Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - July 16th, ’05

[JackSpratts]

"I think [$0.99 per song] is too expensive, and it's not realistic to expect students to pay that much." – Carlos Guerra


"Every studio has a very intricate model for forecasting DVD sales pegged to opening-weekend theatrical performance but now those historic relationships, both in the U.S. and overseas, do not appear to be working, making any forecasting extremely difficult." – Richard Greenfield


"Technology operates at the speed of light and privacy protection is at a snail's pace." – Howard Simon


"For the civil liberties community, this could be a troubling appointment. Stu Baker often stood on the other side of important national debates on protecting privacy and preserving open government." – Marc Rotenberg


"It is essentially an electronic file on everyone whether they are suspected of criminal activity or not. I can't think of anything more un-American." – Howard Simon


"Given the volume of data to be retained, particularly Internet data, it is unlikely that an appropriate analysis of the data will be at all possible. Individuals involved in organised crime and terrorism will easily find a way to prevent their data being traced." – Report from the parliamentary committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs


"It's increasingly clear that the future of CBS News is not just as a practitioner of broadcast journalism but of broadband journalism." – Andrew Heyward
















July 16th, 2005




Dutch File Sharing Decision Made

Moves to identify illegal downloaders in HOLLAND have been blocked by a Dutch judge.

A court in Utrecht heard that anti-piracy group Brein made demands for five net service suppliers to hand over the names and addresses of file-sharers following investigative work by US company Media Sentry.

The judge presiding in the case ruled that the American firm had broken tough laws that protect privacy in Holland by identifying the file-sharers.

But Brein, which represents 52 media organisations including Sony Music, Universal and EMI, said it will take the case to a higher court.

As a result the victory could be short lived because the court ruled that the group did have the power to force net firms to surrender data if they found out the information legally.

Nine people who have already been identified by Brein, have reached out-of-court settlements with the organisation.
http://www.nme.com/news/113007.htm





High Court In Dublin Orders ISPs To Release Names Of File-Sharers To IRMA
Deirdre McArdle

IRMA, the Irish Recorded Music Association, has on Friday welcomed the decision of the High Court in Dublin to compel a number of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to release the names of the 17 individuals engaged in serial file sharing of music. The High Court action comes after 15 months of educational initiatives to raise awareness of the cultural and economic damage done by illegal file sharing. "We will now be writing to the 17 individuals informing them of the seriousness of their actions," said Dick Doyle, Director General of IRMA. "We will offer them the opportunity of settling the action. If they refuse our settlement terms, we will be forced to pursue the matter through the Courts."
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050708/95/fmyuk.html





Judge: MP3 Site, ISP Breached Copyright
Steven Deare

It took almost two years but major record labels in Australia have finally won a legal battle against a Queensland man and his Internet Service Provider for alleged music piracy.

Stephen Cooper, operator of the mp3s4free Web site, was found guilty of copyright infringement by Federal Court Justice Brian Tamberlin.

Although Cooper didn't host pirated recordings per se, the court found he breached the law by creating hyperlinks to sites that had infringing sound recordings.

This is the first such judgement against hyperlinking in Australia.

Tamberlin found against all other respondents in the case, namely ISP Comcen, its employee Chris Takoushis, Comcen's parent company E-Talk Communications, and its director Liam Bal.

In October 2003, the record companies, which included Universal Music, Sony, Warner and EMI, alleged that Cooper cooperated with Bal and Takoushis to increase traffic to the ISP, and aide advertising revenue.

Subsequently, the court was told Cooper was unaware he may have infringed copyright law, while E- Talk and Comcen argued they didn't know of Cooper's actions.

In handing down his judgement today, Tamberlin said: "I am satisfied there has been infringement of copyright.

"I won't make formal orders as yet. But since there's been infringments ...the respondents must pay the applicants' costs."

Outside the Sydney court, Music Industry Piracy Investigations general manager Michael Kerin said the verdict sent a strong message to ISPs.

"This is a very significant blow in the war against piracy.

"The court has found against all the respondents. It sends the message that ISPs who involve themselves in copyright infringement can be found guilty.

"The verdict showed that employees of ISPs who engage in piracy can be seen in the eyes of the court as guilty," Kerin said.

Cooper was not present in court. His legal counsel, Bev Stevens, said the verdict was "extremely disappointing".

The parties will only be required to pay costs -- which will be decided in 14 days once the music industry serves short minutes of orders in reponse to the judgement.
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communi...9202379,00.htm





Warning Notices On Account Of Links To AllofMP3
Robert W. Smith

The music industry has begun to carry out its threat and is sending warning notices to website operators who have set links to the Russian music download platform AllofMP3. On Thursday and Friday at the behest of music industry companies (edel, EMI, Sony BMG Music, SPV, Universal Music and Warner Music) the Munich-based law firm of Waldorf sent warning notices calling on the operators in question to remove the links by July 12. As the law firm has calculated the amount in controversy in the case of private persons to be 75,000 euros, the persons concerned are accordingly asked in these letters to pay the firm a fee of 3,980 euros each. Responding to questions by heise online the lawyer Johannes Waldorf stated that he had so far sent "fewer than ten" such warning notices.

In its warning notices the law firm points out that the District Court in Munich had lately by way of a temporary injunction (PDF) prohibited the operators of AllofMP3 from making available as download on the Web recordings protected by German copyright legislation. The injunction itself, which, however, has not yet been served on the operator of AllofMP3, was attached to the letters. In addition the notice says: "By establishing a hyperlink to the Internet page in question you are enabling the acquisition of copyright protected sound recordings of our clients via the illegal download offer. By illegally providing public access you are thereby objectively supporting the illegal dissemination of copyright protected sound recordings [...] or even aiding and abetting such activity."

Not only private persons, but a number of media companies too have received such warning notices. Heise Zeitschriften Verlag [Heise Publishing House], which among other things publishes heise online, has so far received from the law firm merely a notice calling upon it to remove all links to www.allofmp3.com. There was no declaration of discontinuance attached. In a number of articles by heise online, including this one, a link to the Web address of the Russian music portal has been included for journalistic purposes.

In a different case Heise Zeitschriften Verlag had also been called upon by the law firm of Waldorf on behalf of clients of the firm from the music industry to remove a link to a company offering DVD copying software. When the publishing house took no heed of this demand the law firm of Waldorf obtained a temporary injunction from the District Court in Munich. According to the opinion of the court in Munich heise online by establishing the link to the software manufacturer's homepage had deliberately aided and abetted an illegal act. The music industry, however, failed in having the publication of the article prohibited outright. Heise Zeitschriften Verlag has filed an appeal against the court's decision of April 2005, which it regards as an unconstitutional infringement of the freedom of the press. The hearing at the Higher Regional Court in Munich is set for July 28 2005.
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/61571





P2P Volume Climbs Again in June, User Levels Near 9 Million



The average number of simultaneous users on P2P networks inched up again in June, reaching 8.9 million according to figures from BigChampagne. That is a modest 2.6 percent increase over May, and a substantial 20.1 percent jump over the same period last year. US users accounted for about 75 percent of the global total, with both figures closely aligned. The increase is notable heading into the summer months, which normally produce a drop in P2P traffic. That seasonal effect could confuse any effect that the recent MGM v. Grokster decision has on overall volume, though so far there has not been a notable dip. Overall, P2P traffic levels have been steadily increasing over the past few years. Current levels are now double what they were in September, 2003, when the RIAA first initiated lawsuits against individual file-sharers.
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/resu...e=BigChampagne





Penn Students Find Expectations Of Legal Downloading Unrealistic

Campus opinions mirror findings of national survey
Erica Lederman

Two-thirds of U.S. college students see nothing unethical about downloading copyrighted music without paying, according a survey conducted by the Business Software Alliance.

The national survey also indicated that illegal downloading practices extend beyond the college campus and into the workplace. The survey suggests that music-sharing is a gateway practice into downloading software and other files.

Several colleges across the country have introduced a fee included in tuition to cover the cost of a file-sharing program. At Penn, many students have expressed interest in such a program, but most said that they would not want to have to pay a mandatory fee for the service.

Penn students seem to share the majority belief that downloading copyrighted music presents no ethical dilemma.

Lindsey Wu, who graduated from the School of Engineering and Applied Science in May, said, "I don't think it's unethical. People still buy CDs and usually only download to preview music."

Many students surveyed cited the lack of quality music available on CDs as justification for downloading music off the Web.

College senior Kim Lengle said she legally downloads music from Apple's file- sharing program iTunes so that she does not have to buy an entire album in order to listen to the few songs she enjoys.

"I think that what leads people to download music is not the cost of an album, but rather the quality of all [the] songs on the album. No one likes to buy an album with a majority of songs that they don't like," Lengle said.

Across college campuses, illegal downloading of music has become the norm, which worries the music industry.

Forty-five percent of college students currently use campus networks for downloading activities. University officials around the country are worried that the high-speed Internet access offered on campuses has contributed to widespread nature of illegal downloading.

Several programs are currently available that offer downloadable music either for a monthly fee or on a pay-per-song basis.

Rebecca Safley, a recent College graduate, said, "I used the [paid] Napster service, and it was a great idea."

But Wharton graduate student Carlos Guerra finds the current pay options not to be feasible.

"I think [$0.99 per song] is too expensive, and it's not realistic to expect students to pay that much," he said.

Unlike many of his fellow students on campus, graduate student Dan Leung thinks illegal downloading is unethical.

"But," he adds, "I do it anyway."

Rong Rong Xu, a Wharton senior, offered an explanation for the apparent disconnect between beliefs and actions for someone like Leung.

"It's the whole group mentality. If somebody else can [download music], then why can't I? It justifies the illegal act, and it becomes a generally accepted practice," he said.
http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/vn.../42d604130eee2





Sony BMG Reaches Licensing Deal With Imesh

Music giant Sony BMG has reached a licensing agreement with file-swapping service iMesh, one of the first such tie-ups since a U.S. Supreme Court decision clamping down on online copyright infringement.

The deal, confirmed on Friday by an iMesh representative, followed a high court ruling that unauthorized networks such as Grokster could be held liable for the copyright infringement of their users. Analysts said that decision added momentum to the move toward networks sanctioned by media companies.

Once one of the most popular of post-Napster song-swapping networks, iMesh, formed in 1999, was sued by the record labels in 2003 for copyright infringement and settled for $4.1 million.

The New York-based service said just after the June 27 Supreme Court ruling in favor of entertainment companies and against rival file-swapping network Grokster that it would roll out a music industry-"sanctioned" song-swapping service.

The privately held company also hired former Sony Music President Robert Summer as executive chairman to handle negotiations with the music industry.

Sony BMG, one of the big four music labels, is a joint venture between Sony and Bertelsmann.

Music trade publication Billboard reported on Friday that iMesh was also close to signing a deal with Universal Music Group in the next week to 10 days. A representative for iMesh had no immediate comment on the report.

Other peer-to-peer services have been formed to satisfy the entertainment industry's demand to be compensated for songs like Mashboxx, headed by former Grokster President Wayne Rosso, which has also reached a licensing deal with Sony BMG.

Rosso said he was near deals with the other major labels and that the ruling had unleashed intense interest from investors. "Everybody wants a piece of me," said Rosso.

Mashboxx works with Snocap, a venture headed by Napster founder Shawn Fanning, which identifies songs by their digital "fingerprint" and determines if they are copyrighted.

The iMesh service also uses a centrally managed rights clearinghouse so music companies and publishers can claim compensation for songs being traded.

Record labels in 2001 managed to close down Napster, the first song-swapping service, and then went on to challenge its successors like Grokster and Streamcast Networks in the courts.

Napster has since changed owners and transformed itself into a commercial online music service.
http://news.com.com/Sony+BMG+reaches...3-5781196.html





Detroit Is So Hollywood, and Vice Versa
Daniel Gross

THE capital of the American automotive industry and the capital of American entertainment don't seem to have much in common. Detroit wears Brooks Brothers, Hollywood wears Armani. Detroit eats meat and potatoes, Hollywood (when it's not dieting) dines on sushi and low-carb shakes. Detroit is Rust Belt; Hollywood is Botox Belt.

Crucial numbers in Detroit are market share and miles per gallon. In Hollywood, they're box office takes and agents' percentages. In Detroit, silicon can be found in painstakingly engineered auto parts. In Hollywood, silicone can be found in painstakingly engineered body parts.

But in this summer of shared discontent it suddenly seems the two industrial capitals have something in common. Both iconic American powerhouse industries formed in the early 20th century and saw their high point midcentury. Today, both are discovering that the strategy and tactics that until recently brought them huge profits have led them to re-examine their business models. Sure, the woes afflicting the two industries are vastly different - the Big Three automakers are struggling under the weight of health insurance and pension costs while Hollywood studios are buffeted by rapidly changing technologies and consumer tastes. While no Hollywood studio has seen its debt downgraded to junk, their respective plights reveal striking similarities - and perhaps, a similar way out.

Consumers today face an unprecedented array of choices for how to spend their transportation and entertainment dollars. And with each passing year, they seem less likely to choose to spend them on the stuff cranked out of Detroit and Hollywood assembly lines. In the postwar decade, the height of the American century, both rode high. The Big Three - General Motors, Ford and Chrysler - held down an astonishing 95 percent of the United States car market in 1955. In 1948, writes Edward Jay Epstein, author of "The Big Picture: The New Logic of Money and Power in Hollywood," some 90 million Americans, or 65 percent of the nation's population, went to a movie each week. That year, with TV in its infancy and the only real competition radio, Americans bought a whopping 4.6 billion tickets.

But decades of competition from upstarts - Japanese and Korean automakers for Detroit, television, video games and the Internet for Hollywood - have killed these two incumbents by a thousand cuts. In June, the no-longer-so-Big Three controlled just 58.3 percent of the United States market. Last year, according to the Motion Picture Association of America, only about 10 percent of the population managed to make it to the multiplex each week, and the number of tickets sold slumped 2.4 percent to a little more than 1.5 billion. So far this year, according to Exhibitor Relations, attendance is down another 7.8 percent.

In recent years, both industries thought they had settled on surefire formulas to cope with burgeoning competition, globalization and technological change. Develop a big, expensive blockbuster model, market it like crazy, and then return the next year with slightly tweaked, bigger and more expensive models. Sure as "Terminator 2" and "Terminator 3" followed the Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle "Terminator," Hummer 2 and Hummer 3 followed the Hummer, another Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle. But in both realms, the strategy has stalled. Just as audiences found "Ocean's 12" a pale imitation of "Ocean's 11," itself a remake of a 1960 film, drivers have turned away from the bigger and ever-less-fuel-efficient S.U.V.'s stamped out by General Motors and Ford. Sales of the battleship-size Ford Excursion are off 26.3 percent this year.

In recent months, quirky foreign makes like the Toyota Prius and Mini Cooper have captured the imagination of trendy buyers bored to tears by Detroit's pedestrian automotive retreads. How precisely does the 2005 Ford Taurus differ from the 2002 Ford Taurus?

Moviegoers apparently are having a similar reaction to Hollywood's buffet of warmed-over dishes. Most of the movies in wide release last week - the 19th straight week in which box office receipts were lower than the same week a year before - were either remakes or brand extensions: "War of the Worlds," "Batman Begins," "Herbie: Fully Loaded," "Star Wars: Episode III," "The Longest Yard" and "Bewitched." What's next, a remake of a lame 1970's-vintage television show like "The Dukes of Hazzard"? Well, yes.

For manufacturers, the sum of all fears is seeing the costs of the basic inputs to your product rise beyond your control. For the auto industry, the price of hot-rolled steel increased from $260 a ton in May 2003 to $535 a ton in May 2005, according to Purchasing Magazine. For studios, the price of Hollywood prima donnas has been rising far more rapidly than the consumer price index. Last year, according to the M.P.A.A., the average cost of making and marketing a film was $98 million - up more than 10 percent from 2003.

Worse, neither Detroit nor Hollywood has been able to pass on rising costs to consumers. The average movie ticket price rose just 3 percent in 2004, and is up just 3 percent this year. Meanwhile, Detroit has had to bribe customers to take cars off the lot with huge rebates. And now both Motown and Hollywood are engaging in gimmicky, unsustainable inducements to bring people in the door. On June 1, General Motors started offering its employee discount to all buyers, a move matched last week by Ford and DaimlerChrysler. In late June, AMC (the second-largest theater company, not the late carmaker) began offering money-back guarantees to coax people to sit through "Cinderella Man." Rival chain Cinemark quickly followed suit.

There's more. Both industries are extremely anxious over the threat of piracy from Asia. Hollywood frets over the quick availability of excellent copies of the latest "Star Wars" film; Detroit frets over the prospect of the Chinese car company Chery marketing its cheap QQ minicar, which GM contends is a brazen knockoff of the Chevrolet Spark.

And once-proud manufacturers in both industries no longer depend on earning profits from selling the products they make through the established distribution channel (dealers for Detroit, theaters for Hollywood) but on related activities. GM and Ford routinely lose money on their United States automaking operations, but are bailed out by their finance arms, General Motors Acceptance Corporation and Ford Motor Credit. They're essentially banks attached to unprofitable carmaking operations. Just so, the studios are really merchants of DVD's, broadcast and pay-per-view rights attached to money-losing manufacturers of movies made to be screened in theaters. According to Mr. Epstein, the author, the Hollywood studios garner just 17 percent of their film-related revenues from theaters.

The salvation of these iconically American industries won't come through gimmicks or slick marketing. Autos and movies are regarded as parochial industries. And to a large degree, Detroit and Hollywood remain insular company towns. But the relentless focus on their struggles in the home market they owned in the 20th century may obscure the success they're having in the markets that they could own in the 21st century. Last year, while United States box office revenues stagnated, box office revenues outside the United States surged 47 percent in dollar terms.

As moviegoers in India, Asia and Latin America flocked to "Shrek 2" and "Troy," the number of international tickets sold rose 13 percent last year. Meanwhile, GM's sales in China have risen 19 percent so far this year. As GM loses ground in Middle America, its market share in the Middle Kingdom has risen from about 8 percent in 2003 to 11 percent this year. Sure, Americans may look askance at the umpteenth version of the Ford Taurus, or at the umpteenth feature movie to revolve around a comic book hero. But as the number of middle-class consumers for Detroit and Hollywood's products continues to grow around the world, Americans may no longer be the target audience.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/10/we...w/10gross.html





DVD sales cooling

Animator Warns on Profit
Geraldine Fabrikant

Shares of DreamWorks Animation SKG tumbled 13.2 percent yesterday after the company lowered its earnings estimates because of disappointing DVD sales and also pulled back on a planned $500 million stock offering.

In addition, the company said the Securities and Exchange Commission had started an informal investigation into the trading of its securities after a report on May 10 that news of disappointing first-quarter earnings had been released before the company announcement.

Yesterday's announcement was the second time in two months that the company, led by its chief executive, Jeffrey Katzenberg, and the co-founders Steven Spielberg and David Geffen, with a blue-chip roster of investors that includes the Microsoft billionaire Paul G. Allen, had revised earnings forecasts downward. It closed yesterday at $23.27 a share.

The company said yesterday that it was lowering its earnings estimates for the year to 80 cents a share, from 90 cents. That compares with an earlier forecast of $1 to $1.25 a share. The company now expects to show a loss in the second quarter of 7 to 9 cents a share.

The major reason for lower expectations is slow sales of DVD's for "Shrek 2" and to some degree for "Shark Tale."

DreamWorks executives said it was too early to understand why there was a slowdown in DVD sales.

"We don't know whether this is a short-term issue or some larger shift that is going on," Mr. Katzenberg told analysts in a conference call. "It would be, I think, a mistake to try and assess it today."

When DreamWorks revised earnings in May because of low DVD sales, analysts said they believed that the problem might be specific to DreamWorks. Then nearly two weeks ago Pixar Animation Studios also cut forecasts because of disappointing DVD sales of "The Incredibles."

That led investors to wonder how broadly the trend would affect the industry, where much of the earnings growth has been fueled by DVD demand.

DreamWorks also said it would delay a $500 million stock offering. Although Mr. Katzenberg and Mr. Geffen, acting together, can propose an offering, they cannot participate in the selling of shares until October. The sellers in the offering would have included Mr. Allen's company, Vulcan Capital.

"Pulling the offering made sense," said Lowell Singer, who follows DreamWorks for SG Cowen & Company. "Paul Allen was interested in selling the stock when it was north of $30 a share. Clearly he is not interested in selling when it is below $23 a share. And clearly they would have had to come out with the news of lower guidance before they could issue a secondary."

Indeed, DreamWorks shares are now lower than when it went public at $28 a share in October 2004.

The S.E.C. is also investigating the possibility of insider trading in DreamWorks shares, according to a person briefed on the situation.

Although DreamWorks did not release its earnings until after the market closed on May 10, earlier that day Newsweek published a report on its Web site that said Mr. Katzenberg had briefed some insiders the previous morning, warning that earnings would be below expectations.

That day shares declined 5.19 percent on heavy trading to close at $36.50 a share. The stock fell an additional 12.19 percent the next day. DreamWorks said it was cooperating with the investigation.

DreamWorks also said that six class-action lawsuits had been filed against it and some officers and directors, accusing them of violating securities laws.

The company said that the lawsuits were without merit and that it would fight the charges.

For investors, the drop in DVD sales is worrisome. "Every studio has a very intricate model for forecasting DVD sales pegged to opening-weekend theatrical performance," said Richard Greenfield, who follows media for Fulcrum Global Partners. "But now those historic relationships, both in the U.S. and overseas, do not appear to be working, making any forecasting extremely difficult."

"The company has reduced estimates twice in eight weeks because of this lack of visibility," he said.

For Mr. Singer of SG Cowen, the problem in the foreign markets is particularly troubling.

"We have all been expecting a maturation of the domestic business given the broad penetration of DVD hardware in U.S. homes," he said. "However, we thought the foreign markets were a few years behind domestic, so we anticipated growth for a number of more years given the lower hardware penetration overseas."

What has happened at DreamWorks and Pixar, he said, is worrisome because they have had hits like "Shrek 2" and "The Incredibles."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/12/bu...reamworks.html





The media

M Is for Moronic
Max Blumenthal

"I frankly feel at PBS headquarters there is a tone deafness to issues of tone and balance," Kenneth Tomlinson, the chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said in May. Since he was appointed to his position by President Bush, he has set about to change the "tone" and rectify the "balance." For example, he helped secure $4 million to fund Wall Street Journal Report, a round-table discussion featuring the newspaper's right-wing editorial board; no liberals or Democrats need apply. Next he collaborated with Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, to kill a legislative proposal that would have required appointments with local broadcasting experience to the CPB board. Last year, to justify his campaign for balance, Tomlinson commissioned a secret study to prove that certain programs aired on PBS radio and television are contaminated with liberal bias.

To carry out this delicate task, Tomlinson selected Fred Mann, a conservative activist with no credentials as an expert on journalism, broadcasting or media issues, who was obscure even within right-wing circles. Mann was paid $14,700 in taxpayer money to monitor a sampling of PBS shows and file a report to Tomlinson on the political partisanship of their content. Tomlinson seems to have planned for Mann's report to become a seminal conservative document. Republicans would wave it during House appropriations committee hearings as they argued for defunding PBS and realigning its programming. Right-wing talk jocks would blare talking points based on Mann's disturbing findings, which would at last provide definitive proof of a liberal media tilt. Meanwhile, insidious liberal activists boring from within public broadcasting studios would cower in humiliation from the exposure.

While Mann diligently went about his work listening to the radio and watching TV, monitoring episodes of PBS's NOW With Bill Moyers, The Diane Rehm Show and The Tavis Smiley Show--Tomlinson concealed his activities from CPB's board. When Mann filed his detailed report, Tomlinson hid it from the CPB board. Only an internal investigation by CPB's inspector general in mid May revealed the existence of the Mann report. And only when journalists at NPR managed to secure a copy were its contents reported. Reading the study, it is clear why Tomlinson tried to keep it a state secret.

The Mann report reads as if dictated by Cookie Monster while chewing on a mouthful of lead paint chips. Names of famous political figures and celebrities are chronically misspelled. PBS guests are categorized by labels--"anti-DeLay," "neutral," "x"--for often bewildering reasons. Mann appears to have spent endless hours monitoring programs with no political content, gathering such insights as that Ray Charles was blind.

Mann begins each of his PBS program summaries with a chart showing guests' ideological leanings. An "L" denotes guests he judges to be liberal; "C" beside conservatives; "N" beside those who are neutral. Among those Mann designated as conservative is the ex-rapper and actor Mark "Marky Mark" Wahlberg, best known for his role as a well-endowed porn star in the film Boogie Nights. While Wahlberg used his June 2, 2004, appearance on The Tavis Smiley Show to promote juvenile justice programs--a liberal hallmark--he also said in passing, according to Mann, that Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ "was a good thing." Another Tavis Smiley guest, Everlast, the rock-rapper who once fronted the Irish-American rap trio House of Pain, was dubbed a "C" for his opinion that some rap music is "sending a bad message to youth." And Henry Rollins, the former singer for the legendary hardcore-punk band Black Flag, was labeled conservative for stating, in Mann's words, that "people who have problems with the war should support the troops." Apparently, feeling sympathy for American servicemen and women is strictly "C."

Mann's liberals are an equally curious bunch. Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, garnered his "L" after speaking glowingly of Ronald Reagan in a discussion with Tavis Smiley. Hagel is, of course, that comsymp who earned a 100 percent rating from the Christian Coalition last year. Another Rehm guest, Washington Post reporter Robin Wright, earned her "L" by articulating an analytical point Mann apparently had not heard expressed before. "Ms. Wright's viewpoint was that U.S. intelligence was geared to fight the Cold War and did not adapt to the new threat of terrorism," Mann writes, describing why he put the "L" word beside her name. For investigating three of Tom DeLay's associates for illegal fundraising in Travis County, Texas, District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who was interviewed on NOW, was dubbed "anti-DeLay." Dr. Arthur Bodette was slapped with an "L" after discussing on Diane Rehm's show "the unlimited possibilities of new advances in DNA chips to screen for birth defects, cystic fibrosis, and mental retardation."

Another unintentionally hilarious aspect of the Mann report is its sloppy typos. Apparently Tomlinson's budget didn't include a proofreader. Former Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr appears as "Ken Staff," former Assistant Secretary of Defense Dov Zakheim as "Doug Zukheim" and former Congressman Newt Gingrich as "Next Gingrich."

There are also curious asides and digressions. In a description of the March 29, 2004, episode of NOW, Mann notes that 9/11 widow Kristin Breitweiser filled in for Bill Moyers as host. What did he make of this? He doesn't say. In his summary of former CIA operative Robert Baer's interview with Diane Rehm, Mann writes, "Mr. Baer's viewpoint was that [Ahmad] Chalabi leaked secret classified information to Iran regarding U.S. cracking Iran's codes. As to how Chalabi new [sic] this information, Baer speculated, it was probably a drunken operative." Reporting on Gen. Anthony Zinni's appearance on Rehm's show, Mann observes, "His viewpoint was that...Saddam was not a treat [sic]." Yes, and Nixon was not a cook.

Besides scrutinizing political PBS guests, Mann was paid to watch countless hours of nonpolitical programming and report back to Tomlinson with his insights. Thus Tomlinson was secretly informed that during one Diane Rehm episode, "Carole King talked about her career.... James Taylor inspired her." Or that, during The Tavis Smiley Show, actor Jamie Foxx "discussed the career of the late Ray Charles and the obstacles (blind and black) that he had to overcome to achieve success." Next to Foxx's name Mann affixed a lowercase "x," which, because Mann labeled neutral guests with an "N," may mean that Foxx's politics are beyond neutral. Either that or he's become a secret black Muslim.

Who is Fred Mann? For all we know, he could be a werewolf with supersensitive hearing that detects liberal bias inaudible to the average human's ear. But since he and Tomlinson have not provided the same level of accountability they are demanding from others, it is impossible to know. Reporters who have attempted to locate him, including NPR, have all failed. Perhaps only Van Helsing could uncover Mann's tracks. What is known is that in 1980, Mann worked on the senatorial campaign of Dan Quayle. Then, during Reagan's second term, Mann went to work at the Virginia-based National Journalism Center as its job bank and alumni director until he retired last year. The National Journalism Center is directed by M. Stanton Evans, a former editor of the conservative Indianapolis News, and a founder in 1960 of the right-wing youth group Young Americans for Freedom. Through the center, Evans nurtured movement activists like Mann and trained aspiring young media players, including Ann Coulter and Maggie Gallagher, the conservative Catholic columnist who took federal money from the Bush Administration to promote its policies.

The Mann report may be one of the strangest documents ever produced by the federal government; however, it is not totally without value. Though it may be botched as an indictment of liberal media bias, it inadvertently offers an unfiltered glimpse into the recesses of the conservative mind.

The conservative media game was neatly summarized by Matt Labash, a former senior writer for The Weekly Standard who now writes for National Review, in a 2003 interview on the website journalismjobs.com. Labash explained: "The conservative media likes to rap the liberal media on the knuckles for not being objective. We've created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un- objective.... It's a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It's a great little racket."

But until Ken Tomlinson, no conservative imagined that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would provide taxpayer funding for the "great little racket."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20...A2BHNlYwM3NDI-





Arizona School Will Not Use Textbooks
AP

A high school in Vail will become the state's first all-wireless, all-laptop public school this fall. The 350 students at the school will not have traditional textbooks. Instead, they will use electronic and online articles as part of more traditional teacher lesson plans.

Vail Unified School District's decision to go with an all-electronic school is rare, experts say. Often, cost, insecurity, ignorance and institutional constraints prevent schools from making the leap away from paper.

"The efforts are very sporadic," said Mark Schneiderman, director of education policy for the Software and Information Industry Association. "A minority of communities are doing a good or very good job, but a large number are just not there on a number of levels."

Calvin Baker, superintendent of Vail Unified School District, said the move to electronic materials gets teachers away from the habit of simply marching through a textbook each year.

He noted that the AIMS test now makes the state standards the curriculum, not textbooks. Arizona students will soon need to pass Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards to graduate from high school.

But the move to laptops is not cheap. The laptops cost $850 each, and the district will hand them to 350 students for the entire year. The fast- growing district hopes to have 750 students at the high school eventually.

A set of textbooks runs about $500 to $600, Baker said.

It's not clear how the change to laptops will work, he conceded.

"I'm sure there are going to be some adjustments. But we visited other schools using laptops. And at the schools with laptops, students were just more engaged than at non-laptop schools," he said.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...CTION=BUSINESS





Data Theft: How to Fix the Mess
Joseph Nocera

IN the early 1970's, Senator William Proxmire, the Wisconsin Democrat who was the scourge of the banking industry, decided something needed to be done about the chaotic state of the credit card business.

Credit cards were still relatively new, and all over the country, banks were peppering Americans with unsolicited cards - sending them not only to the heads of households, but to their children, their dogs and their dead grandmothers. Thieves would follow the postman doing his rounds, steal cards out of mailboxes and use them. People were being billed for things they'd never bought with cards they'd never asked for - and the banks were demanding payment. Even though the banking industry insisted that only a small minority of transactions were fraudulent, the public outcry was enormous.

Here's what Mr. Proxmire did. First, in 1970, he drafted a bill that banned the practice of "dropping" credit cards on people without their consent. Four years later, he pushed through a bill that limited consumer liability to $50 if a credit card was used fraudulently.

The banking industry was apoplectic as these bills became the law of the land, especially the $50 limit. Why, bank lobbyists complained, should the institutions have to take the hit if a customer was so careless as to have his wallet stolen or credit card snitched? Shouldn't people be responsible for their own actions?

But in time, the banks came to see that it owed Senator Proxmire a debt of gratitude. He hadn't hurt the credit card industry. He had saved it. By forcing the industry to solicit customers, instead of simply dropping cards on them, he gave Americans the feeling that the decision to have a credit card was theirs, not some bank's.

And with the $50 liability limit, people no longer had to fear the dire consequences of having their card stolen. They could embrace credit cards instead of fearing them, which for better or worse they've been doing ever since; there are today over a billion credit cards just in the United States. Over the years, banks and consumers learned to deal with credit card fraud, so that it has become little more than an irritant. Banks don't even demand the $50; they cover the entire loss themselves.

The current "identity theft" crisis, in which we're learning, daily it seems, that institutions like Bank of America, ChoicePoint, Citigroup and many others have allowed our personal financial data to be lost or stolen, is fundamentally an outgrowth of our dependence on credit.

Credit cards are the primary means of buying things on the Internet. Credit card information is what is most often stolen in a data breach case, like the recent CardSystems Solutions fiasco, in which as many as 40 million credit cards may have been compromised. Even in the worst case, when data thieves get enough personal information to impersonate someone electronically, the bad guys usually wind up using that information to establish credit in order to buy things in that person's name.

So when I read the stories about data theft, I can't help thinking back on that credit card crisis of the 1970's. Now, as then, the chances of facing that worst outcome are pretty rare. The vast majority of modern cases classified as identity theft are really just old-fashioned credit card fraud, easily dealt with. (In fact, most of the time, the fraud is committed the old-fashioned way: through the lifting of a wallet.) According to TowerGroup, a financial services consulting firm, only about 160,000 people last year had their financial identities - as opposed to their credit card information, which numbers in the millions - stolen by fraudsters.

Many of the data losses are just that: lost data, not stolen data. The problem isn't even that new; the main reason we are learning about all these cases is a 2003 California law that required, for the first time, that consumers be informed when their personal information was compromised. Before 2003, there were plenty of examples of hacked data. But we didn't hear about those, so we weren't as worried about it.

But so what? In the end, it doesn't matter if the problem isn't new or the risk of being hurt by a data theft is small: the fear is palpable. "In the ChoicePoint case," said Robert Richardson, the editorial director of the Computer Security Institute, "people weren't just uncomfortable that their data was stolen."

"They were also upset to discover that this company that had insufficiently protected their data even had their data."

ChoicePoint is one of those murky "data aggregators," which describes itself as being involved in the "identification, retrieval, storage, analysis and delivery of data." Just reading the description is unsettling.

There is an uneasy sense that people simply do not have control of their own financial information. Most victims of identity theft have no idea how it happened. Their data is out there in the ether of the Internet or on the computers of companies they've never heard of. And if, heaven forbid, they should have their financial identity stolen, the prospect of disaster looms. Is it any wonder that, according to recent surveys by both the Gartner Group and Forrester Research, the percentage of people who say they have stopped using the Internet to pay bills, has risen substantially?

And yet so far, what we've mainly heard is that the onus is on us, the consumer, to become more vigilant. We are told to check our accounts online regularly and to sign up for services that will allow us to monitor our credit rating. True, banks are finally trying to do a better job of securing credit card and other personal data, but there is no legal requirement for them to do so, and there are plenty of bankers who think the problem is overstated.

"Ever since we've had credit, we've had fraud," said Jerry Silva, a TowerGroup analyst. "There is a feeling from the institutions that they've had this problem solved. And there is not a lot of ID theft, which is what all the hullabaloo is about."

Which is why I wish William Proxmire were still on the case. What we need right now is someone in power who can put the burden for this problem right where it belongs: on the financial and other institutions who collect this data. Let's face it: by the time even the most vigilant consumer discovers his information has been used fraudulently, it's already too late. "When people ask me what can the average person do to stop identity theft, I say, 'nothing,' " said Bruce Schneier, the chief technology officer of Counterpane Internet Security. "This data is held by third parties and they have no impetus to fix it."

Mr. Schneier, though, has a solution that is positively Proxmirian in its elegance and simplicity. Most of the bills that have been filed in Congress to deal with identity fraud are filled with specific requirements for banks and other institutions: encrypt this; safeguard that; strengthen this firewall.

Mr. Schneier says forget about all that. Instead, do what Congress did in the 1970's - just put the burden on the financial industry. "If we're ever going to manage the risks and effects of electronic impersonation," he wrote recently on CNET (and also in his blog), "we must concentrate on preventing and detecting fraudulent transactions." And the only way to do that, he added, is by making the financial institutions liable for fraudulent transactions.

"I think business ingenuity is top notch," Mr. Schneier said in an interview. "And I think if you make it their problem, they will solve it."

Yes, he acknowledged, letting consumers off the hook might cause them to be less vigilant. But that is exactly what Senator Proxmire did and to great effect. Forcing the financial institutions to bear the entire burden will cause them to tighten up their procedures until the fraud is under control. Maybe they will invest in complex software. But maybe they'll take simpler measures as well, like making it a little less easy than it is today to obtain a credit card. Best of all, once people see these measures take effect - and realize that someone else is responsible for fixing the problems - their fear will abate.

As Senator Proxmire understood a long time ago, fear is the great enemy of commerce. Maybe this time, the banks will finally understand that as well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/09/bu.../09nocera.html





Worse Than Death
John Tierney

Last year a German teenager named Sven Jaschan released the Sasser worm, one of the costliest acts of sabotage in the history of the Internet. It crippled computers around the world, closing businesses, halting trains and grounding airplanes.

Which of these punishments does he deserve?

A) A 21-month suspended sentence and 30 hours of community service.

B) Two years in prison.

C) A five-year ban on using computers.

D) Death.

E) Something worse.

If you answered A, you must be the German judge who gave him that sentence last week.

If you answered B or C, you're confusing him with other hackers who have been sent to prison and banned from using computers or the Internet. But those punishments don't seem to have deterred hackers like Mr. Jaschan from taking their place.

I'm tempted to say that the correct answer is D, and not just because of the man-years I've spent running virus scans and reformatting hard drives. I'm almost convinced by Steven Landsburg's cost-benefit analysis showing that the spreaders of computer viruses and worms are more logical candidates for capital punishment than murderers are.

Professor Landsburg, an economist at the University of Rochester, has calculated the relative value to society of executing murderers and hackers. By using studies estimating the deterrent value of capital punishment, he figures that executing one murderer yields at most $100 million in social benefits.

The benefits of executing a hacker would be greater, he argues, because the social costs of hacking are estimated to be so much higher: $50 billion per year. Deterring a mere one-fifth of 1 percent of those crimes - one in 500 hackers - would save society $100 million. And Professor Landsburg believes that a lot more than one in 500 hackers would be deterred by the sight of a colleague on death row.

I see his logic, but I also see practical difficulties. For one thing, many hackers live in places where capital punishment is illegal. For another, most of them are teenage boys, a group that has never been known for fearing death. They're probably more afraid of going five years without computer games.

So that leaves us with E: something worse than death. Something that would approximate the millions of hours of tedium that hackers have inflicted on society.

Hackers are the Internet equivalent of Richard Reid, the shoe-bomber who didn't manage to hurt anyone on his airplane but has been annoying travelers ever since. When I join the line of passengers taking off their shoes at the airport, I get little satisfaction in thinking that the man responsible for this ritual is sitting somewhere by himself in a prison cell, probably with his shoes on.

He ought to spend his days within smelling range of all those socks at the airport. In an exclusive poll I once conducted among fellow passengers, I found that 80 percent favored forcing Mr. Reid to sit next to the metal detector, helping small children put their sneakers back on.

The remaining 20 percent in the poll (meaning one guy) said that wasn't harsh enough. He advocated requiring Mr. Reid to change the Odor-Eaters insoles of runners at the end of the New York City Marathon.

What would be the equivalent public service for Internet sociopaths? Maybe convicted spammers could be sentenced to community service testing all their own wares. The number of organ-enlargement offers would decline if a spammer thought he'd have to appear in a public-service television commercial explaining that he'd tried them all and they just didn't work for him.

Convicted hackers like Mr. Jaschan could be sentenced to a lifetime of removing worms and viruses, but the computer experts I consulted said there would be too big a risk that the hackers would enjoy the job. After all, Mr. Jaschan is now doing just that for a software security firm.

The experts weren't sure that any punishment could fit the crime, but they had several suggestions: Make the hacker spend 16 hours a day fielding help-desk inquiries in an AOL chat room for computer novices. Force him to do this with a user name at least as uncool as KoolDude and to work on a vintage IBM PC with a 2400-baud dial- up connection. Most painful of all for any geek, make him use Windows 95 for the rest of his life.

I realize that this may not be enough. If you have any better ideas, send them along.

E-mail: tierney@nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/12/op...ierney.html?hp

[JackSpratts]

Surveillance

Police Still Using Matrix-Type Database
David Royse

When the federal government in April stopped funding a database that lets police quickly see public records and commercially collected information on Americans, privacy advocates celebrated what they saw as a victory against overzealousness in the fight against terrorism.

But a few states are pressing forward with a similar system, continuing to look for ways to quickly search through a trove of data - from driver's license photos to phone numbers to information about people's cars. Their argument in seeking to keep the Matrix database alive in some form: it's too important for solving crimes to give up on.

Florida, Ohio, Connecticut and Pennsylvania still use software that lets investigators quickly cull through much of the data about people that reside in cyberspace. However, without the federal grant for the Matrix data-sharing system, they won't be routinely searching through digital files from other states - at least for now.

Privacy advocates still don't like the idea, saying government shouldn't have easy access to so much information about people who haven't done anything wrong.

But law officers bent on keeping the Matrix alive say the information is already out there anyway for companies to use for less noble purposes. Law enforcement has always used such information; it just never had a big computer search tool to quickly find links between people and places.

"The media uses that data, attorneys use it, banks use it," said Mark Zadra, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent in charge of the system. "We've been using online data like that for 10 to 15 years. What this does is link those. ... What took law enforcement so long to use technology and get into the 21st century?"

Matrix - the ominous name is shorthand for Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange - was born as an anti-terrorism tool in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Created by Florida law enforcement officials working with a one-time drug-running pilot-turned-millionaire computer whiz named Hank Asher, it was conceived as a way for states to combine data they have on people - driving records and criminal histories, for example - with similar records from other states.

The company that Asher founded but no longer works for, Seisint Inc., also added to Matrix information gathered in the private sector, including some of what credit card companies collect, such as names, addresses and Social Security numbers - though actual credit histories were not included.

Together, the program would give states a powerful tool that could link someone to several addresses or vehicles, and possibly to other people who lived at those same houses or drove the same car.

Those links could help thwart terrorism or solve crimes in which witnesses could provide only partial information, like half of a license plate and the make of a car. The technology is credited in part with helping police crack the Washington, D.C., sniper case in 2002.

"It very quickly allows you to identify identities, associates, things like that," said Lt. Col. Ralph Periandi, deputy commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police. "Two or three other people who might be connected."

Matrix impressed federal officials enough that the program was seeded with $12 million from the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security. Thirteen states eventually signed on or expressed interest in feeding their data into the system, representing half the U.S. population.

But over time, several states pulled out, partly because of concerns about the cost or laws governing the transfer of data out of state. California's attorney general decided Matrix "offends fundamental rights of privacy."

Those objections were nothing compared to the criticism Matrix encountered from the right and the left, including from the American Civil Liberties Union.

"It is essentially an electronic file on everyone whether they are suspected of criminal activity or not," said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU in Florida. "I can't think of anything more un-American."

When the federal grant for Matrix ended in April - there is dispute over whether the privacy issues may have killed the government's interest - the database itself officially ended as well. But Florida and the three other states are still using its database- searching software. Florida is continuing to seek out companies that can help them build another, larger cache of information. And officials envision one day sharing that data with other states again.

In addition to contracting for searching software from Seisint - now part of information giant LexisNexis - Florida has requested information from companies on what data they could provide that the police could add to their database. The proposal says Florida police are interested in such privately available data as insurance, financial, property and business records.

Although Matrix was designed as a terrorism tool, Zadra said its main value has been for solving more ordinary crimes. He cites success stories ranging from kidnapping to frauds and theft. In fact, in Florida the system is most often queried in fraud investigations, followed closely by robbery, state records show.

To support those efforts, the Florida police envision getting what's known as "credit header information" - basic identifiers for people - from private credit rating agencies. That's led to fears that police would looking into people's credit.

"Absolutely not true," Zadra said. What the agency wants from credit agencies is the up-to-date addresses that creditors are famously aggressive about getting.

"We don't get their account numbers, we don't get their expenditures, we don't track and monitor anybody," Zadra said. "We don't know what library books you're checking out, what X-rated videos people are renting."

The agency also wants to limit the searches to information generally available either to the public or to law enforcement without a search warrant, Zadra said. For example, one of the databases the system searches is the FDLE's own registry of sex offenders - which has become a popular Web site for members of the general public to search for people in their neighborhood.

For many privacy advocates Matrix raises the larger question of why so much of this information is already out there in databases for law enforcement to covet.

"Technology operates at the speed of light and privacy protection is at a snail's pace," the ACLU's Simon said. "Governments like the state of Florida have not enacted privacy legislation and aren't limiting the circulation of information about you without your knowledge and consent."

Zadra said the FDLE is keenly aware of concerns about how the data are used - but noted that ultimately the files are mostly public data that people have freely given out. He points to the long lines of people at sporting events who will give away information on themselves by filling out a credit application just for a free T-shirt.

"They've given their private and personal information to somebody they have no idea about, but when they hear law enforcement wants to use it to solve a crime ... they can't believe it," Zadra said.

"We're doing exactly what the public asked us to do after Sept. 11. They said, `My goodness, how did the law enforcement community allow this to happen?'"
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...CTION=BUSINESS





Enhanced In-Air Internet Surveillance Sought
Jonathan Krim

Federal law enforcement agencies are seeking enhanced surveillance powers over Internet service on airplanes, an effort to shape an emerging technology to meet the government's concerns about terrorism.

Authorities want the ability to intercept, block or divert e-mail or other online communication to and from airplanes after obtaining a court order. Internet providers would have to allow government monitoring within 10 minutes of a court order being granted, be able to electronically identify users by their seat numbers and be required to collect and store records of the communications for 24 hours.

Such capabilities would go far beyond the government's current ability to monitor Internet traffic on land.

The FBI, Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security jointly made the requests in a filing last week with the Federal Communications Commission, which is examining mostly technical changes to rules for satellite-based Internet services in hopes of spurring more deployment on airplanes. The service is available on some international airlines, but domestic carriers have not yet launched it.

The law enforcement agencies say they support giving travelers the ability to surf the Web and communicate via e-mail or instant messaging in the air but also fear that terrorists could use the services to coordinate an attack among themselves on a single plane, between aircraft or with people on the ground. The government also fears terrorists could use Internet-connected devices to detonate explosives via remote control.

"There is a short window of opportunity in which action can be taken to thwart a suicidal terrorist hijacking or remedy other crisis situations aboard an aircraft, and law enforcement needs to maximize its ability to respond to these potentially lethal situations," according to the filing, which was first reported by Wired News.

The petition comes at a time of ongoing controversy over how deeply security agencies should be able to penetrate private life in efforts to protect against terrorism.

"It does sort of make your head snap back," said James X. Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a digital rights policy group. "Basically this is the full ability to control all communications into and out of" a particular spot.

Congress is wrestling with competing plans to renew the parts of the Patriot Act that expire at the end of the year. Civil liberties advocates say the law, which passed shortly after the 2001 attacks, is overly intrusive and want it scaled back, while law enforcement and the Bush administration want it renewed and in some ways expanded.

One proposal, passed by the Senate Intelligence Committee last month, would make it easier for the FBI to open mail and issue subpoenas without a judge's approval in terrorism probes. A House panel, meanwhile, voted to limit the FBI's ability to seize library and bookstore records during terrorism investigations.

For more than a year, the FCC has been separately considering whether companies that provide Internet access and carry Web traffic should be required to build surveillance capability into their networks.

Telecommunications carriers are required to do so under the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, and law enforcement agencies argue that the same standard should apply to any type of Internet communication, whether via cable lines, wireless, satellites or other technologies.

But the petition for in-flight rules goes well beyond the provisions in that 1994 law.

For example, Internet providers currently are not required to capture and store logs of Internet communications on their networks, which can carry hundreds of millions of e-mails per day.

Dempsey said the proposals -- such as the ability to disable the Internet use of some passengers while maintaining it for law enforcement or airline personnel on a plane - - amount to government-mandated design of the technology.

And if the proposals are approved, he said, he would expect law enforcement to argue that the same capabilities are needed on land.

A spokesman for the Justice Department said the agencies would not comment on the proposals pending congressional testimony scheduled for tomorrow by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Laura H. Parsky.

The business of providing Internet service on airplanes is just taking shape. Boeing Co. is the largest worldwide provider, but competitors are beginning to emerge, with Europe's Airbus SAS and Germany's Siemens AG announcing a partnership this week to create a similar service.

Boeing will abide by any government rules, company spokesman Terrance Scott said. But he added that the company questions whether the FCC's technical review of satellite services is the proper venue for examining surveillance rules, rather than Congress or the courts.

He said Boeing is still evaluating how much it would cost to comply with the proposed rules as well as the impact on the airlines and customers. Expense remains an issue for many U.S. carriers in deciding whether to offer the service, Scott said. The airlines split installation costs with Boeing and then share in revenues.

The Boeing Connexion service currently ranges in price from $9.95 for one hour to $29.95 for flights longer than six hours, Scott said. Customers sign on to and use the system in much the same way as commercial services provided at outdoor cafes, in airline terminals or other wireless "hot spots."

Much of the world is covered by satellites that transmit the signals, although some areas such as Australia and the South Pacific lag behind.

To date, Scott said, the service is not profitable.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071201435.html





Parties Failing in Joint Effort to Review Patriot Act
Eric Lichtblau

Efforts in Congress to reach a bipartisan compromise over the future of the USA Patriot Act appear to have splintered, with Republican leaders on the Senate and House Judiciary Committees moving ahead on their own with proposals to extend the government's counterterrorism powers under the hotly debated law.

Some Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee said they thought they had reached a tentative compromise in recent weeks on a joint bill that would have extended the law while imposing tougher restrictions on the government's ability to use some surveillance powers against terror suspects.

While negotiations to broker a bipartisan deal continued late Monday, Democratic officials said the compromise appeared to have stalled because of disagreement over whether to impose new restrictions on the government's ability to demand library records and other powers.

Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and other Republicans on the panel are planning to introduce a proposal as early as Tuesday. No Democrats have signed on in support of the proposal, which would make permanent provisions of the law that are set to expire at the end of the year.

On the House side, meanwhile, Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who leads the Judiciary Committee, introduced a similar proposal on Monday.

Frictions on the House Judiciary Committee over the act spilled into public view a month ago at a hearing on the law that degenerated into chaos, as Mr. Sensenbrenner gaveled the session to an end prematurely and stormed out after Democrats made accusations about the administration's policies on torture.

House Democratic officials said Monday that while they were actively involved in negotiations on the original passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001, they felt shut out now.

"There's an incredible contrast this time around," said a senior Democratic aide on the House Judiciary Committee, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of political tensions surrounding the issue.

"This time, the Republicans have told us for some time they are working on a bill, they asked for our suggestions, and they ended up saying that none of our suggestions were acceptable," the aide said. "So they're now dropping a bill that we see as a total reauthorization of the Patriot Act with only very slight tweaks."

The Sensenbrenner bill and the proposal that Mr. Specter is expected to introduce this week represent largely a continuation of current powers under the act.

The Judiciary Committee proposals do not contain the type of expanded counterterrorism powers that would be granted under a competing proposal already passed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, including the F.B.I.'s expanded use of terrorism subpoenas without a judge's approval and its expanded monitoring of certain mailings.

And the judiciary proposals would incorporate some concessions sought by Democrats on relatively narrow points, officials said. These include provisions to ensure that people served with certain types of subpoenas can legally challenge them and that information demanded by the authorities is "relevant" to terror and intelligence investigations.

But Lisa Graves, a senior counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, which is pushing for restrictions, said Monday, "We consider these really cosmetic changes that don't go to the heart of the concerns that people around the country have about the government's powers."

A compromise appeared to have been reached weeks ago between Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee on a plan that would have incorporated further restrictions, but the plan was scuttled at least temporarily when Mr. Specter made plans to move ahead on his own with a bill that would largely re- authorize the existing law, Congressional officials said.

Some Democrats attributed the breakdown to a Justice Department effort to expand government powers further, while Republicans said changes sought by aides to Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the panel, scuttled the plan.

The White House has made renewal of the antiterrorism law a top priority, and President Bush pushed again for its extension in a speech Monday at the F.B.I. Academy in Quantico, Va.

"The terrorist threats against us will not expire at the end of this year," he said, "and neither should the protections of the Patriot Act."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/12/po...12patriot.html





Bush Picks Tech Lawyer For Security Post
Declan McCullagh

President Bush has chosen Stewart Baker, one of Washington's most influential technology lawyers, to be assistant secretary for policy in the Homeland Security Department.

Baker's new job, which requires Senate confirmation, would place him in the prominent position of shaping policy on topics from data mining to the department's planning for "what if" scenarios far off in the future. It also could include evaluating existing department functions for efficiency and creating a national strategy to prevent terrorists from entering the United States.

The nomination, announced Wednesday, is part of a sweeping reorganization of the department that Secretary Michael Chertoff announced Wednesday. "Creation of a DHS policy shop has been suggested by members of Congress, (former Secretary Tom Ridge), and numerous outside experts," Chertoff said. "Now is the time to make this a reality."

Baker is currently a partner at the Steptoe and Johnson law firm--which counts many technology companies as clients--and has been an important but polarizing fixture in many privacy debates during the last 15 years.

Baker served as the general counsel of the National Security Agency--the bane of many civil libertarians--during the early 1990s. At the time, the NSA was busy defending the Clipper Chip, intrusive export controls on encryption products, and "key escrow" rules that would encourage encryption backdoors for police convenience.

In a famous article published in the June 1994 issue of Wired Magazine, Baker warned against the ready availability of strong, secure encryption products without backdoors. "One of the earliest users of (Pretty Good Privacy) was a high-tech pedophile in Santa Clara, California," Baker wrote. "He used PGP to encrypt files that, police suspect, include a diary of his contacts with susceptible young boys using computer bulletin boards all over the country."

After the Senate approved what would become the Patriot Act in September 2001, Baker said privacy advocates were overreacting: "We may be missing some opportunities to improve privacy law, but it's hard to say that the privacy sky is falling."

Those kind of statements have not endeared Baker to privacy advocates, who reacted with dismay when hearing news of the announcement Wednesday.

"For the civil liberties community, this could be a troubling appointment," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "Stu Baker often stood on the other side of important national debates on protecting privacy and preserving open government."

The simultaneous announcements Wednesday by Bush and Chertoff appear to be inspired by a December 2004 report from the conservative Heritage Foundation that urged a shakeup at the Department of Homeland Security. It recommended the creation of a "unified policy planning staff headed by an undersecretary for policy."

But because the creation of a policy undersecretary post would require Congress to rewrite the law--which could take months at best--Baker was picked for the newly created post of assistant secretary for policy. That post requires Senate confirmation but not a change to the law.

Baker recently served as general counsel for the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction, and represents Internet service providers as general counsel of a trade association. He received his law degree from UCLA and clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
http://news.com.com/Bush+picks+tech+...3-5787520.html





UK Lobbies For Data Rentention
Graeme Wearden

Charles Clarke wants email and phone records kept for up to three years to aid police investigations, but critics have claimed the scheme is expensive and unwieldy

Britain will renew its efforts this week to get fellow European Union members to agree to the introduction of new controls for the retention of telecommunications data, following last week's bombings in London.

Under the proposals, telecoms operators and Internet service providers would have to keep records of emails, telephone calls and text messages for between 12 months and three years. Law enforcement agencies would be able to see who had sent and received these communications, although the content of these communications would not be stored.

Home secretary Charles Clarke claims that the powers would help to establish links between individuals.

"Telecommunications records, whether of telephones or of emails, which record what calls were made from what number to another number at what time are of important use for intelligence," said Clarke, according to reports.

The UK is one of several countries advocating the introduction of such measures over recent months. Other EU members have opposed them, fearing they would erode civil liberties.

Back in June the European Parliament rejected draft legislation introduced by France, Ireland, Sweden and the UK, amid fears that the proposals were illegal.

"There are sizable doubts on the choice of the legal basis and the proportionality of the measures. It is also possible that the proposal contravenes Article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights," the report from the parliamentary committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs says.

The committee also criticised the proposal because the data would be difficult to analyse and criminals could find a way around it.

"Given the volume of data to be retained, particularly Internet data, it is unlikely that an appropriate analysis of the data will be at all possible," the report says. "Individuals involved in organised crime and terrorism will easily find a way to prevent their data being traced."

The European Parliament's civil liberties committee has estimated that the proposals could cost large ISPs and telcos up to £120m to set up, and millions of pound a year to run.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050711/152/fn318.html





Coast to coast

UConn Finds Hacking Program in Server
AP

HARTFORD - The University of Connecticut is notifying 72,000 students, staff and faculty as a precaution after officials found a computer-hacking program in a server at the school.

The server contains names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, phone numbers and addresses for anyone with an account that allows access to the school's computer network. The personal information was not in a readable format, officials said.

University officials found the computer-hacking program this week and said it had been placed in a server at the school in 2003. They do not believe any information was compromised although there was an opportunity for someone to access it.

An e-mail was sent to all users at the University of Connecticut and the University of Connecticut Health Center on Friday, and the university was contacting people without e-mail accounts by mail, spokeswoman Karen Grava said.

The security breach was discovered Monday after a university vendor reported that someone tried to access its server with an illegal password.

Technology staff discovered that a program known as a rootkit had been installed on the server. The server was immediately taken off-line, chief information officer Michael Kerntke said.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...st omwire.htm


U-S-C Tells 270-Thousand Applicants A Hacker May Have Accessed Their Records
AP

LOS ANGELES - Online applications at the University of Southern California may have been scrutinized by more than just admissions officers.

University officials say hackers may have been able to read the files submitted online over the past eight years. The school is contacting about 270-thousand people who used its online application system during that period to warn them of the potential security breech. One hacker took advantage of a security flaw he discovered while trying to use the U-S-C Web site, and reported the flaw to an online security magazine, SecurityFocus. The publication then informed U-S-C. Officials believe the hacker looked at only about ten files. Katharine Harrington, U-S-C's dean of admission and financial aid, says "the scope of this is pretty small," but the school is "taking it very seriously."
http://www.wlbt.com/global/story.asp?s=3574055





Coalition Issue Definitions for 'Spyware'
Anick Jesdanun

Anti-spyware vendors and consumer groups took a stab at issuing uniform definitions for "spyware" and "adware" on Tuesday in hopes of giving computer users more control over their machines.

The definitions seek clarity that could help improve anti-spyware products, educate consumers and fend off lawsuits from developers of software that sneaks onto computers.

It's not clear what, if anything, the taxonomy itself might accomplish in ending the deception involved in placing intrusive and damaging programs on people's computers.

The 13-page document is silent, for instance, on what developers must do to obtain consent from consumers. Nor does the document, still formally a draft, clearly state how specific programs might fall under a certain category.

"It's not the end game but it's a great starting point," said Dave Cole, director of product management at Symantec Corp., a member of the coalition that spent three months crafting the terms. "You've got to have a foundation, a common vocabulary to start with ... and have all of us speak the same language."

Forty-three percent of adult U.S. Internet users say they've been hit with spyware, adware or both, according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project. More than 90 percent of Internet users have changed their online behavior, meanwhile, to try to avoid becoming victimized.

The coalition flags as potential threats - an umbrella definition that includes spyware, adware and other categories such as "hijackers" and "cookies" - programs that:

-impair users' control over their systems, including privacy and security;

-impair the use of system resources, including what programs are installed on their computers; or

-collect, use and distribute personal or otherwise sensitive information.

By classifying "adware" as falling under the umbrella term, "Spyware and Other Potentially Unwanted Technologies," the coalition avoided a key dispute that has led to lawsuits: Is adware a form of spyware or are the two separate?

The coalition recognized that not all advertising software is unwanted and restricted the use of "adware" to the potentially unwanted kind. It created a separate category for "hijackers" that change browser settings and noted that some data files, or "cookies," have legitimate uses for saving preferences.

The industry can now discuss and define how specific technologies or practices harm users, said Ari Schwartz of the Center for Democracy and Technology, which led the coalition. He said more specific guidelines are expected this fall.

The definitions themselves could undergo revision after a one-month period for public comment.

Release of the definitions comes as Microsoft Corp. acknowledges that it has revised its treatment of adware made by Claria Corp., formerly known as Gator Corp.

Instead of putting the programs in "quarantine," Microsoft's anti-spyware tool recommends users "ignore" the items it detects. Microsoft said the change was unrelated to speculation that Microsoft has been in talks to buy Claria (Neither company would comment on any talks).

The three months that the coalition spent discussing the terms, Edelman said, could have been better used to get to the heart of the problem: Clarifying what constitutes a user's consent to allow spyware or adware to be installed on a personal computer.

The coalition did, however, provide tips for consumers, including advice on how to read license agreements and other "fine print" where consent is often sought.

Adware vendors said they welcome clearer rules on what's acceptable, though they consider definitions a good start.

"Is it perfect? No, but any kind of refinement, any added clarity is going to be helpful," said Sean Sundwall, a spokesman for 180solutions Inc. "50 percent is way better than 0 percent."

Bill Day, chief executive of WhenU.com Inc., said the terms "will tend to add structure to what has now been unstructured conversations" with anti-spyware vendors.

Schwartz said nothing in the definitions or the upcoming "best practices" guidelines will eliminate all differences among makers of anti-spyware programs.

"Companies are going to make decisions, and people are going to have to decide which anti-spyware tool is best for them," Schwartz said. "Each company itself will have to make decisions about whether something is unwanted or unexpected."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...CTION=BUSINESS





Porn sting yields results

Man Netted In Cyper Sweep To Plead Guilty
Amy Raisin Darvish

A child pornography sting spanning two counties netted a Stevenson Ranch man who has agreed to plead guilty to possessing thousands of images of child porn on his home computer, officials said.
Jesus Rojero Gurrola, 39, agreed to plead guilty and is expected to appear in court in the coming weeks, according to Thom Mrozek, public affairs officer for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles.

Law enforcement officials on Wednesday announced charges against 28 defendants in Los Angeles and Orange counties, nine of whom -- including Gurrola -- have agreed to plead guilty.

Gurrola is suspected of using a peer-to-peer computer file-sharing system to download more than 10,000 images of child pornography, many of which depicted children younger than 12 engaging in sexually explicit acts, according to a statement from Mrozek's office.

In March 2004, an undercover Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent investigating Internet distribution of child pornography downloaded four motion picture files from a file-sharing service that showed young boys performing sex acts. The agent traced the source of the images to Gurrola's home computer, officials said.

Wednesday's cases resulted from independent investigations involving the FBI, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the U.S. Secret Service and the California Department of Justice's Bureau of Investigation.

The cases announced Wednesday are the latest in nearly 100 child exploitation cases filed by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District of California in the last 2 years.

"This aggressive sweep of child pornographers will bring some justice to the...children who have been exploited," U.S. Attorney Debra Wong Yang said in a statement. "These cases should send a strong message that law enforcement will act to protect our children."

Gurrola's plea agreement includes one count of possession of child pornography, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison.
http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1...963848,00.html





CBS News to Expand Web News Component
David Bauder

CBS News is aggressively expanding its Internet capabilities to offer a 24-hour news network with a "video jukebox" that allows consumers to construct their own online newscasts, the network announced Tuesday.

The revamped CBSNews.com site also includes a Web log, "Public Eye," where CBS News executives and journalists respond to questions and complaints from the public.

The advertiser-supported Web site gives consumers free access to more than 25,000 video clips. CBS journalists will be encouraged to frequently contribute video reports to the site instead of simply waiting for the next television broadcast.

"It's increasingly clear that the future of CBS News is not just as a practitioner of broadcast journalism but of broadband journalism," CBS News President Andrew Heyward said.

CBS has lagged behind ABC, the other major broadcast network that does not have an affiliated cable news network, in moving onto the Web. CBS claimed it will offer a more viewer-controlled experience than ABC, which has more elements of a traditional television newscast put on the Web.

Its newly designed home page has a feature called "The EyeBox," which allows viewers to build their own newscast from exclusive Web video, material already broadcast on the network and archival material.

CBS hopes the redesign can also help attract more young people to its news product. Television news viewers tend to skew old, and CBS generally has the oldest audience. CBS News is also still seeking a new format and replacement for Dan Rather on its struggling flagship broadcast, the "CBS Evening News."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...CTION=BUSINESS





AOL, XM Form Joint Entertainment Venture
Anick Jesdanun

Live and on-demand concerts and comedy shows will be the foundation of a new joint venture announced Tuesday for delivering entertainment via the Internet, satellite, wireless and other platforms.

The joint venture involves America Online Inc., XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and Anschutz Corp.'s AEG unit, which owns sports and entertainment arenas and produces concerts and other shows.

Formation of the company, called Network Live, follows AOL's success in delivering seven separate feeds from the Live 8 concerts - all without any meltdowns common with early high-interest events online. Some 5 million people viewed the July 2 shows online, and AOL broke its own records with a peak of 175,000 simultaneous users.

Kevin Wall, who oversaw production of the Live 8 video broadcasts for AOL and other outlets worldwide, will serve as Network Live's chief executive.

"We're creating the network of the future, being able to access entertainment digital content anytime, anywhere on any particular device," Wall said.

Revenues will come from ads and licensing fees, with no current plans to charge for shows on a pay-per-view basis, Wall said. Officials did not disclose other financial terms, besides saying all three companies and Wall have equity stakes.

Network Live is but the latest venture into online video programming.

Earlier Tuesday, CBS News announced it would offer a 24-hour news network over high-speed broadband lines, and Nickelodeon last week launched an on-demand service promising up to 20 hours of new programming for kids every week.

Companies are embracing online video as more than half of U.S. Internet users now have broadband connections at home and technology can deliver programming streams without the jerkiness and graininess typical early on.

AOL already offers free concerts and other video programs on the Internet, both live and on demand, and the new venture will expand on the numbers and types. Shows seen at AOL.com will also be available to XM's 4.4 million subscribers - live and through rebroadcasts - on XM's existing satellite radio channels.

Network Live will also try to license programming for distribution on wireless, HDTV and other platforms, though AOL said no deals have been struck yet.

Much of the programming will come from arenas owned by and concerts produced by AEG, which owns or controls the Staples Center in Los Angeles, the Home Depot Center in Carson, Calif., the Nokia Theatre at Grand Prairie, Texas, and the Manchester Evening News Arena in Manchester, England.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...CTION=BUSINESS





Samsung, LG Nudge Wireless-VoIP Calling
Bruce Meyerson

Internet telephone service tiptoed a few more steps into the wireless realm on Tuesday as Skype and Boingo unveiled a service to enable Voice- over-Internet calls over Wi-Fi hot spots, while Samsung and LG announced plans to develop mobile phones that combine cellular and Wi-Fi technologies.

Skype Zones, costing $8 per month, allows laptop users to make phone calls using Skype Technologies SA's popular Internet phone services whenever they're near one of Boingo Wireless Inc.'s 18,000 transmitters in public locations such as coffee shops, airports and hotels.

Calls using Skype's basic computer-to-computer service, which bypasses the public telephone network, will remain free. Skype Technologies SA will still charge extra for calls dialed to a regular phone number or received from a regular phone number.

The fee for Skype Zones does not include access to the Internet and e-mail, which still costs $22 a month for unlimited usage from Boingo. But compared with the Internet package, where there are extra roaming charges in certain countries, the Skype service includes free access to all of Boingo's hot spots in about 40 nations.

Also Tuesday, Samsung Electronics Co. and LG Electronics Inc. of Korea both announced deals to use a new hybrid wireless technology from Kineto Wireless Inc. to develop mobile phones that can pass a call from a cellular network to a Wi-Fi network without interrupting the connection.

Samsung is licensing the technology to develop new mobile phones, while LG said it will be collaborating with Kineto on new hybrids. The companies did not say when they expect to introduce the new phones.

The new technology, known as UMA for Unlicensed Mobile Access, is designed to provide better call quality indoors, where cellular signals turn weak and short-range Wi-Fi signals are strong. UMA also may lighten the load on crowded cellular networks by allowing carriers to divert phone calls from their towers.

While live trials are already underway, wireless service providers have been hesitant about embracing UMA.

One reason may be that when a cellular call is handed off to a Wi-Fi network, the conversation is transmitted using Voice-over-Internet Protocol, or VoIP - a technology users associate with cheaper fees than mobile phones.

But despite the apparent benefits in terms of call quality and network capacity, it is unclear whether cellular carriers might be willing to provide such discounts.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...CTION=BUSINESS





Air Heads

Play That Funky ... Oh, Never Mind
Dan Crane

FOR a small but passionate group of men and women, myself included, Thursday will be the biggest night of the year.

For weeks I've been windmilling in front of mirrors and limbering up my neck in preparation for excessive head banging. I'm watching my carbs and hitting the hay early. Because in four days, at the Key Club in Los Angeles, I will be representing New York against some of the fiercest competitors ever to take the stage in one of the most important events of our lives: The U.S. Air Guitar Championships.

I know the glory of dressing up and fanatically playing an invisible instrument in front of a crowd is not something that everyone immediately grasps. When I tell people I've spent more than two years as a competitive air guitarist, they often look at me bewildered, like a dog tilting its head at an unfamiliar command. Or they just laugh at me. Following a segment about a competition, Jack Cafferty, a CNN anchor, once scoffed: "That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen. Air guitar?"

And in his book "Air Guitar," Dave Hickey, a professor of art criticism and theory at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, likens air guitar to art criticism, which he says cannot replace the original work but merely "bob after it, like a dinghy in the wake of a yacht."

But I'm here to tell you that air guitar is more than a bobbing dinghy. Up on stage you only have 60 seconds to convince the judges of your airisimilitude, and in those 60 seconds you must take everything you know about rock 'n' roll, boil it down to its essence, drink it and then spit it over the crowd like blood from the mouth of Alice Cooper.

In the words of the two-time (2002 and '03) world air guitar champion, Zac Monro (known as the Magnet), "Air guitar is the purest art form there is left."

So what does it take to win an air guitar competition? After suffering continual losses for three seasons in eight official competitions from New York to Denver to Los Angeles to Oulu, Finland - and coming in second place four times - I found out on May 21 at the New York regional air guitar competition. To paraphrase Nietzsche (an idol to many an air guitarist) my losses only made me stronger.

Wearing a silver jumpsuit and star-spangled armbands filled with dry ice, and rocking under the moniker Björn Türoque (pronounced tu-RAWK), I froze out the other contenders with my explosive rendition of "Set Me Free" by Sweet (an obscure yet classic glam-rock anthem). Advanced airmanship to be sure.

Air guitar is not about pretending to be a rock star. You must be that rock star. You might not need to put dry ice in your armbands to create smoky contrails as you strum, but it helps. As far as other wardrobe options go, nudity is an obvious attention-getter and has become a performance staple, but so far it hasn't won any competitions. And to paraphrase Twain, clothes make the air guitarist.

Another key component is your stage name. Puns are good, like Air Lingus (an Irish-American competitor), Air-Do-Well, and Air-satz. Something simple and to the point, like the Shred, works too. And don't go with a slow song, as I mistakenly did last year with Air Supply's ballad "Making Love Out of Nothing at All," which, when up against the lightning-fast licks of "Queen in Love" by Yngwie Malmsteen, quickly deflated. You may want a track with which the audience is familiar, but avoid clichés like Van Halen's "Eruption" (the air guitar equivalent to playing "Stairway to Heaven" in a guitar store) or Jimi Hendrix's rendition of "The Star-Spangled Banner."

Finally, air guitar is an instrument, but it's an entirely different instrument from the so-called "real" guitar. So don't focus on your fingering too much as you play. Remember, if you hit a bad note only you will know. Instead, engage the crowd: make eye contact, perch yourself on the monitor and flutter your tongue; make fans get out their air lighters.

Though air guitar is probably as old as rock 'n' roll itself (Elvis surely inspired teeny-boppers to imitate his swaggering strums), it didn't come out of the bedroom to gain cultural cachet until Tom Cruise, in briefs, strummed a fire poker to Bob Seger in the 1983 film "Risky Business." Six years later Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter, playing empty-headed American teenagers raised on arena rock, air-plucked their way through "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure."

Today air guitar is everywhere: even Britney Spears, who has never performed with an actual instrument, imitates the fans who imitate rock stars when she strums the air wildly in her 2005 video "Do Somethin' "; Will Arnett of "Arrested Development" recently played air guitar to the theme of "Law & Order" on "Late Night With Conan O'Brien"; and Will Farrell plays air guitar while serenading Nicole Kidman in the current film "Bewitched."

There is also, of course, the world crown. In 1996 the first Air Guitar World Championship took place in Oulu, Finland, with just seven local competitors. This year's competition is on Aug. 26 with national champions from 13 countries, from Australia to the United Arab Emirates, as well as the additional last-minute entrants who trek to Oulu (as I did in 2003) on a whim and a prayer.

The grand prize is a handmade Finnish guitar and an amplifier signed by Brian May of the band Queen. What an air guitarist will do with an actual guitar is anybody's guess.

And though performers from the United States only started competing in 2003, we've reigned air supreme: festooned with a Hello Kitty breastplate and crimson kimono, the Brooklynite C-Diddy won the world crown in 2003, and his female protégé, Sonyk-Rok, also from Brooklyn, tied for the title with a New Zealander in 2004.

This year, as the reigning New York champ, I am confident I can do my city proud. I've certainly paid my dues. But my air guitar chops weren't always so well honed. Growing up in the hardscrabble suburbs of Denver, I always did my air guitar in private, for fear of torment by my older brother and the public at large.

I had no idea that jumping up and down on my bed, wielding an imaginary ax in imitation of my rock 'n' roll heroes, would years later become an internationally recognized pursuit, or much less that I'd be good at it. Now, I dedicate part of my life to sharing the skills I've learned with the world.

There is no air guitar school (though there is an annual training camp prior to the world championship in Finland) and no secret formula, but I have established a monthly Aireoke night (see aireoke.com for details), which recently moved to Trash Bar in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Think of it as a farm system for the major leagues.

With qualifying events in seven cities where thousands of fans cheer on scores of contestants, it is clear that competitive air guitar is on our shores to stay. As Kriston Rucker, an organizer of the U.S. Air Guitar Competition, put it, "If there's one thing that Americans deserve to dominate, it's competitive air guitar."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/10/fa...les/10AIR.html





Expanding Your Mac's Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Options
Anne Zieger.

Because Mac users are largely overlooked when it comes to getting new products from software producers, most of them (happily) missed the Napster fallout. Plenty of safer (and legal) options are now available for Mac peer-to-peer sharing; Anne Zieger covers the possibilities you should be considering.

When the peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing revolution first hit the scene, Macintosh software was something of an afterthought. When Mac technology existed, it was often created as a backhanded, less-functional port of a PC product.

Today, with P2P software playing a much larger role in personal computing generally—and expanding beyond the boundaries of file sharing—the development community has responded. Over the past year or two, Macintosh clients have grown more robust, and the list of pure-Mac software (originating for OS X rather than ported) has grown longer. Few of the Mac clients have the kind of big-bucks support given the leading PC clients—in fact, many are small open-source projects—but at least the clients are rolling out.

Not only have Mac versions emerged for popular file-sharing clients such as LimeWire, but for other types of applications such as IP telephony client Skype. A growing list of Mac-native applications have even been released for other key functions, such as instant messaging, including Apple's own iChat AV.

Why should it even matter whether your latest download uses P2P communications? In some cases, of course, P2P is the predominant protocol on the network you want to access (such as Gnutella). In others, such as instant messaging, P2P communications can speed up processes that might be deadly slow when an intervening server is involved. And P2P meshes of host computers can sometimes dramatically speed up large downloads.

Ready to look around at the Mac P2P universe? Here's an overview of what's hot in some of the key areas of Mac P2P software.

Popular File-Sharing Options

Mac users still don't have access to absolutely everything that PC users do. In fact, Mac users have been passed over completely by developers of some of the most mature and widely used file-sharing clients. For example, while PC users have downloaded the Kazaa Media Desktop file-sharing program nearly 390 million times, this software still isn't available for Mac users. Nor is a Mac version available for Morpheus, another highly popular file-sharing client with more than 130 million downloads to date.

However, a wide variety of file-sharing clients are available for Mac, running on each of the major file-sharing networks. Among the most frequently used is LimeWire, which runs on Gnutella. LimeWire's creators have gone out of the way to make the product cross-platform (for PC, Mac, and Linux), and to address the sensibilities of each community. They've also promised never to bundle any sort of spyware into their product.

If you're tired of using clients that were designed for the PC world, give Xfactor a try. While your system must be up to date to use the latest version (written for OS X 10.3), Xfactor offers many features that should please Mac users, including P2P file sharing, an iTunes-like interface, an internal theater for previewing movies, iTunes and Finder integration, and Internet Relay Chat (IRC).

Other popular clients for Mac:

The popular Poisoned's open source, up-to-the-moment Mac client requires OS X 10.2 or better.
MLdonkey is an Overnet/eDonkey network client.
For fun, use MLdonkey with mlMac, a graphical user interface for the MLdonkey client.
XNap is a free open-source client for the OpenNap network.

A Different Approach

Want to try a slightly different approach to file sharing? How about a directly connected, user-controlled network? NeoModus' Direct Connect offers a version designed for OS X. Direct Connect's network doesn't rank with the big boys, statistically (it has roughly 400,000 users rather than millions) but NeoModus claims that users collectively share a petabyte of entertainment content—triple what the other networks offer.

Another option is BitTorrent, a tool designed to help pull down large files through distributed downloads. Unlike with the other clients, the software doesn't seek and download for you; Bit Torrent helps you locate the files, but you have to download them yourself. This may be less convenient than using tools such as LimeWire, but can offer substantial time savings if you want to download a really big file.

If you're a complete geek—or just like simple clients—there's Mutella, which works from a command-line interface. No pretty graphics here, but Mutella supports all key Gnutella node functions, including file search, downloads, and sharing.

Conferencing Choices

A growing list of communications clients offer a P2P-based Mac option. Perhaps the most widely used comes from Apple itself. Mac OS X Tiger is bundled with Apple's iChat AV, a videoconferencing and IM client. iChat IM is compatible with both AOL Instant Messenger and Jabber Instant Messaging. iChat isn't inherently a P2P-based tool, but it can be set up to establish P2P connections with other users who have iChat, using Apple's Bonjour connectivity technology (formerly known as Rendezvous). This works across an established network or over an ad hoc 802.11b network if your laptop is set up properly.

If you're up for a mixed-media session, another option for Mac P2P messaging is Bitwise IM. Like many other IM packages, Bitwise offers not only messaging but Voice over IP (VoIP) calling, file sharing, and whiteboarding options.

You might also try ineen, a combined audio/video conferencing and IM platform. While it was still in beta at the time of this writing, ineen offers several of the richest features available on a VoIP client, including call transfer, call recording, and speakerphone mode. Exploiting the inherent advantages of the P2P network architecture, ineen offers a unique feature that (theoretically) enables you to include an unlimited number of people in your voice or video conference. (Ordinarily, the limit for Ineen conferences is 10 participants.) Distributed conferencing can handle more visitors, because each participant in the P2P mesh is also a host for 10 participants, each of the 10 participants can host 10 people, and so on.

Just Talk

What if you want to avoid all of the complexities of multimedia conferencing and just have an old-fashioned voice chat? Mac P2P clients can offer this option as well.

If you're primarily interested in talk, one of the more popular VoIP options comes from up-and-coming P2P telephony software startup Skype. Created by the inventors of Kazaa, Skype is a wildly popular PC-phone client that has been downloaded more than 104 million times. Now Mac aficionados (along with Pocket PC and Linux users) can join the party. To use the free version of Skype, you must have a sound card, speakers, and a microphone—and you can only speak to other PCs.

For more flexibility, consider Buzzfon p2p 01, which offers free PC-to-PC, PC-to-phone, and even phone-to-phone conversations. Bear in mind, however, that Buzzfon is shareware, and early-release shareware at that, so it won't have the level of support that a well-funded company like Skype can offer.

P2P Collaboration

And then there's P2P collaboration to consider. Over the past few years, a lot of effort has been put into creating platforms for peer- to-peer collaboration—in some cases, attempts to create a new model for information sharing to rival Lotus Notes or Microsoft Exchange/SharePoint.

To date, none of the P2P collaboration platforms we're aware of have provided a Mac option. The most widely used P2P collaboration platform, the Groove Virtual Office, is built around Microsoft-standard technologies—and despite years of talk, publisher Groove Networks doesn't seem ready to release a Mac OS-compatible version. (Microsoft acquired Groove in March 2005.)

Users who are sincerely interested in Mac-based P2P models might want to try Near-Time Flow, which uses a P2P distribution mechanism to share documents, web pages, images, and files among groups. Unlike most of the products discussed in this article, Flow isn't free; it starts at $99/unit.

Another option is Java-based collaboration frameworks such as Onobee, a distributed collaboration and secure, real-time communications suite; or Colloquia, which is software designed to facilitate group working and group learning through shared workspaces.

Growing Acceptance

Realistically, just as in any other software category, Mac P2P software development is likely to stay a step behind the PC world. But you can help keep the pressure on by making sure that the Mac community stays involved and interested.

You know the score. If you want to P2P-power your Mac, the best way to encourage that possibility is to try the new applications being floated out there by small entrepreneurial companies. If you're a developer, another alternative is to jump in and contribute to some of the Mac-based or platform-neutral open source projects on the P2P front.

Whether on PC or Mac, P2P platforms are an important approach to using networked resources—one for which the benefits have only begun to be tapped. If you're a Mac user or developer, now is the time to make sure that your platform of choice doesn't get left behind.
http://www.informit.com/articles/pri...y.asp?p=380159





Judge In EU-Microsoft Case Removed

The European Union's second highest court has taken the Microsoft antitrust case away from the judge to whom it was originally assigned and given it to a panel of 13 judges, a court official said on Friday.

"I can confirm that the case has been moved to the Grand Chamber," said a court official, who asked not to be identified.

The official also confirmed that the panel or chamber will be headed by Court of First Instance President Bo Vesterdorf and that the case itself will be handled by Judge John Cooke.

But Judge Hubert Legal, who had been in charge of a panel of five judges handling the case, will no longer participate, the court official said. Sources have said Legal was removed, because he wrote a controversial article that angered fellow judges.

Vesterdorf had proposed a change in judges after Judge Legal created an uproar by writing a piece that used the words "ayatollahs of free enterprise" in connection with law clerks and suggested they might have undue influence on some judges.

The European Commission found in March 2004 that Microsoft competed unfairly against rivals, fined it 497 million euros ($605 million) and ordered it to change some of its business practices.

Now the 13-judge panel will decide whether to uphold the Commission's decision or reject all or part of it.

The decision to change judges comes only a few days before the court is set to take its summer break.

In the past, those familiar with the case have estimated that a change in judges may lead to a delay of anything between three months and a year beyond June, 2006, when a decision had originally been expected.
http://news.com.com/Judge+in+EU-Micr...3-5780389.html





Court Holds Microsoft Liable For Infringement

A U.S. appeals court on Wednesday upheld a lower court decision that Microsoft was liable for infringing on an AT&T patent for converting speech into computer code in copies of Windows sold overseas.

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals said that the world's largest software maker was liable for the unauthorized distribution of codec technology, used to compress speech signals into data, in copies of Windows overseas.

Last year, Microsoft settled most of the telephone company's outstanding claims, and both agreed to appeal the unresolved issue over the distribution of the technology overseas, which Microsoft said it was not liable for.

Terms of the March 2004 settlement were not disclosed.

Representatives from AT&T and Microsoft were not immediately available for comment.
http://news.com.com/2100-1014_3-5787044.html





China Makes More Pledges on Piracy

But no deal is reached on textile exports to U.S.
Peter S. Goodman

U.S. and Chinese trade officials concluded a day-long session of high-level talks here Monday with a pledge that Beijing will crack down on rampant traffic in pirated goods by prosecuting more people engaged in the enterprise. But the talks ended with no change on a major source of discord -- the flood of Chinese-made textiles reaching American shores.

In a sign that trade tensions between the two countries are likely to intensify, China's exports surged in June while import growth slowed, according to Chinese government figures released Monday. The result is a $9.7 billion overall Chinese trade surplus with the world -- its third-largest monthly surplus on record.

Always complex, commercial relations between the United States and China have grown more contentious in recent months. Beijing has denounced the Bush administration's decision to choke incoming shipments of Chinese textiles as an anathema to free trade. U.S. trade groups accuse China of keeping the value of its currency too low, making its goods unfairly cheap on world markets. Recent weeks have seen escalating tensions as the state-owned Chinese energy business CNOOC Ltd. pursues the U.S. firm Unocal Corp. in a takeover battle with Chevron Corp. -- a spectacle that has ramped up U.S. fears about China's emerging force in the global economy.

Even as trade frictions worsen, corporate ties between the United States and China continue to develop, linking the two giant economies while bringing U.S. capital and management to bear on China's transition from communism to free enterprise. This week came reports that Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the U.S. investment bank, has joined with the German financial firm Allianz AG to seek the purchase of a $1 billion stake in China's largest state-owned bank, the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China. China's leaders are keen to sell shares in its biggest financial institutions to foreign investors as they seek to modernize a lending culture that has left banks with an estimated $500 billion in bad loans. Meanwhile, China Petroleum and Chemical Corp., known as Sinopec, one of China's three largest energy companies, is forging a venture with Exxon Mobil Corp. and Saudi Arabian Oil Co. aimed at delivering a $3.5 billion expansion to an oil refinery in southern China.

But as a high-level U.S. trade delegation met with Chinese counterparts here in China's capital, officials focused on a long-sought and vexing goal -- curbing the widespread trade of counterfeit and pirated goods that U.S. companies say costs them billions of dollars a year in lost sales. U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman and Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez said the meetings had produced merely incremental gains.

"I did not have high expectations for major breakthroughs," Portman said in an interview late Monday. "I thought we made measured progress in a number of areas. I'm not satisfied with process. It should be about outcomes."

Experts were dubious about China's pledge for stricter enforcement against piracy, noting that Beijing routinely hands out such promises as parting gifts to visiting U.S. officials, while the trade remains brazen as ever. On the streets of every Chinese city, peddlers and shops openly offer products including Prada handbags, Windows software and new Hollywood movies selling for less than $1. The illicit trade is a major source of employment, and factories are often protected by local officials, some of whom own stakes in them.

"The Chinese government does not have the power to stop piracy," said Tao Xinliang, dean of the department of intellectual property at Shanghai University. "The government closes a lot of factories, but lots of others keep opening."

One senior Chinese official on Monday suggested that the government is doing all it can to combat piracy. At a morning briefing, Li Dongsheng, vice minister of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, said that in the first half of the year, the government investigated more than 2,400 cases involving illegal use of foreign trademarks while shutting down hundreds of factories.

"Some nations have criticized China for lax trademark and anti-counterfeit efforts," Li said. "Many foreign investors don't understand China's law or how our enforcement system works. But the statistics speak for themselves."

In simple terms, Washington's trade dispute with Beijing boils down to a single number -- the $162 billion trade surplus China enjoyed with the United States in 2004. Chinese officials argue that the gap proves that its companies have proved adept at making goods Americans desire. Trade groups in the United States point at the same figure as a sign of foul play, arguing that the Chinese juggernaut manipulates its currency, exploits workers and steals intellectual property.

Limiting the trade deficit with China has become a major goal of the Bush administration. At an evening news conference, Gutierrez said the administration would use the size of the deficit as an indicator of China's progress on combating piracy and removing barriers to U.S. goods.

"That's one of the measures we will look at," he said. "What we will focus on very intensively is our exports to the Chinese market. China has full access to our market. What we want is full access to the Chinese market."

He and Portman highlighted a pledge from Beijing that it will set aside a current draft of procurement regulations that would mandate that a slice of the government's software purchases must go to Chinese companies -- a market they said could be worth as much as $8 billion to U.S. firms.

But if the size of the deficit is to gauge the U.S.-China trade relationship, Monday's data signaled continued turbulence ahead. Over the first six months of the year, China's exports worldwide rose 33 percent compared with the same period a year earlier, exceeding $342 billion, while imports increased by 14 percent, to $302.7 billion. Most economists expect that trend to continue, with some predicting that China's surplus with the world could exceed $100 billion for 2005, more than triple last year's surplus.

"The U.S. deficit with China is going to be growing," said Jonathan Anderson, chief economist at UBS Investment Research in Hong Kong. "It's going to look uglier."

Economists say the slowdown in China's import growth is the result of clamps the government imposed on investment to choke off the threat of inflation, combined with a surplus of factory capacity that has diminished the need to buy goods abroad. Until recently a major importer of steel, China became a net exporter this year -- the result of exuberant investment in an abundance of steel mills.

The textile trade has been a primary irritant between Beijing and Washington. Since the expiration on Jan. 1 of a global system of quotas that limited how much any one country could ship to the United States or Europe, Chinese-made goods have swamped the U.S. market. In May, the Bush administration imposed "safeguard" quotas on seven categories of Chinese textiles -- a move the United States can pursue under the terms of China's entry to the World Trade Organization. U.S. manufacturers filed petitions Monday seeking new quotas on additional categories of textiles.

At the meetings, China did not offer a proposal aimed at settling the textile dispute. A U.S. trade official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to speak on the matter said the Chinese were holding off, cognizant that Washington is in no position to deal as Congress considers passage of the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071100296.html





Gag me, eh

Harry Potter Books Sold by Accident
AP

A handful of people in Canada got a sneak peak of the latest Harry Potter book, but a British Columbia Supreme Court judge ordered them to keep it a secret.

The book was sold to 14 people who snagged a copy of J.K. Rowlings' much anticipated "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince," when it landed on shelves last Thursday at a local grocery store.

The book, officially set for release this coming Saturday, has been shrouded in secrecy and its debut has been highly orchestrated to enable everyone - readers, reviewers, even publishers - to crack it open all at once. It's the sixth in Rowling's seven-book fantasy series on the young wizard.

But the store slipped up and sold 14 copies before realizing its mistake.

"It was an inadvertent error on behalf of one of our staff," said Geoff Wilson, a spokesman for the Real Canadian Superstore. He said the books were quickly removed.

Justice Kristi Gill last Saturday ordered customers not to talk about the book, copy it, sell it or even read it before it is officially released at 12:01 a.m. July 16.

The order also compels them to return the novel to the publisher, Raincoast Book Distribution Ltd., until the official release. At that time it will be returned to them.

As an added incentive, Raincoast will include Rowling's autograph and a gift pack.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...M&SECTION=HOME





Downloading Trouble At The BBC
Anthony Barnes

The BBC has been lambasted by classical music labels for making all nine of Beethoven's symphonies available for free download over the Internet.

This week the BBC will announce there have been more than a million downloads of the symphonies during the month-long scheme. But the initiative has infuriated the bosses of leading classical record companies who argue the offer undermines the value of music and that any further offers would be unfair competition.
http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article298067.ece





Neuron Network Goes Awry, and Brain Becomes an iPod
Carl Zimmer

Seven years ago Reginald King was lying in a hospital bed recovering from bypass surgery when he first heard the music.

It began with a pop tune, and others followed. Mr. King heard everything from cabaret songs to Christmas carols. "I asked the nurses if they could hear the music, and they said no," said Mr. King, a retired sales manager in Cardiff, Wales.

"I got so frustrated," he said. "They didn't know what I was talking about and said it must be something wrong with my head. And it's been like that ever since."

Each day, the music returns. "They're all songs I've heard during my lifetime," said Mr. King, 83. "One would come on, and then it would run into another one, and that's how it goes on in my head. It's driving me bonkers, to be quite honest."

Last year, Mr. King was referred to Dr. Victor Aziz, a psychiatrist at St. Cadoc's Hospital in Wales. Dr. Aziz explained to him that there was a name for his experience: musical hallucinations.

Dr. Aziz belongs to a small circle of psychiatrists and neurologists who are investigating this condition. They suspect that the hallucinations experienced by Mr. King and others are a result of malfunctioning brain networks that normally allow us to perceive music.

They also suspect that many cases of musical hallucinations go undiagnosed.

"You just need to look for it," Dr. Aziz said. And based on his studies of the hallucinations, he suspects that in the next few decades, they will be far more common.

Musical hallucinations were invading people's minds long before they were recognized as a medical condition. "Plenty of musical composers have had musical hallucinations," Dr. Aziz said.

Toward the end of his life, for instance, Robert Schumann wrote down the music he hallucinated; legend has it that he said he was taking dictation from Schubert's ghost.

While doctors have known about musical hallucinations for over a century, they have rarely studied it systematically. That has changed in recent years. In the July issue of the journal Psychopathology, Dr. Aziz and his colleague Dr. Nick Warner will publish an analysis of 30 cases of musical hallucination they have seen over 15 years in South Wales. It is the largest case-series ever published for musical hallucinations.

"We were trying to collect as much information about their day-to-day lives as we could," Dr. Aziz said. "We were asking a lot of the questions that weren't answered in previous research. What do they hear, for example? Is it nearby or is it at a long distance?"

Dr. Aziz and Dr. Warner found that in two-thirds of the cases, musical hallucinations were the only mental disturbance experienced by the patients. A third were deaf or hard of hearing. Women tended to suffer musical hallucinations more than men, and the average patient was 78 years old.

Mr. King's experience was typical for people experiencing musical hallucinations. Patients reported hearing a wide variety of songs, among them "Don't Cry for Me Argentina" and "Three Blind Mice."

In two-thirds of the cases, the music was religious; six people reporting hearing the hymn "Abide With Me."

Dr. Aziz believes that people tend to hear songs they have heard repeatedly or that are emotionally significant to them. "There is a meaning behind these things," he said.

His study also shows that these hallucinations are different from the auditory hallucinations of people with schizophrenia. Such people often hear inner voices. Patients like Mr. King hear only music.

The results support recent work by neuroscientists indicating that our brains use special networks of neurons to perceive music. When sounds first enter the brain, they activate a region near the ears called the primary auditory cortex that starts processing sounds at their most basic level. The auditory cortex then passes on signals of its own to other regions, which can recognize more complex features of music, like rhythm, key changes and melody.

Neuroscientists have been able to identify some of these regions with brain scans, and to compare the way people respond to musical and nonmusical sounds.

Only a handful of brain scans have been made of people with musical hallucinations. Dr. Tim Griffiths, a neurologist at the University of Newcastle Upon Tyne in England, performed one of these studies on six elderly patients who developed musical hallucinations after becoming partly deaf.

Dr. Griffiths used a scanning technique known as PET, which involves injecting radioactive markers into the bloodstream. Each time he scanned his subjects' brains, he asked them whether they had experienced musical hallucinations. If they had, he asked them to rate the intensity on a scale from one to seven.

Dr. Griffiths discovered a network of regions in the brain that became more active as the hallucinations became more intense. "What strikes me is that you see a very similar pattern in normal people who are listening to music," he said.

The main difference is that musical hallucinations don't activate the primary auditory cortex, the first stop for sound in the brain. When Dr. Griffith's subjects hallucinated, they used only the parts of the brain that are responsible for turning simple sounds into complex music.

These music-processing regions may be continually looking for signals in the brain that they can interpret, Dr. Griffiths suggested. When no sound is coming from the ears, the brain may still generate occasional, random impulses that the music-processing regions interpret as sound. They then try to match these impulses to memories of music, turning a few notes into a familiar melody.

For most people, these spontaneous signals may produce nothing more than a song that is hard to get out of the head. But the constant stream of information coming in from the ears suppresses the false music.

Dr. Griffith proposes that deafness cuts off this information stream. And in a few deaf people the music-seeking circuits go into overdrive. They hear music all the time, and not just the vague murmurs of a stuck tune. It becomes as real as any normal perception.

"What we're seeing is an amplification of a normal mechanism that's in everyone," Dr. Griffiths said.

It is also possible for people who are not deaf to experience musical hallucinations. Epileptic seizures, certain medications and Lyme disease are a few of the factors that may set them off.

Dr. Aziz also noted that two-thirds of his subjects were living alone, and thus were not getting much stimulation. One patient experienced fewer musical hallucinations when Dr. Aziz had her put in a nursing home, he said, "because then she was talking to people, she was active."

There is no standard procedure for treating musical hallucinations. Some doctors try antipsychotic drugs, and some use cognitive behavioral therapy to help patients understand what's going on in their brains. "Sometimes simple things can be the cure," Dr. Aziz said. "Turning on the radio may be more important than giving medication."

Despite these treatments, many people with musical hallucinations find little relief. "I'm just living with it," Mr. King said. "I wish there was something I could do.

"I do silly things like talking to myself, hoping that when I stop talking, the tune will stop. But it doesn't work that way."

More studies may help researchers find new treatments. Prof. Diana Deutsch, a psychologist at the University of California, San Diego, is planning a new scanning study of musical hallucination on people who are not deaf, using functional M.R.I. Unlike the PET scanning used by Dr. Griffiths, functional M.R.I. is powerful enough to catch second-by-second changes in brain activity.

"It might be awhile before we have results, but it's certainly something I'm very excited about," Dr. Deutsch said. "We'll see where it takes us."

Dr. Aziz also believes that it is necessary to get a better sense of how many people hear musical hallucinations. Like Mr. King, many people have had their experiences dismissed by doctors.

Dr. Aziz said that ever since he began presenting his results at medical conferences last year, a growing number of patients have been referred to him.

"In 15 years I got 30 patients," he said, "and in less than a year I've had 5. It just tells you people are more aware of it."

Dr. Aziz suspects that musical hallucinations will become more common in the future. People today are awash in music from radios, televisions, elevators and supermarkets. It is possible that the pervasiveness of music may lead to more hallucinations. The types of hallucinations may also change as people experience different kinds of songs.

"We have speculated that people will hear more pop and classical music than they do now," said Dr. Aziz. "I hope I live long enough to find out myself in 20 years' time."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/12/he...gy/12musi.html
















Until next week,

- js.


















Current Week In Review





Recent WiRs -

July 9th, July 2nd, June 25th, June 18th, June 11th, June 4th

Jack Spratt's Week In Review is published every Friday. Please submit letters, articles, and press releases in plain text English to jackspratts (at) lycos (dot) com. Include contact info. Submission deadlines are Wednesdays @ 1700 UTC.


"The First Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public." - Hugo Black

[legion]

Dutch File Sharing Decision Made

Moves to identify illegal downloaders in HOLLAND have been blocked by a Dutch judge.

A court in Utrecht heard that anti-piracy group Brein made demands for five net service suppliers to hand over the names and addresses of file-sharers following investigative work by US company Media Sentry.

The judge presiding in the case ruled that the American firm had broken tough laws that protect privacy in Holland by identifying the file-sharers.

But Brein, which represents 52 media organisations including Sony Music, Universal and EMI, said it will take the case to a higher court.

As a result the victory could be short lived because the court ruled that the group did have the power to force net firms to surrender data if they found out the information legally.

Nine people who have already been identified by Brein, have reached out-of-court settlements with the organisation.
http://www.nme.com/news/113007.htm

HEHEHE those fuckers never seize to amaze me. For the longest time Brein tries to pass themselves off as investigators while they don't have the right to even investigate my narrow little ass. There for every little piece of that so-called evidence they might find is rendered useless in a court of law (smart going dudes)

All Brein is trying to accomplish is that they can ask for the name and addresses of file sharers without going through court. Right now Dutch privacy laws prevent non-government and/or commercial parties to obtain such information.

Now lets look at that evidence. It consist of nothing more than an IP address and they try to sniff around on my machine … WOW that is so not impressive … Thank god those two will hold water in a court of law (NOT). Everybody knows that IP’s can’t be spoofed .
And by snooping around on my computer they actually broke a law of their own … oh goody more illegally obtained evidence.



In short SHARE ON NETHERLANDS.