Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - June 25th, '05

[JackSpratts]

"Respondents may now be less likely to report peer-to-peer usage due to the stigma associated with the networks." – Pew research study


"The lack of any concrete numbers at all shows the typical academic hand-wavy 'our asymptotic is good, we don't need to worry about reality' approach. As you've probably figured out by now, I think that [the Avalanche] paper is complete garbage." – Bram Cohen


"There's unlimited business out there for us." - Robert L. Livingston, Washington lobbyist and Republican former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee


"You've got no friends in the Supreme Court watching your back." - Spatula


"We the people have no representative of any kind. It's now the multinationals. They've taken over. It's no different than the 70's, but it's gotten worse. And if you use words like 'impeachment' or 'fascist' you're a nut on a soapbox." – Tom Laughlin






















June 25th, 2005





They Be Yuppies Arrrrhg

Music Pirates Shun Peer-To-Peer For iPod-to-iPod
Jo Best

As legal music downloading takes off as never before, music pirates are shunning peer-to-peer services in favour of using iPods to swap music.

According to a report from the Pew Internet and American Life Project, the number of music downloaders using P2P networks has dropped in recent months. Currently, 21 per cent of downloaders use networks such as Kazaa or Grokster for music or video, compared to the 58 per cent who downloaded music from file-sharing networks in February 2004.

By contrast, other methods of swapping music are gaining favour. Alongside IM, blogs and other sources, iPods are becoming a popular music transfer tool. Eleven per cent of former file-sharers admitted to using iPods or other MP3 players to swap songs in the past, compared to the 15 per cent of downloaders as a whole who currently do.

While Apple's iTunes Music Store allows users to download purchased songs to an unlimited number of iPods, the report states that users are also happy to use complex DRM-cracking software to trade music.

"Digital audio players like the iPod that can store thousands of songs and other files are emerging as an alternative way to access media files and avoid some of the potential risks of peer-to-peer usage," the report adds.

However, the report hints the number of P2P users could in fact be far higher: "Respondents may now be less likely to report peer-to-peer usage due to the stigma associated with the networks."

Broadband, it seems, is likely to encourage criminal behaviour.

"These broadband users who have high-speed access at home and at work represent a leading edge of content consumers and content creators and are among the most likely to have used peer-to-peer services," the report says.

Nevertheless, legal downloading is putting its pirate cousin in the shade in terms of growth. The report found 43 per cent of downloaders have tried legal sites, compared with 24 per cent in 2004.

A small percentage of internet users have fallen out of love with the downloading scene as a whole and now no longer get their music from the net at all. Eleven per cent of all internet users once got music online but don't any more, with 44 per cent of those previously using Kazaa and illegal alternatives and another 25 per cent having lost interest in legal sites like iTunes.

"Among all former music and video downloaders, 28 per cent volunteer that the main reason they stopped was because they were afraid to get in trouble or heard about the RIAA lawsuits," the report concludes.

Fifteen per cent of ex-downloaders said they quit because they were getting too many viruses, pop-up ads and other PC problems as a result of their online music activity.
http://networks.silicon.com/webwatch...9129016,00.htm




'BadApple' Podcasts First in iTunes
John Borland

A new company called BadFruit has anticipated Apple Computer's plans to add podcasting support to iTunes with a software plug-in called "BadApple" that does the trick itself.

As yet, the programmers behind the BadFruit site are remaining anonymous, although several clues point to a corporate identity. Unlike most basement-hacker projects, the software comes with a sophisticated privacy policy and terms of use that may indicate bigger plans for the future.

For now, the plug-in provides seamless access to hundreds of podcasts inside the iTunes shell, with downloads functioning in much the same way that the iTunes music store itself works.

"BadApple is NOT from the Beatles," the bare-bones site reads. "It's also not from Apple Computer Inc. It's definitely not endorsed or approved by Apple. In fact, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want you to use BadApple."

Podcasting--the practice of recording and distributing MP3 files that can be automatically downloaded and put on digital music players such as the iPod--has in the space of months evolved from a hobbyists' tool to adoption by some of the biggest media companies in the world.

Less than a year old in their current form, podcasts initially were dominated by the often-eccentric recorded ramblings of the high-tech crowd. But they've quickly evolved into a widespread distribution format, with major media companies such as Clear Channel and BusinessWeek jumping onboard.

Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced several weeks ago that the next version of iTunes would have support for creating and distributing podcasts. He demonstrated the capability at the company's developers conference two weeks ago, explaining that the service would let people subscribe to individual broadcasts, and provide a way for podcasters to charge for their productions.

"We see it as the hottest thing going in radio, hotter than anything else in radio," Jobs told the audience of Macintosh developers at that event.

At this point, there is no official indication of BadFruit's origin. But a handful of signs seem to link the site to MP3Tunes.com, the online song store opened a few months ago by MP3.com founder Michael Robertson.

Log files created by the software show that it talks to a server hosted by MP3Tunes. Code inside the software package, once downloaded, also show links to MP3Tunes.

The privacy policies displayed by MP3Tunes.com and BadFruit are also identical in almost every way, with details such as the name of the company and the name of the service changed. BadFruit's terms of use say that any legal actions concerning the software should be taken in San Diego County, where Robertson's companies are based.

An Apple spokeswoman did not immediately return calls for comment.

An MP3Tunes employee said that Robertson was out of the country and unavailable for comment.

Apple is scheduled to add its podcast support in version 4.9 of its iTunes software. Some Web site operators say they're already seeing entries in their logs that indicate test versions of the iTunes 4.9 software are being used to download podcasts.
http://news.com.com/BadApple+podcast...3-5754227.html




Music Labels Look To Corral iPod
Ben Fritz

The approximate 300,000 people who've picked up a copy of the Backstreet Boys' "Never Gone" might not know it, but they're part of a growing skirmish between the record labels and digital music master Apple Computer.

Both Sony BMG and EMI are rapidly increasing the number of copy-protected CDs they release in the U.S. CDs with the protective technology prevent users from posting them on the Internet and allow users to burn only three copies onto other discs, which themselves can't be copied again. Sony BMG is already selling about half its discs with the technology, while EMI releases its first this summer.

But the technology also prevents consumers from transferring songs onto an iPod, the Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) digital-music player that currently holds about 80% of the U.S. market.

That's because the technology uses Microsoft's (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) Windows Media software, which isn't compatiable with iPods.

Both labels hope to reach a deal with Apple, which will allow users move songs onto iPods. But by launching the copy-protected CDs without iPod compatibility, the labels are raising the stakes in an ongoing conflict between Apple and the rest of the music business, which wants the tech company to open its proprietary iPod and let others sell antipiracy-protected songs that work on the device.

Apple has refused, relying on the thus-far successful strategy of forcing users to buy music from its iTunes Music Store.

IPod owners who buy one of the growing numbers of copy-protected discs are likely to chafe at the incompatibility. The question is, who will they blame?

If it's the labels, Sony BMG and EMI may have to back down. But labels are clearly hoping it's the other way around.

Asked how users should react to the problem, one insider at a major label responded, "Maybe they'll send Steve Jobs an e-mail."
http://www.forbes.com/technology/200...620labels.html




Putting the DMCA On Trial
Declan McCullagh

The U.S. Supreme Court could release its decision on Monday in the much-anticipated Grokster case, which will determine whether file-swapping networks are legal to operate.
Yet another, unrelated lawsuit before a federal appeals court taking place on the same day promises to be just as important.

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis is set to hear arguments Monday in a case that may decide how the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA, applies to computer software and the important practice of reverse engineering.

The text of the law is hardly clear, but it seems reasonable to conclude that...the DMCA should not apply. At issue is what a band of merry programmers did when analyzing video games published by Blizzard Entertainment in a successful bid to make the games work with servers other than Blizzard's official Battle.net. Affected games published by Blizzard, a division of Vivendi Universal, include titles in its "Diablo," "Starcraft" and "Warcraft" lines.

The reasons for the effort include the usual hacker love of tinkering, coupled with the desire to eliminate some of the problems with Battle.net (primarily response time). Eventually the authors, Ross Combs and Rob Crittenden, found their "BnetD" software turning into a SourceForge project, and it's been mirrored in the United Kingdom.

Blizzard won the high score before U.S. District Judge Charles Shaw, who ruled last September that the programmers violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and a "click-wrap" license that barred mimicking Battle.net protocols. (A click-wrap agreement is the sort that appears when a user attempts to download or install software; generally the user is shown a page with various restrictions and has to click on a button that says "I agree" or something similar.)

"The users of the Battle.net service have occasionally experienced difficulties with the service," Shaw wrote. "Blizzard has also received complaints about user profanity and users who cheated to win games by modifying Blizzard's software. Although Blizzard has taken actions to correct these difficulties with its Battle.net service, including adding additional server capacity, banning cheaters, and providing for private channels and games, defendants were frustrated by the difficulties."

Still, Shaw concluded, inconvenience and a desire to tinker did not make it legal to develop BnetD: "The court finds that the defendants' actions constitute a circumvention of copyright under the DMCA."

Now that the case is before the 8th Circuit, the ideological divide highlighted in the Grokster lawsuit is repeating itself. Lined up on one side is the Electronic Frontier Foundation (which is also providing free legal assistance), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the Consumers Union, Public Knowledge, and some law professors. On the other: the Entertainment Software Association, the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America, and law professors.

Copyright buffs, of course, may remember that the DMCA includes limited protections for reverse engineering.

The text of the law is hardly clear, but it seems reasonable to conclude that Shaw was wrong and the DMCA should not apply. BnetD was invented to offer people who had bought legal copies of Blizzard games new ways to enjoy them. Besides, any reverse engineering seems to have been done primarily by packet-sniffing rather than more intrusive techniques, and courts have permitted even complete chip disassembly before (see Sega v. Accolade).

Defending Blizzard?
A more difficult question centers on the click-wrap license to which Combs and Crittenden agreed when installing Blizzard's software. It explicitly forbids reverse engineering or doing anything to "emulate or redirect the communication protocols used by Blizzard as part of Battle.net."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and its ideological allies argue that this kind of license is invalid and unenforceable because of a "fair use" right to reverse engineer. I'm not so sure about that, though.

The real question should be: Would a reasonable person expect to find that kind of restriction in a software license agreement? If the answer is yes, it's a legal contract. (Courts have properly ruled that unexpected fine print in a standard contract, such as a no-alcohol-at-all clause in a car rental agreement, is unenforceable.)

Nobody is forcing Blizzard customers to click "I agree." In fact, they can return the software for a full refund if they don't like the fine print. Or they can continue the reverse-engineering process without the benefit of having the software installed normally--a more difficult task, but not impossible.

That doesn't mean Blizzard is wise to file this lawsuit. Its energy could have been better spent in improving Battle.net or, better yet, offering legal ways for its customers to create their own servers. Suing your customers, especially devoted fans of your games, is rarely the wisest business strategy.

Still, corporations have the right to make mistakes--and, hopefully, learn from them. Just don't be surprised if the 8th Circuit chooses tried-and-true contract law over the hacker ethic.
http://news.com.com/Putting+the+DMCA...3-5753491.html




Showdown Looms Over Patenting Bill
Huw Jones

EU lawmakers are heading for a showdown over new rules on patenting inventions as a key vote next week may struggle to find a consensus, an outcome seen favoring big software developers.

Member states and the European Parliament are looking at a bill on patenting inventions that use software. The legislature's legal affairs committee is due to debate the bill on Monday and vote on Tuesday.

"It's not like a budget where you can cut the pie in two. Either you allow patenting or you do not. It's a political decision," Laurence van de Walle, who advises the Greens on the bill, said on Friday.

The bill's sponsor, French socialist Michel Rocard, has pleased people who want minimal patenting, but liberal and center right parties want a broader scope.

A source in the center-right EPP party bloc, which is the largest grouping on the legal affairs committee, said on Friday that Rocard's version of the legislation is "still largely unacceptable."

Rocard, a former Prime Minister of France, was not immediately available for comment.

Lawmakers have come under intense lobbying, reflecting a politically-charged faultline in the world's software industry.

Those who support open-source or free software say copyrighting is preferable to patenting, and welcome Rocard's stance, saying it will allow developers to enter markets that would otherwise be sealed by patents.

Rocard wants a narrow approach to patenting, to effectively include only "programmable apparatus" or hardware applications such as an ABS braking system or a machine to pump insulin.

But the member state version opted for a broad approach to patenting software-related innovations, pleasing large companies such as Nokia and Microsoft which say this will stop copycat devices from countries like China.

EICTA, which represents 51 major multinational companies, said on Friday that lawmakers should reject Rocard's proposals and back what the member states have agreed.

The Greens back Rocard, but said the vote looked tight. "I am not optimistic. It's a dossier where you don't have a middle way," van de Walle said.

"But we have seen many cases where the result of the vote in the legal affairs committee was demolished in plenary," she said, adding that the Greens were trying to switch the vote back to its original slot on Monday.

Full parliament is due to vote on the bill next month.

What's In A Name?

In his latest version of the bill, Rocard has proposed changing the name of the directive to patentability of 'computer controlled invention' from 'computer implemented inventions'.

"The scope of the directive is thus the one of the patenting of hardware devices that use software in order to control this hardware," Rocard says in his report seen by Reuters.

EICTA said changing the title would alter the scope of the rules and leaves the computer outside the invention, which the group says does not represent reality.

Crucial flashpoints among lawmakers remain how to define 'technical contribution', a key criteria for patenting, and whether data processing should be excluded.

Only a simple majority is needed to adopt the bill in committee, but a qualified majority would be needed in the full parliament, a tricky feat if there is no consensus.

The fear among some MEPs that if the bill fails to get a qualified majority then the member state version of the bill would go ahead unchanged, pleasing big industry players.
http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jh...toryID=8824698




Republican Rule Makes Lobbying Big Business

Lobbying Firms Hire More, Pay More, Charge More to Influence Government
Jeffrey H. Birnbaum

To the great growth industries of America such as health care and home building add one more: influence peddling.

The number of registered lobbyists in Washington has more than doubled since 2000 to more than 34,750 while the amount that lobbyists charge their new clients has increased by as much as 100 percent. Only a few other businesses have enjoyed greater prosperity in an otherwise fitful economy.

The lobbying boom has been caused by three factors, experts say: rapid growth in government, Republican control of both the White House and Congress, and wide acceptance among corporations that they need to hire professional lobbyists to secure their share of federal benefits.

"There's unlimited business out there for us," said Robert L. Livingston, a Republican former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and now president of a thriving six-year-old lobbying firm. "Companies need lobbying help."

Lobbying firms can't hire people fast enough. Starting salaries have risen to about $300,000 a year for the best-connected aides eager to "move downtown" from Capitol Hill or the Bush administration. Once considered a distasteful post-government vocation, big-bucks lobbying is luring nearly half of all lawmakers who return to the private sector when they leave Congress, according to a forthcoming study by Public Citizen's Congress Watch.

Political historians don't see these as positive developments for democracy. "We've got a problem here," said Allan Cigler, a political scientist at the University of Kansas. "The growth of lobbying makes even worse than it is already the balance between those with resources and those without resources."

In the 1990s, lobbying was largely reactive. Corporations had to fend off proposals that would have restricted them or cost them money. But with pro-business officials running the executive and legislative branches, companies are also hiring well-placed lobbyists to go on the offensive and find ways to profit from the many tax breaks, loosened regulations and other government goodies that increasingly are available.

"People in industry are willing to invest money because they see opportunities here," said Patrick J. Griffin, who was President Bill Clinton's top lobbyist and is now in private practice. "They see that they can win things, that there's something to be gained. Washington has become a profit center."

Take the example of Hewlett-Packard Co. The California computer maker nearly doubled its budget for contract lobbyists to $734,000 last year and added the elite lobbying firm of Quinn Gillespie & Associates LLC. Its goal was to pass Republican-backed legislation that would allow the company to bring back to the United States at a dramatically lowered tax rate as much as $14.5 billion in profit from foreign subsidiaries.

The extra lobbying paid off. The legislation was approved and Hewlett-Packard will save millions of dollars in taxes. "We're trying to take advantage of the fact that Republicans control the House, the Senate and the White House," said John D. Hassell, director of government affairs at Hewlett-Packard. "There is an opportunity here for the business community to make its case and be successful."

The Republicans in charge aren't just pro-business, they are also pro-government. Federal outlays increased nearly 30 percent from 2000 to 2004, to $2.29 trillion. And despite the budget deficit, federal spending is set to increase again this year, especially in programs that are prime lobbying targets such as defense, homeland security and medical coverage.

In addition, President Bush has signed into law five major tax-cut bills over the past four years. His administration has also curtailed regulation. Over the past five years, the number of new federal regulations has declined by 5 percent, to 4,100, according to Clyde Wayne Crews Jr., a vice president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The number of pending regulations that would cost businesses or local governments $100 million or more a year has declined even more, by 14.5 percent to 135 over the period.

Companies have had to redouble their lobbying merely to keep track of it all. "Much of lobbying today is watching all the change that's going on in Washington," Cigler said. "Companies need more people just to stay apprised of what regulators are doing."

At the same time, government activism has presented potential problems for business. "As government grows, unless you're right there to limit it, it can intrude in just about any industry," Livingston said. "There are agencies that love to do things and acquire new missions. People in industry better have good lobbyists or they're going to get rolled over."

But whether it is to protect themselves against harm or to win more benefits, executives and insiders say they have no choice but to hire lobbyists who are deeply rooted in official Washington and its complexities. "Hiring a lobbyist is part of system these days," said Kent Cooper, co-founder of PoliticalMoneyLine, a nonpartisan compiler of lobbying and campaign-funding information.

Jonas Neihardt, vice president of federal government affairs for Qualcomm Inc., the San Diego technology company, agreed: "Without professional lobbyists I don't see how a company can monitor everything that's going on or provide the inputs that are necessary to explain why rules and laws have to be changed."

The result has been a gold rush on K Street, the lobbyists' boulevard. Quinn Gillespie has added at least 16 clients and six professionals since its co-founder, Edward W. Gillespie, announced last November that he was returning after a stint as chairman of the Republican National Committee. Barbour Griffith & Rogers LLC, another lobbying firm, increased the number of lobbyists to 15, from eight in 2003.

The owner of a large lobbying shop said that five years ago he could hire veteran Capitol Hill staffers for $200,000 a year or less. Now the going rate is closer to $300,000 a year and the most-sought-after aides can expect even more. In 2002, Susan B. Hirschmann, chief of staff to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), had so many lobbying offers that she enlisted Robert B. Barnett, the attorney for Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), to receive and filter them.

For retiring members of Congress and senior administration aides, the bidding from lobbying firms and trade associations can get even more fevered. Well-regarded top officials are in high demand and lately have commanded employment packages worth upward of $2 million a year. Marc F. Racicot, a former Montana governor who chaired the Republican National Committee, will soon collect an annual salary of $1 million-plus as president of the American Insurance Association.

The fees that lobbyists charge clients have also risen substantially. Retainers that had been $10,000 to $15,000 a month for new corporate clients before President Bush took office now are $20,000 to $25,000 a month or more, lobbyists say.

All-Republican lobbying firms have boosted their rates the most. Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock and the Federalist Group report that at the end of the Clinton administration, $20,000 a month was considered high. Now, they say, retainers of $25,000 to $40,000 a month are customary for new corporate clients, depending on how much work they do.

Such fee inflation is widespread, even by newcomers. Venn Strategies LLC, a bipartisan lobbying firm that opened in 2001, has doubled its retainer for new clients. "When we first started, most of them came in at $7,500 a month or $10,000 a month," said Stephanie E. Silverman, a principal in the firm. "Now retainers are more in the $15,000- and $25,000-a-month range."

Corporate clients accept the extra cost as the price of success in Washington. At the turn of the year, the American Ambulance Association decided to step up its lobbying and switched to Patton Boggs LLP, the Capitol Hill powerhouse, from a smaller lobbying shop across town. In the process it boosted its lobbying budget by about a third, to more than $300,000 a year.

"It is essential we have a very strong presence," said Robert L. Garner, president of the association. "It's pricey, but it's the cost of doing business in the federal environment."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...062101632.html




Got what they paid for

Copyright Bill Satisfies Recording Industry
Jack Kapica

Copyright holders and Internet service providers are the direct beneficiaries of the revisions to the Copyright Act in a bill tabled in Parliament this afternoon.

The revisions favour the Canadian recording industry, which demands greater protection against sharing digital music files, and the ISPs, who will be exempt from copyright liability for providing Canadians with access to the Internet.

One major point of the bill is that it says explicitly that the "making available" right, which gives the copyright holder the exclusive right to control who gets the material and how, has been extended to cyberspace. The original Copyright Act was not clear on that issue.

Copyright holders are to get new rights, including the right to technological protection measures, rights-management information, the ability to control the first distribution of material in tangible form, new moral rights for performances, performers would get reproduction rights, and an adjustment in the term of protection for sound recordings.

The bill also includes a "notice and notice" system, by which Internet providers would have to notify subscribers of alleged copyright infringements. ISPs have been voluntarily performing similar systems for several years.

They would also have to keep personal information relevant to the allegation for six months. They will also not be required to disclose a subscriber's identity unless ordered by a court to do so.

"The cable industry is pleased that the Government of Canada recognizes that as intermediaries, ISPs have no control over the copyright material that passes over their networks," Canadian Cable Television Association president Michael Hennessy said in a statement.

The recording industry's initial reaction was very positive.

"We are relieved that Canadian Heritage Minister Liza Frulla and Industry Minister David Emerson kept their commitment to introduce revisions to copyright legislation before Parliament recessed for the summer," CRIA President Graham Henderson said. "In doing so, they have advanced Canada's long-standing commitment to ratify international treaties and bring our law in tune with new digital realities."

"We're extremely delighted the government has taken this step," said Richard Pfohl, legal counsel to the Canadian Recording Industry Association. "It's been a long time coming."

In essence, he said, it's a first step to ratifying the World Intellectual Property Organization treaty that Canada signed but has yet to ratify.

Mr. Pfohl said he'd have to take some time to study the bill to decide whether it ratifies the WIPO treaty, and he'll have to wait further to see how the government intends to act on applying the law.

"My immediate impression is that the recording industry is the big winner with an enormous basket of new rights and individual Canadians are the big losers," said University of Ottawa Internet lawyer Michael Geist.

"There is simply no denying that the lobbying efforts of the copyright owners, particularly the music industry, have paid off as they are the big winners in this bill," he said.

The bill, he added, does little to address individual interests.

He noted that technological protection against copying provisions do not cover devices that can be used to infringe, but to people who circumvent the technology whose purpose is copyright infringement or for making a private copy. The bill also targets people who offer services to circumvent these measures — while the circumvention might be lawful, the subsequent use of the copied work might not.

The Canadian Coalition for Fair Digital Access condemned the bill for not including a provision to eliminate the levy that is currently applied to compact discs.

"Canadians are forced to pay a hidden fee on CDs, mini-discs and other blank recording media," said CCFDA representative Fraser Smith. "This antiquated approach was originally designed to compensate musicians for the duplication of their music onto blank audio tapes. Today, however, Canadians must pay the levy even when they use products like CDs to simply store photos, data and other digital files, rather than copy music. This unfairly penalizes Canadian consumers, small business owners and independent musical artists to the tune of tens of millions of dollars every year. "

Copyright lawyer Lesley Ellen Harris was disappointed about the bill's failure to address the scholarly use of copyright material. "Educational use of Internet material was not addressed in the bill," she said, but noted that "will be part of a new public consultation process."

Mr. Pfohl and Mr. Geist agreed that the private copying regime needs to be clarified further. The bill makes it an infringement to knowingly sell, rent, trade, distribute or communicate copies made for private use, but does not alter the right to make a personal copy, such as a download from the Internet.

Other groups, especially photographers, would benefit from the bill. Photographers are to get removal of provisions focusing on their rights in commissioned photographs.

The requirement that Internet providers to send notice to a subscriber if there is a claim of copyright infringement and to retain "records that will allow the identity of the person to whom the electronic location belongs to be determined," is not clear. The bill says nothing about an individual who is identified by the recording industry as a violator of copyright material (such as music on a peer-to-peer network). It says the copyright holder can issue a notice to the Internet provider, who would then pass it on to the subscriber, but not whether that means the copyright holder has the right to sue right away.

Mr. Geist roundly condemned the bill, saying that although it "could have been worse ... and there are some provisions that permit the use of digital works in an electronic and teaching environment ... that is cold comfort to millions of Canadians who find themselves with a bill that does virtually nothing to address their concerns."

Mr. Geist added that the bill did not say anything about the concept of fair use, which had been recommended by a government study more than 20 years ago.

He added that the bill does nothing to reform statutory damages. Under the current system, an infringer who has made 2,000 songs available on a computer, is liable to damages to the industry amounting to $1-million.

But, he said, one welcome part of the bill is that it focuses on the infringers, and does not target the technology, which is a major problem with the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

"Those provisions are good, but not good enough," he said, adding that the bill pays little attention to privacy protection, which "suggests that Canadians who circumvent a technology protection measure to avoid automated collection of their personal information will be committing copyright infringement."

Ottawa copyright lawyer Howard Knopf was quick to condemn the bill.

"It might as well have been called the Canadian Recording Industry of America Act," he said.

He noted that the CRIA has more than it needs after a court spelled out how the industry can act against infringers. The record companies "get paid several times" over for the music they own.

"Also, since the CRIA has achieved what it calls 'complete success' in the court case last month, there is no longer any urgency to the bill. The government should do what it can to counterbalance the provisions."
http://globetechnology.com/adsv3/par...20x120_gt.html




One sided? This court isn’t one sided enough!

Intellectual Property Court Likely In Two Years

An Intellectual Property (IP) court to handle cases of infringement could be set up within the next two years.

The Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry is lobbying hard for this, Minister Datuk Shafie Apdal said. "The court will have judges and lawyers who specialise in IP so that the rights of owners can be properly represented," he said after his ministry’s annual meeting with the private sector here yesterday.

Shafie said there was a huge backlog of IP cases which was being heard at the Sessions Court "due to the lack of expertise".

"We have looked at various aspects, like capacity and various property legislation."

Shafie said with the specialised court, Malaysia can resolve ongoing issues of piracy, imitation and counterfeit. "Protecting IP rights is necessary for Malaysia to honour its international promises. It also creates a favourable trade and investment environment and improves the quality of the economy."

He said the ministry was stepping up enforcement so that more foreign firms would register their IP and invest here.
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/N...le/indexb_html




Spain Arrests Web Code-Cracker "P. Power"
AFP

Spanish police said they had arrested "P. Power", one of the most renowned code-crackers on the Internet, following a nine-month inquiry.

Armed with a simple modem connection to the World Wide Web, a decrepit computer and standard software "P.Power" broke security codes and hacked his way into costly professional computer programmes, the interior ministry said. Spanish authorities have not released the identity of "P. Power," known only by his Internet pseudonym, but they did say he was a 26-year-old engineer. After meticulously unassembling programmes, analysing their weak points and then stripping them of their protection, the hacker broadcast messages to the Internet saying that he was the unique code-cracker and was sending out the codes for free, according to the interior ministry. The ministry added it was impossible to put a price on the damage caused to firms using the programmes pirated or how many Internet users had downloaded the codes for free. Unlike code "crackers," web "hackers" break into protected programmes of organisations such as NASA, banks or the FBI.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050622/323/flr98.html




Experts Handicap Grokster Case

Legal experts say the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to give either side exactly what it wants in upcoming Grokster ruling.

Court-watchers say neither the entertainment industry nor peer-to-peer companies are likely to receive a clear victory when the U.S. Supreme Court issues its first
ruling on file-sharing later this month.

“I don’t think either side is going to get five votes for what they argued in court,” said William Patry, a partner at Thelen Reid & Priest in New York City and former copyright counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.

MGM v. Grokster once again pits content creators against the technology industry, but even that’s not so simple. The Business Software Alliance chose the MGM side, and many digital entertainment companies aligned with MGM or took a neutral stance.

The case takes up the 1984 “Sony Betamax” rule, which has become a landmark for the technology industry. In that 5-4 decision, the Court determined that “substantial non-infringing uses” can protect a technology’s creators from being liable for copyright infringement.

After the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said that Grokster and Streamcast, the distributor of Morpheus, passed the Sony Betamax test, the Supreme Court took the case as an opportunity to make its first ruling on systems for trading files over the Internet.

The central question is whether the software companies that design those systems are liable for copyright infringements made by their customers. Questions about marketing, business practices, and older versions of the software are still in front of the district court and were not appealed to the Supreme Court.

“They’re going to keep Sony intact,” predicted Beth Noveck, director of New York Law School’s Institute for Information Law and Policy. “There’s inadequate empirical evidence in this case to redesign the Sony test.”

However, she suggested that the Supreme Court’s ruling may not be definitive, leaving the door open for “connecting the business practices and activities of the accused company to unlawful activity.”

Where They Stand
Of the nine justices, only three—Justices Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and John Paul Stevens— seem to have tipped their hands.

Justice Kennedy authored the dissent in Sony Betamax, and was noticeably hostile to Grokster’s legal representation.

Justice Stevens wrote Sony Betamax and is seen as the strongest ally of the Grokster side. Justice Breyer joked at the hearing, “For all I know, the monks had a fit when Gutenberg made his press.” But he also seemed concerned that some technologies are simply more prone to infringing uses.

The two were the sole dissenters in the Court’s last two copyright cases: New York Times v. Tasini in 2001 and Eldred v. Ashcroft in 2003. Both rulings increased copyright holders’ rights and made the widespread distribution copyrighted works more difficult.

Justices Sandra Day O’Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg seemed most sympathetic to sending the case back to the Ninth Circuit because of their concerns about P2P services actively encouraging infringement.

Justice O’Connor, a deciding vote for Sony Betamax 20 years ago, is seen as more friendly to Grokster. Justice Ginsburg may lean toward giving Congress the leeway to rewrite Sony, considering that she wrote the majority opinion in Eldred.

At the oral arguments, Justice Scalia expressed displeasure with the idea of letting Hollywood control technology. However, he rebuked the Grokster lawyer for oversimplifying the case. Justice Clarence Thomas often sides with Justice Scalia.

The MGM contingent took comfort in one of Justice Souter’s questions for the defense—“Why isn’t this a classic willful-ignorance case?” However, they also had reason to worry about his stated concern for the iPod inventor.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist was a dissenter in the original Sony Betamax decision. He is likely to favor changing the somewhat theoretical ruling to measure the actual usage of a technology, suggested Cathy Kirkman of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich, and Rosati in Palo Alto, California. But he was quiet at the oral arguments, making it hard to tell which way he was leaning.

The Court’s Options
The only thing that Grokster watchers agree upon is that the Supreme Court is unlikely to uphold the Ninth Circuit’s ruling without change.

The Court could elect to clarify secondary liability—establishing some kind of knowledge requirement or other measure—or refer the issue back to the Ninth Circuit. It could also push for a move by the U.S. Congress, which could draft new laws.

“The Court has a historical reluctance to tamper with new technologies, deferring to Congress to work out the tough compromises,” said independent copyright expert and former law professor Edward Samuels, citing piano rolls, cable television retransmissions, library photocopying, and Sony Betamax as precedents.

Facing Congress could mean a loss for MGM. “It hasn’t been a good year for the copyright industry on the Hill,” said Cardozo Law School professor Susan Crawford, noting recent movie censorship legislation and cold receptions to broadcast flag proposals.

Last fall, an attempt to incorporate inducement into the Copyright Act—effectively overriding Sony Betamax—died in committee. Ms. Crawford expects a 5-4 decision that affirms the Ninth Circuit ruling but clarifies Sony.

Tim Wu, an associate professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, thinks the Court wants to “try to catch intentional wrongdoers like Kazaa and Grokster— people who premise their business on infringement.” He predicts a 7-2 decision on these grounds, with Justices Stevens and Breyer dissenting.

What’s Next?
The Recording Industry Association of America isn’t betting on Congress or the Supreme Court to defend its products. The RIAA has been especially litigious on behalf of the music industry’s declining sales, slapping the users of Napster and its offspring with 11,700 lawsuits since September 2003.

Despite all these measures, illegal file-sharing is growing. P2P market research firm Big Champagne estimates that over 4 million individuals are on a single popular network at the same time, and that a large portion of all networks’ traded files are under copyright.

“We’re moving toward stabilizing patterns in the P2P wars,” said Mr. Wu. “Some percent of the population—college students—have been lost as a market. But a larger percentage will rely on iTunes and such stores.”
http://www.redherring.com/Article.as...nmentAndMedia#




Supreme Court To Rule On File-Sharing
Kristi Heim

The eyes of the technology and entertainment worlds are on the U.S. Supreme Court this week for a pivotal decision that could determine the future of music on the Internet.

The decision on MGM v. Grokster, which could come as early as tomorrow, tackles the problem of illegal file sharing of songs and video over the Web, but its impact could be much broader.

As more creative content goes digital, the case has far-reaching implications for consumers and companies across the country.

At the heart of the case is a question: Should Grokster and other companies that provide technology be held responsible for the actions of people who use the technology?

Rights holders — from movie studios to Major League Baseball — argue that the manufacturers of the technology should be held liable for protecting copyrights. Technology advocates and civil libertarians argue that manufacturers should not have the burden of controlling how their product will be used.

"There should be some way of prohibiting so-called pirate services so copyright owners don't go bust," said Steve Gordon, an entertainment attorney and consultant who has written extensively on the issue. At the same time, he said, "You don't want to thwart new technologies from growing and expanding and helping the economy."

Companies on both sides of the debate already have started to formulate strategies. For some, the outcome could make or break their business plans.

That's because the technology behind Grokster's software, called peer-to-peer, or P2P, has spread into all kinds of applications.


Lining up on file sharing

MGM v. Grokster has attracted supporting legal briefs from dozens of organizations, corporations and individuals. Here's a selected list.

Supporting the Grokster position

Computer science professors

National Venture Capital Association

Intel

Group of Internet law professors

Consumer Electronics Associations and other industry trade groups

Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association and other telecom trade groups and corporations

Consumer Federation of America and other consumer-advocacy organizations

Musical artists

American Conservative Union

American Civil Liberties Union

Supporting the MGM position

Progress and Freedom Foundation

U.S. Solicitor General's Office

Business Software Alliance

Law and economics professors

Kids First Coalition, Christian Coalition of America and other groups

Commissioner of Baseball, NBA, NFL and other groups

Napster, Movielink and other Internet companies

American Federation of Musicians and other trade groups

National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences

National Association of Broadcasters

Neutral position

Digital Media Association, Netcoalition and other industry groups

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R- Utah

American Intellectual Property Law Association

Audible Magic and other companies

Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation Web site


Peer-to-peer networks enable files to be transferred directly from one computer to another through a decentralized setup that escapes easy control by a central source. This setup gives P2P enormous power because the software can find and share content — music and video — from one person's computer with the million other PCs on that network.

Kirkland-based Laplink uses the technology in a software product that helps lawyers, doctors and business people share files. Laplink Chief Executive Thomas Koll says some of the arguments in the Grokster case give the useful and promising technology a bad name.

"It's as if, through some of the debate, everyone doing peer-to-peer is criminalized," Koll said. "A lot of business-class peer-to-peer services offer a legitimate way of exchanging files that is very necessary to the world. We are all connected to the Internet, but not to each other. When businesses want to exchange data, the best way to do it is through peer-to-peer."

Although he's watching the case closely, Koll doesn't think the court will restrict the sale of file-sharing products. "Then the printing presses would have to be prohibited because they print illegal material," he said.

Encouraging lawbreakers?

The film studios and recording companies are suing Grokster, which is registered in the West Indies, along with its cousin Morpheus, created by StreamCast Networks of Los Angeles. They claim Grokster's technology encourages illegal sharing of copyrighted works and should be shut down.

A federal court forced song-trading site Napster to close four years ago, but then new services cropped up to let people share music files directly without going through a central database like the one Napster operated. As a result, millions of people can use Grokster software to download songs free from any other computer with Grokster, bypassing record-industry control.

Courts have rejected MGM's arguments so far, upholding the 20-year-old Sony Betamax standard. Even though people could use the Betamax recorders for making unauthorized copies of movies, they could also use them for legitimate purposes, so a ban was not justified. That decision set the precedent for a host of new consumer-electronics products, from VCRs to personal computers with CD burners.

Serving the industry

In anticipating a court ruling that could change the legal landscape, the head of Seattle-based Loudeye says he's taking a two-pronged approach in promoting and protecting digital files.

Loudeye encodes, stores and distributes music for its clients, including the five major record labels. Loudeye's technology allows third-party companies, such as Microsoft and its MSN Music, to set up their own digital music stores. Meanwhile, Loudeye is working on ways to drive more Web users to those sites, says President and CEO Michael Brochu.

But, he says, "A lot of people are only going to take music if they can get it for free."

Loudeye's other approach is to enhance anti-piracy protection through a separate service it sells to record labels.

"If the court comes out and says P2P networks are legal," Brochu said, "we stay very focused on anti- piracy and shift more emphasis on protecting those files."

Old system "dying"

Record companies blame illegal file sharing over the Internet for decimating CD sales, now in a three- year decline.

But the Internet itself is also forcing a tectonic shift in the way people are listening to music, watching videos and otherwise using media.

The new models threaten the system that record companies have dominated for decades, says Seattle music producer Steve Fisk.

The next album Fisk is helping produce for the band Harvey Danger will be available free on the Internet and later sold as a CD with extra tracks.

"The minute you make a CD, you have to have a building with employees running around trying to sell that CD and trucks to transport the plastic disks all over the world," he said. "That's the system that's dying."

Growing up through the cracks of the old system are new services like Weed, a tool for sharing files legally over peer networks created by Seattle-based Shared Media Licensing.

WeedShare technology embedded in the file lets users download a song and listen to it three times for free. Most songs cost about $1.25 each. The artist earns 50 percent of every sale. When people who buy songs persuade others to buy them, they earn a commission of 20 percent. Weed collects 15 percent of each sale.

Musician Roger Manning Jr. is selling his new album as a Weed file. He has earned $1,000 from sales over the past 2 ½ months, he said. While that amount is still tiny, the approach "puts control back into the hands of artists," he said.

Manning has worked with four record companies over the past 10 years. But he says he makes more money selling music directly over the Internet. With a record contract, he'd have to sell half a million records to cover marketing costs and other expenses.

Creative model

The Weed model proves the value of creative solutions to the entrenched problem of unlicensed file sharing, said John Beezer, president of Shared Media Licensing.

Beezer, a veteran of RealNetworks and Microsoft who ran Maria Cantwell's online senatorial campaign in 2000, started the company three years ago.

Regardless of the Supreme Court decision, Beezer expects his company to endure because it has made friends on all sides. Weed works with P2P sites Morpheus and LimeWire, and it just inked its first deal with a major record label for online sales.

Either way, Beezer thinks the peer-to-peer phenomenon can't be stopped. "You may as well outlaw the tide coming in," he said. "It's going to become much more important in the future, and anything that hampers it would be a huge mistake."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...rokster19.html




The Court of Online Opinion Has Its Say on File Sharing
Tom Zeller Jr.

EVER since the Supreme Court agreed in December to hear the entertainment industry's case against the file-sharing software companies Grokster and Streamcast, armchair legal experts have been casually wagering on the outcome. The case pits copyright holders against those who fear a stifling of technological innovation. With the court poised to weigh in, perhaps as early as today, all sides have been getting edgy.

Not surprisingly, technophiles siding with Grokster have been most vocal on Internet forums and Web logs. But among those willing to make predictions, whether authors of Grokster supporting briefs, or mere spectators keeping watch on the case as they download "Batman Begins," pessimism prevails.

Most believe that the Supreme Court will send the case back to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which upheld a lower court's decision against MGM and its fellow petitioners last August. Others think that the Supreme Court will side cleanly with the industry. Only a plucky minority said the high court would unequivocally side with the software companies.

If the seers have not already been proved sage or foolish - the Supreme Court typically issues decisions on Mondays at around 10 a.m. - they soon will be. A selection of those bold enough to predict the outcome follows.

The discussion has penetrated some unusual corners of the Internet, including the newsgroup rec.sport.pro-wrestling. That's where Don Del Grande, a civilian computer programmer for the United States Navy, made this pointed observation:

"Grokster, unlike Napster, doesn't use a central database to save information on who has what, which is probably what will make Grokster legal in the end. Besides, even if Grokster was declared illegal, what would be next - banning e-mail because it is possible to send illegally obtained music files as attachments?"

Of course, that slightly mischaracterizes the debate, which hinges not on the legality of peer-to-peer file sharing, but on whether makers of file-sharing software are liable for illegal copying by users. Lower courts have held they are not, but Eric Goldman, a professor of law at Marquette University who maintains a "Technology & Marketing Law Blog" at blog.ericgoldman.org, predicted a reversal of those decisions - and potential legislation:

"What will the court say? We're all on pins and needles!

"I've heard lots of predictions. Predicting Grokster has turned into a modern-day parlor game. I don't have any special insight, but FWIW, here's mine: Supreme Court reverses the Ninth Circuit, but writes a narrow opinion that effectively limits itself to the Grokster facts..."

"Whatever the Supreme Court rules, I further predict that Grokster - and all of us - lose eventually. Either the Supreme Court reverses the Ninth Circuit or I predict that Congress will reverse the Supreme Court statutorily."

Gerald Smith, a lawyer and frequent contributor to the technology forums at ABXZone.com, also wagered on a reversal:

"I believe the Supreme Court will reverse the Ninth Circuit and the case will wind up in the district court for further proceedings. It is important to note that if the court does indeed reverse, that does not mean the plaintiffs have won. It will simply mean that the summary judgment will be vacated and the case will proceed, perhaps to trial."

But last month, on the Volokh Conspiracy Web log (volokh.com), David Post, a professor of law at Temple University and the author of a Grokster supporting brief submitted to the Supreme Court , reversed an earlier prediction he had made for, well, a reversal.

"A few months ago I fearlessly predicted that the Supreme Court would side with the entertainment industry plaintiffs, reverse the Ninth Circuit, and find Grokster liable for inducing copyright infringement (through the distribution of its software). Maybe I've just talked myself into it, but ... I think my initial prediction was wrong.

" ... I don't think the court will be able to reach the question of whether Grokster can be liable for inducement - actively encouraging, through advertising or otherwise, others to infringe copyright. That leaves just the question of whether distribution of its software, alone, can be considered contributory infringement. On that question, I think the court's going to get it right ..."

And a few bold sorts simply predicted a slam-dunk for the Grokster team.

Don Snyder, a student in a course titled Information Technology and the Law at Princeton University, argued on the class Web log that a 1984 Supreme Court decision, which held that the Sony Betamax videocassette recorder had substantial legal uses, even if individual consumers used it to copy movies illegally, provides a compelling precedent; the Grokster lawyers have argued that, too.

"Having reviewed its central contentions, compared it with petitioners' claims and arguments, and balanced it against the weight/direction of Sony and subsequent rulings, I predict, unequivocally, that the court will not side with petitioners."

But Mr. Snyder's instructor at Princeton, Prof. Edward W. Felten, a frequently read blogger, was less enthusiastic. At his Web log, freedom-to-tinker.com, Professor Felton predicted that the court would leave the whole issue muddy.

"The Supreme Court's Grokster decision won't provide us with a broad, clear rule for evaluating future innovations, so the ball will be back in Congress's court."

None of this, of course, will matter to avid downloaders in the end. Peer-to-peer file sharing will rage on, via endless permutations of open source, anonymous, non- profit-seeking software - even in a Groksterless world. That might suit just fine "littlelisa," a file-sharer who reviewed Grokster's product at Download.com earlier this year:

"Pros: It's no longer on my computer.

"Cons: Infected my computer with the most spyware I've ever had. Crashed my computer multiple times and made things so complicated I had to have my whole hard drive wiped clean. I want the creator of Grokster tied down and repeatedly poked with pointy sticks. That is all."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/business/20link.html




Local news

Score One for the Corporate Oligarchy
Posted by spatula

The Supreme Court has ruled that a city may use eminent domain to take land from the middle class and the poor and give it to the rich...

Residents in the city of New London, Connecticut are going to lose their homes, thanks in part to a recent Supreme Court decision that cities may use eminent domain to take their land away and give it to wealthy developers, not for a road, bridge, powerline, pipe line, utility, or other obvious public need, but instead so an office complex can be constructed. The Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution says "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Findlaw's annotations provide an excellent explanation and justification for the eminent domain process. But it wasn't until now that "public use" became so broadly defined.

In a strangely-divided 5-4 ruling, Justices Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer concluded that cities were well within their rights to sieze property, even in an area that isn't blighted, for private development for the sake of economic growth and increased tax revenue. So conceivably any time a city found itself hurting for money, it can now take a look for some homes to bulldoze so a Wal-Mart can move in. Although I suspect that any city council that authorizes this kind of thing may find itself rapidly kicked out of office, by then the damage will have already been done.

Justice O'Connor issued an angry dissent, saying in part, "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms." In other words, those with more money will be able to lobby the local governments to get siezed land at a discount price for their own benefit. It's Robin Hood in reverse: stealing from the poor (and middle class) to give to the rich. O'Connor was joined by justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas, with whom I find myself in rare agreement.

If you think this is the sort of thing that happens infrequently, think again. According to the Institute for Justice, over 10,000 properties were threatened with eminent domain in the recent past.

New London city officials plan to sweep away Victorian-era homes and businesses for a commercial development to attract tourists and businesses, joining a nearby Pfizer research center and including a Coast Guard museum.

The majority decision seems to hinge on the notion that the city had a plan for the use of the siezed property:

The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue. As with other exercises in urban planning and development, the city is trying to coordinate a variety of commercial, residential, and recreational land uses, with the hope that they will form a whole greater than the sum of its parts. ... Because that plan unquestionably serves a public purpose, the takings challenged here satisfy the Fifth Amendment.

But the existence of the plan isn't at issue. The issue is whether the city has a right to develop plans to take private property for private commercial development at all. Any city council with dollar signs in its eyes can come up with a comprehensive plan for redevelopment of private homes into larger-tax-revenue-producing business parks.

To their credit, the majority did make it clear that cities must have a legitimate purpose in mind:

the City would no doubt be forbidden from taking petitioners' land for the purpose of conferring a private benefit on a particular private party. ... Nor would the City be allowed to take property under the mere pretext of a public purpose, when its actual purpose was to bestow a private benefit. The takings before us, however, would be executed pursuant to a "carefully considered" development plan. The trial judge and all the members of the Supreme Court of Connecticut agreed that there was no evidence of an illegitimate purpose in this case. [citations omitted]

Nonetheless, the court leaves it to the cities to decide:

Just as we decline to second-guess the City's considered judgments about the efficacy of its development plan, we also decline to second-guess the City's determinations as to what lands it needs to acquire in order to effectuate the project.

The majority opinion also indicates that states may introduce more strict requirements of eminent domain than what the Supreme Court finds Constitutionally necessary. Maybe this is a hint to state legislatures (or private property advocates)?

In her dissent, justice O'Connor pointed out the obvious problem with this broad interpretation of the Fifth Amendment:

Today the Court abandons this long-held, basic limitation on government power. Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner, so long as it might be upgraded i.e., given to an owner who will use it in a way that the legislature deems more beneficial to the public in the process. To reason, as the Court does, that the incidental public benefits resulting from the subsequent ordinary use of private property render economic development takings "for public use" is to wash out any distinction between private and public use of property and thereby effectively to delete the words "for public use" from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

O'Connor favors a more narrow interpretation of the clause: "Government may compel an individual to forfeit her property for the public's use, but not for the benefit of another private person. This requirement promotes fairness as well as security."

O'Connor also takes exception to giving local authorities a free hand in deciding what constitutes "public use," saying "But were the political branches the sole arbiters of the public-private distinction, the Public Use Clause would amount to little more than hortatory fluff. An external, judicial check on how the public use requirement is interpreted, however limited, is necessary if this constraint on government power is to retain any meaning." In other words, if you leave it to the cities to decide what constitutes "public use" then there's nothing to stop any city from arbitrarily deciding that anything and everything could be "public use" with no checks.

So do you think you can compete with Wal-Mart when it comes to property tax revenue and job creation? If not, you'd better make sure you elect people you can trust to your city council. And if you don't think you can trust your city council, it's going to be up to your state to restrict eminent domain to real public use; you've got no friends in the Supreme Court watching your back. After all, you're just a person, not a wealthy corporation.
http://web.morons.org/article.jsp?sectionid=2&id=6348




Microsoft Extends IP Protection For Partners

Microsoft Corp. said on Thursday it is strengthening the intellectual property protection it provides to PC manufacturers as it tries to fend off competition from Linux rivals.

Linux, a freely available operating system, has gained popularity among cost-conscious companies. But there are lingering intellectual property concerns as illustrated by software company SCO Group Inc.'s numerous lawsuits against large companies claiming ownership technology used in Linux.

The Microsoft protection package provided to large partners such as Dell Inc. and an array of small resellers shields them from exposure to legal costs and damage claims. It also covers some software companies such as Citrix Systems, which provides secure Internet access products.

It includes protection for patent, copyright, trade secret and trademark and the coverage extends to current and future versions of software such as the Windows Server System, Microsoft Office System, and Windows client software.

Linux distributors also offer some protection for the users.

Microsoft shares were up 20 cents, or less than 1 percent, to $25.27 in early morning trade.
http://today.reuters.com/News/TechSt...CROSOFT-DC.XML




Gates, Vietnamese Prime Minister Talk Piracy

Vietnamese Prime Minister Phan Van Khai pledged to combat software piracy during talks with Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates on Monday as he became the most senior official of the communist state to visit the United States since the Vietnam War ended 30 years ago.

Khai signed two agreements committing Vietnam to work with Microsoft in curbing theft of intellectual-property rights and removing licensing barriers for used computers donated to schools, said Microsoft spokeswoman Tami Begasse.

The Business Software Alliance, a Washington-based lobby group, estimates that 92 percent of the software used in Vietnam in 2004 was pirated, the highest rate in the world.

Gates said users in Vietnam had downloaded a Vietnamese language package to work on Windows XP and Office 2003 more than 18,000 times since its introduction in March--something he said made Microsoft rededicate its commitment to Vietnam.

Khai's stop in Seattle was the first in a four-city tour that includes a meeting on Tuesday with President Bush in Washington.

In Washington, the White House said the United States was eager to advance Vietnam's bid to join the World Trade Organization. Hanoi's goal is to join the WTO at the group's next ministerial meeting in December in Hong Kong.

"The United States strongly supports Vietnam's integration into the world economic community and its bid to join the World Trade Organization," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

Since Washington and Hanoi restored diplomatic links in 1995, two-way trade has rocketed from just $451 million to $6.4 billion in 2004. The United States became Vietnam's most important commercial partner after the signing of a bilateral trade pact in 2001.

Hundreds of demonstrators rallied in Seattle against Khai's visit Sunday to protest against Vietnam's human rights record. Vietnamese exiles, religious activists and ethnic minority opponents of Hanoi also plan rallies in Washington.

Microsoft spokeswoman Begasse said there were no protests at the software maker's campus.

Khai will also travel to Boston and New York on a trip that coincides with the 10th anniversary of the normalization of diplomatic ties frozen after the end of "The American War," as it is known to Vietnamese.

Vietnam is also expected to sign a contract to buy four Boeing 787 "Dreamliner" planes, worth about $500 million, during Khai's visit.

Despite growing commercial ties, differences remain between the two nations, in particular over U.S. criticism of Vietnam's record on human rights and religious freedom, and Washington's refusal to compensate thousands of Vietnamese victims of wartime chemical weapons such as Agent Orange.
http://news.com.com/Gates%2C+Vietnam...3-5755247.html




Lost Credit Data Improperly Kept, Company Admits
Eric Dash

The chief of the credit card processing company whose computer system was penetrated by data thieves, exposing 40 million cardholders to a risk of fraud, acknowledged yesterday that the company should not have been retaining those records.

The official, John M. Perry, chief executive of CardSystems Solutions, indicated that the records known to have been stolen covered roughly 200,000 of the 40 million compromised credit card accounts, from Visa, MasterCard and other card issuers. He said the data was in a file being stored for "research purposes" to determine why certain transactions had registered as unauthorized or uncompleted.

"We should not have been doing that," Mr. Perry said. "That, however, has been remediated." As for the sensitive data, he added, "We no longer store it on files."

Under rules established by Visa and MasterCard, processors are not allowed to retain cardholder information including names, account numbers, expiration dates and security codes after a transaction is handled.

"CardSystems provides services and is supposed to pass that information on to the banks and not keep it," said Joshua Peirez, a MasterCard senior vice president who has been involved with the investigation. "They were keeping it."

The security breach was first reported Friday when MasterCard International said a lapse at CardSystems had allowed the installation of a rogue computer program that could extract data from the system, potentially compromising 40 million accounts of various credit cards.

MasterCard said Saturday that 68,000 of its own account numbers were especially at risk because they were in a file found to have actually been "exported from the system." CardSystems said yesterday that the file also contained data from other cards in proportion to the volume of business it handles from each company. That would translate to about 100,000 Visa accounts and roughly 30,000 others.

It is not clear whether those numbers could yet grow.

The details about CardSystems' handling of the data raised new questions about the effectiveness and enforcement of the standards established by the card companies for data protection and storage.

To protect cardholders, Visa and MasterCard have long-established policies for the merchants and processors that handle transactions on their payment network. They require their processors, for example, to hire a certified outside assessor to do an annual security assessment. Processors must also conduct a quarterly self-evaluation and scans for network vulnerabilities.

The card associations have also spent millions of dollars to upgrade their own computer systems with sophisticated fraud-detection software. Over the last two years, they have sent out teams to processor and merchant sites to review compliance.

But one kink in this chain - one processor that fails to comply - can put untold numbers of cardholders at risk of fraud.

"The standards themselves are very effectively written," said Tom Arnold, a partner at Payment Software Company, a consulting firm in San Francisco that advises and provides security assessments for merchants and processors. "The challenge in the industry can be when people don't fully comply or try to cut corners."

Avivah Litan, an industry analyst at Gartner Inc., agreed. "If they are really serious about these programs, they should pay attention to how the processors are guarding the data, and they are not," she said. After the disclosure of the security breach at CardSystems, varying accounts were offered about the company's compliance with card association standards.

Jessica Antle, a MasterCard spokeswoman, said that CardSystems had never demonstrated compliance with MasterCard's standards. "They were in violation of our rules," she said.

It is not clear whether or when MasterCard intervened with the company in the past to insure compliance, but MasterCard said Friday that it had now given CardSystems "a limited amount of time" to do so.

Asked about compliance with Visa's standards, a Visa spokeswoman, Rosetta Jones, said, "This particular processor was not following Visa's security requirements when we found out there was a potential data compromise."

Earlier, Mr. Perry of CardSystems said his company had been audited in December 2003 by an unspecified independent assessor and had received a seal of approval from the Visa payment associations in June 2004.

CardSystems, based in Tucson, processes more than $15 billion in payments for small to midsize merchants and financial institutions each year.

MasterCard said that it had detected atypical levels of fraudulent charges on its cards as early as mid-April and, joined by Visa and an unspecified bank in mid-May, had requested that CardSystems allow its independent forensics team, Ubizen, to investigate. It was not until May 22 that the security specialists identified the rogue computer program as the source, MasterCard said.

CardSystems said it contacted the F.B.I. offices in Tucson and Atlanta on May 23. The F.B.I. said Friday that its investigation was continuing.

Only MasterCard affirmed that it knew of specific instances of fraud against its customers traced to the CardSystems breach. Visa said it was monitoring the situation but had yet to detect any fraud traceable to the case. Those companies, along with American Express and Discover, said their cardholders would not be liable for fraudulent charges on their accounts.

Cardholders' concerns were largely referred to the card-issuing banks. Citigroup said the risk of identity theft to its cardholders was low but said it would closely monitor accounts. Chase Cards said that if cardholders spotted suspicious activity on their monthly or online statements, they should contact their bank. In such a case, identity theft experts said, it would be prudent to cancel the account.

CardSystems is one of hundreds of processors that provide terminals to merchants and help banks process millions of transactions a day, electronically relaying cardholders' names, account numbers and security codes so that once a card is swiped, the sale will be authorized, the merchant will be paid and the customer will be billed.

The processors area also a point in the matrix exposed to Internet traffic and possible intrusion.

"They typically have a Web site where merchants sign on with and then the merchants can look at the daily transactions, the balance in their account," Edward Lawrence, a managing associate at the Auriemma Consulting Group in Westbury, N.Y., which advises credit card merchants and processors. "My guess is that a hacker would get into the Web site and somehow find their way past a firewall and through the passwords and encroach onto the programming system."

Mr. Peirez of MasterCard said that the data inappropriately retained by CardSystems was particularly sensitive because it included cardholders' three- and four-digit security codes, making it more attractive to potential thieves because it can double or triple the black-market value of a cardholder's account. Ms. Litan of Gartner said there was no reason for a processor to store security codes. "It's probably just laziness or they don't know the rules," she added.

In addition, the data lost in the CardSystems case was apparently not encrypted. "If it was encrypted, the hacker would have gotten data but would not have known how to read it," said Mr. Lawrence of Auriemma Consulting.

The 40 million accounts that passed through CardSystems during the period in question may be the largest case of exposed data to date.

"There is going to be a lot of finger-pointing," said Susan Crawford, a professor of Internet law at Cardozo Law School. "It's a very complex situation, and we'll wind up for calls for very heavy-handed government regulation of data transmission."

Yet, there may be little incentive for processors to change. Visa and MasterCard have said that payment processors that violate their rules must pay a penalty, but they do not disclose the amounts of those fines. And it is typically the merchant that bears the cost of data fraud.

Zero liability for customers means that fraudulent charges come out of a bank or store's coffers in the form of higher merchant transaction fees. "The retailers will pay for it and the issuing banks will get rich off it," Ms. Litan said. "It's just another revenue stream."

"What is the incentive?" she added. "Staying out of the newspapers."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/te...ZJZQT/uv4lICXg




Ubiquitous Technology, Bad Practices Drive Up Data Theft
Jonathan Krim

Call 2005 the year of the data breach.

One day, tapes with the Social Security numbers of 1.2 million federal workers are reported missing. Another day it's hackers gaining access to private information on 120,000 alumni at Boston College. Then, last Friday, comes word that 40 million credit card numbers fell prey to computer criminals.

Collectively, nearly 50 million accounts have been exposed to the possibility of identity fraud since the beginning of the year, a significant increase from last year.

Security experts, law enforcement officials and privacy advocates agree that while computer crime is on the rise, it is hardly new.

So why the apparent escalation?

In part, organizations are telling their customers or employees about incidents more than they used to, many complying with a California notification law that is being considered as the basis of possible federal legislation.

After data broker ChoicePoint Inc. reported in February that it was infiltrated by identity thieves posing as legitimate customers, the company received a second black eye when reports surfaced that it did not notify consumers about a previous breach, before California's law took effect. Now, most organizations are choosing to notify potential victims.

Experts see other factors contributing to the data-theft siege.

A boom in data collection has created a marketplace of valuable information stored on computers in thousands of places, many with weak security.

"The current fiascos in cyber-security have been occurring for the past 10 years," said Tom Kellermann, who recently left his position as senior data risk management specialist for the World Bank.

Kellermann and others blame poorly designed software, inattention to data security and an underappreciation of the problem by top management in corporations and other institutions.

"We've used weak practices for some time," said Chuck Wade, an Internet security and commerce consultant. "The vulnerabilities are well known, and we have not been improving the security measures . . . as we should have been."

At the same time, some hackers who used to get their kicks merely being disruptive are pooling efforts with organized criminals, said Jonathan J. Rusch, a special counsel in the fraud section of the Justice Department.

"The motivation now is money," Rusch said. In addition to using stolen data for credit card or other financial fraud, a thriving black market for the stolen data itself exists online, run in large part from Eastern Europe.

Among the most extreme examples of data for sale are offerings known in the online underground as "fulls." These reports include not only Social Security and credit card numbers, but also account passwords for Web sites that a consumer might use, such as eBay or a bank.

"There's so much information that has been leaked out over the years, it may be that there are, outside of the country, criminal elements with huge databases on American consumers," Wade said.

With more and more people getting high-speed Internet connections, and participating in online commerce and banking, the targets of opportunity for criminals only grow.

Wade and others argue that many industry players have not responded aggressively enough because they are insulated from the financial consequences of breaches.

Banks and credit card companies, for example, pay nothing when a criminal uses someone's credit card for a fraudulent charge. The same is true for credit card processing companies such as CardSystems Solutions Inc., which announced last week that it housed the 40 million credit card numbers that hackers may have obtained.

Payment processors and banks collect fees for charges that are reversed.

"They are making money on fraudulent transactions," said Brian Mortensen, head of a New Jersey company that sells telecommunications equipment. "They should not be allowed to do that."

Mortensen said that as a result of fraudulent purchases, his firm has lost $12,000 to $15,000 on equipment that will never be recovered and owes several thousand dollars more in various fees.

Although consumers generally don't have to pay for fraudulent charges on their credit cards, if their identity has been compromised it can take years and thousands of dollars to restore good credit.

Some security experts say many financial companies have been slow to adopt multiple layers of customer verification, such as requiring a password and a second identification number. Many companies also are not encrypting stored data.

But many firms argue that while data protection is a top priority, such measures could make online commerce too inconvenient for consumers without adding appreciably to security. And security already is a large business expense.

Companies must monitor their computer networks and "patch" vulnerabilities in software that are discovered regularly.

That can be especially complex when firms merge and one company's system needs to be incorporated into another's, said David Thomas, head of the FBI's computer intrusion section.

"It's very, very difficult to stay on top of it," Thomas said.

Moreover, said Mark Rasch, a former federal prosecutor who works for an Internet security firm, "The company has to try to protect against every kind of attack. The intruder only needs to find one."

Some breaches, such as mortgage data from General Motors Acceptance Corp. that was stored on a laptop stolen from a car, leave consumers wondering how seriously companies take information security.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), one of several on Capitol Hill sponsoring identity theft legislation, said the CardSystems incident last week "is a clear sign that industry's efforts to self-regulate when it comes to protecting consumers' sensitive personal data are failing."

Thomas F. Holt Jr., an attorney who represents companies involved in breach cases, said he expects things to change when large class-action suits begin to get filed against firms for improperly protecting information.

"When that game is afoot . . . companies will begin to redouble their security efforts and reexamine a lot of assumptions they have regarding the gathering and storing of sensitive data," Holt said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...062101615.html




Fewer choices, more giants

AMC, Loews Theater Chains Merge
Anjali Athavaley

AMC Entertainment Inc., the second-largest movie theater chain in the United States, is buying Loews Cineplex Entertainment Corp., the companies said yesterday, banding together to keep once-loyal customers from staying at home and waiting for the DVD.

Once, theater owners could put huge multiplexes in the suburbs and watch customers flock to the summer blockbusters. But this year, Hollywood hasn't come through with those big, irresistible movies. And too many movie lovers are settling into their easy chairs and watching films in their living rooms on their new flat-screen TVs rather than heading out to the theaters.

"It's a durable business, not a growth business," said Matthew Harrigan, managing director at Janco Partners Inc., an investment banking firm that follows the telecommunications industry. "We're going through a dry patch at the box office."

Those dry patches mean less revenue for the theaters, which pay for movies upfront, meaning the longer they run, the more money they make.

AMC did not say how much it was paying for Loews, the third-largest theater chain in the country. The new company, AMC Entertainment Inc., will have its headquarters in Kansas City, Mo. It will operate or have interest in about 450 theaters with 5,900 screens worldwide. The new chain will remain second-largest behind Regal Entertainment Group, which operates more than 6,000 screens.

AMC said it is too soon to tell whether it will close any theaters. It has eight theaters in the D.C. area; Loews has 12.

Peter C. Brown, chairman, chief executive and president of AMC, said in a written statement that the merger would give AMC the opportunity to "blend the best practices of two remarkable organizations as we create an extraordinary company."

Both companies are privately owned. AMC is owned by Marquee Holdings Inc., which is controlled by affiliates of J.P. Morgan Partners LLC and Apollo Management LP.

Loews is owned by LCE Holdings Inc., which includes affiliates of Bain Capital Partners, the Carlyle Group and Spectrum Equity Investors.

After the merger, which is expected to close in six to nine months, Marquee will be the holding company for the new theater chain, and LCE will hold about 40 percent of the stock.

Some analysts say mergers are the way for movie theater chains to stay more competitive in a fragmented industry. The AMC and Loews merger will give the new company a greater market share and lower overhead.

But it will still have to fight to draw moviegoers. Fewer people are willing to shell out $8 to see the weekend's newest release in the theater when they can wait for it to come out on DVD. Attendance at movie theaters has declined for the past 17 weekends in a row, Harrigan said. "This has been a disappointing summer," he said.

One thing keeping moviegoers at home is the comfort of their home theaters, Harrigan said. As more consumers invest in flashy home-viewing systems equipped with big-screen TVs, they decide they'd rather watch a movie from their couch.

"People still want to go to movies, but HDTV and DVR and DVDs have siphoned off customers somewhat," Harrigan said.

The movie theater industry needs to scale up theaters by adding new technology, such as more Imax films, he said. "It'd be nice to have a new toy, because there's a lot of competition for viewers out there."

At the same time, movies don't stay in theaters as long. Analysts say more of them are opening big but then fading away shortly afterward, preventing theater owners from reaping much profit once they've paid for the movie.

The ideal movie would bring in a steady stream of viewers over a few weeks. Harrigan listed "Titanic" and "The Passion of the Christ" as examples of the kinds of movies that keep the people coming and the cash registers filled.

Business has been declining since a peak in 2002, when movies such as "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" and "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" just kept on going.

Although nothing this summer has quite measured up, there is still time for a box-office hit to turn the year around, said Tom Adams, president of Adams Media Research, which follows the entertainment industry.

The merger comes after both AMC and Loews were bought out by groups of private investors in 2004, and both deals were paid for largely with debt. AMC's holding company, Marquee Holdings, has more than $1.3 billion in debt.

Last year, Marquee Holdings reported a loss of $93.6 million on revenue of $1.8 billion for the year ended March 31.

In 2004, Loews lost $14.5 million on revenue of $923 million.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...062100520.html




Billy Jack Is Ready to Fight the Good Fight Again
Sharon Waxman

It has been more than 30 years, but Billy Jack is still plenty ticked off.

Back then, it was bigotry against Native Americans, trouble with the nuclear power industry and big bad government that made this screen hero explode in karate-fueled rage. At the time, the unlikely combination of rugged-loner heroics - all in defense of society's downtrodden and forgotten - and rough-edged filmmaking sparked a pop culture and box-office phenomenon.

Now the man who created and personified Billy Jack, Tom Laughlin - the writer, director, producer and actor - is determined to take on the establishment again, and his concerns are not so terribly different. Mr. Laughlin (and therefore Billy Jack) is angry about the war in Iraq and about the influence of big business in politics. And he still has a thing for the nuclear power industry.

"I'm going to say a lot of egregious things," Mr. Laughlin, 73, announced at the start of an interview at his home here in the rolling horse country east of Los Angeles. His face is creased with deep lines, his hair a bleached gray, but he is still entirely recognizable as the handsome Billy Jack.

"We despise both political parties, really loathe them," he said. ("We" might be Mr. Laughlin and his alter ego, or it might include his wife, Delores Taylor, who played Billy Jack's pacifist partner, Jean; but one doesn't interrupt the man lightly.)

"We the people have no representative of any kind," he continued. "It's now the multinationals. They've taken over. It's no different than the 70's, but it's gotten worse. And if you use words like 'impeachment' or 'fascist' you're a nut on a soapbox."

So Mr. Laughlin and Ms. Taylor are planning to bring their characters back to the big screen with a new $12 million sequel, raising money from individuals just as they did to make their films three decades ago.

In this new film, they say, they will take on social scourges like drugs, and power players like the religious right. They say they will also outline a way to end the current war and launch a political campaign for a third-party presidential candidate.

They have already formed a 527 nonprofit committee with the aim of ending the war, and say they will run full-page ads in major newspapers beginning next month explaining their plan to withdraw from Iraq. (Money raised for that committee is separate from the film project.)

"We both have our reasons for doing this," said Ms. Taylor, who joined the conversation midway through. "Mine is for our children - we have three - and four grandchildren. I feel right now America is in a big, big problem. I feel America is falling apart."

"We're not delusional," Mr. Laughlin added. "We'd disappeared from the business. We devoted our time to psychology and religion, teaching and lecturing. We're not wealthy retired people. We're surviving, we're fine."

Still, at least one industry veteran who worked briefly with Mr. Laughlin said he thought the filmmaker would not be successful.

" 'Billy Jack' had a huge impact on me," said Gavin Polone, a television producer who made "Revelations," on NBC this past season, and who approached Mr. Laughlin years ago about making a sequel to his trademark film. But, he said, Mr. Laughlin was unwilling to work within the Hollywood system, and his new project would probably suffer as a result.

"You can work inside the business and try to figure it out, get good writers, build your career," Mr. Polone said. "Or you can say: 'I'm smarter than everyone else. I'll make my own movies, finance them' - and you're never heard from again."

But three decades ago Mr. Laughlin defied the odds and made his mark on movie history with his homegrown tale "Billy Jack" and the sequel "The Trial of Billy Jack." The films unexpectedly connected with audiences during the social miasma of Vietnam and Watergate, but also had an impact on Hollywood marketing and distribution techniques.

"He was the model for Rambo, for 'Walking Tall,' " said Robert Sklar, professor of cinema studies at New York University. "When you think of what 'Rocky' meant for the culture - Laughlin was ahead of all that. He represented the indomitable outsider, and he was the first one in that era. It was also true in the sense in which he fought to make the film, and fought to get it distributed with this terrific idea of self-releasing."

Because exhibitors were reluctant to gamble on "Billy Jack" in 1971, Mr. Laughlin pioneered what is known as four-walling a theater: renting space from theater owners and collecting the box-office profits. He said he hired Mormons all around the country to work the ticket booths, figuring they could be trusted with the cash, and the film took in an astonishing $32.5 million.

With the sequel in 1974, Mr. Laughlin spent $3 million, then a huge sum, on advertising to promote the film. He demanded cash upfront from exhibitors for the right to show it, and opened in 1,000 theaters, defying industry conventions of the time. The first week of box-office sales resulted in a banner headline in Variety: "Billy's Sequel's Grand $11 Mil Preem; Tom Laughlin Stuns Old Film Biz Pros."

After that, he suffered some setbacks. He sank millions into a film distribution company that became a money pit. A second sequel, "Billy Jack Goes to Washington," about corruption in the nuclear industry, was made in 1976 but never made it into theaters. Mr. Laughlin said the film was blackballed under pressure from politicians involved with nuclear power.

Another sequel, this one about child pornography, had to be shut down during production when Mr. Laughlin was injured on the shoot and unable to finish filming. Later he developed tongue cancer, now in remission.

Then in 2002 Mr. Laughlin made a deal with the film company Intermedia for the rights to make yet another sequel. That endeavor ended in a lawsuit, though he eventually got the rights back in 2004. After that experience, Mr. Laughlin says he is done with the Hollywood studios, and back where he is most comfortable: as an outsider. When the new film is finished, which will be early next year if financing materializes, he will seek an independent or major distributor to release it, as with "The Passion of the Christ."

Ms. Taylor said: "This is something we have to do. We don't know if it will be successful, but we're committed. We have to do it. Just like 'Billy Jack.' "
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/movies/20jack.html

[JackSpratts]

Cinexpo 2005

Organized Crime Rings Have Become A Formidable Threat To The Street-Level Fight Against Piracy In Europe

Jimmy Katz could hardly believe his eyes as he read the May 12 Wall Street Journal: Vladimir Ovsyannikov, a member of Russia's Duma parliament, was publicly admitting that he used his legislative privileges to protect a powerful businessman in his constituency, who also happened to be a well-known DVD, video game and software pirate.

For Katz, vp Europe, Middle East and Africa at the Motion Picture Assn.'s Brussels office, the politician's relationship with the copyright thief summed up the entrenched links between piracy and organized crime in Europe.

"Piracy in Russia is as bad as it can get," Katz says. "The piracy rate is 90%; the number of DVD lines at optical disk plants is increasing, flooding the local market and spreading into Europe, the United Kingdom and the Middle East. The manufacturers and distributors are very much in the grip of organized crime."

Russian movie piracy is among the worst in Europe, where gangsters increasingly are using intellectual- property theft as a front for other unlawful activities, including human, drugs and arms smuggling, plus money laundering. It's guaranteed to be the subject of the moment at this year's Cinema Expo International -- running Monday-June 30 at the Amsterdam RAI International Exhibition and Congress Center -- where one seminar is called "A Wake-up Call: European Perspectives on Movie Theft."

But growing piracy problems are hardly confined to Russia.

"In several other (European) countries, criminal gang masters are involved in large-scale piracy," says Ted Shapiro, deputy managing director at the MPA's Brussels office and vp general counsel Europe. "We've had raids where drugs, guns, knives are found. These are not nice people; they know very well that the penalty for piracy is far less than it is for smuggling an ounce of cocaine or heroin."

In the U.K. alone, where terrorists and Chinese gangs are among the worst perpetrators, the national film industry loses about £400 million ($732 million) a year to pirates.

If the numbers reveal anything, it's that the country's anti-piracy battle has a long way to go. Last year, the U.K.'s Federation Against Copyright Theft and the British government's HM Revenue & Customs seized more than 3 million unauthorized DVDs, compared with 314,000 illegal videos confiscated in 2001. The MPA estimates more than 35 million are actually sold, making the U.K. the second- worst-affected territory after the U.S.

U.K. custom officers at airports are constantly impounding oil paintings, stuffed animals and even computer accessories that are used to disguise smuggled illegal DVDs. China, Malaysia and Pakistan are the U.K.'s biggest source of pirated DVDs, and, according to FACT, the proceeds are being used to fund organized crime and human trafficking.

In addition, Britain's piracy situation is exacerbated by the discovery that more than 25% of illegal DVDs purchased in the country are bought at the workplace, says Paris-based research company IPSOS.

The country's online piracy via peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing and DVD-burning also is expected to grow as broadband Internet penetration is forecast to exceed 12 million homes by 2008. Last year, a British Video Assn. study estimated that 1.7 million illegitimate movies and TV programs were downloaded, nearly three times the quantity calculated the previous year.

FACT's seizure of DVD-R (recordable blank DVD) for reproducing illegal copies soared 200% in the first quarter of this year.

Elsewhere on the continent, piracy and technology have converged in Germany to form especially sophisticated distribution channels called "release groups," whereby pirates dub local or Hollywood movies into German to sell as pirate DVDs before the films open in theaters.

Before the movies are officially distributed, the release groups unleash copies on P2P networks for illegal downloads. France, Italy and the Netherlands also have a growing number of release groups.

In one of the most effective anti-piracy investigations to date, in April, FACT's German counterpart, GVU, smashed the operations of a release group known as "Flatline" -- described as "the largest local source of German-dubbed pirate movies on the Internet."

In Southern Italy, family owned cottage industries are set up to download and burn unlicensed DVDs.

Currently, camcorder piracy is not a statutory crime in European nation states as it is in the U.S. But anti-piracy organizations fear Europe's lax laws might tempt serial camcorder pirates to cross the Atlantic.

"We're beginning to press governments in Europe to make it criminal to operate a recording device in cinemas," says Dara MacGreevy, MPA vp and anti-piracy director for Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

Elsewhere, regulators and movie industry representatives are hitting back where it hurts at regional and national levels. Several new initiatives have been launched to bolster Europe's anti-piracy resources:

FACT has received financial support to open a new unit designed to provide enforcement authorities with the necessary evidence for clamping down against movie counterfeiters. The unit, which goes into effect in September, will use analytical software called I2 on FACT's database to gain extra know-how and identify trends that will make anti-piracy probes more effective.

In March 2004, an anti-piracy initiative called the Industry Trust for IP Awareness was launched in Britain to help employers nationwide block copyright theft in the workplace.

Brussels-based International Video Federation, which represents national video associations in 15 European markets, aims to back local campaigns similar to those by the Industry Trust for IP Awareness.

France's video sector is adopting the government-sanctioned anti-piracy charter launched by the music industry in July 2004. The charter invites local ISPs to help discourage illegal downloads among subscribers.

At the Dutch Film Festival in Utrecht on Sept. 28, the Netherlands' movie industry, video distributors, video retail chains and cinema exhibitors will join forces to spread their anti-piracy message to the public in a €500,000 ($614,000) campaign featuring its new Web site, www.filmwereld.net. In addition to featuring anti-piracy TV and cinema ads, the site will explain why movie piracy is a crime punishable with a maximum of four years in prison and a €45,000 ($55,000) fine and will be used to launch a future survey to see if its message is effectively reaching consumers.

At the regional level, the European Commission has embarked on a survey designed to learn about copyright enforcement and infringement among the European Union's trading partners, including Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America. The move aims to help make the EU's Copyright Directive and Enforcement Directive more effective.

Currently, the Copyright Directive's provisions have been incorporated into national law in all but three of the EU's 25 states. France, Finland and Spain claim more pressing local issues have delayed their implementation of the agreement. The deadline for local adoption of the Enforcement Directive, which permits civil prosecution for copyright theft, is 2006.

But the industry is confident the legislations will be adopted throughout Europe, facilitating their battles against IP infringement.

"Most of the former Eastern European markets had already adopted the provisions to join the EU, and we've seen improvements in those countries," MacGreevy says. "Several of them have really improved their enforcement regimes."
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr..._id=1000965008




P2P Networks Not Only Reason For Sagging CD Sales

A report just issued by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an alliance of developed nations, has concluded that peer-to-peer (P2P) networks are not solely to blame for any drop in music sales, and that other factors also may be at work.

The report, titled "Digital Broadband Content: Music," prepared by the Working Party on the Information Economy for the Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry of the OECD, begins by noting that there are a large number of legitimate online music services available to consumers. Indeed, "access to broadband and technological developments have lead to the rapid creation of online music services that change the way music is accessed and consumed."

According to the report, "the overall digitization of music, changing ways of listening to music, the diversification of delivery platforms and sharing are likely to have increased the time listened to music." However, "the unauthorized downloading of copyrighted content over the Internet has raised considerable concerns."

The report notes that in 2003, the value of global recorded music sales was approximately $32 billion. OECD countries accounted for about 94% of that market. One can reasonably infer that the value of global recorded music sales has only gone up since 2003.

Turning to P2P, the report states that as of October, 2004, there were almost 10 million simultaneous users on all P2P networks. The United States comprises more than half of the simultaneous file-sharing users.

The OECD acknowledges in the report that the use of P2P networks to exchange unauthorized copyrighted material "presents a significant challenge to the music industry and to enforcement of intellectual property rights." The report states that "there is currently a considerable volume of copyright infringement that is taking place among users of peer-to-peer networking software," and that "this unfair competition puts pressure on legitimate online music and other content services and may have slowed commercial services that offer access to online content."

Still, the report comes out and declares that "it is very difficult to establish a basis to prove a causal relationship between the size of the drop in music sales and the rise of file sharing." Instead, the OECD opines that sales of CDs and the success of online music services "likely" have been affected "to some degree" by other factors, such as "physical piracy and CD burning, competition from others, newer entertainment products and faltering consumer spending in some markets."

The report concludes that if "Internet-based piracy is effectively addressed, licensed file-sharing and new forms of 'super-distribution' could be important growth factors." Thus, the stated challenge is to "make file-sharing a business model for the licensed delivery of copyrighted material." That's easier said than done, as most P2P networks operate in an unlicensed manner.

So, what is the upshot? Yes, the availability of digital music online probably has increased music listening time. And yes, while P2P networks are not the only source of infringement of copyrighted works of music, and there are other causes, P2P networks certainly do facilitate such infringement in certain instances. No doubt then, the music industry will continue to search for ways to license digital music content while attempting to ward off infringement.

Eric Sinrod is a partner in the San Francisco office of Duane Morris (www.duanemorris.com), where he focuses on litigation matters of various types, including information technology disputes. His column appears Wednesdays at USATODAY.com. His Web site is www.sinrodlaw.com, and he can be reached at ejsinrod@duanemorris.com. To receive a weekly e-mail link to Mr. Sinrod's columns, please send an e-mail with the word Subscribe in the subject line.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columni...6-22-p2p_x.htm




A Matter of Substance OmniMedia Unveils P2P Piracy Elimination Platform
Press Release

A Matter of Substance OmniMedia (AMOS) has partnered with Intent MediaWorks to launch its "Piracy Prevention Platform" - a state of the art encryption, tracking, and distribution system, built to stop the theft of music and films through the Internet.

AMOS/INTENT announced it has developed and implemented the solution to the piracy problem; which the critical supreme-court ruling of

MGM vs. Grokster pulls to the headlines - Making P2P the place where all eyes are pointed at for the future of the entertainment business.

DCIA estimates that in the time-span it took iTunes to sell 350 Million tracks, 70 Billion dollar's worth of music and film have been illegally downloaded via the peer-to-peer (P2P) networks and the WEB. Billions of dollars are unfairly stolen from artists and content creators. And yet consumers have not been presented with a compelling alternative, until now.

The new AMOS/INTENT platform encrypts music and film files, launches it into the P2P jungle attached to a sponsor-ad, essentially making the track a 'free gift' from advertiser to consumer. The same encryption can alternatively completely block the spread of the file into the P2P stream. "To address these issues and be the solution AMOS has partnered with Intent MediaWorks and employed a new consumer friendly business-model for protection and distribution for all forms of media content on the Web," said, Eytan Rockaway, AMOS Co-Founder and CEO.

By executing this new business model, AMOS/INTENT connects the proven power of ad-dollars directly into the plight of the artist, without charging the consumer: "The kids download for free (the 'price' of viewing an ad)- the artist gets paid for their song- and the advertiser hits a highly targeted demographic- so everyone goes home happy," says Ohad Maiman, AMOS Co-Founder and CEO.

AMOS/INTENT is committed to "being the solution" to piracy of music and feature films. Any and all media AMOS presses and distributes will be protected with encryption technology that will allow the content to be intentionally distributed via the Internet. This will occur by embracing the precise and limitless reach, as well as remarkable speed of online viral distribution.

"Our encryption allows us to 'sell' that content in the same place where hundreds of millions of consumers (still growing, matter of fact doubling in # each year) download illegally for free. We accurately introduce ad-dollar target-demographics to matching fan bases, we sell songs at better prices than iTunes or any other online store, we allow free previews, we provide free trailers," says Joey P, AMOS A&R and Director of Marketing.

AMOS represents the future business models of record labels and film studios. It is more cost effective, more precise with target audiences, as well as more empowering to the artists and consumers.

Being a record label and a Film/TV studio, AMOS believes that protecting an artist's creative content in the current digital world of piracy is the most important change necessary in the industry.

The music industry continues to implode and scramble to address these painful issues that have cut into billions of revenue. Everyone in the entertainment industry has been waiting for a solution to the problem of illegally traded files. AMOS/INTENT Says the solution has arrived.

This is a monumental moment in the history of entertainment. AMOS welcomes your submissions as well as inquiries regarding the new platform as well as their unique mode of distribution.

If Mr. George Lucas had consulted AMOS/INTENT a few months ago, he would have been able to harness the potential of P2P file swapping and profit - instead of having Star Wars stolen six hours after its premier.

The future is embracing the Internet intentionally rather than fighting it. And A Matter of Substance is poised to be the trailblazer in this brave new digital world.
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...&newsLang =en




"Complete garbage"

Cohen on Avalanche

A bunch of people have been pestering me about Avalanche recently, so I'll comment on it.

First of all, I'd like to clarify that Avalanche is vaporware. It isn't a product which you can use or test with, it's a bunch of proposed algorithms. There isn't even a fleshed out network protocol. The 'experiments' they've done are simulations.

It's a bad idea to give much weight to simulations, especially of something so hairy as real-world internet behavior. I spent most of my talk at stanford explaining why it's difficult to benchmark, much less simulate, BitTorrent in a way which is useful. But we can look at their simulation to see if it might at least be ballpark.

Let's see, here's their simulation of 'tit-for-tat':

Ø To simulate a tit-for-tat scenario, the simulator keeps track of the difference between uploaded blocks minus downloaded blocks from a user S (source) to a user D (destination). If the difference is larger than the pre-configured value (typically 2 when we study tit-for-tat), then the source S will not send any block to D even if there is spare upload capacity at S and spare download capacity at D.



I can't fathom how they came up with this. Researching either the source code or the documentation on the BitTorrent web site would have shown that the real choking algorithms work nothing like this. Either they just heard 'tit-for-tat' and just made this up, or they for some odd reason dredged up BitTorrent 1.0 and read the source of that. You see, BitTorrent work this way when it was nowhere near functional yet, and the first test among multiple peers (6 if my memory serves) showed that it sucks. It was promptly rewritten, way back in late 2001. This gaffe alone makes their simulation completely worthless, but it isn't the only one:

Ø Whenever a user joins the system it picks four nodes at random and makes them its neighbors (provided that they have not exceeded the maximum number of neighbors, which is set to six in most of our experiments). The simulator supports dynamic user populations with nodes joining and leaving the system, and topology reconfigurations. In fact, at the end of each round, if a node determines that the utilization of its download capacity in the most recent rounds drops below a certain threshold (10% in most of our experiments), then it tries to discover and connect to new neighbors. Similarly, if the user has exceeded its maximum number of neighbors, then it will drop some of the old neighbors at random.



So in their simulations peers have 4-6 neighbors with a strong preference for 4. BitTorrent in the real world typically uses 30-50. Since BitTorrent depends entirely on its neighbors for information related to piece selection, this limitation has ratcheted the amount of useful information BitTorrent gets to the absolute minimum possible without making the system not work at all.

They also don't simulate varying transfer rate abilities, transfer rate abilities varying over time, or endgame mode.

In other words, intentionally or not, the simulation is completely rigged against BitTorrent.

The central idea here is basically 'Let's apply error correcting codes to BitTorrent'. This isn't a new idea, everybody comes up with it. In fact I saw fit to mention that it's a dubious idea before. (Some people will point out that 'error correcting codes' isn't the right term for the latest and greatest of this sort of technology, to which I say 'whatever'.) The main reason that this is a popular idea is that recent work in error correcting techology is very cool. While it is very cool, and very applicable to sending information across lossy channels, the case for using it in BitTorrent is unconvincing.

What error correction can in principle help with is that it the chances that any given peer has data which is of interest to another peer. In practice this isn't really a problem, because rarest first does a very good job of piece distribution, but error correction can in principle do as well as is theoretically possible, and rarest first is in fact less than perfect in practice.

One thing badly missing from this paper is back-of-the-envelope calculations about all of the work necessary to implement error correction. Potential problems are on the wire overhead, CPU usage, memory usage, and disk access time. Particularly worrisome for their proposed scheme is disk access. If the size of the file being transferred is greater than the size of memory, their entire system could easily get bogged down doing disk seeks and reads, since it needs to do constant recombinations of the entire file to build the pieces to be sent over the wire. The lack of any concrete numbers at all shows the typical academic hand-wavy 'our asymptotic is good, we don't need to worry about reality' approach. Good asymptotics are one thing, but constant multipliers can be killer, and it's necessary to work out constant multipliers for all pontentially problematic constants, not just the easy ones like CPU.

The really big unfixable problem with error correction is that peers can't verify data with a secure hash before they pass it on to other peers. As a result, it's quite straightforward for a malicious peer to poison an entire swarm just by uploading a little bit of data. The Avalanche paper conveniently doesn't mention that problem.

As you've probably figured out by now, I think that paper is complete garbage. Unfortunately it's actually one of the better academic papers on BitTorrent, because it makes some attempt, however feeble, to do an apples to apples comparison. I'd comment on academic papers more, but generally they're so bad that evaluating them does little more than go over epistemological problems with their methodology, and is honestly a waste of time.

If you're interested in doing more fleshed out research on error correction in BitTorrent, I suggest starting with a much less heavyweight approach. Having peers transfer the xor of exactly two pieces could potentially get most of the benefits of full-blown network coding.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/bramcohen/




Time On Your Hands?

Peruse the Morpheus boards for the latest dustup between the big M and Limewire.
http://www.morpheusforum.com/showthread.php?t=23




Surveillance

Libraries Say Yes, Officials Do Quiz Them About Users
Eric Lichtblau

Law enforcement officials have made at least 200 formal and informal inquiries to libraries for information on reading material and other internal matters since October 2001, according to a new study that adds grist to the growing debate in Congress over the government's counterterrorism powers.

In some cases, agents used subpoenas or other formal demands to obtain information like lists of users checking out a book on Osama bin Laden. Other requests were informal - and were sometimes turned down by librarians who chafed at the notion of turning over such material, said the American Library Association, which commissioned the study.

The association, which is pushing to scale back the government's powers to gain information from libraries, said its $300,000 study was the first to examine a question that was central to a House vote last week on the USA Patriot Act: how frequently federal, state and local agents are demanding records from libraries.

The Bush administration says that while it is important for law enforcement officials to get information from libraries if needed in terrorism investigations, officials have yet to actually use their power under the Patriot Act to demand records from libraries or bookstores.

The library issue has become the most divisive in the debate on whether Congress should expand or curtail government powers under the Patriot Act, and it was at the center of last week's vote in the House approving a measure to restrict investigators' access to libraries.

The study does not directly answer how or whether the Patriot Act has been used to search libraries. The association said it decided it was constrained from asking direct questions on the law because of secrecy provisions that could make it a crime for a librarian to respond. Federal intelligence law bans those who receive certain types of demands for records from challenging the order or even telling anyone they have received it.

As a result, the study sought to determine the frequency of law enforcement inquiries at all levels without detailing their nature. Even so, organizers said the data suggested that investigators were seeking information from libraries far more frequently than Bush administration officials had acknowledged.

"What this says to us," said Emily Sheketoff, the executive director of the library association's Washington office, "is that agents are coming to libraries and they are asking for information at a level that is significant, and the findings are completely contrary to what the Justice Department has been trying to convince the public."

Kevin Madden, a Justice Department spokesman, said that the department had not yet seen the findings and that he could not comment specifically on them. But Mr. Madden questioned the relevance of the data to the debate over the Patriot Act, noting that the types of inquiries found in the survey could relate to a wide range of law enforcement investigations unconnected to terrorism or intelligence.

"Any conclusion that federal law enforcement has an extraordinary interest in libraries is wholly manufactured as a result of misinformation," Mr. Madden said.

The study, which surveyed 1,500 public libraries and 4,000 academic libraries, used anonymous responses to address legal concerns. A large majority of those who responded to the survey said they had not been contacted by any law enforcement agencies since October 2001, when the Patriot Act was passed.

But there were 137 formal requests or demands for information in that time, 49 from federal officials and the remainder from state or local investigators. Federal officials have sometimes used local investigators on joint terrorism task forces to conduct library inquiries.

In addition, the survey found that 66 libraries had received informal law enforcement requests without an official legal order, including 24 federal requests. Association officials said the survey results, if extrapolated from the 500 public libraries that responded, would amount to a total of some 600 formal inquires since 2001.

One library reporting that it had received a records demand was the Whatcom County system in a rural area of northwest Washington.

Last June, a library user who took out a book there, "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America," noticed a handwritten note in the margin remarking that "Hostility toward America is a religious duty and we hope to be rewarded by God," and went to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Agents, in turn, went to the library seeking names and information on anyone checking out the biography since 2001.

The library's lawyers turned down the request, and agents went back with a subpoena. Joan Airoldi, who runs the library, said in an interview that she was particularly alarmed after a Google search revealed that the handwritten line was an often-cited quotation from Mr. bin Laden that was included in the report issued by the Sept. 11 commission.

The library fought the subpoena, and the F.B.I. withdrew its demand.

"A fishing expedition like this just seems so un-American to me," Ms. Airoldi said. "The question is, how many basic liberties are we willing to give up in the war on terrorism, and who are the real victims?"

The survey also found what library association officials described as a "chilling effect" caused by public concerns about the government's powers. Nearly 40 percent of the libraries responding reported that users had asked about changes in practices related to the Patriot Act, and about 5 percent said they had altered their professional activities over the issues; for instance, by reviewing the types of books they bought.

Representative Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont, who sponsored the House measure to curtail the power to demand library records, said he was struck by the 40 percent response.

"What this demonstrates is that there is widespread concern among the American people about the government having the power to monitor what they are reading," Mr. Sanders said.

The margin of the vote on Mr. Sanders's measure, which passed 238 to 187, with support from 38 Republicans, surprised even some backers, but Bush administration officials say they are hopeful the decision will be reversed and have threatened a veto of any measure that would limit powers under the Patriot Act.

Carol Brey-Casiano, who runs the library system in El Paso and is president of the library association, said she, too, sensed a public unease.

"We're concerned about protecting people's privacy," she said. "People will say to me, 'I've read about the Patriot Act, and does that mean the government can come in and ask you what I'm reading?' And my answer to them has to be, 'Yes, they can,' and quite frankly, I can't even tell anyone if that happened, because there's a gag order."

Investigators have long had the ability to seek out library records in tracking leads in criminal inquiries. In two of the most noted cases, investigators in the 1990's used library records to search for the Unabomber, who wrote detailed and unusual academic treatises in his string of bombings over almost two decades, and for New York's "Zodiac Killer," who had cited the writing of an obscure occult poet.

Government officials say that while they have no interest in using their expanded powers under the Patriot Act to monitor Americans' reading habits, they do not believe that libraries should be safe havens for terrorists. They point to several cases in which Sept. 11 hijackers and other terror suspects used library computers to send e-mail messages.

Perhaps the fiercest counterattack from the Bush administration on the issue came in 2003 from John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, who said in a speech in Washington that groups like the American Library Association had bought into "breathless reports and baseless hysteria" about the government's interest in libraries.

"Do we at the Justice Department really care what you are reading?" Mr. Ashcroft asked. "No."

Ms. Sheketoff at the library association acknowledged that critics of the study may accuse the group of having a stake in the outcome of the Patriot Act debate. "Sure, we have a dog in this fight, but the other side has been mocking us for four years over our 'baseless hysteria,' and saying we have no reason to be concerned," she said. "Well, these findings say that we do have reason to be concerned."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/po...20patriot.html




Social Security Opened Its Files for 9/11 Inquiry
Eric Lichtblau

The Social Security Administration has relaxed its privacy restrictions and searched thousands of its files at the request of the F.B.I. as part of terrorism investigations since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, newly disclosed records and interviews show.

The privacy policy typically bans the sharing of such confidential information, which includes home addresses, medical information and other personal data. But senior officials at the Social Security agency agreed to an "ad hoc" policy that authorized the release of information to the bureau for investigations related to Sept. 11 because officials saw a "life-threatening" emergency, internal memorandums say.

The Internal Revenue Service also worked with the bureau and the Social Security agency to provide income and taxpayer information in terror inquiries, law enforcement officials said. Officials said the I.R.S. information was limited because legal restrictions prevented the sharing of taxpayer information except by court order or in cases of "imminent danger" or other exemptions. The tax agency refused to comment.

The Social Security memorandums were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a civil liberties group here. Copies were provided to The New York Times.

Social Security and law enforcement officials said that they were sensitive to privacy concerns and had put safeguards in place, but that they believed that the information gave investigators a valuable tool.

"We ran thousands of Social Security numbers," said a former senior F.B.I. official who insisted on anonymity because the files involved internal cases.

"We got very useful information, that's for sure," the former official said. "We recognized the value of having that information to track leads, and, to their credit, so did the Social Security Administration."

Some privacy advocates and members of Congress, although sympathetic to the extraordinary demands posed by the Sept. 11 investigation, said they were troubled by what they saw as a significant shift in privacy policies.

Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, a New York Democrat who has sought information from the Social Security agency on the issue, said the new policy had "real civil liberties implications for abuse." Ms. Maloney questioned whether Congress was adequately informed.

"If we don't know when the Social Security Administration decides to change its rules to disclose personal information," she said, "I think Americans have a right to be skeptical about their privacy."

The director of the Open Government Project at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Marcia Hofmann, acknowledged the need for investigators to have access to vital information.

"But an ad hoc policy like this is so broad that it allows law enforcement to obtain really sensitive information by merely claiming that the information is relevant to the 9/11 investigation," Ms. Hofmann said. "There appears to be very little oversight."

In addition to easing its rules, the Social Security agency agreed to waive normal privacy restrictions for information related to the F.B.I. investigation of the sniper shootings in the Washington region in 2002, the internal memorandums show. It does not appear that any information was ultimately turned over.

The agency agreed two days after the Sept. 11 attacks to give the F.B.I. access to material from its files to obtain information on the hijackers, anyone with "relevant information" on the attacks and victims' relatives.

Under Social Security Administration policy, which goes beyond federal privacy law, such information cannot typically be shared with law enforcement officials unless the subject has been indicted or convicted of a crime. The loosening of the policy was updated and reauthorized last year, the internal documents show, and Social Security officials said Tuesday that it remained in place.

Social Security officials said they were not aware of recent F.B.I. requests for information from their files in the inquiry.

It appears that there was a flood of requests for at least a year after the attacks and perhaps longer, as bureau agents sought personal and financial information on illegal immigrants and other suspects who might be using fraudulent Social Security information. Some of the hijackers used fake Social Security numbers.

Officials at the Social Security Administration said the policy directives since Sept. 11 identified 11 offices - 10 in the inspector general's office and one in the privacy office - authorized to approve the F.B.I. requests.

"Thankfully, these requests don't come up that often," Jonathan Cantor, the privacy officer at the agency, said. "You just have to look at each situation as it comes in, and it's my job to balance the privacy of the records against legitimate requests for that information."

Mr. Cantor said that the bureau had made requests for financial and employment information from Social Security files, but that the agency had referred them to the I.R.S. because it was not legally allowed to release taxpayer information.

James Huse, who was the inspector general at the Social Security agency until March 2004, said his agency provided relevant identifying information to the bureau on possible terror suspects but relied on the tax agency to determine what information it would turn over on a suspect's income and employment.

The F.B.I. requests "came in by the thousands," Mr. Huse said in an interview. "They would give us the names of people suspected of being terrorists for whatever reason, and we'd match them against Social Security indices to see if these people were real, did they have Social Security numbers, things like that."

He said that most of the names and numbers run by the bureau did not match up to Social Security records, and that he was unaware of cases of governmental abuse in the requests. Mr. Huse added that "on a big-volume name check like that you wouldn't really know if you had a frivolous name thrown in or not."

A major debate is under way on access for the F.B.I. and other law enforcement agencies in national security investigations to confidential information like library checkout lists, hospital records or airline manifests. Bush administration officials say it is imperative for investigators to have broad tools to track terror suspects.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/po...rtner=homepage




Gov't. Collected Airline Passenger Data
Leslie Miller

The federal agency in charge of aviation security collected extensive personal information about airline passengers even though Congress forbade it and officials said they wouldn't do it, according to documents obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

The Transportation Security Administration bought and is storing details about U.S. citizens who flew on commercial airlines in June 2004 as part of a test of a terrorist screening program called Secure Flight, the documents indicate.

"TSA is losing the public's trust," said Tim Sparapani, a privacy lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union. "They have a repeated, consistent problem with doing one thing and then saying they did another."

Secure Flight and its predecessor, CAPPS II, have been criticized for secretly obtaining personal information about airline passengers and failing to do enough to protect it.

The TSA and several airlines were embarrassed last year when it was revealed that airlines gave personal information on 12 million passengers to the government without the travelers' permission or knowledge. An inspector general's report found TSA misled the public about its role in acquiring the data.

Class-action lawsuits have been brought against airlines and government contractors for sharing their passengers' information. As a result, airlines agreed to turn over passenger data for testing only after they were ordered to do so by the government in November.

According to the documents, which will be published in the Federal Register this week, the TSA gave the data, known as passenger name records, to its contractor, Virginia-based EagleForce Associates. Passenger name records can include a variety of information, including name, address, phone number and credit card information.

EagleForce then compared the passenger name records with commercial data from three contractors that included first, last and middle names, home address and phone number, birth date, name suffix, second surname, spouse first name, gender, second address, third address, ZIP code and latitude and longitude of address. The reason for the comparison was to find out if the passenger name record data was accurate, according to the TSA.

EagleForce then produced CD-ROMs containing the information _ except for latitude and longitude and spouse's first name _ "and provided those CD-ROMs to TSA for use in watch list match testing," the documents said. TSA now stores that data.

According to previous official notices, TSA had said it would not store commercial data about airline passengers.

The Privacy Act of 1974 prohibits the government from keeping a secret database. It also requires agencies to make official statements on the impact of their record keeping on privacy.

The TSA revealed its use of commercial data in a revised Privacy Act statement to be published Wednesday in the Federal Register.

"This is like creating an FBI file, not just some simple check, and then they're storing the data," said Sparapani, the ACLU attorney.

TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said the program was being developed with a commitment to privacy, and that it was routine to change Privacy Act statements during testing.

"Secure Flight is built on an airtight privacy platform, and the GAO (Government Accountability Office) and Congress are providing close oversight every step of the way," Hatfield said. "The purpose of the testing is to define what the program will ultimately look like."

The TSA said it is protecting the data from theft and carefully restricting access to it.

Congress said no money could be spent to test such an identity verification system "until TSA has developed measures to determine the impact of such verification on aviation security and the Government Accountability Office has reported on its evaluation of the measures." That language was part of the Homeland Security Department spending bill, which became law Oct. 18.

The GAO issued its report on Secure Flight testing on March 28. The report gave the TSA a failing grade, saying the program hadn't met nine of 10 criteria that Congress said it must meet before being implemented.

Hatfield said appropriate congressional committees were briefed in December on the contract awarded to EagleForce on Feb. 22.

But Bruce Schneier, a security expert who serves on the TSA-appointed oversight panel for Secure Flight, said the agency was explicitly told not to try to verify passengers' identity with commercial data.

"They're doing what they want and they're working around any rules that exist," Schneier said.

Last week, the Homeland Security Department's chief privacy officer, Nuala O'Connor Kelly, announced she's conducting an investigation of the TSA's use of commercial data for Secure Flight testing.
http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/s...toryId=1051751

[JackSpratts]

Jack S. Kilby, an Inventor of the Microchip, Is Dead at 81
John Markoff

Jack S. Kilby, an electrical engineer whose invention of the integrated circuit gave rise to the information age and heralded an explosion of consumer electronics products in the last 50 years, from personal computers to cellphones, died Monday in Dallas. He was 81.

His death, after a brief battle with cancer, was announced yesterday by Texas Instruments, the Dallas-based electronics company where he worked for a quarter-century.

The integrated circuit that Mr. Kilby designed shortly after arriving at Texas Instruments in 1958 served as the basis for modern microelectronics, transforming a technology that permitted the simultaneous manufacturing of a mere handful of transistors into a chip industry that routinely places billions of Lilliputian switches in the area of a fingernail.

His achievement - the integration - yielded a thin chip of crystal connecting previously separate components like transistors, resistors and capacitors within a single device. For that creation, commonly called the microchip, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2000.

During his career at Texas Instruments he claimed more than 60 patents and was also one of the inventors of the hand-held calculator and the thermal printer. But it was Mr. Kilby's invention of the integrated circuit that most broadly shaped the electronic era.

"It's hard to find a place where the integrated circuit doesn't affect your life today," Richard K. Templeton, Texas Instruments' president and chief executive officer, said in an interview yesterday. "That's how broad its impact is."

It is an impact, Mr. Kilby said, that was largely unexpected. "We expected to reduce the cost of electronics, but I don't think anybody was thinking in terms of factors of a million," he said in an undated interview cited by Texas Instruments.

The remarkable acceleration of the manufacturing process based on the integrated circuit was later described by Gordon E. Moore, co-founder of the Intel Corporation, whose partner, Robert N. Noyce, invented another version of the integrated circuit just months after Mr. Kilby.

In 1965, three years after the first commercial integrated circuits came to market, Dr. Moore observed that the number of transistors on a circuit was doubling at regular intervals and would do so far into the future. The observation, which came to be known as Moore's law, became the defining attribute of the chip-making industry, centered in what is now known as Silicon Valley, where Intel was based, rather than in Dallas.

That was partly because Dr. Noyce's version of the integrated circuit, using silicon and based on a photolithographic printing technology known as the planar process, was easier to manufacture than Mr. Kilby's original invention, which employed germanium and used individual wires.

In 1959 Mr. Kilby and Dr. Noyce, then with Fairchild Semiconductor, were named as inventors in their companies' applications for patents for the integrated circuit. After years of legal battles, Fairchild and Texas Instruments decided to cross-license their technologies, ultimately creating a world information industries market now worth more than $1 trillion annually. Dr. Noyce died in 1990.

Dr. Moore remembered Mr. Kilby as a tall - he was 6-foot-6 - and gentle man with whom he would occasionally socialize while attending technical meetings.

"He was mild mannered," Dr. Moore recalled in a telephone interview yesterday, "but I would never worry when I was walking down the street with him in New York City."

Mr. Kilby's contribution came in an era when manufacturing industries were hunting for new approaches to miniaturization for reasons of both cost and performance. It was a drive that began during World War II and pushed beyond military uses into consumer products in the postwar era.

He began his career in 1947 with the Centralab division of Globe Union Inc. in Milwaukee, developing ceramic-based silk-screen circuits for consumer electronic products.

Michael Riordan, co-author of "Crystal Fire: The Invention of the Transistor and the Birth of the Information Age" (W. W. Norton & Company, 1998), noted that Globe Union and Texas Instruments were both pioneers in miniaturization, and that Mr. Kilby "came to T.I. with a drive to make things small."

Mr. Kilby had also been sent by Globe Union to attend an early workshop held by the Bell Laboratories of A.T.& T. to familiarize the technical world with the transistor in the early 1950's. It was Mr. Kilby who first pulled the idea of miniaturization together with the transistor.

A lifelong optimist who rarely showed signs of anger, according to his daughter, Janet Kilby Cameron, Mr. Kilby took his Nobel Prize in stride. When asked what he did after learning of the award, he said simply, "I made coffee."

Jack St. Clair Kilby was born in Jefferson City, Mo., on Nov. 8, 1923, to Hubert and Vina Kilby. He grew up in Great Bend, Kan., and was exposed early on to the world of engineers: his father ran the local electric utility.

He decided in high school that he would become an electrical engineer and applied to M.I.T., even then the mecca for aspiring engineers. He took a train to Cambridge, Mass., but fell slightly short in his score on the entrance exam in June 1941 and was unable to enroll. A few months later he joined the Army and was assigned to a radio repair shop at an outpost on a tea plantation in northeast India.

After the war he attended college on the G.I. Bill of Rights. After receiving a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois and a master's from the University of Wisconsin, he went to work for Globe Union.

He arrived at Texas Instruments in 1958 and during his first summer, working with borrowed equipment, improvised a working integrated circuit. A successful laboratory demonstration of the first simple microchip took place on Sept. 12, 1958. He formally retired from the company in 1983 but continued his association as a consultant.

His other awards included both the National Medal of Science and the National Medal of Technology, the highest technical awards given by the United States government.

His wife, Barbara Annegers Kilby, died in 1982. In addition to Ms. Cameron, of Palisade, Colo., Mr. Kilby is survived by another daughter, Ann Kilby, of Austin, Tex., and five granddaughters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/business/22kilby.html




Dial R for Radio on Your Cell

Scores of companies are betting that delivering audio content of all kinds to handsets could be as big a camera phones and ringtones
Olga Kharif

A small deception is being practiced in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. In those cities, 300 people who might look like typical headphone-wearing commuters are listening to the radio while stuck in traffic or holding on as their overcrowded train chugs along in the morning rush hour. But they carry a secret.

They aren't listening to music on their portable radios, nor playing podcasts of homebrewed radio programs on their iPods. They're grooving to the radio, all right, but it's flowing from an unexpected source: their cell phones.

This small army of testers is checking out Motorola's (MOT ) iRadio service, expected to launch by yearend. And these listeners won't be on their lonesome for long. Scores of handset makers, wireless carriers, Web portals, and even satellite radio companies are starting up services that offer radio over cell phones -- betting that the market for such services could be as big as camera phones and ringtones.

"VERY INTUITIVE." Chances are radio services will be a hit with the 2 billion wireless subscribers worldwide. "Mobile phones are always with you," explains Nancy Beaton, a general manager at telco Sprint (FON ), which became the first carrier with a commercial cell-phone radio service in December. "Because customers are familiar with how the phone works, adding radio can be very intuitive," says Beaton.

And many users want that addition. According to surveys conducted by America Online, a unit of Time Warner (TWX ), more than half the respondents say they would listen to the radio on their phones. AOL is in talks with wireless service providers to offer its online radio stations on mobile phones within months.

Cell-phone radio might have greater appeal than mobile video. Handset maker Nokia (NOK ) is currently testing cell-phone video over a new network, but it has discovered that many consumers end up using the video broadcasts as radio. They listen to them most of the time, instead of squinting at the phones' two-inch screens, says Kari Lehtinen, a manager at Nokia. "Radio seems to be surprisingly popular," he says. So, Nokia expects the new network, when launched sometime in 2006, to also offer numerous audio channels.

RIPPLE EFFECT. Just how big is the revenue opportunity? So far, it's small because wireless networks, as well as cell-phones microprocessors and memory, have only recently become robust enough to support the service. Cell-phone radio should generate a little over $70 million in sales in 2005, estimates market researcher IDC. But those sales will mushroom as companies like major wireless network operator Crown Castle (CCI ) and other providers launch a dozen radio services in the next year. Crown Castle is expected to build the new Nokia video network.

Radio service also could spark sales of other wireless content. "Since radio is how people discover new music, I'd look at radio as the trigger that would create follow-through sales of [popular content like] ringtones, ringbacks, and music downloads," says Lewis Ward, an analyst at IDC. If users hear a song they like on their cell-phone radio, they'll be able to immediately buy a related ringtone via their cell. That should accelerate the growth of the $500 million ringtone market, as well as sales of ringbacks and music downloads.

However, companies have yet to agree on the best way to deliver radio broadcasts to mobiles: Simply installing an FM/AM radio receiver onto a cell phone makes it bulkier and rapidly drains its battery. So many outfits are trying other, more battery-saving approaches.

SNIPPETS OF NEWS. One possibility is adding satellite radio receivers to cell phones. Both industry heavyweights, XM Satellite Radio (XMSR ) and Sirius Satellite Radio (SIRI ), say they're in discussions with wireless carriers. And on June 14, Sirius signed an agreement with Sprint to offer programming for cell phones.

Most cell-phone radiocasters, though, plan to use existing wireless networks, but to varying extents. Motorola's iRadio, expected to cost $5 a month, will let customers download hours of radio programming via a PC. New radio-ready Motorola phones are expected to be unveiled this fall. Motorola plans to insert snippets of breaking news into these broadcasts as they're downloaded over its wireless network.

Sprint is using its wireless network to deliver an entire radio broadcast. Costing $5.95 a month, the service is supported by programming partners like Mspot. The startup adapts radio content to the cell-phone format, offers music news, a selection of music stations, and customizable content. For instance, if you're a fan of rock band Green Day, you might receive special interviews and concert audio.

PEER-TO-PEER TUNES. Other companies, like a startup called Mercora, hope to make cell-phone radio drastically different from traditional radio. At the heart of the $3.99-a-month service, which debuted on June 7, is special downloadable software that turns every cell phone into a radio station. Each phone then broadcasts its owner's songs to other users over the wireless network. A user can then stream, say, a Gwen Stefani radio station. That station broadcasts of all of the singer's songs that are available on the network.

The beauty of this radio peer-to-peer approach is that users can choose from more than 25,000 radio stations, offering everything from German pop to American jazz, says CEO Srivats Sampath, who previously co-founded antivirus giant McAfee (MFE ). Unlike many Internet-based peer-to-peer sharing sites, Mercora also pays royalties to the corresponding record labels each time a song is played. Thus, users can enjoy the piece of mind knowing that their pleasure is legal.

Streaming radio over a wireless network has downsides, however: If the service becomes popular, the network could become overloaded. What's more, wireless dead spots will cut off radio transmission.

A CHEAPER WAY? That's why Nokia and chipmaker Qualcomm (QCOM ), are both pushing for an alternative approach: Building a special network that would broadcast video and audio content -- perhaps from existing radio stations like those owned by Clear Channel (CCU ) or Infinity Broadcasting -- onto cell phones. That would be cheaper than beefing up existing wireless networks to handle audio and video, says Lehtinen. Nokia is now testing in the U.S. and Europe. These networks should become operational in 2006.

Whatever path it takes, listening to the radio on a cell phone might be commonplace very soon.
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...853_tc_212.htm




Multitasking: You Can’t Pay Full Attention to Both Sights and Sounds
Newswire

The reason talking on a cell phone makes drivers less safe may be that the brain can’t simultaneously give full attention to both the visual task of driving and the auditory task of listening, a study by a Johns Hopkins University psychologist suggests.

The study, published in a recent issue of “The Journal of Neuroscience,” reinforces earlier behavioral research on the danger of mixing mobile phones and motoring.

“Our research helps explain why talking on a cell phone can impair driving performance, even when the driver is using a hands-free device,” said Steven Yantis, a professor in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences in the university’s Zanvyl Krieger School of Arts and Sciences.

“The reason?” he said. “Directing attention to listening effectively ‘turns down the volume’ on input to the visual parts of the brain. The evidence we have right now strongly suggests that attention is strictly limited -- a zero-sum game. When attention is deployed to one modality -- say, in this case, talking on a cell phone -- it necessarily extracts a cost on another modality -- in this case, the visual task of driving.”

Yantis’s chief collaborator on this research project was Sarah Shomstein, who was a doctoral candidate at Johns Hopkins. Shomstein is now a post-doctoral fellow at Carnegie-Mellon University.

Though the results of Yantis’ research can be applied to the real world problem of drivers and their cell phones, that was not directly what the professor and his team studied. Instead, healthy young adults ages 19 to 35 were brought into a neuroimaging lab and asked to view a computer display while listening to voices over headphones. They watched a rapidly changing display of multiple letters and digits, while listening to three voices speaking letters and digits at the same time. The purpose was to simulate the cluttered visual and auditory input people deal with every day.

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), Yantis and his team recorded brain activity during each of these tasks. They found that when the subjects directed their attention to visual tasks, the auditory parts of their brain recorded decreased activity, and vice versa.

Yantis’ team also examined the parts of the brain that control shifts of attention. They discovered that when a person was instructed to move his attention from vision to hearing, for instance, the brain’s parietal cortex and the prefrontal cortex produced a burst of activity that the researchers interpreted as a signal to initiate the shift of attention. This surprised them, because it has previously been thought that those parts of the brain were involved only in visual functions.

“Ultimately, we want to understand the connection between voluntary acts of the will (for instance, a choice to shift attention from vision to hearing), changes in brain activity (reflecting both the initiation of cognitive control and the effects of that control), and resultant changes in the performance of a task, such as driving,” Yantis said. “By advancing our understanding of the connection between mind, brain and behavior, this research may help in the design of complex devices – such as airliner cockpits – and may help in the diagnosis and treatment of neurological disorders such as ADHD or schizophrenia.”

This type of work also informs debates about the safety of mobile phone use while driving. It suggests that when attention is focused on listening, vision is affected even at very early stages of visual perception. A paper describing the research appeared in the Nov. 24, 2004, issue of the Journal of Neuroscience (10702-10706).

The National Institute on Drug Abuse funded this research.

Note: related video online at http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/news/au...deo/brain.html
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/512657/?sc=swtn




Burners' Bummer

New Software Guards CDs From Copiers, and the Mix Culture Doesn't Like It
Anjali Athavaley

Ben Freedland did two things that his fellow college students have been doing routinely for the past several years: First, he bought a new music CD by campus fave the Dave Matthews Band, then he tried to upload it onto his Apple iPod.

But something was wrong. When Freedland, 20, first inserted the "Stand Up" disc into his laptop in preparation for transferring it to his iPod, "it took over my computer," he said.

The screen went blank, then a copyright agreement popped up. The music wasn't going anywhere. Freedland could play the CD on his laptop, but he couldn't transfer it, and he couldn't copy it to share the mellow grooves with friends or family.

Freedland deemed the CD "worthless."

The Duke University student had had his first run-in with a technology that record companies are using to limit the number of times users can burn, or make extra copies of, CDs. The new content-protected disc, which is not yet compatible with the iPod, is the recording industry's latest strategy to curb the illegal spread of music. This time, the crackdown is on the CD purchased at your local music shop -- the last bastion consumers held in freely sharing legally bought music.

It's one thing for record companies to file suit against people who share music files illegally on the Internet, or to pursue criminal charges against those who make pirated copies of CDs and sell them on street corners. But this is different. Generations have grown up with the notion that if you buy an album at the store, the songs are yours to show off to your friends.

In the 1970s and '80s, people made mix tapes without thinking twice. The tapes were an expression of personality. "A good compilation tape, like breaking up, is hard to do," Nick Hornby wrote in "High Fidelity," a novel in which mix tapes served as the very definition of identity and the currency of relationships.

With the death of the cassette tape, that same mentality transferred to the mix CD. It became a birthday gift, a wedding compilation, a way to say "sorry" or "I love you." In college dorms, students started exchanging CD albums so that a hardcore Nirvana fan could try a little Garth Brooks without having to pay for the whole CD.

But the technology got too good. Copies of CDs sound just as clear as the originals -- unlike cassette tapes, which always had some level of hiss. And with the rise of the Internet and online file-sharing, suddenly it became possible to share with several thousand "friends" at a time.

Such behavior is being blamed by the industry for a dramatic drop in sales of CDs and other forms of recorded music. Over the past five years, shipments of music to retailers have dropped by 21 percent, according to the Recording Industry Association of America.

"There is no question that piracy -- in its various, ugly forms -- is the primary reason for that decline," said Mitch Bainwol, chairman and chief executive officer of the association, in a written statement. "In the face of such devastating and ongoing harm, it is appropriate that record companies find ways to facilitate the continued investment in new art."

So in a move that risks alienating a dwindling customer base, the major record labels are tightening up restrictions on CDs.

A growing number of newly released CDs are equipped with software that limits users from burning copies more than three times. On CDs released by record company Sony BMG Music Entertainment, individual songs can be used in compilations only three times.

Rival EMI Music will test CDs with a similar technology this summer, releasing three to six titles with a three-time burn limit on each album. (No, you can't make copies of burned CDs -- the content protection won't allow it.) In addition, consumers can copy an individual song up to seven times. Both EMI Music and Sony BMG use technology that prevents the songs from working on peer-to-peer networks such as Kazaa, which contain songs in MP3 format.

This juncture in technology is a tricky proposition for music lovers, who often say they support artists' rights to combat piracy. Yet, when it comes to individual use, they assert ownership of their CDs with an almost parental pride.

Steve Coleman, 43, said he prefers to buy his music at local CD stores rather than download songs online. Sporting a black T-shirt, a Harley-Davidson cap and long blond hair in a ponytail, he looks like the epitome of the old-school music junkie. One recent afternoon he flipped through the racks at Melody Record Shop on Connecticut Avenue NW, searching for New Order's latest release.

In his high school days, Coleman made mix tapes of his favorite rock and dance tunes for his friends, and other kids would invite him to parties to play his Led Zeppelin and Donna Summer records. Today he's a deejay, and he gives burned CD mixes to potential clients who want to know his musical tastes.

"I paid for it," Coleman said. "I should be able to do what I want with it, as long as I'm not breaking the law by giving it away to all my friends en masse, which is ridiculous."

But CD loyalists are divided on that issue. Greg Shadley, who works in the campus ministry office at Georgetown University, takes two buses and a train to get to his job every day. His iPod and his jumbo headphones accompany him every step of the way, he said.

Shadley, 49, even listens to his playlists at work. He prefers classical music, but he also rocks out to bands like the Grateful Dead and the Doors. He hates downloading music off the Internet unless it's absolutely necessary.

The content-protection technology would not keep him from buying an album, Shadley said, because he doesn't like to share music out of respect for the artists, who stand to lose royalties every time someone copies a tune instead of paying for it. Shadley used to work at a Tower Records downtown and hated watching kids buy the latest pop CD to lend to all their friends.

A newer generation of music lover views things somewhat differently. Around the George Washington University campus, students said they understand the record industry's reasons for combating music piracy. But they also acknowledged that it wouldn't stop them from sharing CDs with their friends or downloading free music.

Emily Mannie teaches a spinning class and likes to sample music online before deciding if it's worthy enough for her music mixes. She says she respects artists' rights and understands why the recording industry is setting boundaries. But she still downloads illegally because, well, it's free. The average college student pocketbook isn't very full of money.

"It's like speeding," said Mannie, a 28-year-old graduate student. "I know I shouldn't speed, but I have to get there."

If she comes across an artist she finds appealing, she's willing to invest in a CD. For example, when the rock band the Killers first got big, she wanted to hear more than just the hit single "Mr. Brightside" before buying the album. If she hadn't listened to the songs online, she doesn't know if she would have been willing to go to a record store to buy the CD.

Getting a taste of the music online and buying the album seem to go hand in hand. Consumers who spend the most money on music usually buy a mix of digital music and CDs, according to the NPD Group, a market research firm.

"Everyone likes to think this is a zero-sum game, and that's not necessarily going to be the case," said Russ Crupnick, president of NPD's music and movies division.

For their part, record companies say content protection won't hurt sales. The technology is meant to target music pirates who burn more than a reasonable amount of purchased CDs.

The CDs that have content protection say so in a label on the disc. If consumers try to get around it, they should know that their actions are illegal, said Thomas Hesse, president of global digital business for Sony BMG.

"If you go over a speed bump, you know you went over a speed bump," Hesse said. "They know that when they do so, it might be dangerous and it is illegal."

Those bumps don't seem to slow down some music lovers who just won't quit until they have the song they want. According to Yankee Group, the crackdown on peer- to-peer networks isn't effectively cutting into music file sharing.

In some ways the iPod, with its vast storehouse of music files, has become the mix tape of the digital age. It is a soundtrack to everyday life. Whether it's riding on the rail or walking to work in the summer heat, people are constantly moving to a rhythm.

The recording industry knows it must keep up with the beat. The new CDs are not compatible with the iPod. Both Sony and EMI are in talks with Apple to try to solve the problem.

As technological advances empower consumers, the free flow of music continues to spill over the boundaries set by the recording industry. Last week, Freedland, the Duke University student, downloaded free tracks from the new Dave Matthews Band CD from a peer-to-peer network. They are now on his iPod, ready for listening.

"It seemed like an entitlement," Freedland said. "I purchased the music, and I should be able to do what I want with it. Now I can."
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/p.../1003/BUSINESS




I know a Push-Poll when I see one

The following script was used during the process of interviewing survey respondents:

Right now, courts in the United States are trying to decide whether to make it illegal to provide file sharing services which could be used to share illegal copies of music and movies…


Digital Divide Underscores Generation Gap

Press Release

With a Supreme Court ruling in the MGM v. Grokster case believed to be due before the end of June, a new research study finds that American public opinion is divided over peer-to-peer file sharing. In a national survey with a random sample of 1,062 Americans conducted in May 2005, 45 percent say file sharing services should be outlawed while 39 percent say they should be allowed (16 percent are "not sure").

The research found significant differences in opinions by age, education and Internet use. Among key highlights:

Among Internet users, the vote was split down the middle with 44 percent saying these services should be outlawed and 44 percent saying they should be allowed.

Support for allowing file sharing services was much higher than average among:

- Younger Internet users aged 12-29 (54% allow, 34% outlaw)
- Those who own MP3 players (55% vs. 35%)
- Broadband users (48% vs. 38%)
- Those who downloaded music - free or paid - sometime in the past (63% vs. 27%)
- Those in the North East (43% vs. 33%)

Those who paid for songs online in the past were also in support of allowing file sharing services - 52 percent were in support of allowing file sharing services and 35 percent were opposed.

Strongest opposition to file sharing services was among older Americans: 51 percent of Americans 50+ said file sharing services should be outlawed, while 27 percent said they should be allowed. Regionally, opposition is much higher than average in the West (51% outlaw, 32% allow), and in the South (50% outlaw, 39% allow).

"The magnitude of the generation gap in attitudes toward file sharing is striking," said Kaan Yigit, director of the study. "As the first generation raised on the 'browse, sample and share' culture of the Internet, young Americans are challenging the traditional notions of intellectual property."

The information for this release comes from a random national sample of 1,062 interviews conducted via telephone between May 7-24, 2005. The survey is part of the syndicated Digital Life America research program being launched by Solutions Research Group. Based in Toronto, Solutions Research Group offers entertainment & technology research expertise to companies in Canada, U.S. and Bermuda. To maintain an unbiased perspective, the company funds its own syndicated research.

The sample for the survey statistically reflects the regional and age/sex composition of the U.S. population. The results of the overall survey are accurate to ±3.0 points for the population, 19 times out of 20.

The following script was used during the process of interviewing survey respondents:

Q: Right now, courts in the United States are trying to decide whether to make it illegal to provide file sharing services which could be used to share illegal copies of music and movies.

The following statements were alternated with respondents:

- One/The other side says that these file sharing services help people to steal music and movies, and their existence encourages people to do this. They say these services should therefore be outlawed.

- One/The other side says that it is wrong to outlaw a service simply because it could be used to share illegal copies of music and movies, and that such a ruling would stifle growth and innovation on the Internet. They say these file sharing services should be allowed.
http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/view_...e.php?id=12194




Democrats Call for Firing of Broadcast Chairman
Stephen LaBaton

Sixteen Democratic senators called on President Bush to remove Kenneth Y. Tomlinson as head of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting because of their concerns that he is injecting partisan politics into public radio and television.

"We urge you to immediately replace Mr. Tomlinson with an executive who takes his or her responsibility to the public television system seriously, not one who so seriously undermines the credibility and mission of public television," wrote the senators.

They included Charles E. Schumer of New York, Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, Jon Corzine and Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey, Bill Nelson of Florida, Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer of California.

Also on Tuesday, Democratic lawmakers joined other supporters of public broadcasting, including children and characters from PBS children's programs, to protest House Republicans' proposed cuts in financing for the corporation.

The Democrats' letter follows a series of disclosures about Mr. Tomlinson that are now under investigation by the corporation's inspector general, including his decision to hire a researcher to monitor the political leanings of guests on the public policy program "Now," the use of a White House official to set up an ombudsman's office to scrutinize public radio and television programs for political balance, and payments approved by Mr. Tomlinson to two Republican lobbyists last year.

Mr. Tomlinson said he would not resign.

"There is no reason for me to step down from the chairmanship of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting," he said. "I am confident that the inspector general's report will conclude that all of my actions were taken in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations and the traditions of CPB."

The White House said Mr. Bush continued to support Mr. Tomlinson.

"Mr. Tomlinson was first nominated to the board by the past administration and was renominated in 2003," said Erin Healy, a White House spokeswoman. "He is the chair of an independent bipartisan board, and the president stands by the chairman."

A new problem emerged for Mr. Tomlinson on Tuesday, when evidence surfaced that he might have provided incorrect information about the hiring of a researcher last year to monitor political leanings of the guests of the "Now" program.

In a letter to Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, on May 24, Mr. Tomlinson said he saw no need to consult with the board about the contract with the researcher, Fred Mann, because it was "approved and signed by then CPB President, Kathleen Cox." But a copy of the contract provided by a person unhappy with Mr. Tomlinson's leadership shows that Mr. Tomlinson signed it on Feb. 3, 2004, five months before Ms. Cox became president. Ms. Cox stepped down in April after the board did not renew her contract.

Mr. Mann, who was paid $14,170 for his work by the taxpayer-financed corporation, rated the guests on the show by such labels as "anti-Bush" or "anti-DeLay," a reference to Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, the House majority leader. He classified Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska as a "liberal," even though Mr. Hagel is well-known as a mainstream conservative Republican.

Asked about the apparent discrepancy between the contract he signed and what he wrote to Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Tomlinson declined through a spokesman to comment.

Mr. Dorgan was sharply critical of Mr. Tomlinson.

"If he signed the contract, he was not telling the truth, which would be very troubling," Mr. Dorgan said on Tuesday. "He's trying to pawn some responsibility for this on others, which is very troubling. This guy has some real credibility problems."

At its first public meeting since the inquiry began, the corporation's board on Tuesday did not address who should be the organization's next president.

Mr. Tomlinson had made it clear in recent weeks that his top choice is Patricia Harrison, an assistant secretary of state and former co-chairwoman of the Republican National Committee. Public broadcasting executives say the choice is another instance of injecting politics into an organization that is supposed to be a political buffer. Mr. Tomlinson has told at least one lawmaker that Ms. Harrison would be a smart choice because of her credibility at the White House and on Capitol Hill.

Mr. Tomlinson began the meeting by calling for a bipartisan approach to public broadcasting: "When people with partisan positions come to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, they leave their partisan positions at the door."

The other Democratic senators who signed the letter were Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware; Maria Cantwell of Washington; Richard J. Durbin of Illinois; Tom Harkin of Iowa; Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont; Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland; Debbie Stabenow of Michigan; and Ron Wyden of Oregon.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/na...broadcast.html




Yahoo Closes Chat Rooms Over Sexual Content

Yahoo! has closed hundreds of chat rooms after a Texas TV station exposed that some of the chat rooms promoted sexual content involving children. The television channel KPRC uncovered chat rooms called '9-17 Year Olds Wantin' Sex' and 'Girls 12 and Under for Older Guys'. The lack of editing up to this point has caused several advertisers such as Pepsi, State Farm, and Georgia- Pacific withdrawing their advertising dollars from the site.

Yahoo has faced criticism in the past for their lack of moderation in their chat rooms, and was even presented with a large petition last year to close the rooms. However, nothing was done and their advertisers pulled the advertising revenue for the chat rooms. The company is also reportedly being fined $10 million for hosting the chats.
http://www.geekcoffee.net/archives/2...closes_ch.html




Spain Arrests 186 In Child Pornography Crackdown

Spanish police have arrested 186 people throughout the country in a crackdown on the distribution of child pornography, the Interior Ministry said Wednesday.

In two parallel operations, 650 officers searched 188 homes and found evidence of child pornography distribution across the Internet using "peer-to-peer" (P2P) software and a system of passwords.

In a statement, the ministry said the material included all kinds of pornographic images of children engaged in explicit sexual acts with other minors and with adult men and women.

The operations were part of a high-priority police crackdown on child pornography and were the most extensive ever undertaken in Spain.

Using the P2P software, those using the illicit group would need passwords to send each other pornographic material without having to post it on a Web page.

Last month police broke up a group of pedophiles who raped babies and distributed pictures of their crimes over the Internet. One of the group advertised as a cut-price babysitter.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=8861958




Online To Overtake Print In Broadband Boom
Staff

Print publishers are under threat from new media, while broadband is set to power a media explosion according to a new report from PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Broadband internet growth will propel the value of the worldwide entertainment and media industries to $1.8 trillion (£990bn) by 2009.

Legal digital distribution of games, videos and movies is also tipped to boom over illegal file sharing.

Total spending from new revenue streams such as broadband and digital downloads will surge from $11.4bn to $73bn over the next five years, according to PwC's report, Global Entertainment and Media Outlook: 2005-2009.

Spending on media and entertainment around the world grew 8% last year to $1.3 trillion. This was the biggest gain since 2000. The internet was the fastest growing medium. Online advertising was up 36% and access revenues up 21%, driven by the switch from dial-up to broadband services.

The internet will continue to outpace other media, as more people access broadband and buy online.

Marketers will take advantage of broadband media, pushing internet advertising to increase by 16% to $32bn in 2009.
http://www.netimperative.com/2005/06...line_boom/view




Should Cities Be ISPs?
Declan McCullagh

When Philadelphia's city government decided to sell wireless access to downtown residents last year, a furious political fight in the state capital erupted.

Verizon stridently opposed the plan, liberal advocacy groups just as emphatically endorsed it, and politicians in Harrisburg ended up approving a compromise bill that effectively let the city of brotherly love do what it wanted.

Now this politechnical dispute is bubbling up from states to Washington, D.C., where lobbyists are pressuring Congress to resolve the question of whether governments or private companies do a better job as Internet service providers.

Both sides took their case on Wednesday to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce here on H Street, which hosted a debate over the merits of city- sponsored wireless networks that drew a crowd of about 50 people, largely federal staffers.

"Our focus is that 75 to 85 percent of our population in our low-income and minority areas that don't have access," said Dianah Neff, Philadelphia's chief information officer. "When we talked to them and we did surveys with them, they said 76 percent of the time that cost was the No. 1 reason why they didn't have access to the Internet."

Philadelphia plans to blanket a 135-square-mile area with low-cost wireless access by next summer. Neff said the estimated $10 million project could ultimately save the city's government up to $2 million in telecommunications bills, which it could in theory reroute to other social programs. Municipal governments need to do this because "we want to ensure our families and children have the abilities they need to compete in the 21st century."

But if reaching low-income people is the primary goal, said Jim Speta, an associate professor at the Northwestern University School of Law, then cities could keep costs down by relying on "consumer demand pull"--that is, handing vouchers to poorer consumers, who could use them to pay for private sector broadband.

"The economics are quite clear that the more efficient way is private ownership rather than public ownership," Speta said.

Dueling federal proposals

An opening federal salvo has come from Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, who introduced a bill last month that would effectively prohibit state and local governments from providing Internet, telecommunications or cable hookups if a private company offers a "substantially similar service." Existing municipal services already in place would be permitted to continue.

If enacted, Sessions' proposal would have a dramatic impact. Dozens, and perhaps hundreds, of cities have started to offer municipal broadband services to their residents and more are in the works.

Some, like the efforts of Ashland, Ore., started with high hopes but have become saddled with piles of debt. Others, like Philadelphia, are even more ambitious but have not yet proven whether they'll be a money-losing or profitable venture.

Another bill veering in precisely the opposite direction could be introduced as early as this week by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. Their proposal, the Community Broadband Act of 2005, is expected to permit a town or city to explore the option of deploying its own broadband network. (Neither McCain nor Lautenberg's offices returned phone calls seeking comment on Wednesday.)

The Bell phone companies and local cable companies have spent millions of dollars lobbying local and state officials to pass laws that would prohibit cities and towns from building their own broadband networks. In the last year, 14 bills were introduced in state legislatures to prohibit the build-out of municipal networks. But state legislatures typically only meet for the first six months of the year.

This is one reason why the topic is now being addressed at the federal level, said Ben Scott, a policy analyst at Free Press, a liberal advocacy group in Washington that's trying to rally opposition to Sessions' bill.

"We had to fight this battle in 14 different states this year," said Jim Baller, an attorney in Washington who represents municipal governments. "It's counterproductive to be wasting time having these arguments at a time when we need to get the country moving toward nationwide broadband coverage."

"People saw the outrageous message being sent from the government to try to prohibit local people from deciding their communities' communications needs," Scott said. "It also helped that the only opponents to these networks are the incumbent service providers."

U.S. cities are bracing for a broadband war. At stake is the fate of high-speed Internet access for millions of Americans.

Whether governments or private companies are best-positioned to provide Internet connectivity invokes questions of both economics and politics. Governments and private businesses have long quarreled, for instance, over who should control the build-out of highways, canals, railroads, the postal system and telephone networks.

In the case of broadband, governments that make money from selling Internet service would be tempted to impose onerous taxes and regulations on private companies--which would be, after all, their competitors. "Why would a carrier like Verizon try to offer EV-DO in Philadelphia if the city is trying to undercut them at every turn?" asked Adam Thierer, an analyst at the free-market Progress and Freedom Foundation in Washington. (EV-DO is a high-speed wireless service that works over longer distances than Wi-Fi.)

"It's not surprising that this fight, like so many others, is going to be federalized and turned into a national issue," Thierer said. "It's a bit bizarre, especially because there are so many other issues that deserve the attention of politicians."

Some governments have experimented with municipal connectivity--and then abandoned it. On June 19, the city of Orlando shut down its 18-month-old downtown Orlando Wi-Fi pilot program that once served a sliver of the city's business district.

Meant to boost foot traffic in the area, instead "usage was not what they expected," plus the costs of running it were too high, said a representative for Orlando-based Net provider Pure Connection, which the city hired to provide the hot zones.

Traffic was a disappointing average of 27 users each day, said Brie Turek, Orlando's public information officer. "We're just hoping this is a temporary break," she said. "We're looking at alternate ways to bring this back."
http://news.com.com/Should+cities+be...3-5758262.html




Beyond Wi-Fi: Laptop Heaven but a Price
David Pogue

PLENTY of technologies can get you online wirelessly these days, but there's always a catch. Wi-Fi Internet hot spots are fast and cheap, but they keep you tethered to the airport, hotel or coffee shop where the hot spot originates. A Bluetooth cellphone can get your laptop online, but at the speed of a slug. And smoke signals - well, you know. The privacy issues are a nightmare.

But for the laptop lugger with an expense account, there may be another option. It's a relatively new cellular data network called C.D.M.A. 1xEV-DO, which, as you surely knew, stands for Code Division Multiple Access Evolution-Data Only. No wonder Verizon Wireless, the earliest and largest adopter of this technology, just calls it the BroadbandAccess plan.

To get your laptop onto this very fast wonder-net, you need a special cellular card that slides into its PC-card slot. Novatel and Kyocera have recently given the blossoming EV-DO future a big thumbs-up by releasing new cellular cards for laptops running Windows (and, with a little tweaking, Mac OS X).

EV-DO offers two addictive benefits. First, it's cellular. You don't have to hunt down public hot spots; an entire metropolitan area is a hot spot.

Second, EV-DO means sheer, giddy speed. EV-DO is a so-called 3G (third-generation) network, the fruits of $1 billion in Verizon development. And when your laptop or palmtop locks onto a good signal, you can practically feel the wind in your hair.

How fast is that, exactly? Verizon claims you'll be able to download data at an average of 400 to 700 kilobits per second (kbps), which turns out to be true. That makes EV-DO at least five times as fast as the rival technology offered by Cingular and T-Mobile, called EDGE (70 to 135 kbps), and about seven times as fast as Verizon's original data network (still available), which it calls NationalAccess (60 to 80 kbps).

Yeah, but how fast is that? Who besides network geeks measures anything in kilobits per second?

A more familiar unit might be time, as in how long it might take you to download a two-megabyte attachment. On a dial-up modem, you'd wait over six minutes; Verizon's older NationalAccess service, about five minutes; the EDGE wireless network, about three minutes; and Verizon's BroadbandAccess, about 40 seconds.

In short, using BroadbandAccess (EV-DO), you feel as if you're hooked up to a cable modem, even when you're sitting on a beach, your deck or a speeding commuter train. When your signal is strong, you get Web pages in a flash, file attachments in no time and video feeds without a hiccup.

(Sending data is a different story, however. You average around 100 kbps, because these cards use the older, slower channel for uploading. "When you download a big presentation, it goes really fast," says Roger Entner, a telecom analyst at the consulting firm Ovum. "But then if you forward it to someone else, you feel as though you've hit a wall." He suspects that the wireless carriers limit upload speeds so that wireless laptops can't be used as traveling Web sites. "The wireless carriers want to avoid letting people using the card as a wireless Web server," he explains. "It kind of kills your business model.")

So in general, speed is not a problem with EV-DO. But coverage and price may be.

Verizon's high-speed wireless network now covers 32 major metropolitan areas, including biggies like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Miami, along with a somewhat baffling selection of smaller cities like West Palm Beach, Fla., and Madison, Wis. Verizon says that the rollout has just begun, and that by the end of this year, half the American population will be EV-DOable.

Fortunately, even when you're outside the designated cities, you can still get online. Verizon's software seamlessly switches you to its older, slower NationalAccess network, which pretty much works wherever Verizon cellphones do. There's quite a speed hit; you feel as though someone secretly swapped your cable modem for a dial-up modem. But at least you can check your e-mail without having to return to, say, West Palm Beach.

Finally, there's the little matter of price: $80 a month, a price that seems expressly designed to milk corporate business travelers. On one hand, that price gets you unlimited service, and it really is $80 a month; at this point, you're not saddled with the taxes and fees that jack up your cellphone bill. On the other hand, that price doesn't even include cellphone service. (Of course, you can always use a free program like Skype to make voice calls while you're connected - but you didn't hear it from me.)

Then again, Verizon has the playground all to itself, so it can charge whatever it wants. But wait until Sprint introduces its own EV-DO service later this year. You might not be able to pronounce "C.D.M.A. 1xEV-DO," but you can sure say "competition."

If EV-DO sounds, on balance, as though it would be a good fit, your next step is to choose a cellular card for your laptop. Verizon offers three EV-DO models to individuals: Verizon's older, slower, less-featured Audiovox card ($100), and two new ones: the Novatel V620 ($50) and Kyocera's KPC650 ($70). (A fourth card, from Sierra, is offered only to corporations.)

In general, the cards are pretty much alike. Each can automatically switch to the older NationalAccess network when necessary. Each protrudes from your laptop by over an inch, meaning that you'll probably have to eject the card each time you put the laptop back in its case.

The Novatel and Kyocera cards come with Verizon's VZAccess Manager software, a little dashboard that lets you switch among your three wireless options: BroadbandAccess (EV-DO), NationalAccess (the older, slower network with more coverage) and Wi-Fi (if your laptop is so equipped). This software isn't especially gorgeous, but it's rock solid, easy to install and filled with useful displays; one shows a graph of your connection speed, for gloating purposes. It also lets you exchange short text messages with your friends' cellphones.

(The software works only in Windows. But at EVDOinfo.com - a great site for EV-DO news and instruction - Mac OS X fans can find step-by-step instructions for making these cards work in PowerBooks, too.)

Kyocera says there's quite a difference between its card and its rivals, though: its KPC650 is supposed to provide speeds up to 35 percent faster, especially in low-signal areas. Its tricks include faster circuitry, shielding from interference and a flip-out antenna that swivels in any direction. And sure enough: PC Magazine found that the Kyocera card was faster than the Novatel in two-thirds of its test locations.

My tests in downtown Tampa, Fla., which has BroadbandAccess coverage, must have fallen into that "other third" category. With the antenna in its best position, the Kyocera averaged 476 kbps, versus the Novatel's 543. (Test protocol: five runs of the bandwidth tester at www.toast.net.) Clearly, speed tests are flaky and variable, giving different numbers depending on your signal strength, which online bandwidth test page you use, and the mood of the EV-DO gods. (If you really get the bug, you can also buy an external antenna for extra speed and reception.)

But no matter which card you get, the big winner is EV-DO - or it will be, once its coverage grows and its price shrinks. Someday soon, it may even become the first completely satisfying wireless way to get online.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/te...tml?oref=login




A Joke Too Blue to Repeat, and the Movie That Dares to Tell It, Repeatedly
Sharon Waxman

How do you sell a movie about the dirtiest joke ever told?

Note to reader: None of the good parts of the joke will be told during the course of this article. Or in any of the ads. Or in the trailer. In fact, much of the content of the movie, a documentary called "The Aristocrats," is basically unrepeatable in just about any mainstream public forum.

Which is the essence of the problem.

"There is no violence or hostility of any kind" in "The Aristocrats," explained Penn Jillette, an executive producer of the film, who is better known as half of the magic act Penn and Teller. "We want to say: 'We have 150 really funny human beings in the back of a room making each other laugh, but they're going to be swearing, and if you don't want to hear swearing, you better not come in.' "

Mr. Jillette; the comedian Paul Provenza, who directed; and the distributor, Think Film, have decided to release "The Aristocrats" at the end of July without any rating, a decision that will probably make the film even more difficult to sell, since some moviegoers may be wary of an unrated film.

But they preferred that option to releasing "The Aristocrats" with an NC-17 rating, which is what the producers figure it would get if submitted to the ratings board - a voluntary step for distributors like Think that are not attached to one of the seven major studios. NC-17 ratings are almost always reserved for films with explicit sexual images. Yet "The Aristocrats" features nothing more than talking heads.

Still, the "funny human beings" in the film - famous comedians from Robin Williams to Chris Rock to Phyllis Diller to Jon Stewart - are not merely swearing, as Mr. Jillette said. They're telling their versions of a joke that involves every imaginable form of sexual perversion in graphic detail, including but not limited to incest, scatology, bestiality and sadism. Rabelais would blush.

So what's the joke? Basically, it's this: a guy walks into a talent agent's office and says he has a terrific family act. The act, the guy explains, involves a husband who comes out onstage with his wife and two kids.

What follows is the part that can't be told in this publication, or most others, but it's the point at which each comedian in the film cuts loose in a can-you-top-this exercise in pornographic oratory. Cut to the kicker where the talent agent asks, What's the name of the act? The answer comes: the Aristocrats.

The point of the joke, and the film, may be freedom of expression, or self-censorship, or what happens among professional comedians behind closed doors. But for practical purposes, the joke is so absurdly obscene that the viewer is shocked into hilarity, or deep offense. Or possibly both. The conundrum for those marketing the film is encapsulated in its tagline: "No nudity. No violence. Unspeakable obscenity."

"We're not selling sex, we're selling comedy," Mark Urman, head of theatrical distribution for Think Film, said of the decision to release the film unrated. "To give it the same rating as films that have completely disrobed bodies writhing and throbbing is misleading and could turn off a lot of people who have no problem with language, who hear it and use it all the time."

But one conservative commentator said that the lack of a rating was just an attempt to create controversy for a movie that would otherwise die in indie obscurity.

"I don't see it as an assault on anything, because it's not a film anybody's going to see, it's not a film that anybody cares about," said Michael Medved, a syndicated talk show host and conservative writer. "What we're seeing here is a desperate attempt to get attention for a project by outraging people, and I stubbornly refuse to be outraged."

The documentary, which was first shown at the Sundance Film Festival in January, came about as a result of Mr. Jillette's and Mr. Provenza's carrying low-caliber video cameras around to their friends in the comedy business and asking them about the infamous "Aristocrats" joke. They didn't necessarily set out to make a film, but ended up with some of America's best-known comics breaking taboos on camera (including, most shockingly, Bob Saget of the hit family sitcom "Full House").

Largely because of the movie's star roster, Think Film executives say, "The Aristocrats" could become a mainstream hit. Despite the lack of a rating, they have booked it in about 40 cities, in multiplexes rather than small art-house theaters. Free publicity will come in the form of interest from glossy magazines and syndicated television shows, not to mention articles like this one, and the distributors say they will spend upward of $1 million on movie prints and radio and television advertising.

John McCauley, senior vice president of marketing for Loews Cineplex, said "The Aristocrats" would be treated as an adults-only film, even though it is unrated. (It will open at the Loews in Times Square.)

"We are providing signage at the theater that specifically outlines the graphic nature of the film, so no one will be walking into the film not knowing what the content is," he said. "We support all forms of film, and we want to give the film an outlet to be seen."

Mr. Provenza denied that he was trying to create controversy. Indeed, he said he was trying to avoid it.

"We're not trying to sucker punch anybody, not trying to trick anybody into seeing the movie," he said. "The movie is about creative expression, creative freedom. If people want to fight us on it, go right ahead."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/movies/23aris.html




ILN News Letter
Michael Geist

Privacy Concerns With Google Library Search

A contract between Google and the University of Michigan released publicly on Friday contains no provisions for protecting the privacy of people who will eventually be able to search the school's vast library collection over the Internet. A Google spokesman said that Google Print does not require users to share any personally identifiable information.
http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5752085.html

BJ's Reaches Deal With FTC Over Data

BJ's Wholesale Club Inc. has agreed to settle charges that it failed to protect sensitive data of thousands of its customers. The FTC charged that BJ's mishandled customer data, resulting in millions of dollars' worth of fraudulent purchases that were made using that information. BJ's admitted no wrongdoing in the case, but the settlement requires the company to implement new security procedures and have them periodically audited for the next 20 years. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1...761661,00.html

FDIC Warns Employees Of Data Breach

Thousands of current and former employees at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. are being warned that their sensitive personal information was breached, leading to an unspecified number of fraud cases. In letters dated last Friday, the agency told roughly 6,000 people to be "vigilant over the next 12 to 24 months" in monitoring their financial accounts and credit reports. The data that may have been improperly accessed included names, birth dates, Social Security numbers and salary information on anyone employed at the agency as of July 2002.
http://tinyurl.com/98uwl

Security Flaw Exposes CVS Purchase Data

A security hole that allowed easy access to the purchase information of millions of CVS Corp.'s loyalty card customers prompted the company to pull Internet access to the data on yesterday. The company, which has issued 50 million of the cards, said it would restore Web-based access to the information after it creates additional security hurdles. The data security flaw in the ExtraCare card service was exposed Monday by Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering, or CASPIAN.
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/sil...l/11949589.htm

Equifax Canada Reports Data Breach

Equifax Canada said yesterday that the credit files of about 600 Canadian consumers were accessed without authorization. The breach resulted from what appears to be improper use of the access codes and passwords of one of Equifax's customers.
http://news.com.com/2110-1029_3-5750434.html

Card Breach Hits 50,000 Down Under

At least 50,000 Australians were caught in the major US credit card security breach. MasterCard and Visa have confirmed National Australia Bank was among the first to report an unusual pattern of transactions.
http://tinyurl.com/bsgm7




Utah Bank Says Big Breach Put Its Data At Risk
Eric Dash

A small bank in Utah is the latest company to become entangled in the controversy over a security breach that has put personal data on 40 million cardholders at risk for fraud.

The Utah institution, Merrick Bank, began using CardSystems Solutions--the processor from which the information was stolen--when it bought a portion of Provident Bank's merchant business in November 2004. Merrick acknowledged Wednesday that CardSystems had not complied with Visa and MasterCard's security standards, but would not say when it became aware that the company was not following the rules, or whether the violations occurred under its watch.

The timing is important because those violations have placed Visa, MasterCard and American Express cardholders at risk for fraud. It is also critical because those payment companies have said that banks that hire third-party processors are responsible for ensuring that those companies are in compliance.

In a statement, Merrick said it was "committed to ensuring that all the necessary steps are taken by CardSystems to quickly resolve the problems that allowed the incident to occur." Merrick said that CardSystems had already made a number of changes, and with the help of an outside security consultant would complete any remaining changes shortly.

A CardSystems spokeswoman declined to comment because of several investigations.

The news from Merrick comes as the scope of the security breach becomes even more serious than previously thought. The National Australia Bank said Wedneday that it had detected fraudulent activity on a few hundred MasterCard and Visa accounts as early as November 2004. That suggests that the consumer data was missing for at least six months, and possibly longer, between the time the theft occurred and when MasterCard said it could trace it back to the processor.

It also offers a somewhat different timetable than the ones MasterCard, Visa and CardSystems have provided. According to Jeff Lynch, a National Australia Bank spokesman, the suspicious activity prompted the bank to conduct an investigation. By mid-January, it was able to home in on CardSystems as the source, and the bank says it notified MasterCard, Visa and other Australian banks around that time.

MasterCard has said it did not detect atypical fraud levels until mid-April, when it was alerted by several banks and then began investigating; CardSystems and Visa said they did not start until May.

Over the last few days, cardholders in Australia, Japan, China and elsewhere in Asia have been told that their accounts are now at risk. Even though American processors handle transactions made on American soil, any foreign traveler to the United States or shopper who visited an American retailer online may have found account information exposed.

The credit card industry is organized so that many of a bank's important functions are contracted out to third-party providers. A so-called sponsoring bank, like Merrick, handles accounts for thousands of merchants. But the processing of the transactions is outsourced to a third-party company like CardSystems.

Merrick said it had worked closely with credit card payment associations and law enforcement authorities since learning of the breach.

Both the FBI and a federal financial regulators are investigating CardSystems, which says it is cooperating. Merrick declined to say if it had been contacted.

Merrick's disclosure raises more questions about the oversight of security controls in an industry where processing companies are largely unregulated, even though they handle millions of consumer records each day. While Visa and MasterCard provide a list of security requirements in order to link to their networks, it is up to the bank that hires the processor to ensure that it is following the rules.

The associations, like Visa and MasterCard, require that outside processors pass an annual security audit and have their computer networks scanned every quarter. Processors are required to register with the associations, but the results of the network scans are provided to the bank that contracts for their services and is available to Visa or MasterCard only upon request.

Merrick declined to comment on the last time it reviewed the results of the security audit or scan.

Wayne Arnold contributed reporting from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for this article.
http://news.com.com/Utah+bank+says+b...3-5758882.html




Feudalism’s Lackeys vs. Ayatollahs of Free Enterprise?

Change Proposed In EU Microsoft Case

The top judge of the European Union's second-highest court has proposed changing judges in the Microsoft antitrust case, according to a letter sent to all parties in the case.

The move, shared with Reuters on Sunday by some of those who have seen the one-paragraph letter sent Friday, comes after internal court criticism directed at the judge heading the Microsoft case because of a controversial article he wrote.

The letter lays out plans by Court of First Instance President Bo Vesterdorf to transfer the case away from the current judge and panel to a larger panel which Vesterdorf will head.

The European Commission found in March 2004 that Microsoft used its dominance to compete unfairly, fined the world's No. 1 software company 497 million euros ($608.8 million) and ordered it to change its business practices.

Microsoft sued and its case has been making its way through the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg before a five-judge panel headed by Judge Hubert Legal.

But Legal got into hot water at the court after he published an article in the French journal Concurrences (Competition) saying that some of the judges' clerks tended to regard themselves as "ayatollahs of free enterprise" and should avoid an impression of "arbitrary power."

These young "ayatollahs" can gain a central role when they speak the language of deliberations--the working language of the court is French--better than the judges, the article said. That angered judges and clerks at the court, numerous sources said.

Reuters wrote about the Concurrences piece on June 10. Legal said in an interview with Reuters on June 12 that he had great respect for the court.

But that was not enough to forestall the change. All members of the 25-judge court will meet to vote on Vesterdorf's proposals, once those who received the letter offer their comments by Friday.

The move to the court's Grand Chamber, headed by Vesterdorf, will give him a lot more power over the case. The new Grand Chamber panel is to include the existing five-member panel, heads of other chambers and four senior judges.

Until now, Legal has headed the case but Vesterdorf would choose who handles it going forward. It could be Vesterdorf himself or another member of the court.

It is not clear what the effect will be on the timing or the outcome of the case as new judges are brought up to speed. Legal had been aiming to complete it by mid-2006, which is considered quick by the court's standards.

Vesterdorf already has some familiarity with the case because he heard Microsoft's unsuccessful attempt last year to suspend sanctions until the case was complete. But many other judges will be starting from scratch.

Some at the court are wondering why Legal wrote the piece for the French specialty magazine. In his interview with Reuters, Legal explained his reasons.

"It is an attempt to make vivid for the academics a theoretical, intellectual problem which we have to face in the future," Legal said.

"There was no criticism intended of Bo Vesterdorf in particular and no criticism intended for the case law of the Court of First Instance or for the court itself," he said.

Legal's troubles recall those of the judge in the U.S. Microsoft case, U.S. District Judge Thomas Jackson.

Jackson gave interviews to reporters during the course of the trial, with the understanding that they would not be published until after the trial was over.

An appellate court in 2001 upheld some parts of Jackson's decision, rejected others, but chastised the judge for meeting with reporters and removed him from the case. The case was taken over by another judge.
http://news.com.com/Change+proposed+...3-5752938.html




Record-Setting New Chip Has Potential for Bioterrorism Detection

Researchers have built a world-record high frequency chip using a common type of semiconductor, an advance that could lead to inexpensive systems for detecting hidden weapons, and chemical and biological agents.
Newswire

Engineers at the University of Florida and United Micro Electronics Corp., a Taiwan- based semiconductor manufacturer, announced late last week they had built the 105 gigahertz circuit using widespread complementary metal oxide semiconductor, or CMOS, technology – the same technology found in most of the chips in ubiquitous personal computers and handheld electronic devices.

The previous record for CMOS circuits was 103 gigahertz, reported in February of last year, but that circuit consumed four times more power than the newly announced circuit and was built using a more advanced technology. Gigahertz is a measurement of frequency, with one gigahertz equaling 1 billion cycles per second, or a wave repeating its motion 1 billion times in one second.

“It’s a demonstration of what these standard technologies are really capable of, and it also opens up new applications areas for CMOS,” said Ken O, a UF professor of electrical and computer engineering.

In a related development, Swami Sankaran, a UF doctoral student in electrical engineering, and O have engineered a Schottky diode – a device that allows current to flow in a single direction – to operate at even higher frequencies of up to 1.5 terahertz, or 1.5 trillion cycles per second, using the same CMOS technology. That’s the highest operating frequency for any devices built with the mainstream silicon technology.

Engineers have created such ultrahigh frequency circuits in the past, but they have been too expensive for commercial use because of the exotic nature of the materials involved.

Steve Maas, chief scientist at Applied Wave Research, a California-based supplier of high-frequency electronics, said the cost is gradually coming down, but that high- frequency chips built using the standard CMOS are a recent and surprising alternative.

“Until recently, no one would have imagined that CMOS could be capable of operating at such high frequencies,” Maas said.

“The next logical step is to achieve this kind of high-frequency operation with a process that is designed for low-cost fabrication, and this seems to be what Ken has accomplished. I don’t know what his limitations are, but it appears to be a very respectable accomplishment.”

The UF advances suggest it would be relatively easy to transform the now experimental devices into inexpensively manufactured commodities – chips that in the near future might even reach even higher frequencies.

“Using the diodes we have, it should be possible to build circuits operating at around 400 gigahertz,” O said. “Within the next one to two years, the advances in CMOS could enable fabrication of diodes good enough to built terahertz circuits with.”

One of the exciting potential applications for such high frequency devices is chemical and biological weapons detection, O said. The circuits’ high operating frequency closely matches the vibrating frequency of the tiny pathogens and chemical bonds that make such weapons effective, O said.

“Many elements have spectral lines at these frequencies, so conceivably such circuits could be used to sense them,” Maas said. “These are not technological pie in the sky. They are thoroughly practical, technologically, but cost has always been the main hang up.”

According to Maas, other applications for high frequency sensors include “automotive radar for crash avoidance, adaptive cruise control, parking assistance (and) detection of obstacles.”

The 105 gigahertz circuit was announced Friday in a paper presented by O and Changhua Cao, a UF doctoral student in electrical and computer engineering, at the 2005 Symposium on VLSI circuits in Kyoto, Japan. A paper about the Schottky diode will appear in the July issue of the journal IEEE Electron Device Letters.
http://www.newswise.com/p/articles/view/512681/




DISSCO Makes 'Music' for Argonne, UIUC Researchers
Newswire

A mathematician and a musician have teamed up to create a new computer program that both composes music and creates the instrumentation to play it. The software is available for free from http://SourceForge.net.

The mathematician – Hans G. Kaper of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory – and the musician – Sever Tipei of the Computer Music Project at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign – have worked together for several years on the project, called DISSCO for Digital Instrument for Sound Synthesis and Composition. A key feature of DISSCO is that it integrates composition and sound synthesis in one seamless process, delivering a finished product that needs no further processing.

“The idea is to use the computer as an assistant in composing a piece of music,” Kaper said. “The computer takes a general idea and develops sheet music or recorded sound.” Kaper knows the concept from both sides; in addition to his position at Argonne, he is also adjunct professor of music in the Computer Music Project.

“It’s like writing a symphony and at the same time building the instruments to play it,” Tipei added.

The resulting sounds are not Mozart, or Thelonious Monk, or even Moby, but an interesting amalgam of notes. A sample of computer-composed music is at http:// ems.music.uiuc.edu/cmp/manyWorlds.wav, and a sample of computer-composed and sound-generated music is at http://ems.music.uiuc.edu/ANL-folds3.wav. Included in that second sample is a series Kaper and Tipei call the “Argonne chime” – a series of notes created by the computer program that spell the word Argonne – the notes A, Re, G, Sol, two computer-selected sounds to represent the letter “n,” and E.

The program serves two major purposes: The ability to create and hear sounds allows students to understand the interplay between structure and randomness in music composition; and the ability to produce sounds from computer data offers scientists a new way to discover the patterns and aberrations in data – “data sonification” instead of “data visualization.”

Tipei appreciates showing his students how structure and randomness can blend to enhance the creative process. “The idea is to develop a manifold composition, which is one musical structure which includes some degree of randomness. The end product is a composition that changes every time it is played,” Tipei said. DISSCO permits variable degrees of indeterminacy at all levels while producing a fully completed musical product. Parallels are established between the way sounds are grouped in various structural units and the way partial sounds and notes contribute to the makeup of a sound, which leads to the use of similar tools to manage events that occur at different time scales.

DISSCO uses additive sound synthesis to build sounds from sine waves. It allows precise control over each parameter of each sine wave, as well as over the overall qualities of the resulting sound. “Scientists can use this instrument to explore scientific data by rendering them in a sound file,” Kaper said. “The data are used to define the characteristics of the sound wave, such as the way it is tuned, its loudness, its spatial distribution and the amount of reverberation. In all there are more than a dozen useful degrees of freedom that we can build into a sound – more than enough for most physical or computational experiments.”

DISSCO is available at http://dissco.sourceforge.net, and is free software distributed under the terms of the GNU General License.

The nation’s first national laboratory, Argonne conducts basic and applied scientific research across a wide spectrum of disciplines, ranging from high-energy physics to climatology and biotechnology. The University of Chicago operates Argonne as part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s national laboratory system.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is the birthplace of computer music, first produced in 1956. The Computer Music Project, founded in 1984, is both a research and a teaching facility involved in computer sound analysis and synthesis, computer-assisted composition, music notation and printing, visualization of music and scientific sonification.
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/512650/?sc=swtn




Sweet News For Young Diabetics
Jason L. Miller

A study in today's New England Journal of Medicine reports that an experimental drug showed positive results in slowing the course, and maybe even preventing the development of juvenile (type 1) diabetes.

Affecting up to 2 million Americans, type 1 diabetes robs the body's ability to produce insulin, a necessary hormone for processing sugars. It is often called juvenile diabetes because the onset occurs at an early age.

Funded by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, researchers from Belgium, Germany, England, and France tested the new drug, a lab created antibody, on 80 patients diagnosed with the disease.

Half of them were given six days of treatment and scientists found that the CD3 monoclonal antibody was sufficient to stop the immune system from destroying beta cells in the pancreas, which make insulin.

The drug preserved the beta cells for up to 18 months after treatment in 12 of the 40 patients, which is a large enough percentage to create excitement. The difference was in the number of beta cells in any given patient. Those with more beta cells at the beginning of treatment faired better than those whose beta cell levels were already deplete.

This indicates that if treatment is given at the onset of the disease, the new drug can slow and even stop the disease altogether. Though treatment would be limited to the youngest of sufferers of one type of diabetes, a little progress is exciting progress.

Side effects included temporary flu-like symptoms, mononucleosis-like illnesses, fever and swollen glands. Though side effects have raised concern, according to Ake Lernmark of the University of Washington in Seattle, when combined with other treatments, the new antibody could be a significant step toward effect treatment of type 1 diabetes. The safety of the new drug will be addressed in further studies.

"If CD3 monoclonal antibodies are shown to be safe, perhaps their use ... could lead to improved therapies for type 1 diabetes," said Dr. Lernmark.
http://www.webpronews.com/business/t...Diabetics.html




Physicists Re-Create Nature's Best Sound System
Stefanie Olsen

Scientists have re-created the highly sensory hairs of crickets, a development that could lead to next-generation implants for the hearing-impaired.

Physicists at the Netherlands-based University of Twente have built artificial hairs like those found on the chirping insects, whose highly evolved sound detection helps avoid predators like spiders or wasps, according to research published this week in the Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering.

"These sensors are the first step towards a variety of exciting applications as well as further scientific exploration," Marcel Dijkstra, a member of the Twente team, said in a statement. "We could use them to visualize airflow on surfaces, such as an aircraft fuselage."

Cricket hairs are fine-tuned to detect airflow with energies as small as--or even below--thermal noise levels, according to the research. With the natural defense, grounded crickets like the wood cricket Nemobius sylvestris can perceive changes in the air current caused by the beating of another insect's wing, for example.

Each tiny hair sits in a socket on a cricket's appendages, called cerci, and can be directed independently of others. Airflow causes the hair to rotate in its socket, which in turn fires a neuron. This allows the cricket to detect low-level sound in any direction and use the collective information of sensors to act, according to the research.

Scientists have managed to produce a few hundred mechanical hairs that are longer than normal cricket hairs, which can measure 1 millimeter. The sensors are composed of thin layers of electrically insulating and conducting materials to form structured electrodes on a suspended membrane. The hairs, made of a photo-structurable polymer, are placed on the membrane.

The goal of the experiment is to create comparable sensory systems using Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) technology--which is the integration of mechanical elements, sensors, actuators and electronics on a common chip. These chips could ultimately be used in hearing aids.

Dijkstra said that because the sensors are small and consume little energy, they can also be applied to large sensor networks.

The research is part of the European Union project CICADA (Cricket Inspired perCeption and Autonomous Decision Automata), a project to study and mimic biological concepts through technology.
http://news.com.com/Physicists+re-cr...3-5758325.html




From Very Private Schools to Very Public Stages
Ada Calhoun

AFTER a muggy morning spent in last-minute rehearsal for their new play, "Big Times," a tribute to vaudeville, the play's three actresses fled to the cool, brick-walled dressing room of Walkerspace in TriBeCa. They threw off their old-time costumes, shimmied into light summer outfits and pulled sandwiches out of bags. Instantly, the cluttered offstage space assumed the atmosphere of a slumber party.

The three actress-playwrights - Maggie Lacey, Mia Barron and Danielle Skraastad - were soon joined by the show's director, Leigh Silverman; its producers, Sasha Eden and Victoria Pettibone; and its co-producer, Marla Ratner. The giddiness level climbed.

"The play is about friendship and refusing to suffer," Ms. Barron said, "but it's also a ribald entertainment."

"Did you just say 'rye bread entertainment'?" asked Ms. Silverman.

"Rye bread!" the women began chanting.

"Big Times," which opened on Saturday, is the latest production from the on-the-rise company Women's Expressive Theater (primarily known as WET). Founded in 1999 by Ms. Eden, 31, and Ms. Pettibone, 30, WET is known in the low-budget theater world for its unusual combination of glamorous fund-raising parties and old-school feminist politics. WET's mission statement is teeming with words like "empower," "sisterhood" and "women-centric," but WET's parties hardly feel like political action meetings; the drinks are strong and the guest lists elite, with attendees like Billy Crudup, Amy Sedaris, Paul Rudd and Ally Sheedy.

"We're putting the sparkle back in feminism," Ms. Eden said.

Ms. Eden and Ms. Pettibone, Upper East Side natives, met at an interschool singing group. (Ms. Pettibone attended Brearley, and Ms. Eden attended Chapin.) They became friends and began meeting once a week before school for iced coffee.

"Even then we were having power breakfasts," Ms. Eden said.

Ms. Pettibone added, "Except back then, our meeting agenda was boys and skiing." The women lost touch but reunited after college; Ms. Pettibone was Anna Deavere Smith's assistant, and Ms. Eden was the office manager of Bernard Telsey Casting, which was casting Ms. Smith's "House Arrest."

Though successful, Ms. Eden and Ms. Pettibone discovered a mutual frustration with the way women (themselves included) were treated in the acting world.

"I'm the brunette and I look ethnic, so I'm not going to be the ingénue," Ms. Eden said. "One of my best friends is a beautiful blonde, and she never gets to play anyone intelligent. We were following our dreams and making things happen, but something didn't feel right."

Sexism, she said, "has just been swept under the carpet." She cited a New York State Council on the Arts report that only 17 percent of the plays produced in the 2001- 2 season were written by women. "We decided we should just produce the kind of work we're not seeing out there," Ms. Pettibone said. "It's not about teaching the world a lesson. It's about producing media that we love."

WET's first show was "I Stand Before You Naked" by Joyce Carol Oates, which appeared at the 1999 New York International Fringe Festival. Ms. Oates saw the show and wrote additional material for WET that became "I Stand Before You Naked II." In 2002, the company staged Sheila Callaghan's "Scab," about two female roommates sharing a boyfriend. And in 2003, WET's production of Julia Jordan's "St. Scarlet" - the first and arguably the best of four plays by Ms. Jordan that were produced in New York that season - became a must-see for followers of Off Off Broadway. "Big Times," WET's new offering, is a play with live music that follows an orphan who models herself after Jimmy Durante; a ukulele-toting burlesque performer; and an unemployable waif with a dove impression. Ultimately, the three stage hopefuls discover that their solo acts are going nowhere but that, as a vaudeville producer tells them, "Individually you're awful; together you're awful good."

Ms. Silverman recalled the plays that she and WET considered collaborating on before they chose "Big Times": "Plays about rape! Bigotry! Murder! Transgender issues! And then I invited Sasha and Victoria to the workshop of this play."

Ms. Eden said: "We saw this show, and it was a big yes. The women in the play are desperately trying to get in a door. It's a true representation of life as an artist."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/th...es/19calh.html




Moonlighting Napsterite receives good notices

Careers Pulled Out of Hats: 3 Vaudevillians Who Could
Anne Midgette

Did you hear the one about the three actresses who decided to write themselves a play?

The punch line of this one is called "Big Times," a sweet, slender homage to the glory days of vaudeville, which opened Saturday at Walkerspace in SoHo.

The story is about three actresses and how they got on the stage. Mia Barron, Maggie Lacey and Danielle Skraastad came together in the graduate acting program of New York University in 1999 to begin work on the piece that became "Big Times." No, wait, that's the story of the play. The play itself, in vaudeville style, is about three young women - a ditsy dreamer (Ms. Lacey), a gutsy orphan (Ms. Barron) and a stripper who's seen it all (Ms. Skraastad). They make their way to the Big City and finally break into big-time vaudeville.

Sound clichéd? Cliché is the whole point. "Big Times" is the kind of play that can actually get a laugh out of "Why did the chicken cross the road?" It would be mean to give away too many of the other goofy jokes, since they're part of the piece's substance, along with slapstick, rapid-fire dialogue and quick costume changes as each actress takes on a host of minor roles. You can bring your 8-year-old to this one, and you both will probably enjoy it.

Women's Expressive Theater has turned Walkerspace into a tiny vaudeville stage, complete with red velvet curtains, little round tables and popcorn handed out at the door. Providing original and adapted music are the Moonlighters, a great ukulele-steel-guitar close-harmony band that specializes in 1940's-style Hawaiian music and grabs the flavor of the era with classics like "Frankfurter Sandwiches" ("Instead of me billing and cooing/ All I keep doing is chewing/ Frankfurter sandwiches/ Frankfurter sandwiches/ All night long").

The three actresses are not particularly singers or dancers, though Ms. Skraastad has the hoofer's body and mien, but they sing and dance anyway in a couple of numbers, and manage to be adorable doing it. They have also managed to create a tight piece that sets itself realistic goals and for the most part meets them. There are a couple of hitches: the very end, in particular, is a wistful coda searching for a punch line. But for the most part, dumb punch lines fly thick and fast and dare you not to like them. It may be unkind to freight this small piece with too-great expectations, but it would take a true curmudgeon to withstand its charms altogether.

The show runs through July 9 at Walkerspace, 46 Walker Street, near Broadway, SoHo; (212) 868-4444.
http://theater2.nytimes.com/2005/06/...ws/20walk.html




Court Will Issue P2P Decision Monday
Lyle Denniston

All remaining decisions of the Supreme Court's current Term will be announced on Monday, the Court's public information office said on Thursday. Six cases remain to be decided, unless, by chance, some are put over for reargument in the Term starting Oct. 3. That does not appear likely at this point.

At Monday's session, orders also will be issued on granting and denying review of new cases. After the opinions are announced, the Court's summer recess will begin.
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype
















Until next week,

- js.

















Current Week In Review





Recent WiRs -

June 18th, June 11th, June 4th, May 28th, May 21st, May 14th

Jack Spratts' 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

[multi]

hey,hey
lookin good !

[JackSpratts]

Originally Posted by multi

hey,hey
lookin good !

sure does.

kudos to tankgirl. the girl knows how to handle a pixel!

- js.

[legion]

possibly unfair, definitely unbalanced loving that one

thanks jack

[Haole]

Thanks for the mention, Jack. Things are going very well with Big Times.

[JackSpratts]

you're welcome guys.

- js.