Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - August 20th, ’05

[JackSpratts]

"I think it has alienated a large part of the new generation of music lovers and I think it's radicalized a lot of kids. In many ways, it may seem trite, but this is this generation's Vietnam. Iraq should be this generation's Vietnam, but I think free music, at least in terms of emotion and commitment and politicizing kids, may be it." – Paul Rapp



















August 20th, 2005




Local News

No Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy In Internet Subscriber Information

Court dismisses civil suit against city and police officers for obtaining information about AOL subscriber without warrant.

Plaintiff Freedman used his AOL e-mail account to anonymously send a message to two other residents of his Connecticut town. The message contained the statement "The end is near," and the recipients interpreted this as a threat to their safety. They immediately filed a police report.

A Detective Young and an Officer Bensey drafted an affidavit and application for a search warrant to seek information that would help them identify who sent the complained-of e-mail. Without submitting the paperwork to the state's attorney's office or a judge, Young faxed it to AOL's legal department. A week later, AOL provided Freedman's name, address, phone numbers, and various pieces of information relating to his account with AOL, including his screen names. No charges were ever filed.

Angry that his subscriber information had been released, Freedman filed suit against AOL, the City of Bridgeport, Detective Young, and Officer Bensey. (The case against AOL was transferred to federal court in Virginia.) Freedman argued, among other things, that the release of his account information was an intrusion into his privacy that violated his Fourth Amendment rights.

The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that Freedman's Fourth Amendment rights could not have been violated, because he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in his subscriber information. The court agreed, and granted the motion for summary judgment on this issue.

Freedman was unable to show that any expectation of privacy he had regarding his subscriber information was objectively reasonable. The court pointed to three different reasons why one would not reasonably expect his or her subscriber information to be private for Fourth Amendment purposes.

First, by signing up for service, a subscriber knowingly discloses information to the ISP, which is accessed and used by the ISP to provide services. Second, AOL's terms of service provided that AOL would release subscriber information "in special cases such as a physical threat to [its customer] or others." Such a provision was especially relevant given the underlying facts of this case. Third, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510 et seq. provides that subscriber information can be divulged in situations where the risk of physical injury justifies its release.

Given these factors, one should not reasonably believe that his or her subscriber information would be private for Fourth Amendment purposes. With no reasonable expectation of privacy, Freedman's Fourth Amendment claim was without merit.
http://www.internetcases.com/archive...nable_e_1.html





Singapore Cracks Down On Music File-Sharing Offenders
Nur Dianah Suhaimi

Three Internet users have been arrested in Singapore and charged with distributing digital music files in the city-state's first crackdown on illegal file sharing, Singapore police said on Thursday.

The three young men who were arrested, between the ages of 16 to 22, had shared more than 20,000 files in internet chatrooms.

It was the first time Singapore police have clamped down on web surfers who download pirated music and films since new copyright laws came into effect in January this year.

Under the amended Copyright Act, anyone who illegally downloads files on a "commercial scale" could face criminal charges, including five years in jail and fines of up to S$100,000 (33,322 pounds).

Police were tipped off by the Record Industry Association of Singapore (RIAS), an association representing local and foreign record companies. The suspects used an Internet chat programme as well as a music-sharing programme to distribute the music files, a police statement said.

RIAS, which conducts constant checks to curb illegal file sharing told Reuters it has sent warning letters to those engaged in illegal file-sharing on the Internet.

"Prosecution was a last-resort measure," said RIAS Chief Executive Officer Andrew Neubronner.

Industry analysts say the rollout of high-speed broadband Internet in Asia, particularly in countries with high piracy rates like China, India and Indonesia, has sent the number of people downloading free music off the Web spiralling up by millions a month -- and recorded music sales to tumble.

Singapore has one of the world's highest Internet penetration rates, with over 60 percent of its 4.2 million people living in homes wired to the Internet.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/news...NET-PIRACY.XML





Computer Worms Attacking Each Other

Computer worms that have brought down systems around the world in recent days are starting to attack each other, Finnish software security firm F-Secure said on Wednesday.

"We seem to have a botwar on our hands," said Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at F-Secure.

"There appear to be three different virus-writing gangs turning out new worms at an alarming rate, as if they were competing to build the biggest network of infected machines."

Hypponen said in a statement that varieties of three worms -- "Zotob", "Bozori" and "IRCbot" -- were still exploiting a gap in Microsoft Corp.'s <MSFT.O> Windows 2000 operating system on computers that had not had the flaw repaired and were not shielded by firewalls.

"The latest variants of Bozori even remove competing viruses like Zotob from the infected machines," Hypponen said in a statement on the company's Web site. (http://www.f- secure.com)

The worms were blamed for major system trouble at some media outlets and companies in the United States on Tuesday, causing personal computers to restart repeatedly and potentially making them vulnerable to attack.

Microsoft and the top computer security companies, Symantec Corp. and McAfee Inc, said damage to systems on Tuesday had been limited and was unlikely to cause widespread havoc like that which resulted from other malicious software such as "SQL Slammer" and "MyDoom".
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...RS&srch=+Worms





Industry Targeting File-Sharing Music Lovers

This is the first in a two-part series on music file-sharing, and its legal ramifications.
John E. Mitchell

If rock 'n' roll is considered the traditional opening salvo announcing music as the line in the sand between kids and adults, file sharing has turned the battle into a war. Since the late 1990s, peer-to-peer file sharing has become the hottest and most controversial way to obtain music and Recording Industry Association of America has responded with lawsuits that have only added to public confusion on the issue.

Paul Rapp is an attorney practicing in New York and Massachusetts. He is currently representing at least 20 people who have been slapped with an RIAA lawsuit and has consulted on the phone with dozens more. Rapp also is a musician who has found file-trading works for him and his band. Rapp is the drummer for the Albany, N.Y., area band Blotto, which may be best remembered as one of the earliest MTV stars with their song "I Wanna Be A Lifeguard."

Rapp first began to look into file sharing in 2000, when he downloaded Napster and typed in his band's name to see what the big deal was, sarcastically interested to see how much the band might be losing through downloading.

"As the search thing was flashing, all of a sudden I got this chill of 'What am I going to be if we're not on there? How much would that suck?'" said Rapp. "It came up and there were half a dozen files of 'I Wanna Be a Lifeguard' up there to be traded and I was relieved. Here's a song that's 20 years old and it's still got viability, people are still listening to it, and that's when I realized the real beauty of the file-sharing services."

Rapp said many musicians on his level and above feel the same way about file sharing, especially since recording contracts often penalize the musicians monetarily for not being platinum sellers. To musicians in this situation, whatever theoretical "lost sale" they might have for any given download is far outweighed by the positive publicity they received from still having their work out there, which translates into sales and concert attendance.

The band may never know -- or care -- how many of their songs are being traded, but the RIAA does and when Rapp gets a settlement agreement for one of his clients, it is accompanied by a list of files that were found on the offending computer.

"I'm looking at one here," said Rapp. "It's a stack of papers, each one has 15 to 20 tracks on it, and it's a stack of papers that's about 3 inches thick, it's about 450 pages."

Rapp goes over the list with his client to make sure it accurately reflects what is in the share folder on the computer. The answer is usually that the file list is accurate, although sometimes the client does dispute some of the list.

"I've had some kids come in and say 'Well, look, a lot of this stuff I have is indie stuff by labels that aren't members of the RIAA.' One kid said 'Most of what I've got is Malaysian folk music,'" said Rapp.

The music industry is giving the contents of a share folder a quick check -- RIAA doesn't verify that each and every file is under its jurisdiction or is, in fact, really the song that the file name claims. Given these facts, Rapp can help a client whittle down a file list, but that really doesn't really matter, he said, since the client will be taken to court regardless if he doesn't agree to the settlement.

"The alternative is if you challenge them and go into full-scale litigation, that settlement number goes off the table and if you lose, you're in the tank for significant damages plus all their attorney's fees, so there's a considerable risk," said Rapp.

Rapp and other people involved in file-sharing cases say the RIAA's tactics are plainly bullying, but that this makes sense when you consider that the purpose of the lawsuits has nothing to do with compensation for copyrighted music.

"The industry isn't suing you for damages, that's not what they're doing here," said Rapp. "They're suing you so that they can issue a press release that they're suing you. It is simply playing to the cheap seats and it has nothing to do with actual damages, it's all about public relations and trying to change the behavior of -- the last I heard -- something like 50 million people."

In other words, the music industry slaps 2,000 people with easily settled lawsuits in order to spread fear among consumers. Consider that their target lawsuit also is their target sales audience: College kids.

"Whenever they do a wave of 750 lawsuits at 20 colleges across the country," said Rapp, "they very methodically issue press releases that are dutifully picked up by the wire services about the RIAA's targeting 750 and they always call them 'thieves.' It's less about litigation and more about public relations, to be sure."

Demonizing your target audience is few businesspeople's idea of sound publicity, yet the music industry bandies around the term "piracy" in their press releases despite the fact that downloaders aren't attempting to sell anything for an illegal profit. In this climate, "pirate" might as well be slang for "music enthusiast" -- file sharing is a similar phenomenon to the age-old record collector practice of trading sides and making mix tapes. Rapp thinks that treating the audience this way is encouraging those who might not be downloading under other circumstances to do just that.

"I think it has alienated a large part of the new generation of music lovers and I think it's radicalized a lot of kids," said Rapp. "In many ways, it may seem trite, but this is this generation's Vietnam. Iraq should be this generation's Vietnam, but I think free music, at least in terms of emotion and commitment and politicizing kids, may be it."

Part Two will trace the music industry's role in the downloading boom and what the future holds for file sharing.
http://www.thetranscript.com/Stories...search=filter#





Single Mother Of Five Takes On RIAA In Downloading Case

Patricia Santangelo claims no one in her house downloaded music.
Gil Kaufman

Over the past three years, thousands of people have settled lawsuits brought by the Recording Industry Association of America for illegally uploading copyrighted songs. But Patricia Santangelo doesn't plan on being one of them.

The 42-year-old divorced mother of five from Wappingers Falls, New York, didn't set out to be a trailblazer, but when she was served with a lawsuit late last year claiming songs had been illegally shared using her computer, there was no way she was going to pay up to make it go away.

"I was shocked because I didn't understand how someone could be sued for something they didn't do. I didn't know what was going on," said Santangelo. "When [the RIAA's lawyers] called me, there was no music on my computer and they had an old IP address."

Once the judge in the case suggested Santangelo hire a lawyer to help her case, she tapped New York's Morlan Ty Rogers, who quickly suspected that the case might be the first one in which a defendant could fight the RIAA, and maybe even win.

"Many of the people who have been sued in these cases did do the downloading, and they haven't been willing to fight the complaints because if they lose, they could end up owing hundreds of thousands of dollars," Rogers said. "In my client's case, she did not know about Kazaa being on her computer, had no idea any of this was going on, and her understanding is that it was not her kids who were doing it." Rogers said it's possible the files were downloaded without Santangelo's knowledge by someone using a wireless connection.

The RIAA has filed federal lawsuits against more than 13,000 Internet users since September 2003, with nearly 3,000 of those accused settling for an average of $4,000-$5,000 (see "RIAA Sues 784 For File-Sharing, Gives Props To Supreme Court Ruling"). To date, none of the other cases have advanced beyond the early trial stages. In Santangelo's case, as in the others, the RIAA's computerized 'bot detected copyrighted songs available for uploading on her computer, but in what Rogers claims is a novel defense, it's the very fact that the RIAA found the songs that could end up exonerating his client.

"As an exhibit in the complaint, they typed up a list of six songs that RIAA investigators downloaded from a shared account that was supposedly on my client's computer," Rogers said. "The complaint said those files were there for sharing, but they have no evidence that anyone did share them. For them to prove copyright infringement, they have to show that there was unauthorized distribution of a copyrighted file to the public. If they knew some 16-year-old who downloaded those songs from my client's drive, that would be copyright infringement, but if their own investigators did it, it's not distribution to the public. A copyright owner cannot infringe on their own copyright."

Rogers, who recently filed a motion to dismiss the complaint against Santangelo, also said he thinks the "boilerplate" language of the suits is too vague to stand up to the scrutiny of a copyright case. "Other than changing the names, this is the same complaint used in thousands of other lawsuits, and they don't have any specific allegations about anyone uploading music from a file on someone else's computer," he said. "They're just using their software to find the person whose name is on the IP account, but that doesn't mean that person was at a computer downloading stuff. It could be anyone outside the home with a wireless connection doing it without the person's knowledge."

Santangelo said the lawyers representing the recording industry offered her a chance to settle the case for $7,500, and later reduced the sum to $3,500, but she refused. "I just felt like what they were doing was wrong and how they did it wasn't proper," said Santangelo, who added that she's never used Kazaa and that the screen names on the complaint did not belong to any of her kids.

RIAA spokesperson Jonathan Lamy declined to comment on the specifics of the Santangelo case, but said, "We believe that we have ironclad evidence that the illegal downloading occurred in this person's house. The ISP identified her as an account holder and all of the evidence supports our belief to file a good-faith claim."

In a unanimous decision in June in the case of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., the Supreme Court ruled that file-trading networks can and should be held liable when they create programs that are used primarily to illegally swap music, movies and other copyright-protected works. Lamy said that just as the RIAA will continue to hold accountable businesses that engage in theft, it will pursue individuals who engage in the uploading of copyrighted works.

Lamy noted that several other users have taken the RIAA to court over the suits, and to date none have had judgements in their favor.

U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon is expected to issue a judgement in the Santangelo case soon. She can either dismiss the charges, or find in favor of the RIAA, in which case Santangelo could be on the hook for much more than $3,500, plus the RIAA's legal fees.
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/150...headlines=true





The Gloves Come Off

Thanks to the Supreme Court and the FCC, U.S. Telcos Are About to Reinvent Their DSL Businesses
Robert X. Cringely

Last week, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission again bowed to the interests of the big telephone companies, and ruled that those telcos have no obligation to provide other Internet Service Providers wholesale access to their DSL networks. While this might look like a death knell for Earthlink DSL, for example, and vindication for AOL's and MSN's decisions to drop their own DSL businesses, that isn't necessarily the case. What IS the case, however, is that the decision has as much to do with telephone service as broadband, and the telcos are positively gleeful. Whether we consumers should be gleeful, too, isn't yet clear, but the answer right now is, "Probably not."

Let's first look at the decision. The short version is that the FCC, seeing enough incumbent and emerging broadband alternatives to DSL (cable modems, power line, WiMax, and 3G cellular data) no longer felt that alternate ISPs had to be guaranteed access to the local phone company's DSL plant. The ruling didn't look at the DSL infrastructure, itself, other than to place it in this broader network and legal context and say there seems to be plenty of competition now.

Not in my town there isn't. Here in Charleston, SC, my choices are BellSouth DSL which, as my 81 year-old mother put it, "sucks" (the first time I ever heard her use that term), or a Comcast cable modem, which is faster but brainless in that Comcast hasn't done a very good job of provisioning Domain Name Service. Power line, WiMax, and 3G cellular are nowhere to be seen in my neighborhood, and so far aren't even on the drawing board, either (I checked).

But through the Beltway glasses of the FCC, the nation apparently looks awash in broadband alternatives, so they gave the poor telephone companies this sorely-needed relief.

Here's where I get really confused.

It seems to me that the telcos got their relief a year ago when the FCC -- in an earlier decision -- concluded that the companies didn't have to share their next-generation networks with third-party ISPs. Fiber-to-the-home, fiber-to-the-curb, fiber-to-the-neighborhood, and even certain copper services like ADSL2 and 2+ were exempt from required sharing, leaving plain old original ADSL the only network they were required to share. The idea last year was that telcos wouldn't invest in these new networks at all if they had to share them, so the FCC said they didn't have to, with the goal that we'd all then get faster service. This, of course, completely ignored the existence of the same cable, power line, WiMax and 3G cellular infrastructures that today -- only months later - - are justifying the current decision.

So the telcos were first exempted from having to share their faster services in order to encourage them to build those services, which we sorely needed. And now they are exempted from having to share their slower service specifically because there are so many broadband alternatives.

Huh?

Remember, "share" means "sell" or "rent" to the third-party ISPs for rates that are higher than I expected, and a lot higher than the telcos suggested. For all the talk of having to sell "at cost," those agreements are profitable for the telcos, and we'll see that proved next year when the agreements are generally renewed. You see, this new FCC decision didn't prohibit telcos from reselling DSL, it just made doing so optional.

One thing that's very true is the phone companies WILL shortly begin a frenzy of broadband improvements, but my belief is that this isn't based on the logic stated to be at the basis of either of the two enabling FCC decisions. It's based, instead, on the implicit result of these two decisions, which is a fundamental change in the way telcos are regulated.

The basis of utility regulation is that for the privilege of being allowed to have a monopoly, utilities have to accept obligations in the form of reasonable profits and additional public services. These privileges and obligations are supposed to balance each other. But what happens if you take away the obligations, as the FCC appears to be consistently doing? Then all that's left is privilege.

What's happening here is the telephone companies are getting parity with the cable TV companies. Last year, the FCC reclassified cable modems from being common carrier services -- that is, COMMUNICATION services -- to being INFORMATION services. The distinction here is critical, because a communication service is regulated while an information service is not. A communication service is like a phone company or a cable TV company, while an information service is like a Yahoo or a Google -- except, of course, Yahoo and Google don't own any wires. The cable decision was tested recently in the U.S. Supreme Court and upheld, with the ultimate result being this DSL decision.

And here are the two most important bits of both decisions: 1) the cable and telephone companies now have an effective broadband oligarchy that is pretty much without regulation, and 2) any additional services that are encapsulated within the now deregulated ISPs will be, themselves, deregulated. Initially, this will mean phone service, but eventually it will mean EVERYTHING.

So here's the new landscape of DSL as it is about to be rolled-out by my local phone company, BellSouth. I am sure similar initiatives are happening at your phone company, too.

At BellSouth, I'm told, DSL will shortly become the core service. The company will begin rolling-out 6 megabit-per-second service, followed later by 24 megabit-per-second service. The former is possible under the current ADSL spec, though only within a short distance from the telephone company DSLAM where DSL signals begin their journey. My friend Stephen in San Francisco lived perhaps 100 meters from the DSLAM and consistently saw 8 megabit-per-second speeds even though he was only paying for 1.5 megabits. But given the poor quality of phone lines here in Charleston, I'm guessing even the six megabit service will be ADSL2.

ADSL2, which the ITU calls G.992.3, uses the existing copper infrastructure in a smarter way. It offers slightly faster speeds -- up to 8 megabits-per-second -- but more importantly it has greater range, supports true ATM Quality of Service, uses less power, and has significant self-diagnostic and bandwidth optimization capabilities. Remember, this is one of the technologies the telephone companies said they couldn't afford to install if the FCC didn't get the third-party ISP's off their backs. Yet the bottom line for ADSL2 is simple: It costs no more to build and costs less to run, leading to significant overall cost savings for the telco. ADSL2 will run over lines that wouldn't work for original ADSL, it will run further over lines of any type, and the diagnostics mean fewer truck rolls, which cost real money.

This is a service the phone companies had to essentially be bribed to provide, yet it is clear they would have built it anyway. And that bribe came not just in the form of eliminating mandatory wholesaling, but ADSL2 and everything carried by it is pretty much unregulated.

So BellSouth, for example, will roll out ADSL2 and throw its own VoIP phone service on top. But instead of fighting with the state utility commissions about rates and taxes, this new VoIP service will be as unfettered as a Vonage or a Skype. As a result, BellSouth will be able to offer very competitive VoIP rates and still make more money than a Vonage, and in fact, more money than they made with the previous regulated phone service, which will quickly die.

There's a push and a pull here. Buy ADSL2 and get cheap phone service. Want cheap phone service? Buy ADSL2.

Then comes ADSL2+ (G.992.5), a four-wire service running at up to 24 megabits-per-second, most of which will be used for (again unregulated) video. Those who think Internet cable TV is too expensive are caught up in the idea of the phone company having to use their Internet backbone connections for any of this, which they won't. They'll get TV signals the same way the cable companies do -- by satellite. But the available LOCAL bandwidth of a DSL plant is so much larger than any digital cable system (up to 1,000 lines per seven-foot rack, all running at up to 24 megabits-per-second) that the phone companies will right from the beginning be selling value-added services like Digital Video Recording, except the DVR will be at the phone company, not at your house.

This is why the cable TV companies are all ramping-up their Internet bandwidth. For the moment, they still have an advantage, but in another year or two that will be lost, so they are trying to bulk-up now, hoping customers will later be too lazy to switch.

The ultimate result of all this FCC rule-making is that the big get bigger, and the small learn to adapt or they die. There is a quid pro quo of sorts, and that's the conversion of regulation from governing rates to mainly governing emergency services. It looks like beyond e911 and supporting digital wire taps, the feds don't really care what the cable TV and telephone companies do or what they charge. And many of the telephony services currently subsidized by carrier fees will probably die or be pushed off on the states as a result of this effective telco tax cut.

And maybe that's good. Maybe a thousand flowers will bloom.

Or not.

But for sure, the logic used to support all these decisions is, itself, bogus.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050811.html





Google Library Database Is Delayed
Edward Wyatt

Google said yesterday that it would temporarily halt its program to make searchable, digital copies of the vast contents of three university libraries to give publishers and other copyright holders the chance to opt out of having their protected works copied.

But a publishing trade association called the opt-out offer inadequate, saying it did not address the main concern of its members: the belief that the entire program, the Google Print Library Project, is built on a foundation of purposeful copyright violation.

Google said it would go ahead with plans to digitize, and make searchable, works that are in the public domain, that is, those whose copyrights have expired. But in response to discussions with publishers, authors and others who hold copyrights, Google said it would wait until at least Nov. 1 before beginning to scan works that are still under copyright.

In the meantime, Google will allow publishers and others to tell it which of their works they do not want included in its searchable database of printed material.

Adam M. Smith, a senior product manager at Google, said in an interview that the opt-out policy was consistent with the way Google maintains its relationships with Web site owners, allowing them to say when they do not wish to be included in a searchable index.

"We believe this program is consistent with the principle of fair use, and it will allow authors to write more books, allow publishers to sell more books and to have a more robust publishing industry," Mr. Smith said.

But Patricia Schroeder, the former Colorado congresswoman who is president and chief executive of the Association of American Publishers, the trade group, said that while publishers were "very happy" with the suspension of copying, the program still set a damaging precedent that copyrighted works could be reproduced at will, as long as a copyright holder had not pre-emptively objected.

"That is really turning it on its head," Ms. Schroeder said. "How is an author even supposed to know that his or her work is being copied?"

Ms. Schroeder said that the publishers were in favor of expanding access to the content that they publish. But some publishers have said they were concerned that Google might begin to sell advertising related to the results of searches of copyrighted material without sharing the revenues with the copyright owners.

The dispute stems from a deal, announced in December, that Google struck with libraries at three American universities - Harvard, Stanford and the University of Michigan - as well as with Oxford University and the New York Public Library.

The agreements with Oxford and the New York library allow Google to make copies of all of the works in those institutions that are no longer protected by copyright. Once the project is up and running, the company will allow users of its Google Print site (print.google.com) to search those works and display contents that match a search term.

The agreements with the three university libraries have proved more problematic. The libraries agreed to let Google copy their entire collections, of both public domain and copyrighted works, to allow searching. When a search request produces a result in a protected work, Google displays only a snippet of text, plus bibliographic information and, if the book is still in print, links to sites where it might be available for purchase.

Publishers have objected to the program, however, saying that even if only snippets of a protected work are displayed in the search results, Google has still violated the copyright by making a wholesale copy and keeping it on the company's computers.

In June, the publishers' association asked Google to suspend its project for six months while questions about the copyright issues were discussed. And in May, the Association of American University Presses sent Google a letter with 16 detailed questions about the program's parameters, and plans for storage and use of the copied materials.

Ms. Schroeder said that her association was preparing to propose potential changes to the program, but that Google rejected them after receiving a briefing on the plans. She declined to characterize further what changes the publishers were seeking, and Mr. Smith of Google declined to comment on discussions with the publishers, which he said were continuing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/13/arts/13goog.html





S.F. Wants Wireless for Everyone

San Francisco wants ideas for making the entire 49-square-mile city a free -- or at least cheap -- Wi-Fi zone.

Taking a step toward bridging the so-called digital divide between the tech-savvy and people who can't afford computers, the city government issued guidelines for a plan to "ensure universal, affordable wireless broadband access for all San Franciscans."

The city is soliciting ideas for an ambitious system that would put Wi-Fi in the hands of people whether they are working in a high-rise office tower, riding on a cable car or living in a low-income housing project.

According to an annual ranking compiled by Intel, San Francisco already ranks just behind Seattle as the most "unwired city" in America, thanks to a ubiquity of cafes and restaurants that offer Wi- Fi.

Last year, the city erected antennas to make one of its most popular tourist destinations, Union Square, a free hot spot, and three others are set to go up later this year.

- - -

360 for 400: When Microsoft's (MSFT) new Xbox video game console comes out this fall, consumers will be able to choose between a fully loaded system and a more basic version without a hard drive, wireless controller and other features.

The premium Xbox 360 console will sell for $400 in the United States, Canada and Mexico -- nearly triple the price of the current system -- and 400 euros in continental Europe. Meanwhile, the scaled-back version, dubbed "Xbox 360 Core System," will go for $300, and 300 euros in Europe.

Various accessories, like a 20-GB detachable hard drive and wireless controller that will come standard with the premium version, will be sold separately and can be added to the less expensive "core" console.

Other features that can be added to that console include a TV remote, a headset for the Xbox Live online service and an ethernet cable for high-speed internet connections.

- - -

Micro magic: Nintendo will launch its Game Boy Micro, a portable mobile-phone-sized gaming console, in Europe on Nov. 4 for the price of 100 euros.

The Japanese company hopes to attract women and so-called casual gamers -- those unwilling or unable to spend hours playing games on a PC or console at home -- with the new device, which is available in metallic pink, green, blue and silver.

Nintendo said the Game Boy Micro would be available from the end of September in the United States for $100. Nintendo does not yet know whether buyers of its current consoles would switch to the Micro, or whether the device would lure new customers.

Around 500,000 Micros will be available at the European launch. The sleek Game Boy Micro, which weighs just 3 ounces, will be able to play a library of up to 700 Game Boy games. Nintendo says it is the world's smallest console.

- - -

Qwest completed: Qwest Communications (Q) and its largest union reached a tentative contract agreement, removing the threat of a strike by 25,000 telephone workers in 13 states.

The agreement includes a 7.5 percent wage increase over three years, changes to health care to reduce overall costs for many employees and an eight-hour cap on mandatory overtime. Workers must still ratify the pact.

The bargaining teams put the final touches on the tentative pact after several days of intermittent negotiations that intensified after the union's previous contract expired.

The union agreed to keep talking without a contract in hopes of avoiding a strike, and the resulting hike in basic wages is the first since 2003.

- - -

Compiled by Keith Axline. AP contributed to this report.
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,68555,00.html





Surveillance

The FCC's Invite To Big Brother
Declan McCullagh

It's cheaper and easier than ever to make phone calls over the Internet, thanks to innovative gadgets like a Wi-Fi handset from ZyXel.

With the ZyXel phone, you can make phone calls wherever there's an accessible Wi-Fi connection. But if the federal government has its way, you'll be tracked wherever you go.

Buried in the convoluted 91-page legalese of a recent Federal Communications Commission release on voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) is a proposal with worrisome privacy implications.

It isn't wise to copy regulations crafted for analog phone networks and apply them to a packet- switched universe.
In it, the FCC suggests ways to "automatically identify the location" of all VoIP callers with handsets that connect to the telephone network. Those methods include creating an "inventory" of every Wi-Fi access point in the United States, engaging in "mapping and triangulation" of those access points, compiling an "access jack inventory" for wired VoIP users, or even mandating that Net phones include GPS receivers and broadcast their exact latitude and longitude.

The justification for those regulations sounds reasonable enough: to let emergency services identify an Internet caller's location when he or she dials 911. It's part of an ongoing proceeding in which the FCC gave VoIP operators until October to route 911 calls to the geographically appropriate call center.

It's easy enough to identify the location of office VoIP phones that stay in one spot. But the FCC is worried about the arrival of mobile VoIP phones such as ZyXel's, as well as business travelers taking a Vonage-like wired handset on the road.

The FCC warned in the 91-page document released in June that companies "often have no reliable way to discern from where their customers are accessing the VoIP service...There currently are no solutions that allow a provider of portable VoIP services to determine the location of an end user absent the end user affirmatively telling the service provider where he or she is."

"We intend to adopt in a future order an advanced e911 solution for interconnected VoIP that must include a method for determining a user's location without assistance from the user, as well as firm implementation deadlines," the FCC added.

In a subsequent appearance before a gaggle of Washington, D.C., telecommunications lawyers, a senior FCC official from the wireline competition bureau predicted a location requirement deadline of July 1, 2006. (As a side note, I think it's cowardly for FCC officials to refuse to have their names mentioned, but it was a condition of attending the event.)

"Public safety is not keen on solutions with customer intervention," the official said, adding that the FCC is being lobbied by companies selling location technology, including one based on "measuring broadcast signals."

Unanswered privacy questions
The FCC's proposal raises a number of questions: Who will have access to the location data stored by VoIP handsets? What rules will govern police monitoring of your moment-to-moment location? Should the federal government really be in the business of compiling a database of every wireless or wired access point in the country? And once such a database is created, what's to stop the Feds from saying that computer users also must have their locations registered?

I'm sure the FCC will claim that the location-identifying requirement is reasonable, pointing out with some justification that cellular providers are subject to similar regulations and some commercial Wi-Fi-location services are becoming available.

But the Internet is not the telephone network, and it isn't wise to copy regulations crafted for analog phone networks and apply them to a packet- switched universe.

For one thing, what if someone doesn't want 911 service on his or her VoIP phone? I already have a landline and a cell phone at home, and I might add a VoIP phone to the mix. I don't need 911 service and don't wish to pay higher prices for a GPS receiver or location-identifying hardware that would be included in it. Mandating 911 service would amount to a tax on VoIP customers.

A second option is for the FCC simply to do nothing. What would likely happen next is some VoIP providers would offer location-enabled 911 calling to customers who wanted it (for an additional fee), and others would not. That would permit the normal functions of a free market to work--and avoid zany proposals involving Uncle Sam registering all wired and wireless access points.

There's still time to let the FCC know what you think. The deadline for public comments is Monday, and they can be filed on the FCC's Web site. Just remember to fill in the spot labeled "proceeding 05-196."
http://news.com.com/The+FCCs+invite+...3-5830805.html





TSA Data Dump Leads to Lawsuit
Kim Zetter

Following accusations last month that the Transportation Security Administration violated the Privacy Act in testing its new airline passenger-screening program, four individuals sued the agency Thursday.

They want the TSA to dig deeper for commercial data records it may have collected on each of them to test the Secure Flight program, and to hand over those records. The individuals also filed a motion to prevent the agency from destroying records before the lawsuit is resolved.


"Until the court has determined that they conducted an adequate search for my clients' documents, I think the document destruction should cease," said attorney Jim Harrison, who represents the four plaintiffs. He was referring to a recent TSA announcement that it was already destroying Secure Flight records.

Harrison filed the lawsuit in a federal district court in Anchorage, Alaska, where his clients reside.

Under the federal Privacy Act, government agencies that collect data on individuals must let them access the data and correct errors found in the records.

Last year, the TSA ordered U.S. airlines to hand over passenger name records for all domestic flights completed in June 2004 to test Secure Flight. A contractor for the agency then collected more than 100 million commercial records on approximately 42,000 passenger names and 200,000 names created from variations of those names.

In May, Harrison filed a records request to determine what kind of data the TSA collected on his clients. Two of his clients flew several times in June 2004 on Alaska Airlines and other carriers; the other two are travel agents who believe their names were included in the records of passengers whose flights they booked during that period.

The TSA said it had no records on the four, and Harrison appealed, believing the agency didn't adequately search its records. A deadline for responding to Harrison's appeal passed Tuesday without an answer from the TSA.

Secure Flight program director Justin Oberman said last week that it was possible the agency never collected records on Harrison's clients since it collected only a fraction of flight records for June 2004. Harrison said one of his clients, John Davis, has a name so common it is hard to believe it wasn't on the airline lists or the expanded list created from variations of passenger names.

Harrison is concerned the TSA will destroy records before they're adequately searched.

A TSA spokeswoman told Wired News that the agency already destroyed 3 million of 15 million passenger records in April. The agency mentioned the destruction in a notice it posted in the Federal Register's website in June -- without saying when it occurred -- and said it would destroy all remaining records when Secure Flight testing was completed, without saying when that might happen.

The issue raises questions about what is adequate public notice about the destruction of records when the Privacy Act guarantees access to those records. Harrison said most people didn't read the Federal Register or know they had to request records now or lose the opportunity.

"I don't expect them to take out ads in The New York Times," Harrison said. "But I'd suggest that it includes some sort of notice other than in the Federal Register."
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,68560,00.html





Japan's Biometric Security Firms See Demand Booming
Mariko Katsumura

Firms providing the latest in biometric security, using systems that can identify an individual's face, hand or fingerprint, are enjoying a boom in Japan amid an increase in forgery and cybercrime.

The technology includes ways to combat credit card fraud and Internet offences such as identity theft by avoiding the need for PIN numbers, as well as doors that dispense with conventional locks and instead rely on face recognition.

Some analysts say technology vendors including Fujitsu-Frontech Ltd. have great potential in the biometrics security market which, although expected to grow sharply, is still in its infancy.

"It's certainly a growing market. The growth potential for the technology providers, especially specialized ones, is huge if their products are used by big clients," said Jun Morita, a fund manager at Chibagin Asset Management.

Private firm Yano Research Institute says Japan's biometrics market hit 8.76 billion yen in 2004, soaring 39 percent in two years.

It is expected to grow to 27.22 billion yen in 2010, as the technology is adopted for mobile phones, personal data assistants (PDAs) and ATMs.

Interest in biometrics technology for access control or personal identification is growing around the world, with the global biometrics market expected to top $4.6 billion in 2008 from $719 million in 2003, according to the International Biometric Group, an industry body.

In the United States and Europe, companies such as Alcatel, Nuance Communications and SAFLINK Corp. have been developing non-password biometrics security using fingerprints, face recognition or recognition of veins in the palm or fingers.

In Japan, demand for the technology has been spurred by the introduction in April of the Personal Information Protection Law, which calls for companies and organizations to establish and manage company-wide information security.

Japan's second-biggest bank, Mitsubishi Tokyo Financial Group, is receiving over 2,000 applications a day for a credit card launched last year that identifies users by the veins in their palm. It has installed an authentication system, developed by Fujitsu-Frontech, in half of its 3,000 ATMs.

Countering Card Skimming

Japan Post, which includes the world's biggest deposit-taking institution with more than $3 trillion in investment assets, plans to introduce a cash card next year that carries a finger vein authentication system to counter forgery and card skimming.

The number of credit or cash card forgery crimes in Japan rose nearly 6 percent in the first half of 2005 from the same period last year, government data shows.

Internet-related crimes including "phishing" -- scams that trick people into providing personal and financial information -- and illegal access to computer networks have more than doubled in Japan in the past five years, police data showed.

T.D.I. Co. Ltd., which plans to launch commercial sales of a facial recognition security system next month targeting such firms as makers of locks and doors, expects the product to help increase sales by 1 billion yen in the business year to next March.

"Each biometrics security measure has pros and cons, and has its most relevant uses. The market will certainly grow if technologies are used in the best and most efficient way," said T.D.I. spokesman Hideaki Hoshina.

Another vendor, Sylex Technology Inc., which sells finger print authentication for PC access, expects its sales to double next business year and again the following year.

T.D.I.'s shares have soared 58 percent so far this year and Sylex has jumped 17 percent -- against an 18 percent rise in the Nikkei Jasdaq average for startups.

Fujitsu Frontech is up 47 percent so far this year, compared with an 8.6 percent rise in the TOPIX index.

Heavyweights such as Hitachi Ltd., Omron Corp. and NEC Corp. are gearing up for the market.

Many agree on the bright outlook for the technology, saying it can also target non-security areas such as entertainment industries to provide personal and higher-quality services.

But some analysts are skeptical about whether biometrics security can grow into a wide-ranging market due to privacy and technical problems.

"It's a very interesting market but investors are still unable to gauge how fast and big the market will become," said Yasuo Ueki, an analyst at consultancy Poko Financial Office.

"There are also cost and accuracy issues that I think might prevent the technology from spreading widely for a while."
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...S-JAPAN-DC.XML





Game Players Say Blizzard Invades Privacy
Daniel Terdiman

A number of "World of Warcraft" players are up in arms over software being used by the game's publisher to scan users' computers for hacks prohibited under its terms of service.

Many publishers of MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games) contend regularly with players crafting illegal software hacks that provide some form of gameplay advantage, such as increased speed, awareness of monsters or the like.

To that end, some publishers have deployed programs that can peer into players' computers in an attempt to detect the existence of such hacking software. Blizzard Entertainment, publisher of "World of Warcraft," is one of those companies.

Players sometimes cry foul about such practices, though, arguing that a game developer's need to keep out hackers doesn't outweigh customers' rights to privacy.

"It opens the ability for a company to do a whole list of things under the guise of security," said a frequent "World of Warcraft" player who asked to be referred to only by his first name, Dennis. "Once you give a company the right to scan your system, you've basically opened the door...Now you must fully trust that company with any data on your computer, because it's at their discretion that they download this data and do whatever they want to with it under the guise of stopping the hackers."

Another player, known as Malek, wrote in a forum on the official game Web site that users should be wary of Blizzard's motives.

"All of you people not concerned about this," Malek wrote, "are showing an awful lot of trust in Blizzard and its coders not to do anything malicious."

But Blizzard said that it isn't interested in anything other than whether users are trying to hack into the game.

"Our stance has always been that we really want to stop the hacker that actively attacks our game," said John Lagrave, senior producer on the "World of Warcraft" live operations team. "We have a system that looks for hacks into the actual game itself. We're not the police; we're not the Nazis. We have no interest in personal information because it has no direct bearing for our game."

Nevertheless, the history of MMORPGs suggests that sometimes game publishers underestimate players' desire for privacy. In one case, "Everquest" publisher Sony Online Entertainment quickly deactivated its own scanning software after players reacted angrily.

"We put a feature into 'Everquest' that was scanning background programs to find people who were hacking and cheating in the game," said Chris Kramer, director of public relations at Sony Online Entertainment. "We did it the wrong way. We put it into the game without alerting the player base first. We apologized to our user base and promised that in the future if we looked to use a scanning program, we'll let them know ahead of time."

Blizzard said that its own scanning of "World of Warcraft" players' computers is different from that of the "Everquest" situation, because Blizzard spells out in the game's end-user license agreement, or EULA, that the company maintains the right to perform such anti-hacking scans. Players like Dennis and others who have complained about the scanning on the game's official forums don't have much of a leg to stand on, Blizzard says.

"People should read contracts," Lagrave said. "Whenever we update our game, that EULA is always displayed so that people have to accept it every time. So it's been in their face many times."

Kramer agreed that players need to be more careful about reading what they agree to.

"People should read the EULA," Kramer said. If they don't, "that's like saying, 'I didn't read the contract before I signed it. Why does the devil own my soul now?'"
http://news.com.com/Game+players+say...3-5830718.html





Miss Manners Wouldn't Approve: Snoops Bug the High-Tech Car
Ivan Berger

DON'T be too sure your car is an island of privacy. Under certain circumstances, outsiders can eavesdrop on conversations among you and your passengers if your car has a built-in Bluetooth telephone link.

Bluetooth provides a low-power wireless connection between your cellphone and your car - it permits hands-free conversations through a speaker and microphone built into the vehicle, or with a headset - and it may be vulnerable to amateur eavesdroppers. At a recent computer security convention in the Netherlands, a group of European wireless-security experts called the Trifinite Group demonstrated a system that lets a laptop user listen to conversations in passing cars with Bluetooth setups.

The system, which Trifinite calls the Car Whisperer, also lets the user talk to people in these cars. While that could be used to deliver compliments to a fellow motorist ("Nice ride!"), it would also be possible to insult the driver or make a lewd proposition.

Using a laptop computer with a Bluetooth transmitter and a software program (available at www.trifinite.org) that runs under the Linux operating system, the Car Whisperer has a range of 300 feet, some 10 times that of Bluetooth hands-free systems. The range can be extended to nearly a mile by adding a directional antenna.

The system was developed not to create mischief but to head it off, said Martin Herfurt of Salzburg, Austria, a co-founder of Trifinite and inventor of the Car Whisperer, by showing manufacturers how vulnerable some of their products are. "Unless you can demonstrate the problem," Mr. Herfurt said in an e-mail message, "they may not recognize that it exists."

The security loophole exists only in setups that do not follow the recommendation of the industry consortium that sets Bluetooth standards. Bluetooth devices can talk to one another only if they share a secret passcode.

While this code can be up to 128 bits long, the equivalent of a 16-character string of letters and numbers, most are shorter. The Bluetooth consortium recommends eight- character passwords, allowing nearly three trillion potential codes. A computer could try them all, but by that time a moving car would be far out of range.

Many manufacturers' codes are just four digits long and consist solely of numerals. Such passcodes have only 10,000 potential values and can be cracked relatively quickly. Worse, some manufacturers use a single passcode, like 1234 or 0000, over and over.

If you are shopping for a hands-free Bluetooth speakerphone system, or a car equipped with one, you should look for one with a confirmation button that must be pressed to initiate a phone connection, Mr. Herfurt said, adding, "A button press cannot be performed by an external attacker."

Mr. Herfurt added that you should change your car's passcode from the factory default, if the system permits, and that you should keep the phone turned on and linked to Bluetooth. "The system can only communicate with one device at a time," he said.

A system that communicates with other cars could be used to pass useful traffic data to drivers behind you. When traffic slows, for instance, cars might automatically tell the vehicles behind them, giving drivers a chance to exit or slow down to avoid a crash.

This is not the first time privacy issues have arisen in cars with high-tech connections. It is possible to eavesdrop on people in a car that has a telematics service with a phone connection, like General Motors' OnStar (which is also offered on some non-G.M. models) or Mercedes-Benz's Tele Aid.

But listening in through such systems requires the cooperation of the companies providing the service, and they will not cooperate unless they receive a court order. Such orders have been issued at least once, in a 2001 F.B.I. investigation in Las Vegas, but were overturned by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

What are Bluetooth's other vulnerabilities? Despite reports circulating a few months ago, it is not true that a Lexus picked up a virus through a wireless link. Though cellphones can catch viruses, they are rarely linked to a car's vital computers. But the concern behind such rumors is logical: any electronic device connected to the outside world is potentially vulnerable.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/14/au...es/14BLUE.html





For an eye-opening look at how your cash gets to the media companies see "Hollywood's Profits, Demystified" in last weeks WiR – Jack.

The Wonder Of Hollywood

Theatrical runs are marquee attraction, but for how long?
Todd Leopold

Along with theatrical runs, DVD sales, television deals and merchandising tie-ins are big business for movies.

"You used to be big," screenwriter Joe Gillis tells reclusive silent film star Norma Desmond in the 1950 film "Sunset Boulevard."

"I AM big," Desmond retorts. "It's the PICTURES that got small."

Desmond, played by Gloria Swanson in the Billy Wilder classic, didn't know how right she was.

When "Sunset Boulevard" came out, the major Hollywood studios -- the behemoths that built an industry and an art form out of thin air -- were kings of the entertainment realm. Stars were signed to long-term contracts and obeyed studio dictates. The founders -- men like Columbia's Harry Cohn, Warner Bros.' Jack Warner and MGM's Louis B. Mayer -- were still in charge.

There was little competition. Television was in its infancy. Network radio was fading. The music business, years before rock 'n' roll revived it, was stagnant. The generic phrase "going to the movies" was appropriate; a night out at a theater often included a newsreel, a cartoon, and a double feature.

"The movie business was about movies," says Edward Jay Epstein, author of a fascinating analysis of how Hollywood works, "The Big Picture" (Random House) and Slate.com's "Hollywood Economist" columnist.

"In the old days, box office was everything. Until 1950, every penny a film made was from the box office."

Contrast that with today, Epstein observes.

Now the major Hollywood studios of the 20th century's first half -- Columbia, Warner Bros., Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Universal and Disney -- are owned by a "sexopoly" (Epstein's term) of six giant conglomerates: respectively, Sony, Time Warner, Viacom, News Corp., NBC- Universal and Disney. (MGM, another major, went through several buyouts and mergers in its lifetime and ceased to exist in 2004.)

Those six also own America's TV broadcast networks, the majority of its cable outlets, large shares in cable systems, sizable percentages of Internet partnerships and dominate its radio advertising. (Time Warner's holdings include, for example, the WB television network, the Time Warner cable system, DC Comics, America Online -- and CNN.)

And now the pictures literally ARE small. Instead of a film playing at a single-feature, 1,000-seat movie house, they play at 16-screen multiplexes. Instead of the money being in those theatrical runs, it's in the home -- home video, broadcast television, pay cable and syndication.

Theatrical movies -- what are called "current production" in studio parlance -- are simply a sliver of the overall entertainment business, and a money-losing one at that, Epstein says. Today, the profits are elsewhere, in the various ways a conglomerate can spin off a two-hour feature, from video sales to action-figure merchandising.

But what about the stars? The glamour? The attention paid to the weekly parade of movie openings, complete with celebrity interviews, breathless gossip and predictions of the weekend box office? What about the MOVIES?

Well, they're an illusion in more ways than one.

An illusion-based business

Movies are based on an illusion, of course -- the idea that individual images, played in a darkened theater on a large screen at 24 frames per second, can create a bigger-than-life experience.

The inherent excitement and immensity surrounding the movie experience extends to almost everything movies touch. Actors aren't just performers; they're "movie stars." Directors aren't just filmmakers; they're "auteurs" (French for "authors"). Even the old studio heads -- who were some of the best-paid executives of their time -- were called "movie moguls" (a term, notes Epstein, they adopted themselves).

And, of course, movie premieres are experiences worthy of royalty, with red carpets, expensive jewelry, stunning clothing, fleets of livery, dramatic lighting and hundreds of journalists and photographers in tow.

Still, it's always been a business, one that's been eminently adaptable to the economic and artistic needs of the time.

In the early days, movies were ways to fill empty theaters; later, the studios established their own theater chains, which were broken up in an antitrust decision in the late '40s. When television cut into movie attendance, the studios -- after initial resistance -- got into TV production, which is now more profitable than theatrical films.

The studios initially resisted home video (indeed, Universal, with other studios' support, sued Sony over the Betamax video recorder); now it's a huge profit center (and Sony is now a studio owner). They quickly caught on to audience trends: the summer blockbuster season dates from the '70s, the idea of targeting major films to teenagers (the most reliable moviegoing market) followed soon after, and when independent films started attracting audiences and awards, studios bought or established their own "independent" arms.

But so much is still wrapped up -- psychologically, if not necessarily economically -- in the idea of that big-budget, all-star Hollywood movie and its big-screen allure. Which is why studios still put so much energy into making a splash, from making sure their new releases get prominent play in magazines and on television (especially if they own the outlet) and shrewdly using the horse-race-like weekly top 10 list to keep interest high.

Box office slump?

And that's why the trend of declining theatrical attendance has many in the entertainment business concerned.

"Nothing says there has to be [theatrical] movies," says Epstein. "All the theater chains started as vaudeville, and they were all replaced by movie theaters. Opera was replaced by recorded music. ... As home theater [grows], you can lose movie theaters."

Indeed, North American theatrical grosses are down 9 percent this year from 2004, and ticket sales are down 11 percent from last year. Articles about the weekly weekend box office figures have focused on how they've paled compared to 2004.

However, says Brandon Gray, president and publisher of the box office-tracking Web site boxofficemojo.com, nobody should rush to judgment.

"Tales of a slump are premature," he says. "It's a down year, but Hollywood is coming off three boom years. 2002 was the most- attended year in nearly 40 years, and that's in the era of DVD and home video." 2002 attendance also spiked in the wake of the September 11 attacks, he adds, "so in many ways [that year] was unique."

Moreover, Gray says, last year featured "The Passion of the Christ" -- "a once-in-a- lifetime touchstone," he says -- that attracted people who seldom attend movies. And even with its down indicators, 2005 is still ahead of 2001's pace in ticket sales and "will be on a par with the late '90s."

What stands out about 2005, he says, is that "the product drives the industry and the product has been weak this year. It's been boring." There haven't been any water- cooler sleepers, films like "The Blair Witch Project," "The Sixth Sense" or "My Big Fat Greek Wedding."

However, that's cold comfort to exhibitors, who stand to lose the most by declining attendance. Thirteen theater owners filed for bankruptcy between 1999 and 2004, according to an article in Shopping Centers Today.

That article was actually upbeat about prospects for exhibitors. Epstein isn't. He observes that the "window" -- the time separating a movie's theatrical release from its video release -- is getting smaller, and "the video people [in the media companies] are getting stronger."

As that happens -- and home theater systems improve -- more people will wait until a movie comes out on video, he says.

Hollywood executives are thinking along the same lines. "Ten years from now, we'll release a film and you'll be able to consume it however you want," Sony Pictures Digital Vice Chairman Yair Landau told Newsweek.

Where that leaves the theatrical film is anyone's guess.

"It's too early to say if this is the beginning of the end," Gray says.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movi...iew/index.html





TiVo Left Out Of Cable, Satellite Plans
Derek Caney

As cable, satellite and phone companies gear up for battle for control of home entertainment, the odd man out could be TiVo Inc., the pioneer of digital video recording.

No one disputes that digital video recording (DVR), the ability to pause live TV and record TV shows onto a hard drive, will be an integral part of pay television packages.

But most companies selling these services seem intent on building this technology themselves rather than licensing it from TiVo, said executives at the Reuters Telecommunications, Cable and Satellite Summit this week.

Shares fell as much as 8 percent in premarket trading on Thursday, a day after chief executive of DirecTV Group Inc., which accounts for two-thirds of TiVo's subscribers, told Reuters it plans to stop marketing TiVo recorders and replace them with News Corp.-created technology.

TiVo's growth strategy is based on its ability to license its DVR technology to cable, satellite and phone companies. But many industry heavyweights, including DirecTV, SBC and Verizon, told Reuters there is little in TiVo's technology portfolio that they can't build themselves.

"The DVR box is very much at the center of what will be developed as we go forward," Chief Executive Chase Carey said at the summit, held at Reuters U.S. headquarters in New York. "We will have something on our own."

His remarks were echoed by Verizon Vice Chairman Lawrence Babbio who said that while the vast majority of people who use TiVo like the interface, he felt that the company could build easy-to-use features on their own.

"Actually, I think I'm totally confident that our IT folks are on the same path," he said. Verizon's TV service is expected to be introduced this year.

Also, the latest generation of set-top boxes, made by Pace Micro Technology Plc, Scientific-Atlanta Inc., and Motorola Inc., will also have DVR functions.

"TiVo has some significant challenges going forward," said Hoefer & Arnett analyst April Horace, who noted that DirecTV accounts for 12.5 percent of TiVo's revenue. "And that's all high margin revenue, because they don't spend a lot on subscriber acquisition costs for DirecTV customers."

TiVo spokesman Elliot Sloane said: "We are currently embracing integration into other set-top boxes and engaged in discussions with a number of cable companies right now."

DirecTV, which is controlled by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., is betting on an advanced set-top box, which will be introduced next year. Carey envisions the box will ultimately evolve into the hub of home entertainment with the capabilities for music and games, as well as video.

The box will be powered by technology made by NDS Group Plc., which is also controlled by News Corp.

"An ongoing relationship with TiVo would produce something that a segment of the market values but we're confident enough in what we're going to do that the majority of our customers will want the core product we're developing," he added.

SBC Communications Inc. is set to launch its television service by the end of the year. Chief Operating Officer Randall Stephenson said that his company was not in any discussions with TiVo about licensing its technology.

"We're trying to get a product launched with the kind of DVR technologies that are going to meet demand in the future," he said. "The (DVR) functionality we are going to have will be impressive," he said.

BellSouth Corp., which is planning a limited launch of a new TV service in 2006, envisions digital video recording (DVR) technology becoming combined in more advanced set- top boxes, Chief Technology Officer Bill Smith said.

While cable companies have deals with set-top box makers to integrate DVR technology, Smith said PCs from manufacturers, such as Hewlett-Packard Co., equipped with Microsoft's Media Center entertainment software could serve similar functions.

"Perhaps we would be better served if we offered a promotion subsidizing a customer buying a Media Center PC," Smith said. "In essence, you would have the highest end set-top box and then we could build on that."

To be sure, TiVo has some supporters in the industry. In March, TiVo licensed its technology to Comcast Corp. <CMCSA.O>, the largest U.S. cable company.

"TiVo is like the Apple Macintosh in the PC world," said Comcast Corp. chief executive Brian Roberts. "There have been many people who like our DVR interface better than TiVo. But to a TiVo user, it's the original. It's a bit of cult. We affiliated with TiVo because we wanted that innovation around our digital video recorders."

At the time the deal was announced, Comcast touted TiVo's advertising capabilities.

But Hoefer's Horace noted that much of Comcast's advertising focus is on its video-on-demand technology, not digital video recording.

"Comcast has 13 million subscribers today that can access VOD content," she said. "If you're an advertiser, wouldn't you rather have the opportunity to go to more eyeballs?"

Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt said that his company was talking to TiVo.

"There's nothing magical about this technology," he said. "My interest is that there are some consumers who really like the user interface.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...srch=Bellsouth





Jumpstarting The TV Web Race

A startup and a nonprofit compete over the emerging opportunity of publishing and viewing on-demand online videos.

Due to cheaper bandwidth, widespread broadband access, and affordable video creation tools, there’s a lot of video content on the Internet. But how do video makers and audiences find each other? And how do you make the computer screen a tolerable place to watch video?

It turns out these problems are central enough to attract two groups of developers from opposite sides of the spectrum—for profit and not for profit. Both groups think the answer is a stand-alone application that pulls online content by subscription. And they both released previews of their upcoming products in the past week.

Internet TiVo

Participatory Culture Foundation (PCF), a Worcester, Massachusetts-based nonprofit, last Tuesday rolled out the Mac beta of the video software it has been working on since the group’s creation in December.

On Wednesday, Veoh Networks, a venture-funded company based in San Diego, rolled out the uploading portion of its own video platform, which has also been in development since December.

Both groups compare their products to TiVo, offering on-demand access to any video content on the Internet. The two products are remarkably similar, each incorporating peer-to-peer (P2P) distribution protocols and syndication tools to speedily deliver content as soon as it is available.

Both attempt to be one-stop Internet video shops, from upload to feed- creation to content discovery to downloads and viewing. And both are set to be released within the next month.

However, PCF’s product, DTV, is ardently open-source and nonprofit, whereas “VeohNet” will sell ads to support free content. Both groups will offer monetization schemes for video publishers, with VeohNet taking a cut of the proceeds.

PCF is sustaining itself on funding from Mitch Kapor’s Open Source Applications Foundation and the Rappaport Family Foundation.

Veoh’s development team comes from Akonix, a company that specializes in controlling corporate access to P2P networks and instant messaging clients.

Veoh CEO Dmitry Shapiro said his team’s deep technical experience with the wide range of P2P protocols gives it the edge over products like DTV that are built on top of the open-source BitTorrent, which can be somewhat unreliable and are especially difficult for nontechnical users.

Choosing Sides

VeohNet will also use human editors to filter out illegal, mis-categorized, and improperly formatted content. PCF, on the other hand, is deeply committed to community filtering.

Director Tiffany Cheng said she is happy to let the public decide how to utilize her group’s open-source product after it is released into the wild.

“In the end, we don’t believe that proprietary and closed is going to advance independent filmmaking,” she said. PCF is a reincarnation, personnel-wise, of Downhill Battle, an activist group that was especially vocal about alternatives to entertainment industry rhetoric.

“Making sure the tool is open-source and free and easy to use… is very political in nature,” said Ms. Cheng.

But Mr. Shapiro maintained that he too is on the side of the little guy. “What we’re doing really fundamentally changes the world by opening up the media to everyone,” he said.

However, when pressed, Mr. Shapiro agreed that aspects of his product basically cater to the entertainment industry, while PCF is more attentive to do-it-yourself filmmakers.

While Mr. Shapiro contended that PCF has “shot [itself] in the foot” because of its attitude toward Hollywood, he said he’s a big fan. “I use it. I’m running it right now on my Mac as we speak,” he said.

Growing Sector

But it’s unfair to portray Internet video platform creators as a simple dichotomy. These two groups just happen to be the ones that are generating momentum by previewing their products.

Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Brightcove is a VC-backed startup like Veoh and plans to launch its own platform.

Sunnyvale, California-based Kontiki is experimenting with community applications of its business- oriented P2P system through its Open Media Network (see Open Media Network Launches).

In late June, Google’s video project won a lot of attention, but much of it turned negative after it was discovered that users had uploaded full versions of many copyrighted works.
http://www.redherring.com/Article.as...e+TV+Web+Race#





Canadian Community Sees Significant Decline in Proportion of Male Births

There has been a precipitous decline since 1994 in male births in the Chippewas of the Aamjiwnaang First Nation community near Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, according to a study accepted today for publication in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP). The community studied lives on reserve land in the St. Clair River Area of Concern, immediately adjacent to several large petrochemical, polymer, and chemical industrial plants.

After the community expressed concerns about an apparent decrease in male births, researchers analyzed live birth records from 1984 to 2003. They discovered that from 1984 to 1993, the community’s sex ratio was stable and within expected parameters. But starting in 1994, the percentage of male births began to decline sharply, and the significant drop-off continued through 2003.

Sex ratio—the proportions of male and female births within a population—is a key indicator of the reproductive health of a population. Worldwide, between 50.4% and 51.9% of births are males, and this percentage is typically very stable. For Canada it is generally reported that 51.2% of births are male. In the 10-year period from 1994 to 2003, the proportion of male births in the Aamjiwnaang community steadily declined, accounting for only 41.2% of births. In the five years from 1999 to 2003, the decline was even more pronounced, totaling only 34.8% of births.

“Although normal variation in sex ratio can be expected in any population, especially with a small sample size, the extent of the sex ratio deviation appears to be outside the range of normal,” the study authors write.

Ongoing studies of the St. Clair River Area of Concern have found changes in the sex ratios and reproductive ability of fish, bird, and turtle populations, which are thought to be due to exposures to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs).

While the present study does not seek to determine the presence of chemicals such as EDCs and the extent to which those factors may have contributed to suddenly shifting sex ratios, a 1996 assessment of the soil and sediment conditions in the reserve land found “high concentrations of several contaminants.”

The authors suggest further study to analyze potential causes for the decline in male births.

“Although there are several potential factors that could be contributing to the observed decrease in sex ratio of the Aamjiwnaang First Nation, the close proximity of this group to a large aggregation of industries and potential exposures to compounds that may influence sex ratios warrants further assessment into the types of chemical exposures for this population,” the authors write.
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/513866/?sc=swtn