightens its copyright controls on movies, games, and music on DVDs and CDs--most recently squeezing customers accused of copyright infringement in court. But even well-meaning consumers are feeling pressured (and baffled) by conflicting messages about what is allowed. Meanwhile, the courts and Congress mull legal answers to the ongoing digital rights struggle.
The ISP Verizon Online recently buckled and gave the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) the names of four customers suspected of downloading large quantities of music from file-sharing sites in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. More than 40 privacy groups and ISPs are joining Verizon in fighting procedural aspects of the copyright holders' demands. But it is clear that customer privacy has sustained a hit.
The RIAA also recently settled with four university students who ran Napster-like file-sharing networks campuswide. Each agreed to pay $12,000 to $17,000, although the trade group had originally sought up to $150,000 per song. The RIAA warns that it may not settle on such lenient terms in the future.
For the moment, peer-to-peer networks sporting a copy-for-free business model continue to thrive despite being mired in lawsuits. But the line demarcating the lawful use of file-sharing technology may be shifting.
In April, a federal judge in Los Angeles dismissed an RIAA suit against file-sharing services Grokster and StreamCast Networks (maker of Morpheus), holding that peer-to-peer services are not liable for illegal file-trading over their networks. The RIAA is appealing the decision.
"That's the most important victory of the last three or four months," says Cory Doctorow, outreach director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Doctorow notes that it reinforces the Supreme Court's so-called Betamax decision of 1984, in which the court refused to ban legitimate products or services simply because they could also be used for illicit activities.
Even the act of copying DVD movies has a chance to prevail in court: 321 Studios is taking on Hollywood by claiming the right to market its DVD copying software. Its preemptive lawsuit against the major movie studios challenges the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's constitutionality. At the heart of the case--taken under advisement by a federal judge in May--is consumers' right to make back-up copies of DVDs.
Congress offers the public little hope of quick action, but copy-control legislation is nevertheless in the spotlight.
Several pieces of legislation would require labeling of CDs or DVDs that use digital rights management technology (also known as DRM). Other proposed measures would affirm consumers' right to back up digital material or to donate it, and try to balance fair use and copyright.
Also, the DMCA is undergoing its periodic review, facing several complaints about its regulation of copyright.
Ultimately, technology provides new opportunities for both vendors and users. Only 20 years ago, Hollywood feared piracy with the advent of VCRs--but instead prerecorded videotape has become a lucrative market. Today, "consumers want new ways to get content easily," says Kirby Kish, director of digital technology for copy protection developer Macrovision.
Microsoft is licensing Macrovision technology for its Windows Media Player. The technology permits "dual sessions" on a disc, so that users can play the CD in a standard audio player but also can play a DRM-protected digital version in another device. Alternatively, vendors could stuff the extra session with additional material.
"They're still playing with a couple of different models, like bonus songs and other extra content," says Yankee Group consumer technology analyst Ryan Jones.
As another example, this fall Disney is testing DVD discs that become unreadable after 48 hours of play.
Whatever the final outcome of the DRM wars, today's digital technology is sufficiently flexible to give copyright holders many options on packaging content, Kish says.
"We really think of it as an enabling, not restrictive, technology," Kish says. He believes that success is a matter of educating both sides about the different methods possible.
The methods all share one thing in common, however: Users will have to pay.
Whether it's okay--or illegal--to make back-up versions of copy-protected DVD movies may be contested in court for some time to come.
But a pending federal ruling didn't stop scrappy 321 Studios from releasing a new, streamlined version of its program for copying even the longest movies onto a single disc. The earlier version, priced at $99, nearly always required splitting the movie between two discs, but it copies all of the DVD's data; DVD X Copy Express copies only the movie and soundtrack.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,111329,00.asp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vivendi Pares Bids, Eliminates Davis
Oil tycoon's bid rejected; music label won't be sold
Russ Britt
Vivendi Universal's board has dropped one bidder from the running in the contest for its U.S. entertainment assets, and it has decided to keep control of its music labels, people familiar with the situation said Tuesday.
Los Angeles oil tycoon Marvin Davis has been eliminated from the bidding, leaving five parties still in the running, according to sources close to Vivendi (V: news, chart, profile). Davis' proposal, the first of six to be revealed in the months-long shopping of the entertainment properties, fell short of Vivendi's price range, sources said.
It was unclear whether Davis, the one-time head of Twentieth-Century Fox studios, would try to come back with a better offer. A spokesman declined to comment.
The remaining suitors include a private group led by former Universal chief Edgar Bronfman, John Malone's Liberty Media (L: news, chart, profile), Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM: news, chart, profile), General Electric Co.'s (GE: news, chart, profile) NBC unit and Viacom Inc. (VIA.B: news, chart, profile) (VIA: news, chart, profile) Viacom is an investor in MarketWatch.com, publisher of this report.
Vivendi issued a statement saying it was still reviewing the bids, adding that it hasn't ruled out an initial public offering of the assets, which include movie and television properties along with theme parks.
It is believed that Davis was bidding $13 billion for all of Vivendi's U.S. assets, including the music labels, and would take on another $5 billion in debt.
Other bidders who made an offer for the music assets were offering around $15 billion, sources close to Vivendi said. But these people said there also were other concerns about the Davis offer, including how the new entity would be run. Also of concern was his age -- he's 77 -- and his health, sources said.
Vivendi officials have said they may well retain an interest in the entertainment assets through a minority stake, which reportedly is how most of the proposals were structured. For that reason, the company is paying close attention to how the units will be run once they change hands.
In any case, Vivendi would not be out of the entertainment business completely. Sources said Vivendi will retain its industry-leading music business, a decision that may have been a factor working against Davis' bid. Sources close to Davis had said he coveted the music division for its strong cash flow.
Despite all its pluses, the Universal Music Group has been hit hard by the spread of file sharing of online music. That has cut into Universal's sales along with other music labels.
Bidders say that Vivendi originally asked for offers for just the studios, theme parks, television and cable assets, and video games. Some suitors submitted offers for the music group simply to follow the lead of others to be sure they weren't overshadowed by them.
But it appears Vivendi believes its music business is in a trough and due for a rebound.
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/stor...7D&siteid=mktw
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rants & Raves
Date: 06/26/2003 07:40 AM
From: George
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
What I just can't understand is why the RIAA is so uptight about sharing files ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
Why doesn't it go after pawnshops that resell CDs? It's losing money there, isn't it? Or how about those that resell music via outfits like eBay? Better yet, why doesn't the RIAA go after businesses like Hastings that buy back used CDs and then resell them?
Those secondary sellers (pawn shops, eBay and others) are making money off someone else's work, without paying them additional royalties. File sharers are doing nothing more than trading baseball cards.
It seems that the RIAA employs some sort of double standard here. If it claims it's losing money because of file sharing, then what it should really look at is the homologous crap it continues to shelve each week.
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 08:05 AM
From: Rich
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
What I want to know is, what happens to the poor guy on a fast DSL link that has been hacked and is being used as a "bounce" server? The illegally traded files are on his machine and he doesn't even know it, when all of a sudden the RIAA's jack-booted thugs bust down his door and haul him off to the slammer ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
As an artist myself, I highly disapprove of copyright violation, but Senator Hatch's "blow up their computers" scheme, and this RIAA "payola or lawsuit" approach both seem overly draconian to me. I'd much rather see the artists get paid fairly for their work, and the artists suing those who are taking food off of their tables.
To me, the RIAA is nothing more than a bunch of thugs with expensive lawyers who are robbing both the artists and the consumers to feed their own pocketbooks.
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 08:51 AM
From: Johnny
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
Unbelievable. Now they are going to sue their customers? And they wonder why we swap files with such glee. Stupid bastards ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
When are they going to realize that sharing information is the nature of the network, just like evolution is the nature of, well, nature. No matter how many fingers and toes they stick into the holes of what is left of their ancient levy/business model, the industry refuses to realize the levee is already broken and they are chest-deep in their own irrelevance.
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 10:11 AM
From: TC
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
How can they legally target "supernodes"? In case they aren't aware of it, in Kazaa, if you act as a node, you have no control over what passes through. And many things are legal to share ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
The RIAA apparently seems to think it is the law. Well it isn't. I think it's about time the RIAA gets investigated for ripping off song artists and customers.
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 12:26 PM
From: Faast
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
This will, of course, ensure that the animosity against the recording industry grows. Once the first lawsuit is announced, the recording industry will be as popular as Satan himself. The only thing we can be assured of is that programmers will find another way ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 03:05 PM
From: Roj
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
1) They don't have the balls ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
2) They don't have the cash to waste, despite how deep their pockets are. All it will take is one precedent set in a small principality in Europe to derail them -- as has already happened in the MPAA DVD efforts.
3) They don't have the savvy and technology to win this war -- in fact they have already lost.
My advice to them? "Take your lumps and concentrate your efforts on giving your customers a fair shake -- a concept that has been demonstrably alien to you for over 40 years. The honeymoon is over, dahling -- now earn your keep."
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 05:35 PM
From: Benj
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
This is the perfect time for the broadband ISPs to stand up to this type of harassment ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003). We pay far too much for DSL for them to sit back. The only reason most people get broadband connections is to share files.
The music industry is dead. They are now going after the fans who enjoy their product to drag down with them. Very sad.
- - -
Date: 06/26/2003 05:38 PM
From: Bryan
Subject: Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?
The users are the ones with the true power. The RIAA is another form of Big Brother. If hackers were truly as strong as they claim, they would empty the RIAA's collective bank accounts and disperse the funds to every user on every P2P in the world ("Are You in RIAA's Cross Hairs?" June 26, 2003).
- - -
http://www.wired.com/news/rants/0,2350,59458,00.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ars Technica Newsdesk
Emergence of a Pro-P2P Lobby
Ken "Caesar" Fisher
With the threat of lawsuits being targeted at individuals via the RIAA, it's become rather clear that the community needs a voice to represent itself in what is becoming an increasingly one-sided power struggle over fair use. To that end, a number of P2P companies are coming together both in the United States and in Europe to form a pro- P2P lobby.
The initiative won't stop in Washington D.C., said Pablo Soto, a Madrid-based developer of file-sharing technology Blubster. European firms are forming a lobby group in Europe with plans to work with the U.S. group. "We are joining forces to make the U.S. Congress and the European Union listen to us and the hundreds of millions of voters who use our services," Soto told Reuters. Soto said details on the coalition will be released as soon as late July. He would not say if the group had hired a lobbyist, nor how many file-sharing firms were involved.
No one (serious) is wanting to argue that all music should be freely and legally downloadable via the 'net. However, the gross characterization of P2P users as "pirates" has caught on so well that the majority of the public believes that sharing files of any kind is synonymous with piracy, and no one even bothers to think for a second about whether or not some users are downloading songs that they already own on CD. The way the RIAA would have it, mix tapes never existed and no one ever recorded songs off the radio. No, all of this is new and evil, and the RIAA doesn't even have to produce demonstrable proof that they're losing a dime. A lobby group could, at least in theory, push the RIAA (and the MPAA for that matter) to drop its draconian tone, and give the public some real data.
http://arstechnica.com/archive/news/1056999100.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An Apple Down The Hatch
Douglas Wolk
When most people propose technology that can destroy other people's computers remotely, they're called cyberterrorists. When Orrin Hatch calls for that technology, as he did June 17, he's just doing his job as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In a hearing on peer-to-peer systems, Hatch suggested that copyright owners should be freed from liability for damaging computers. If users exchange files online and ignore two warnings, "then I'm all for destroying their machines. . . . There's no excuse for anyone violating copyright laws," he said. By "copyright laws," he appears to mean exclusively the ones that cover music and film; the entertainment business has been the fourth largest industry among Hatch's campaign contributors over the past six years, and he has never proposed, say, destroying photocopy machines on which newspapers or books are copied. (The next day, Hatch offered a non-clarification clarification: "I do not favor extreme remedies—unless no moderate remedies can be found.")
But hardware isn't all the Recording Industry Association of America has been trying to destroy lately. On April 3, the RIAA filed high-profile, high-ticket lawsuits against four students who had built search engines that could be used for file-sharing at three universities; it subsequently settled the suits quickly and brutally. At Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Jesse Jordan agreed to pay the RIAA $12,000 —his entire savings—and Aaron Sherman got hit for $17,500. Daniel Peng at Princeton settled for $15,000, as did Joseph Nievelt of Michigan Tech.
The point of this exercise, of course, wasn't for the RIAA to sue people for their life savings ($12,000 is chump change to them), or even to collect $97.8 billion—the total of the initial suit against Nievelt alone (at $150,000 per song) and yes, that's a b. It was to pick on small fry, to make them fold quickly instead of taking it to the courts, regardless of the legal merit of the lawsuits. (Arguably, since at least a couple of the defendants' programs were search engines rather than Napster-like networks, they were protected under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act against claims for "contributory infringement.") Ultimately, it was to create a chilling effect for file traders —and for service providers and schools, and anybody who uses their networks for any reason. Eight days after the RIAA announced its lawsuits against the students, Columbia University sent out a message threatening to cut off network access for copyright violations and pointing users to instructions for disabling several peer-to-peer programs.
Technology remains three steps ahead of the recording industry anyway. Even as Apple's new iTunes Music Store was getting ecstatic press last month, savvy users discovered that iTunes 4.0, the program that makes it work, could be used to share music between users across the Internet. Apple promptly released an "upgraded" version, 4.0.1, which limited sharing capability to local networks; shortly thereafter, maverick programmer James Speth released iCommune 401(ok), which makes iTunes think the rest of the Internet is on its local network. But don't expect the RIAA to pick on Apple; expect them to pick on you.
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0326/sotc.php
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nielsen SoundScan To Track Download Sales
Matthew Benz
Nielsen SoundScan will announce today (July 2) that it will begin compiling sales of permanent music downloads. SoundScan -- a sister company of Billboard.com -- will include these sales in its "non- traditional" category, which also includes Internet, mail-order and concert-venue sales of physical music.
Sales of downloaded singles and albums will be included in Billboard's charts for those configurations. In addition, SoundScan will offer a new download tracks chart.
Sales data initially will come from Apple's iTunes Music Store, Pressplay, MusicNet, Liquid Audio and Listen.com's Rhapsody service. Digital music that is available only via subscription will not be included.
In the past, SoundScan has occasionally included sales of downloads in the "non-traditional" category, says Rob Sisco, president of Nielsen Music and COO of Nielsen Entertainment's East Coast operations. But he says that in the last few months, the volume of download sales has increased enough "to be able to present the numbers and have them be meaningful in terms of trending and tracking information." Sisco declines to quantify download sales volume.
For the week ending June 29, the top downloaded track was "Crazy in Love" by Beyonce featuring Jay-Z. This was followed by Kelly Clarkson's "Miss Independent," Coldplay's "Clocks," matchbox twenty's "Unwell" and Clay Aiken's "This Is the Night."
http://www.billboard.com/bb/daily/ar...ent_id=1925753
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MEPs Anxious To Avoid Us-Style Software Patenting
David Minto
An EU directive meant to harmonise patenting rules applying to “computer-implemented inventions” across member states has been taken off of ‘fast track’ legislative proceedings because MEPs have claimed it may bring in a US-style patent regime.
Critics of the proposed new regulations say that the terminology of the current proposal is sufficiently ambiguous to have a detrimental effect on European small businesses and open-source software developers, to the tremendous disadvantage of consumers. Some argue that allowing software to be patented, already the situation in the US, is comparable enabling a monopoly on the ideas in novels. An anti-software-patenting petition organised by lobbying group EuroLinux has already garnered more than 150,000 signatures, whilst 30 senior European scientists recently spoke out strongly against the legislation.
The European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (Juri) had approved the legislation on the 17 June, making only minor modifications before fast-tracking it to the parliament itself for a proposed vote on 30 June. MEPs complained, however, that the draft resolution was too controversial to be properly considered in only ten days, and have moved a vote back to the 1 September.
Andrew Duff MEP, a UK Liberal Democrat and keen critic of the proposal, said in a statement that "Blocking competition and free creativity in software is not good for consumers or cultural diversity, and it is a serious problem for the European economic fabric." Writing in The Guardian earlier this month, however, Arlene McCarthy, a UK Labour MEP guiding the patents proposal through Parliament, argued that the legislation would "provide legal certainty for European software inventors" and commented that "It is time some of the 'computer rights campaigners' got real."
http://www.europemedia.net/shownews.asp?ArticleID=16916
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Over 200m European Internet Users By 2004, survey
David Minto
Europe's online population reached 184m by the end of 2002 and will surge beyond 200m by the end of 2004, according to a new study from IDC.
The survey, which covers internet usage and eCommerce in Western, Central and Eastern Europe between 2002- 2006, maintains that Germany is going to be the locus of change as the European internet epicentre moves east, from the UK to the accession states. Commercial connectivity is recognised as a significant driving factor here as strong Germanic ties with the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) region, particularly Poland (Germany is Poland's premier trading partner), will have a knock-on effect for viable IP-based services/providers in neighbouring countries.
Today, clear contrasts exist between the European regions and countries, the report suggests. While the West has grown to include over 43 per cent of the population in 2002, the CEE region reflects an internet population of just 13 per cent.
Businesses or organisations have led the way in internet access; a trend that is particularly pronounced in the CEE. As such, B2B eCommerce has manifested itself across Europe. "The initial wave of B2B eCommerce was started by visionary “sell-side” organisations that explored the internet’s abilities as a sales channel. However, roles are now reversed, and purchasing organisations currently drive B2B eCommerce growth," said Daniel O'Boyle Kelly, research director at IDC's European internet expertise centre.
The study argues that once behaviour change and adoption, whether from a buy side or sell side, is triggered and gains momentum, the effects on internet commerce will be dramatic. This is reflected in the numbers, where by 2006 IDC believes total eCommerce in Central and Eastern Europe will reach E2.1bn (USD2.4bn), while Western Europe will exceed E226bn (USD261bn).
http://www.europemedia.net/shownews.asp?ArticleID=16906
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CDs In Soft Drink Cup Caps
AP
Pop singer Rachel Farris is far from a household name, but a new spin on marketing could change that.
Her independent record label is embedding mini-CDs in the lids of soft drink cups at movie theaters nationwide and a few theme parks.
Featuring not just a pair of songs that can be heard on regular CD players but also video clips and other content viewable on computers, the so-called enhanced CDs make TV and radio seem passe.
In all, 4.8 million of the CDs promoting Farris will be distributed in a monthlong campaign that began Friday, dolling up -- or cluttering, depending on your perspective -- drink containers at the Regal Entertainment Group's 530 theaters in 36 states and at two Universal Studios theme parks.
(The straw fits through the hole in the middle of the disc.)
The theaters will also show a three-minute video of Farris before movies.
"The whole industry is in such a state of flux," said Bill Edwards, whose Big3 Records is financing the Farris promotion. "It's kind of a tough situation, especially for an independent label, to get music played, because we're vying against everyone else in the world."
The marketing push by the St. Petersburg, Florida-based label is unusual for a new artist.
"We know it's a gamble, but we think it's a very good gamble," Edwards said.
LidRock, the company making the discs, pinned costs at several million dollars. The CDs have two of Farris' songs, lyrics, an interview and a video of the singer.
Using such CDs to market musicians is fairly new, but its time has come, said Tena Clark, CEO of Pasadena-based Disc Marketing, which has designed enhanced CD marketing campaigns for companies like United Airlines, Coca-Cola and Victoria's Secret.
Clark said she has received inquiries in recent weeks from both veteran and budding recording artists, but hasn't inked any deals yet.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/0....ap/index.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Apple on Speed
Sandy McMurray
Apple's computers are about to get a dramatic speed boost, and Mac fans couldn't be happier.
Starting in August, a new 64-bit processor co-developed by Apple and IBM, will bring unprecedented speed and performance to the Mac platform. According to Apple CEO Steve Jobs, the new PowerMac G5 is "the world's fastest personal computer" -- faster than any system using Intel's Pentium 4 or Xeon processors.
For several years, Apple fans have watched in dismay as the "megahertz gap" widened between PCs and Macs. Monday's introduction of a truly speedy Macintosh was thrilling news for Mac users. With the PowerMac G5, it appears that Apple and IBM have actually surpassed current Intel technology and built a platform that has "legs" for the future.
The PowerMac G5 is definitely built for speed. The G5 processor can handle more than 10 times as many simultaneous instructions as Motorola's G4 processor (215 versus 16). The "pipes" that take data to and from the G5 "brain" have been redesigned for better performance.
The 1 GHz front-side bus, for example, is six times faster than the fastest G4 system available today. Apple's other design choices (AGP 8x Pro graphics, PCI-X slots, Serial ATA, USB 2 and FireWare 800) reflect this need for speed. For all the geeky details, see
http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html.
What really matters, of course, is real world performance. Apple made its case on Monday with impressive benchmark test results and a series of live demos that pitted a dual-processor 2.0 GHz PowerMac G5 test system against two Intel-based computers: a 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 and a 3.06 GHz dual-processor Xeon system.
Marketing demos are always chosen to highlight a product's best features. Past Apple "bake-off" tests have usually featured Adobe Photoshop doing difficult things with graphics, which played to the Mac's strengths. This time, however, the demos highlighted graphic performance (Photoshop), animation (Luxology), pro audio (Logic) and large-scale numerical problem solving (Mathematica).
Wolfram Research co-founder Theo Gray concluded his demo of Mathematica with this observation: "The competition for [the PowerMac G5] is not PCs anymore. The competition for our customers is high-end workstations that cost twice as much. And it's faster than all of them, too."
It would be ridiculous to claim that the new PowerMac G5 will put Intel, AMD or Microsoft out of business, but I think the personal computer landscape shifted on Monday. The old debate about Mac versus PC has been revived, and the Mac side has a lot more ammunition today than it had last week.
http://www.globetechnology.com/servl...ry/Technology/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wanadoo Is Caching Your KaZaA
Jan Libbenga
Subscribers of Wanadoo Netherlands can download MP3s and videos twice as fast, thanks to a PeerCache set up by the company for users of KaZaA and other peer to peer networks.
Wanadoo's Dutch subsidiary has stored 0.8 terabyte of frequently asked files on local servers, and this cache reduces the volume of international traffic by 25 per cent or more, according to Wanadoo business development manager Lammert van Raan. Most Wanadoo subs in Europe are set to introduce PeerCache.
PeerCache is developed by Joltid, the Swedish company behind the P2P content distribution platform FastTrack, which most file sharing companies now use. Joltid was established by Niklas Zennström, co- founder of KaZaA.
With PeerCache installed, peers transparently query a local temporary cache. Only when a file is unavailable, KaZaA will get it from other users in the network. This means that hundreds of illegal files are stored locally, albeit in a barely recognisable form as 'data objects'.
PeerCache is highly controversial. Typically, files are only swapped between users; there is no central server for downloading. The KaZaA network merely points users to files contained on other PCs. For this reason The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) last week changed legal tack, threatening to file lawsuits against thousands of individual file traders.
"We believe the cache is legal," van Raan said. "The US, Australia and European Union have recently amended their copyright laws to permit temporary caching." Wanadoo also looked carefully at the recent Grokster and Morpheus cases. Neither companies are liable for piracy, a US federal judge ruled earlier this year.
Other Dutch ISPs have also experimented with the PeerCache, but stopped using it citing disappointment with the results, rather than legal fears. "We continued working with Joltid to improve the technology," says Van Raan. "The traffic reduction has improved dramatically."
http://www.theregister.com/content/6/31532.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So Sue Me
Bob Parks
http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_5981.shtml
Better put your heads under the covers and hope the bogeyman will go away!
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is pissed off.
"We'd much rather spend time making music then dealing with legal issues in courtrooms. But we cannot stand by while piracy takes a devastating toll on artists, musicians, songwriters, retailers and everyone in the music industry." – RIAA president Cary Sherman
They have some nerve.
Sure, file swapping is technically stealing. But the record business has ripped off its’ own musicians and consumers for decades, and when the industry starts losing money, it’s time to get payback. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror first before publicly threatening to track down and prosecute petty thieves when they’ve been ripping off everybody so a few non-talented suits could suck off the artistic teat of legends long since gone.
Full Disclosure
Besides being an opinion columnist, I am a songwriter, producer, percussionist, synthesizer programmer and have been since 1979. Still waiting for my big break….
Song Rippers
For a long time, record companies screwed older musicians by charging them for, among other things, the recording sessions (to be paid for off the top of sales), new instruments, food, drink, and any other expenses they could. The companies sometimes paid those musicians a one-time few hundred dollars (big money to broke musicians in the 50’s) and pocketed millions in sales made to this day with digital re-releases and re-packaged box sets.
“Online music piracy through illegal file-sharing is killing the business as we know it today, and songwriters like myself won't be able to write the songs if there's no way for us to make a living. It's the only job I know how to do!” – Lamont Dozier, legendary songwriter (Stop! In The Name Of Love)
Nowadays, record companies charge musicians for recording sessions, even though the companies keep the master tapes, convince them of the need to embrace MTV and make a few $2-5 million promotional videos. The band later has to re-pay those costs first off the top before they see any money. Some companies even charge the artist for the costs of promotion, which can also be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. And when all is said and done, the artist is lucky to receive even 10% of the record sales.
Some record companies have what are known as “9-5 composers” whose sole job it is to write hit songs according to “formulas”. Some are paid a “kill fee” and some get royalties as well. This is money that doesn’t make it to the artists, and some groups are required to use some of these composers even though they are quite capable of writing their own material. This keeps the mortgages paid for friends and relatives of senior record company personnel. The artists may come and go, but do a search of some obscure composer names and see all the different places they appear….
“If you create something and then someone takes it without your permission, that is stealing. It may sound harsh, but it is true.” – Mary J. Blige, multi-Platinum award winning artist
I find it amusing: today’s R&B and hip-hop artists lecturing us about obeying the law. How many of them illegally carry guns, beat their girlfriends (the ones they artistically refer to as “bitches” and “hos”), shoot their rivals on the street and in the studio, beat up company employees, commit gang rape, and more. When was the last R&B, hip-hop award ceremony that didn’t need to have the police called?
Content
Why would someone break the law and download a song rather than pay for the CD? Simple; with the exception of maybe two high-profile songs, the other 15 or so probably suck. And the CD still costs near $20.
Today’s compact disks hold up to 80 minutes whereas yesterday LP’s held only 46. There’s almost twice the room to fill and today’s talent, to be quite generous, is questionable.
“Downloading… it’s petty theft for those that don’t have the guts to go ahead and shoplift.” – Marcus Hummon, songwriter and playwright
I remember paying $14 for Stevie Wonder’s “Songs In The Key Of Life”: a double album with a bonus 45 tucked in a sleeve. There was a line around the corner and it was an album everyone had to have. Now why would someone want to pay an additional $6 today for Brittany Spears or Justin Timberlake?
A few short decades ago, you could play an entire album at a party. Almost any Stones album, Earth, Wind & Fire, The Eagles, K.C. & The Sunshine Band, The J. Geils Band, Harold Melvin & The Blue Notes, Boston, The Ohio Players, and lots more.
Watch your average commercial today. Are they playing a hit song from last year or 20 years ago? I’ll bet anyone out there over 30 can name 10 hits from the 70’s and 80’s. The 90’s get a bit murky…. Can someone name me 10 hits from last year? How about five?
As I’ve pointed out on many previous columns, this is what it takes to be a songwriter today:
1. Sit down and create a song from dead air. Tough, but most satisfying.
2. Go to Tower Records, find a Rhino Records’ Greatest Hits of the 60’s or 70’s CD, take a song painstakingly written using Method 1, extract an eight measure “hook” from a song, loop it indefinitely, and get some rapper to talk over it in an attempt to “make it his own”. The more profane, violent, and juvenile the sexual references, the better.
The record companies aim their product at kids 14-17 (the teen demographic). One problem guys: this demographic, for the most part, ain’t got no money. The music industry is relying on a hard sell off MTV hopefully (for them) resulting in persistent whining and nagging from spoiled-brat kids to get the $20 from parents who know better.
What do parents know? They’re just the ones who have to listen to their kids play one song over and over and over, later just to leave that CD face up on the floor to be run over by a skateboard.
“Without copyright protection and the royalties it insures, artists and songwriters will have no long-term bankable financial security whatsoever.” – Hugh Prestwood, number-one Country Music hit songwriter
Personally, I would love to be writing and performing songs for a living. I would much rather be on stage slowly going deaf, but taking in the adrenaline rush of playing to thousands of people who are singing my song along with the band. I’d much rather be doing that instead of eking out a living, and writing columns that I feel a passion for but have yet to see any monetary reward.
Bottom line, Hugh: no one owes me a living in the music business just because I write songs. One small suggestion: if the record industry wants to make more money, MAKE A BETTER PRODUCT!
We, the adults in this equation, who give the our brats the money so Christina Aguilera can over-sing every line, pierce her genitals, and tell us how cool she is, bought a lot of the music we download before.
We ditched our records since y’all stopped making turntables. We re-bought a lot of our old record collections on CD, so we really bought those albums at least twice. But the industry expects us to pay more for music with inferior content and album art that you need a magnifying glass to read even if you still have 20/20 vision.
“It hurts artists, songwriters and everyone else who brings music to the public, and we will hold those who engage in this activity accountable.” – RIAA spokeswoman Amy Weiss
The music industry had better watch out whom they threaten. Those who are doing the majority of the downloading are kids with little or no earning power. It’s the parents who have to deal with the out-of- control “artists” who have our daughters dressing like porn stars, and our sons like thugs.
The music industry produces videos that portray young girls doing almost obscene gyrations while being eye-candy for young males cruising the streets while flashing gang signs. When a crime is committed, the industry is the first to deny responsibility.
Now, they produce garbage and issue ultimatums when they can’t meet a bottom line.
Good music sells. People will want a pristine version, physically hold it, enjoy the album art, and play it over again. An mp3 is instant gratification, but it’s a lot better than being made to look the fool again: buying an expensive CD with one or two good songs on it, and a near worthless trade-in value.
Only a dumb business would sue its’ customers to force them to buy more of a lousy product.
The record industry is dumb. So sue me.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They Know Where You Are
New technologies can pinpoint your location at any time and place. They promise safety and convenience—but threaten privacy and security
By Jay Warrior, Eric McHenry & Kenneth McGee
The terrorist blast had destroyed the office building. Piles of glass and concrete littered most of a city block, the air was thick with dust, debris still smoldered. The police had no suspects but had already sent out an all-points alert. Then, when troopers pulled a van over for making a couple of risky lane changes, they found a pile of fertilizer sacks and an empty fuel-oil drum in the back. A duffel bag held a change of clothes, a small kit with a new razor and other toiletries, and a .45-caliber pistol. The truck had been stolen, and the driver wasn't talking.
Within an hour, some 1000 km away, an FBI team walked into a Wal-Mart with pictures of the arrested man. One of the cashiers recognized the face. "There were four of them," she said. "One of our regular customers said they were friends visiting from out of town—but that guy's a loner. He lives out on County 15."
This may sound like the start of a mediocre TV drama. But given recent events—and coming technical advances —it just might be a scenario pulled from tomorrow's news. Here's the rest of the story: a bit of microcircuitry called a radio frequency identification (RF-ID) tag was embedded within the package of razor blade cartridges in the suspect's toiletry kit. The manufacturer inserted it into that package, and all others of its kind, to let retailers track inventory cheaply and conveniently. But because the tag carried a unique identifying code, the FBI could scan it, check it against a database, and then track down the store where the razor was purchased.
The future, in this case, is already here. This past January, the Gillette Co. (Boston) announced that it would purchase up to half a billion RF-ID tags to put on its Mach3 and Venus razors and razor blade packages. The tags, which contain chips that respond to an RF field from a scanner, are now being used in a test by Wal-Mart Stores Inc., by the UK-based grocery chain Tesco PLC, and most recently by Metro AG, Germany's largest retailer, to determine whether the technology can streamline inventory management and save retailers billions of dollars a year in supply chain costs.
It's not much of a stretch to imagine this relatively benign way of tracking goods being put to other, more dramatic uses. Indeed, RF-ID tags are only one example of a coming wave of wireless communications technologies that will be everywhere in the next year or two, merging location and time-related information.
The most spectacular of these will be large-scale systems that piggyback on cellular networks to locate any cellphone on the network—in other words, in the near future, your whereabouts won't be a secret if you are carrying your cellphone. Other plans revolve around smaller-scale technology that will, for example, let you buy an item merely by pointing at it with your cellphone.
The commercialization of these technologies promises to make your life safer, easier, and more enjoyable by providing instant, personalized information. It might even save your life by helping rescue officials find you in an emergency, no matter where you are.
But these benefits will almost certainly cost you some privacy. In the case of the tagged razor blades, the loss will be small and incremental; with cellphone tracking, it could be substantial and potentially intrusive. So, in coming months, expect some clashes as watchdog groups, businesses, and governments try to find common ground and deliver the benefits of location tracking with the least possible intrusion.
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY...ul03/e911.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Iran Shuts Out Porn, Dissent Web Sites
Authorities are worried that such access is helping stir reform calls in the Islamic nation.
AP
TEHRAN — Iran is blocking access to Web sites containing pornographic material and dissent against the country's Islamic establishment, an official said Tuesday.
More than 140 Web sites promoting dissent, dancing and sex have been blocked since the crackdown began last month, said Farhad Sepahram, a Telecommunications Ministry official.
Religious hard-liners are increasingly worried about Iranians' access to information from the outside world, apparently concerned that communications are playing a role in stirring reform sentiment such as the recent anti-government protests by young people.
Sepahram said most of the blocked Web sites belong to opposition groups. They include one run by Reza Pahlavi, son of the late Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who was toppled by the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and one by Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, Iran's first elected president after 1979 who now opposes the cleric-dominated establishment.
Also blocked are the Voice of America's Persian-language service and radiofarda.com, a U.S.-financed Persian-language audio program.
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la...nes-technology
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Computer Bugs Even Infiltrate the Kitchen
Now that software controls everyday devices, it's hard to escape malfunctions. And manufacturers aren't liable.
Peter Svensson
When his dishwasher acts up and won't stop beeping, Jeff Seigle turns it off and then on, just as he does when his computer crashes. Same with the exercise machines at his gym and his CD player.
"Now I think of resetting appliances, not just computers," said Seigle, a software developer in Vienna, Va.
Malfunctions caused by bizarre and frustrating glitches are becoming harder and harder to escape now that software controls everything from stoves to cell phones, trains, cars and power plants.
But computer code could be a lot more reliable — if only the industry were more willing to make it so, experts say. And many believe that it would help if software makers were held accountable for sloppy programming.
Bad code can be more than costly. Sometimes it's lethal.
• A poorly programmed ground-based altitude warning system was partly responsible for the 1997 Korean Air crash in Guam that killed 228 people.
• Faulty software in anti-lock brakes forced the recall of 39,000 trucks and tractors, and 6,000 school buses in 2000.
• The $165-million Mars Polar Lander probe was destroyed in its final descent to the planet in 1999, probably because its software shut the engines off 100 feet above the surface.
Of course, more deaths are caused by human error than by bad software, and modern society would be unthinkable without Web servers, word processors and autopilot.
But software's usefulness means people tolerate it even when quality is not the best.
Last year, a study commissioned by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that software errors cost the U.S. economy about $59.5 billion annually, or about 0.6% of the gross domestic product. More than half the costs are borne by software users, the rest by developers and vendors.
Most software is thrown together with insufficient testing, says Peter Neumann, principal scientist at SRI International's Computer Science Laboratory in Menlo Park, Calif.
"The idea that we depend on something that's inherently untrustworthy is very frightening," he said.
When Neumann's group worked with NASA on software for the space shuttle, developers were so careful about bugs that they produced just three lines of code per day, an unthinkable pace in an industry where a major application may have a million lines of code.
Developers say defects stem from several sources: software complexity, commercial pressure to bring products out quickly, the industry's lack of liability for defects and poor work methods.
Programmers typically spend half their time writing code, and the other half looking for errors and fixing them.
That approach may have worked in the infancy of computers, when programs were small, says Watts Humphrey, former director of programming quality at IBM Corp. But as demands on software balloon, the size of programs seems to double every year and a half — just like microprocessor speeds, says Humphrey, now with Carnegie Mellon University's Software Engineering Institute.
Most programs in testing have five to 10 defects per 1,000 lines of code, or up to 10,000 bugs in a million-line program. It would take 50 people a year to find all those bugs, Humphrey says.
Consequently, he teaches engineers to plan and pay attention to details early, and to reject aggressive deadlines.
The problem, says consortium director Bill Guttman, is that unlike other engineers, programmers have no way of measuring the reliability of their designs.
"It always takes us by surprise when the rocket blows up or the ATM goes down," Guttman said.
The consortium wants to create automated tools that analyze software and rate its reliability.
But others say bugs would be greatly reduced if software makers were held legally responsible for defects.
"Software is being treated in a way that no other consumer products are," said Barbara Simons, former president of the Assn. for Computing Machinery. "We all know that you can't produce 100% bug-free software. But to go to the other extreme and say that software makers should have no liability whatsoever strikes me as absurd."
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la...nes-technology
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Small Companies Sow Decoy Files To Fool Would-Be Internet Pirates
Anick Jesdanun
Next time you try to download the latest pop tunes over the Internet, don't be surprised if you get a message chewing you out as a thief.
Chances are, the digital reprimand would be the work of Randy Saaf or Marc Morgenstern, whose small companies belong to a budding cottage industry devoted to thwarting file-sharing and other Internet piracy. Sowers of decoy files and digital detectives, these agents of entertainment and software companies tend to work stealthily, at their clients' behest.
Morgenstern, president of Overpeer Inc., said his year-old, 15-employee company in New York fools would-be pirates some 300 million times a month by flooding file-sharing networks with decoys, mostly masquerading as popular songs.
http://media.canada.com/scripts/loca...b-85781ad2ba67
MediaDefender's Randy Saaf
Some decoys are blank, circulated to make real files harder to find. Others carry warnings or other messages. An embedded programming script might even take individuals expecting free songs and movies to a Web site where they are sold.
Though neither Saaf nor Morgenstern would name clients, Madonna fans who tried to download her new song this spring instead heard from the singer, "What the - do you think you're doing?"
Saaf, president of MediaDefender Inc., said his Los Angeles company also tries to tie up queues by posing as real users who want to download large files through slow modems.
MediaDefender's engineers - previously in the business of foiling radar systems for the Pentagon - began thinking of ways to stymie file-sharing three years ago just as the recording industry began its legal fight to end Napster, Saaf said. Its tactics, he said, aim to make downloading so frustrating that people simply give up.
Other companies, like BayTSP Inc. and Ranger Online Inc., use software to seek out pirated materials at peer-to-peer, or P2P, networks along with chat rooms, newsgroups and Web sites. Another group that includes BigChampagne LLC measures the scope of P2P trafficking.
http://www.canada.com/technology/sto...C-46A48D5304B0
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To Catch A Music Thief
Record industry's war on downloading gets draconian against file-sharers
John Gorman
You're either with or against the Record Industry Association of America (RIAA). They're the non- profit lobby controlled by the Big Five label conglomerates: BMG, AOL-Time Warner, Universal Music Group, EMI and Sony. Download music from the Internet and you're a thief.
The RIAA has already threatened to pull the cable on independent Internet radio stations unless they fork over up-front mega-fees to SoundExchange, the collection arm of the RIAA. It's fair to say that, excluding commercial stations that also stream, most Internet radio stations are giving airplay to independent and European music from smaller labels that aren't members of the RIAA and can't afford to buy their way onto the conventional radio playlists.
Immediately following 9/11, the RIAA's chief lobbyist, Mitch Glazier -- considered one of most influential on Capitol Hill -- attempted to tack a hack-authorization amendment on last year's anti-terrorism bill. If approved, it would have immunized all copyright holders for any data destruction caused by computer intrusions. The RIAA would like you to believe that file sharing is on par with an Al Qaeda terrorist attack, and is the cyberspace equivalent of North Korea's nuclear program.
The RIAA also launched its own terrorism campaign. They took Verizon to court, demanding the identity of a client that used their platform to download music. They randomly targeted and prosecuted college students from Princeton, Rensselaer Polytech Institute and Michigan Tech for running a music file-sharing service. With White House permission, the RIAA raided a group of renegade U.S. Navy sailors for downloading music.
That was followed by the RIAA targeting Fortune 1000 companies and warning their CEOs that employees downloading music on their dime could cause legal, security and efficiency problems.
The ringleader was former RIAA Chairman and CEO Hillary Rosen. Wrapped in a bizarre interpretation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, she insisted the RIAA had the right to do whatever necessary to silence Internet radio stations that can't afford pay her fee and hold downloaders hostage. Rosen resigned earlier this year and landed at CNBC, where she will, presumably, shill for entertainment industry.
Rosen's campaign has now been taken over by new RIAA head Cary Sherman. His first order of business is to sue anyone housing a significant library of downloadable songs, which could be accessed by a file-sharing program. "Significant" was not clearly defined. The RIAA claims it will file several hundred lawsuits in the next six to eight weeks.
Music downloaded from the Internet is highly compressed and not even remotely close to a perfect digital copy. Music heard on Internet radio is down a few more notches in audio quality. In most cases, downloading has replaced radio as a medium for hearing new music. The majority of those who download music buy "hard copy" CDs of music they truly like. The percentages haven't changed.
What the RIAA refuses to admit is that downloading music and Internet radio are replacing commercial radio as the prime exposure of new music. Current music on U.S. radio is bought and paid for in advance. Station chains cut deals with third-party promoters peddling wares for the Big Five. Small indie labels no longer get radio airplay. They can't afford the pay for play fees, and they're not members of the RIAA's Big Five club.
It costs at least $1 million to promote one song on hit music stations. That's the retainer fee. Since all costs of promotion are liposucked from the artists' hides, many are reluctant to give up cash with no guarantee of airplay. Heard Liberty X, Atomic Kitten or Sophie Ellis-Baxter on the radio? These acts had top 5 successes worldwide but elected not to enter the pricey pay-for-play game. In doing so they've shut themselves out of radio airplay in the U.S.
Commercial radio listening has dropped significantly and no longer serves as the soundtrack to American popular culture. Unlike the payola of old, today's pay-for-play isn't illegal. It's not the cash under-the-table payments exposed in Fredric Dannen's 1990 book The Hit Men. In radio new-speak, it's referred to as "non-traditional revenue." Chains report payoffs as taxable income. Since most station playlists are dictated by radio's corporate offices, the Big Five no longer have the need for the expense of their own promotion staff.
A couple of radio chains claim they're revisiting their current legal payola deals, but none have said they're giving them up.
The RIAA blames downloading, not radio, as the reason for their flaccid music sales. They ask you not to confuse them with the facts that some of the best music being released is neither seen nor heard, due to the combination of legal payola and labels buying up every square inch of music retailer stores and even controlling what's heard on the store's speakers.
How about the reality that with broadband, it's just as easy to download full-length feature films. That technology hasn't hurt Hollywood. Every year's box office tally breaks the previous year's record, and that's not even counting the record number of DVDs rented or sold.
Here's another one. The Big Five? Next year at this time it will probably be down to the Big Three. Both AOL-Time Warner and EMI have their label divisions on the block.
http://www.freetimes.com/issues/1110...ns-gorman.html
Mass Hysteria at RIAA
Barry Willis
Last October, US Senate Commerce Committee chairman and former presidential hopeful John McCain hosted NBC's long-running comedy show Saturday Night Live. In a spoof of the political talk show Hardball, McCain did a devastating impression of US Attorney General John Ashcroft, a fellow Republican. Speaking of homeland security, the faux Ashcroft intoned, "This country won't be safe until every American is in jail."
That sort of irony is apparently over the heads of lawyers and executives at the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). On Wednesday, June 25, the music industry trade group announced that it would escalate its legal war against music fans who continue to offer or download collections of MP3 music files. Hundreds of lawsuits will be launched against alleged copyright violators over the summer, in the wake of a recent US appeals court ruling that Internet providers must reveal the identities of subscribers suspected of sharing unauthorized copies of music or movies. The ruling exposes millions of Internet users to the threat of litigation, according to RIAA president Carey Sherman. "We're going to begin taking names," Sherman told reporters. File sharers must relent or "face the music," he added.
Despair has given way to desperation. Now entering its fourth year of declining sales, the music industry has decided that threatening its customers with massive fines—from $750 to $150,000 per song—is a good public relations move, despite strong evidence that the most enthusiastic file-sharers are also the most voracious buyers of recorded music at full retail. "This latest effort really indicates the recording industry has lost touch with reality completely," said Fred von Lohmann, attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). "Does anyone think more lawsuits are going to be the answer? Today they have declared war on the American consumer."
They have also declared war on themselves. If the industry's failure in the mid-1990s to recognize the inevitability of the Internet and to embrace its commercial potential was a bit like punching a hole in the bottom of its boat, mass lawsuits are like spraying it with an automatic weapon. How long will it be until the RIAA sinks completely? "The recording industry is not going to win if all they do is sue people," said Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a Washington-based advocacy group for technology and copyright issues. "They can sue all they want, but that's not going to make CD sales go up."
Announcements of the threat caused a brief dip in the amount of file sharing, which quickly rebounded, according to a June 28 report from the Associated Press. "The threat appeared to have little effect on the pace of downloading over the most popular file-sharing services," read the report. KaZaa, one of the most popular file-sharing services, saw a drop in traffic during the first 10 hours after the announcement, but it surged back within 24 hours, with between 3.4 million and 4.4 million users. Richard Chernela, spokesman for KaZaa's corporate parent Sharman Networks, described the drop as a "consistent-to- normal fluctuation." On Thursday, June 26, file-sharing service Grokster reported an increase in traffic between 5% and 10%.
http://www.stereophile.com/shownews.cgi?1679
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
File-Swapping Services, Entertainment Execs To Meet
Dawn C. Chmielewski
Even as the recording industry escalated its war on Internet downloaders, a group of entertainment industry executives plans to meet privately this afternoon with representatives of the file-swapping services to start talking detente.
The newly formed Distributed Computing Industry Association will gather in Los Angeles to discuss how the long-reviled file-swapping networks can gain legitimate access to music and movies.
The high-level meeting represents a shift for the entertainment industry, which has favored confrontation -- in the form of lawsuits and technological counter-measures -- over cooperation with the creators of file-swapping software.
Last week, the Recording Industry Association of America announced it would sue hundreds, even thousands, of individual computer users who exchange unauthorized copies of music on popular services like Kazaa, Grokster and iMesh.
But this new group, while bankrolled by entertainment industry pariah Sharman Networks, corporate parent of Kazaa Media Desktop, nonetheless has an aura of entertainment-industry legitimacy.
It is the brainchild of former Hollywood agent Derek Broes -- who, at age 21, started a production company with actor Cuba Gooding, and by 2000 had developed technologies to prevent piracy of music and films across peer-to-peer networks.
Broes, 36, has testified before Congress on the evils of unauthorized Internet piracy -- and called on both the entertainment and technology industries to work together ``to find solutions to this problem that is threatening the very essence of our business.''
He has since switched corporate allegiances -- joining the executive staff of Brilliant Digital Networks, which, as Altnet, distributes paid content across the 50 million users of the Kazaa network. But he remains the driving force behind bringing entertainment executives and technologists together in a coalition that's intended to turn Internet ``pirates'' back into customers.
His entertainment-industry background helped woo long-time television executive Martin Lafferty, a veteran of NBC and Turner Broadcasting, as the group's new chief executive.
Other digital entertainment heavyweights, including Phil Lelyveld, director of digital industry relations at Walt Disney, and Ted Cohen, senior vice president of digital distribution for EMI Recorded Music, are expected to attend the session.
But Laffety has not, so far, won over other members of the file-swapping community. Grokster President Wayne Rosso said he plans to pursue another approach, joining with other Internet download services in lobbying Congress for blanket licenses for the right to distribute content across peer-to-peer networks.
``Frankly, we're late coming to the party. There's no question about it. We realize that,'' Rosso said. ``We realize there's a lot of work to be done. We've got a lot of tar on us that we've got to wash off.''
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/sil...ey/6201974.htm
Top 10 D/Ls - Singles
BigChampagne
'Raw Deal' On Printer Ink
BBC
Consumers are getting a raw deal when it comes to the ink used in printers, according to research by Which? magazine. With the top brand names costing more than vintage champagne, it is an unnecessary waste that people can ill afford, said the campaigning magazine.
Tests on a crop of colour printers found that many gave premature warnings that the cartridges were running out of ink. Which? is also critical of the overall cost of printer ink. It says some cartridges cost over seven times more than vintage champagne per millilitre. It recommends that people buy generic cartridges which are often half the price of branded products.
Protecting customers?
The Cost Of Ink
Colour HP Cartridge costs £29
This works out at £1.70 per millilitre
1985 Dom Perignon costs 23p per milliliter
The magazine suggests that people squeeze every drop out of the ink they use, ignoring the premature warnings that the ink is low and continuing until they see a drop in quality of printing. Most cartridges give people the option of continuing printing. But Which? found that Epson embeds a chip which stops the cartridge running when the ink runs low. The company says that it employs the cut-off system to "protect customers from accidentally damaging their printer or producing sub-standard print quality".
A Which? researcher who over-rode the system found that in one case he could print up to 38% more good quality pages, even though the chip stated that the cartridge was empty. The least amount of extra pages that could be printed was 17%.
The cost of ink has been the subject of an Office of Fair Trading investigation. It has accused manufacturers of a lack of transparency about the price of ink and called for an industry standard for measuring ink cartridge performance.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3035500.stm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Electronic Frontier Foundation Defends Printer Cartridge Co.
Opposes Printer Manufacturer's Broad Copyright Claims
Press Release
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today asked a federal appeals court to rule that a company can examine a competitor's technology in order to manufacture printer toner cartridges compatible with Lexmark printers without facing a copyright lawsuit.
Printer maker Lexmark had sued, claiming that cartridge remanufacturer Static Control Components circumvented Lexmark's access control technologies and infringed its copyrights by "reverse engineering" its printer toner cartridges. Static Control produced replacement microchips that enabled resellers to refill toner cartridges and sell them more cheaply.
Lexmark cited provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in the lawsuit. The district court ruled in Lexmark's favor, then Static Control appealed to the Sixth Circuit.
EFF today filed an amicus brief to the appeals court supporting Static Control.
"Whether you like or hate the controversial DMCA, Congress never intended the law to shield printer manufacturers from competition in toner cartridges," said EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer. "The Lexmark lawsuit shows how far copyright law has strayed from its original foundations, that is, 'to promote progress of science and useful arts.'"
EFF's amicus brief continues the EFF tradition of defending the rights of technologists and innovators. The brief argues that manufacturers should not be able to use the law to thwart interoperability with their products, because reverse engineering is protected fair use of copyrighted programs.
http://www.eff.org/Cases/Lexmark_v_S...702_eff_pr.php
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
German Comedian Ordered To Take Down Parody Site
BNA
EDRI reports that a comedian has been ordered by the German Federal Chancellor to take down a parody website that has been operational for five years. The Chancellor claims that the site infringes on its trademark.
German language article at
http://rhein-zeitung.de/on/03/06/16/...nzler-web.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ecast Shuts Online Music Store Service
Jon Healey
Online music distributor Ecast Inc. has closed its downloadable music operations, saying it couldn't afford to spend the marketing dollars needed to compete with Apple Computer Inc. and other suppliers of songs online.
The move comes two months after Apple launched its much-ballyhooed iTunes Music Store, whose success has spurred Amazon.com Inc., Yahoo Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and other major players to explore competing offerings.
Many music-industry executives expect more downloadable music stores to open by Christmas. San Francisco-based Ecast's Rioport division, which employed 25 people in San Jose, appeared to have been in a position to supply those stores with music and technology.
But Ecast Chief Executive Robbie Vann-Adibe said the situation wasn't as promising as it seemed.
"There's a lot of conversations going on, there's not a lot of check-writing going on right now," he said.
"We're a relatively small organization, we're a private company with limited resources," he added. "We cannot at this point continue to invest in this part of our business and wait for these organizations to get around to make decisions to go on this stuff."
Instead, the company plans to focus on the other half of its business: supplying restaurants, bars and other gathering places with jukeboxes stocked with music and other digital media from the Internet. That operation is growing significantly, Vann-Adibe said, noting that the number of songs played in the last quarter was more than three times as great as the same period last year.
Even in that division, however, Ecast has cut expenses significantly. Last month the company quietly closed its customer-support offices in San Diego and laid off some workers in its jukebox division.
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la...nes-technology
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sonia K. Katyal is an associate professor at Fordham Law School specializing in intellectual property.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...,1457054.story
A War on CD Piracy, a War on Our Rights
Sonia K. Katyal
It has become more than just a war against piracy. It is a war against basic American civil liberties.
A few years ago, round one began with the Recording Industry Assn. of America filing suit against Napster, the renegade file- sharing program developed by a 19-year-old. The result was an explosive public debate about the clash between law and technology. The battleground was the Internet.
Recording industry execs and ordinary citizens lined up to declare their allegiances in the question of whether downloading copyrighted music constitutes piracy or something else.
A few years later, with Napster sputtering its last breaths, round two started. The RIAA filed a host of lawsuits against other file- sharing entities that had developed in Napster's stead, like Kazaa, Morpheus and Grokster. The RIAA used the same rhetoric it used against Napster, but the strategy changed. If round one made Napster into the enemy, round two made file-sharing itself the scapegoat. However, just weeks ago, a California court corrected the RIAA's rhetoric, reminding it that peer-to-peer file-sharing services are deserving of protection as long as people use them for legitimate purposes.
But the RIAA's battle continues, each move more invasive and threatening than the last. Not only do anti-piracy devices search the hard drives of individuals looking for copyrighted music, the RIAA appears determined to force Internet service providers to reveal the identities of their users at any cost.
Already, schools across the country, fearful of threats from the RIAA, have implemented monitoring programs to track and report the exchange of copyrighted files. Employers now search through employee hard drives looking for MP3s, irrespective of whether the person is authorized to have them, and prohibit the use of peer-to-peer technologies, even for the sharing of legitimate files.
Of course, stealing music is wrong. But the RIAA's efforts are just as misguided as its own piracy detection techniques, which often mistake legitimate files for illegitimate ones. Witness the recent cease-and-desist letter addressed to Pennsylvania State University, which accused an astrophysics professor of illegally sharing files. The problem? His last name was Usher, which the RIAA Web crawler confused with an artist of the same name. Or the time that the RIAA sent a cease-and-desist letter to a broadband provider, claiming that one of its subscriber's sites illegally "offers approximately 0 sound files for download."
The legislative response has been equally misplaced: Last session, Rep. Howard Berman (D-N. Hollywood) proposed a bill that would have authorized an unprecedented host of invasive measures to prevent file-sharing, including attacks on a suspect's computer that deny service. And a few days ago, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) proposed destroying the computers of individuals who illegally downloaded material, pointing out that damaging someone's computer "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights."
Now, round three begins. The RIAA's efforts have culminated in yet another display of unilateral aggression. This week, the RIAA announced that it would track down and sue hundreds of file sharers. In doing so, the RIAA pits itself against ordinary Americans who use file-sharing programs legitimately.
The deeper question is why Congress would let the RIAA wage such a war without even a shred of opposition from Capitol Hill. Americans enjoy online freedom and take their rights to privacy, fair use and free speech seriously. But these rights appear to have swiftly collapsed in the face of threats by the RIAA and congressional inaction.
Most people support the protection of copyrighted works from unauthorized file-sharing, but not at a cost that compromises the civil liberties that our nation has traditionally cherished. In the end, we will have to ask ourselves whether the music we love is really worth hearing, especially when it comes at such a grave cost to our individual freedoms.
Until next week,
-
js.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Recent WIRs -
http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/...threadid=16759 June 28th
http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/...threadid=16705 June 21st
http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/...threadid=16638 June 14th
http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/...threadid=16580 June 7th
The Week In Review is published every Friday. Please submit letters, articles, and press releases in plain text English to jackspratts at lycos.com. Include contact info. Submission deadlines are Wednesdays @ 1700 UTC.
JUST SAY NO!
This week the RIAA announced that it will now be pursuing lawsuits against individual music lovers using peer-to-peer(P2P) file-sharing networks. We as musicians wish to state our objection to the RIAA's action, and have issued the statement below, which we would encourage all who are concerned to sign using the form below.
For Immediate Release
MUSICIANS SAY NO TO PERSECUTION AND PROSECUTION OF MUSIC LOVERS
June 30th 2003
In response to the continuing legal attacks by the RIAA and major record labels on internet music sharing, which now include both criminal charges and civil suits against individuals, musicians are joining together to say NO to the action supposedly being taken on our behalf.
Just because the major labels haven't figured out a way to make money out of the internet doesn't mean that individuals who have shared music should go to prison, or be forced into bankruptcy. The industry is alienating the very people it hopes to sell music to in future with its heavy handed action.
With its collective failure to understand the internet, or the benefit it derives from the peer to peer networks that have sprung up in the vacuum created by that failure, the industry has now turned to desperate methods. Suing your customers one by one is not a business model. We can only assume that the intention behind these attacks on individuals is to create an atmosphere of intimidation in which music lovers dare not use legally acquired computers to listen to music, except under very limited terms that the industry intends to dictate.
As musicians we recognise and defend the right of artists to be compensated for their work. However, these prosecutions are not helping musicians, or helping the industry create a better system of internet distribution.
We ask that the RIAA refrain from assuming our implicit support for their persecution of individual music lovers, stop equating all free online music with 'piracy', and concentrate its legal sanctions on the organisations who are making money out of the unauthorised duplication of our work.
We invite all musicians who support our position to add their names to this open letter at
http://www.copyleftmedia.org.uk/justsayno/
Keep these dates in mind...
Boycott-RIAA is planning some action in the near future and you want to be aware of these dates. The dates are August 1st and August 2nd. Start thinking about what you can do in your area. We're wanting to co-ordinate fax campaigns to our legislators, phone campaigns to our legislators (August 1st is a friday). Some suggestions for local actions on August 2nd (Saturday) CD Burning Party (literally) Independent Music Concerts, Educational Seminars, Press Conferences, Handout flyers and picketing record stores that sell RIAA Products..It's time to get off of your rear end folks and get to work...We want pictures, we'll post them. NO Violence!
I'm in the process of creating a "Street Team" forms, and will be posting what actions are taking place and where, so that you can get the maximum turnout. Let us know through the form that will be available MONDAY JUNE 30.
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/7001