*HOT* Tech News And Downloads, I Would Read This Thread And Post Any Good Info

Thanks for all the info. ireland, you're the greatest. Geo.

 

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13310
Stealthy Audio Watermarking: DRM

p2pnet news | DRM:- Remember DRM? Now meet SAW, short for Stealthy Audio Watermarking.

Cool name, huh?

“Music is the world’s universal form of communication, touching every person of every culture on the globe,” says a September 4 document, stating earlier:

Since the earliest days of human civilization, music has existed at the crossroads of creativity and technology. The urge to organize sound has been a constant part of human nature, while the tools to make and capture the resulting music have evolved in parallel with human mastery of science.

Throughout the history of audio recordings, the ability to store and transmit audio (such as music) has quickly evolved since the early days just 130 years ago. From Edison’s foil cylinders to contemporary technologies (such as DVD-Audio, MP3, and the Internet), the constant evolution of prerecorded audio delivery has presented both opportunity and challenge.”

Then comes the punch-line:

Behind the music is a growing multi-billion dollar per year industry. This industry, however, is constantly plagued by lost revenues due to music piracy.

Tamperproofness

Stories about SAW, yet another bid by Bill and the Boyz to implement DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) consumer control, have been circulating for quite a while.

But it’s now confirmed.

Microsoft has been granted a patent, also introducing the concept of “Tamperproofness”.

It claims its new anti-copying gear can “protect digital content even when it is distributed without DRM protection”.

It achieves this remarkable feat by, “embedding inaudible digital watermarks directly into an audio file, allowing the owner to be traced”.

How do it do what it do?

Says United States Patent 7,266,697, Kirovski, et al, September 4, 2007:

The watermark identifies the content producer, providing a signature that is embedded in the audio signal and cannot be removed. The watermark is designed to survive all typical kinds of processing and malicious attacks. In one described implementation, a watermarking system employs chess spread-spectrum sequences (i.e., “chess watermarks”) to improve the balance of positive and negative chips in the watermarking sequences. The balance is not imposed in an orderly fashion, which might make the watermark sequence more easily detectable to an attacker, but in a pseudo-random fashion. In that way, better sequence balance is achieved while preserving its randomness for an attacker without knowledge of the keys. In another described implementation, a watermarking system employs an energy-level trigger to determine whether to skip encoding of a portion of a watermark within a given time span of an audio clip. If a large discrepancy in energy levels exists over a given time frame, then the frame is not watermarked, to avoid audible time-dispersion of artifacts due to spectral modifications (which are similar to “pre-echo” effects in audio coding). In another described implementation, a watermarking system begins encoding of a watermark at a variable position after the beginning of an audio clip.

But there’s more. A lot more. And it’s worth running the rest of the opening diatribe, to wit >>>

Piracy is not a new problem. However, as technologies change and improve, there are new challenges to protecting music content from illicit copying and theft. For instance, more producers are beginning to use the Internet to distribute music content. In this form of distribution, the content merely exists as a bit stream which, if left unprotected, can be easily copied and reproduced.

At the end of 1997, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), the British Phonographic Industry, and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) engaged in a project to survey the extent of lo unauthorized use of music on the Internet. The initial search indicated that at any one time there could be up to 80,000 infringing MP3 files on the Internet. The actual number of servers on the Internet hosting infringing files was estimated to 2,000 with locations in over 30 countries around the world.

Each day, the wall impeding the reproduction and distribution of infringing digital audio clips (e.g., music files) gets shorter and weaker. “Napster” is an example of an application that is weakening the wall of protection. It gives individuals access to one another’s MP3 files by creating a unique file-sharing system via the Internet. Thus, it encourages illegal distribution of copies of copyrighted material.

As a result, these modern digital pirates effectively rob artists and authors of music recordings of their lawful compensation. Unless technology provides for those who create music to be compensated for it, both the creative community and the musical culture at large will be impoverished.

Identifying a Copyrighted Work

Unlike tape cassettes and CDs, a digital music file has no jewel case, label, sticker, or the like on which to place the copyright notification and the identification of the author. A digital music file is a set of binary data without a detectible and unmodifiable label.

Thus, musical artists and authors are unable to inform the public that a work is protected by adhering a copyright notice to the digital music file. Furthermore, such artists and authors are unable to inform the public of any addition information, such as the identity of the copyright holder or terms of a limited license.

Digital Tags

The music industry and trade groups were especially concerned by digital recording because there is no generation loss in digital transfers–a copy sounds the same as the original. Without limits on unauthorized copying, a digital audio recording format could easily encourage the pirating of master-quality recordings.

One solution is to amend an associated digital “tag” with each audio file that identified the copyright holder. To implement such a plan, all devices capable of such digital reproduction must faithfully reproduce the amended, associated tag.

With the passage of the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, inclusion of serial copying technology became law in the United States. This legislation mandated the inclusion of serial copying technology, such as SCMS (Serial Copy Management System), in consumer digital recorders. SCMS recognizes a “copyright flag” encoded on a prerecorded original (such as a CD), and writes that flag into the subcode of digital copies (such as a transfer from a CD to a DAT tape). The presence of the flag prevents an SCMS-equipped recorder from digitally copying the copy, thus breaking the chain of perfect digital cloning.

However, subsequent developments–both technical and legal–have demonstrated the limited benefits of this legislation. While digital secure music delivery systems (such as SCMS) are designed to support the rights of content owners in the digital domain, the problem of analog copying requires a different approach. In the digital domain, information about the copy status of a given piece of music may be carried in the subcode, which is separate information that travels along with the audio data. In the analog domain, there is no subcode; the only place to put the extra information is to hide it within the audio signal itself.

Digital Watermarks

Techniques for identifying copyright information of digital audio content that address both analog and digital copying instances have received a great deal of attention in both the industrial community and the academic environment. One of the most promising “digital labeling” techniques is augmentation of a digital watermark into the audio signal itself by altering the signal’s frequency spectrum such that the perceptual characteristics of the original recording are preserved.

In general, a “digital watermark” is a pattern of bits inserted into a digital image, audio, or video file that identifies the file’s copyright information (author, rights, etc.). The name comes from the faintly visible watermarks imprinted on stationery that identify the manufacturer of the stationery. The purpose of digital watermarks is to provide copyright protection for intellectual property that is in digital format.

Unlike printed watermarks, which are intended to be somewhat visible, digital watermarks are designed to be completely invisible, or in the case of audio clips, inaudible. Moreover, the actual bits representing the watermark must be scattered throughout the file in such a way that they cannot be identified and manipulated. And finally, the digital watermark must be robust enough so that it can withstand normal changes to the file, such as reductions from lossy compression algorithms.

Satisfying all these requirements is no easy feat, but there are several competing technologies. All of them work by making the watermark appear as noise–that is, random data that exists in most digital files anyway. To view a watermark, you need a special program or device (i.e., a “detector”) that knows how to extract the watermark data.

Herein, such a digital watermark may be simply called a “watermark.” Generically, it may be called an “information pattern of discrete values.” The audio signal (or clip) in which a watermark is encoded is effectively “noise” in relation to the watermark.

Watermarking

Watermarking gives content owners a way to self-identify each track of music, thus providing proof of ownership and a way to track public performances of music for purposes of royalty distribution. It may also convey instructions, which can be used by a recording or playback device, to determine whether and how the music may be distributed. Because that data can be read even after the music has been converted from digital to an analog signal, watermarking can be a powerful tool to defeat analog circumvention of copy protection.

The general concept of watermarking has been around for at least 30 years. It was used by companies (such as Muzak.TM.) to audibly identify music delivered through their systems. Today, however, the emphasis in watermarking is on inaudible approaches. By varying signals embedded in analog audio programs, it is possible to create patterns that may be recognized by consumer electronics devices or audio circuitry in computers.

For general use in the record industry today, watermarking must be completely inaudible under all conditions. This guarantees the artistic integrity of the music. Moreover, it must be robust enough to survive all forms of attacks. To be effective, watermarks must endure processing, format conversion, and encode/detect cycles that today’s music may encounter in a distribution environment that includes radio, the Web, music cassettes, and other non-linear media. In addition, it must endure malevolent attacks by digital pirates.

Watermark Encoding

Typically, existing techniques for encoding a watermark within discrete audio signals facilitate the insensitivity of the human auditory system (HAS) to certain audio phenomena. It has been demonstrated that, in the temporal domain, the HAS is insensitive to small signal level changes and peaks in the pre-echo and the decaying echo spectrum.

The techniques developed to facilitate the first phenomenon are typically not resilient to de-synch attacks. Due to the difficulty of the echo cancellation problem, techniques that employ multiple decaying echoes to place a peak in the signal’s cepstrum can hardly be attacked in real-time, but fairly easy using an off-line exhaustive search. (The term “cepstrum” is the accepted terminology for the inverse Fourier transform of the logarithm of the power spectrum of a signal.)

Watermarking techniques that embed secret data in the frequency domain of a signal facilitate the insensitivity of the HAS to small magnitude and phase changes. In both cases, a publisher’s secret key is encoded as a pseudo-random sequence that is used to guide the modification of each magnitude or phase component of the frequency domain. The modifications are performed either directly or shaped according to the signal’s envelope.

In addition, watermarking schemes have been developed which facilitate the advantages but also suffers from the disadvantages of hiding data in both the time and frequency domain. It has not been demonstrated whether spread-spectrum watermarking schemes would survive combinations of common attacks: de-synchronization in both the temporal and frequency domain and mosaic-like attacks.

Watermark Detection

The copy detection process is performed by synchronously correlating the suspected audio clip with the watermark of the content publisher. A common pitfall for all watermarking systems that facilitate this type of data hiding is intolerance to desynchronization attacks (e.g., sample cropping, insertion, repetition, variable pitch-scale and time-scale modifications, audio restoration, and arbitrary combinations of these attacks) and deficiency of adequate techniques to address this problem during the detection process.

Desiderata of Watermarking Technology

Watermarking technology has several highly desirable goals (i.e., desiderata) to facilitate protection of copyrights of audio content publishers. Below are listed several of such goals.

Perceptual Invisibility. The embedded information should not induce audible changes in the audio quality of the resulting watermarked signal. The test of perceptual invisibility is often called the “golden ears” test.

Statistical Invisibility. The embedded information should be quantitatively imperceptive for any exhaustive, heuristic, or probabilistic attempt to detect or remove the watermark. The complexity of successfully launching such attacks should be well beyond the computation power of publicly available computer systems.

Tamperproofness. An attempt to remove the watermark should damage the value of the music well above the hearing threshold.

Cost. The system should be inexpensive to license and implement on both programmable and application-specific platforms.

Non-disclosure of the Original. The watermarking and detection protocols should be such that the process of proving audio content copyright both in-situ and in-court, does not involve usage of the original recording.

Enforceability and Flexibility. The watermarking technique should provide strong and undeniable copyright proof. Similarly, it should enable a spectrum of protection levels, which correspond to variable audio presentation and compression standards.

Resilience to Common Attacks. Public availability of powerful digital sound editing tools imposes that the watermarking and detection process is resilient to attacks spawned from such consoles. The standard set of plausible attacks is itemized in the Request for Proposals (RFP) of IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) and RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). The RFP encapsulates the following security requirements: two successive D/A and A/D conversions, data reduction coding techniques such as MP3, adaptive transform coding (ATRAC), adaptive subband coding, Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB), Dolby AC2 and AC3 systems, applying additive or multiplicative noise, applying a second Embedded Signal, using the same system, to a single program fragment, frequency response distortion corresponding to normal analogue frequency response controls such as bass, mid and treble controls, with maximum variation of 15 dB with respect to the original signal, and applying frequency notches with possible frequency hopping. Watermark Circumvention

If the encoding of a watermark can thwart a malicious attack, then it can avoid the harm of the introduction of unintentional noise. Therefore, any advancement in watermark technology that makes it more difficult for a malevolent attacker to assail the watermark also makes it more difficult for a watermark to be altered unintentionally.

In general, there are two common classes of malevolent attacks: 1. De-synchronization of watermark in digital audio signals. These attacks alter audio signals in such a way to make it difficult for the detector to identify the location of the encoded watermark codes. 2. Removing or altering the watermark. The attacker discovers the location of the watermark and intentionally alters the audio clip to remove or deteriorate a part of the watermark or its entirety. Framework to Thwart Attacks

Accordingly, there is a need for a new framework of protocols for hiding and detecting watermarks in digital audio signals that are effective against malevolent attacks. The framework should possess several attributes that further the desiderata of watermark technology, described above. For example, such desiderata include “perceptual invisibility” and “statistical invisibility”. The framework should be tamperproof and inexpensive to license and implement on both programmable and application-specific platforms. The framework should be such that the process of proving audio content copyrights both in-situ and in-court does not involve usage of the original recording.

The framework should also be flexible to enable a spectrum of protection levels, which correspond to variable audio presentation and compression standards, and yet resilient to common attacks spawned by powerful digital sound editing tools.

In addition, the framework will facilitate search for the “El Dorado” and the “Holy Grail” of watermarking technology.

The seemingly unattainable “El Dorado” of watermarking technology is an encoded watermark that is unalterable, irremovable, and cannot be de-synced without perceptually and noticeably affecting the audio quality.

Likewise, the seemingly unattainable “Holy Grail” of watermarking technology is an encoded watermark where a malevolent attacker may know how the watermark is encoded, but still cannot effectively attack it without perceptually and noticeably affecting the audio quality.

But DRM is still DRM by any other name.

 

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13311
RIAA victims’ new weapon

p2pnet news | RIAA News:- “Conclusory” “speculation” and “boilerplate” is how a California judge described the RIAA’s initial complaint in Interscope v.Rodriguez, potentially the most damaging - to the RIAA - filesharing case since Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG first began suing their own customers in 2003.

Yet the mainstream media, always quick to report press releases issued by the Big 4, have so far completely disregarded this milestone which will force the labels to re-evaluate their approach in their campaign to use copyright infringement claims to try to compel their customers to buy corporate, and only corporate, music downloads.

The Rodriguez case was thrown out last month and significantly, it took the RIAA only six days to file its amended complaint.

In a startling turnaround, it completely abandon its controversial “making available” theory, its main contrivance, and one for which it had fought so hard in Elektra v Barker and Warner v Cassin.

It now remains to be seen if:

The RIAA will to stick to this new form of complaint in future cases; and,

Will get into a different kind of trouble for some of its new allegations, such as the contention that the investigator “detected an individual” (contradicting the testimony of the RIAA’s expert witness that the RIAA’s method does not detect individuals) and the allegation that the defendant was “the individual responsible for that IP address at that date and time”, a phrase which would appear to be meaningless in a copyright infringement context.

Meanwhile, Ray Beckerman, the New York lawyer who was one of the first to represent RIAA victims, is pointing out that lawyers acting for the men, women and children accused of being illegal file sharers by Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG now have an effective weapon they can use to defend their clients.

Based on the RIAA’s abandonment of its Making Available position, “I recommend that defendants’ lawyers consider making motions to dismiss complaint or motions for judgment on pleading,” he says.

Stay tuned.

 

UPDATE

Microsoft Installs New Software Without Permission


Posted by kdawson on Thursday September 13, @09:20AM
from the slipperiest-of-slopes dept.
Microsoft
Futurepower(R) writes "Even though I have Automatic Updates turned off, on August 28, 2007, between 3:49 and 3:51 AM PDT, Microsoft installed new files on my Windows XP computer." Nine files are updated on Vista and on XP SP1, a different set of on each, relating to Windows Update itself. Microsoft-watch.com's Joe Wilcox and ZDnet's Adrian Kingsley-Hughes confirm the stealth update.


Microsoft updates Windows without users' consent

Microsoft has begun patching files on Windows XP and Vista without users' knowledge, even when the users have turned off auto-updates.

Many companies require testing of patches before they are widely installed, and businesses in this situation are objecting to the stealth patching.

Files changed with no notice to users

In recent days, Windows Update (WU) started altering files on users' systems without displaying any dialog box to request permission. The only files that have been reportedly altered to date are nine small executables on XP and nine on Vista that are used by WU itself. Microsoft is patching these files silently, even if auto-updates have been disabled on a particular PC.

It's surprising that these files can be changed without the user's knowledge. The Automatic Updates dialog box in the Control Panel can be set to prevent updates from being installed automatically. However, with Microsoft's latest stealth move, updates to the WU executables seem to be installed regardless of the settings — without notifying users.

When users launch Windows Update, Microsoft's online service can check the version of its executables on the PC and update them if necessary. What's unusual is that people are reporting changes in these files although WU wasn't authorized to install anything.

This isn't the first time Microsoft has pushed updates out to users who prefer to test and install their updates manually. Not long ago, another Windows component, svchost.exe, was causing problems with Windows Update, as last reported on June 21 in the Windows Secrets Newsletter. In that case, however, the Windows Update site notified users that updated software had to be installed before the patching process could proceed. This time, such a notice never appears.

For users who elect not to have updates installed automatically, the issue of consent is crucial. Microsoft has apparently decided, however, that it doesn't need permission to patch Windows Updates files, even if you've set your preferences to require it.

Microsoft provides no tech information — yet

To make matters even stranger, a search on Microsoft's Web site reveals no information at all on the stealth updates. Let's say you wished to voluntarily download and install the new WU executable files when you were, for example, reinstalling a system. You'd be hard-pressed to find the updated files in order to download them. At this writing, you either get a stealth install or nothing.

A few Web forums have already started to discuss the updated files, which bear the version number 7.0.6000.381. The only explanation found at Microsoft's site comes from a user identified as Dean-Dean on a Microsoft Communities forum. In reply to a question, he states:

* "Windows Update Software 7.0.6000.381 is an update to Windows Update itself. It is an update for both Windows XP and Windows Vista. Unless the update is installed, Windows Update won't work, at least in terms of searching for further updates. Normal use of Windows Update, in other words, is blocked until this update is installed."

Windows Secrets contributing editor Susan Bradley contacted Microsoft Partner Support about the update and received this short reply:

* "7.0.6000.381 is a consumer only release that addresses some specific issues found after .374 was released. It will not be available via WSUS [Windows Server Update Services]. A standalone installer and the redist will be available soon, I will keep an eye on it and notify you when it is available."

Unfortunately, this reply does not explain why the stealth patching began with so little information provided to customers. Nor does it provide any details on the "specific issues" that the update supposedly addresses.

System logs confirm stealth installs

In his forum post, Dean-Dean names several files that are changed on XP and Vista. The patching process updates several Windows\System32 executables (with the extensions .exe, .dll, and .cpl) to version 7.0.6000.381, according to the post.

In Vista, the following files are updated:

1. wuapi.dll
2. wuapp.exe
3. wuauclt.exe
4. wuaueng.dll
5. wucltux.dll
6. wudriver.dll
7. wups.dll
8. wups2.dll
9. wuwebv.dll

In XP, the following files are updated:

1. cdm.dll
2. wuapi.dll
3. wuauclt.exe
4. wuaucpl.cpl
5. wuaueng.dll
6. wucltui.dll
7. wups.dll
8. wups2.dll
9. wuweb.dll

These files are by no means viruses, and Microsoft appears to have no malicious intent in patching them. However, writing files to a user's PC without notice (when auto-updating has been turned off) is behavior that's usually associated with hacker Web sites. The question being raised in discussion forums is, "Why is Microsoft operating in this way?"

How to check which version your PC has

If a system has been patched in the past few months, the nine executables in Windows\System32 will either show an earlier version number, 7.0.6000.374, or the stealth patch: 7.0.6000.381. (The version numbers can be seen by right-clicking a file and choosing Properties. In XP, click the Version tab and then select File Version. In Vista, click the Details tab.)

In addition, PCs that received the update will have new executables in subfolders named 7.0.6000.381 under the following folders:

c:\Windows\System32\SoftwareDistribution\Setup\ServiceStartup\wups.dll
c:\Windows\System32\SoftwareDistribution\Setup\ServiceStartup\wups2.dll

Users can also verify whether patching occurred by checking Windows' Event Log:

Step 1. In XP, click Start, Run.

Step 2. Type eventvwr.msc and press Enter.

Step 3. In the tree pane on the left, select System.

Step 4. The right pane displays events and several details about them. Event types such as "Installation" are labeled in the Category column. "Windows Update Agent" is the event typically listed in the Source column for system patches.

On systems that were checked recently by Windows Secrets readers, the Event Log shows two installation events on Aug. 24. The files were stealth-updated in the early morning hours. (The time stamp will vary, of course, on machines that received the patch on other dates.)

To investigate further, you can open the Event Log's properties for each event. Normally, when a Windows update event occurs, the properties dialog box shows an associated KB number, enabling you to find more information at Microsoft's Web site. Mysteriously, no KB number is given for the WU updates that began in August. The description merely reads, "Installation Successful: Windows successfully installed the following update: Automatic Updates."

No need to roll back the updated files

Again, it's important to note that there's nothing harmful about the updated files themselves. There are no reports of software conflicts and no reason to remove the files (which WU apparently needs in order to access the latest patches). The only concern is the mechanism Microsoft is using to perform its patching, and how this mechanism might be used by the software giant in the future.

I'd like to thank reader Angus Scott-Fleming for his help in researching this topic. He recommends that advanced Windows users monitor changes to their systems' Registry settings via a free program by Olivier Lombart called Tiny Watcher. Scott-Fleming will receive a gift certificate for a book, CD, or DVD of his choice for sending in a comment we printed.

I'll report further on this story when I'm able to find more information on the policies and techniques behind Windows Update's silent patches. Send me your tips on this subject via the Windows Secrets contact page.

Scott Dunn is associate editor of the Windows Secrets Newsletter. He is also a contributing editor of PC World Magazine, where he has written a monthly column since 1992, and co-author of 101 Windows Tips & Tricks (Peachpit) with Jesse Berst and Charles Bermant.
http://windowssecrets.com/2007/09/13/01-Microsoft-updates-Windows-without-users-consent

 

FROM THE ABOVE ARTICLE

FREE Tiny Watcher, keep your Windows clean


I'd like to thank reader Angus Scott-Fleming for his help in researching this topic. He recommends that advanced Windows users monitor changes to their systems' Registry settings via a free program by Olivier Lombart called Tiny Watcher.

The problem

Most Windows users discover it with time: right after Windows is installed, or when one gets a new PC, the machine is "clean". Startup and shutdown are fast, the system directories are not crowded with files that contain God knows what, no useless program is wasting your CPU 24/24, etc.
Then, things start deteriorating...

Windows does not provide an easy way to keep its system clean.
For example, there are many different ways for a program to install itself so that it is run automatically, so it is not easy for you to track down which application decided "by itself" to use your system's resources in the way it wants.

Slowly, your machine becomes a mess. Your CPU is wasted by running processes that you don't need. Applications create files in your system directories and leave them behind. You sometimes refrain to install and evaluate a new program because you are afraid that it will not uninstall everything afterward. Anyway, the time it takes you to start and stop Windows become longer and longer. You start thinking about reinstalling "just to get things clean again"...

What you've got to do
In fact, very little:
# Keep the shortcut "Tiny Watcher -logon" that the installer puts in your startup menu. This will check your machine status at logon time.

# Eventually, perform a "post install check" (you will find this shortcut in your start menu) after installing a new application. This will tell you if things you might want to know about were installed (for example, programs who put themselves in your startup list without asking).
In fact, it's OK if you forget to do this right after installing a new application (and you will, since most of the time you are damn too busy at that time to think about everything). Anyway, Tiny Watcher will run (and do the same job) the next time you log in (probably the next day). The only problem with this is that you might not remember so well what you have installed earlier, so you will just be a bit surprised at first, until you remember: "Oh yeah, that's right, I installed that thing yesterday".



LINK FOR DOWNLOAD
http://www.donationcoders.com/kubicle/watcher/



Note for Windows ME, 98 and 95: these versions of Windows do not support Unicode fully. You might have to change the regional options (see in the options dialog). Use a font in accordance with your system usual code page. For example, on a Japanese system, use a font that support Japanese (like MS Gothic). The "MBCS locale" will be set by default on "system" and we suggest you leave it this way except if you know what you are doing (there are no risks in trying other values, though).

 

UPDATE:

microsoft installed those files with out me knowing outside of the update cycle,7-30-07 on win -2000

* cdm.dll
* wuapi.dll
* wuauclt.exe
* wuaucpl.cpl
* wuaueng.dll
* wucltui.dll
* wups.dll
* wups2.dll
* wuweb.dll

Microsoft downplays stealth Windows Update file updates

Microsoft sought today to downplay the recent, but unpublicized, automatic update of system files on Windows XP and Vista machines as "normal behavior." ZDNet blogger Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has been writing the last two days about a "stealth" update that occurred on his and other machines in late August, even though those machines are set to not install automatic updates. "I just don't like the idea of having updates foisted upon systems without being aware that they are coming in and having the option to postpone them," he wrote.

A Microsoft spokesperson said, "Windows Update automatically updates itself from time to time to ensure that it is running the most current technology, so that it can check for updates and notify customers that new updates are available."

"The point of this explanation is not to suggest that we were as transparent as we could have been; to the contrary, people have told us that we should have been clearer on how Windows Update behaves when it updates itself," said Nate Clinton, Program Manager Windows Update, in a blog today.

Clinton went on to say, "WU does not automatically update itself when Automatic Updates is turned off, this only happens when the customer is using WU to automatically install upgrades or to be notified of updates." That would explain what happened on the machines that Adrian Kingsley-Hughes observed. According to his blog each were set to be notified of any updates.


For the curious, the updated files on Vista are:

* wuapi.dll
* wuapp.exe
* wuauclt.exe
* wuaueng.dll
* wucltux.dll
* wudriver.dll
* wups.dll
* wups2.dll
* wuwebv.dll

And on XP SP2:

* cdm.dll
* wuapi.dll
* wuauclt.exe
* wuaucpl.cpl
* wuaueng.dll
* wucltui.dll
* wups.dll
* wups2.dll
* wuweb.dll

All nine files are system files related to the XP and Vista versions of Windows Update (WU) itself.
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9778152-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

 

DVD Flick 1.2.2.1

Size: 7.03MB

Publisher: Visit Website

Release Date: 2007-09-13

Submit Date: 2007-09-13

OS: Win 9x/ME/NT/2K/XP/2K3

Publisher's Description
DVD Flick aims to be a tool to convert various PC video formats to a DVD that can be played on pretty much any standalone DVD player. It´s main target audience is people who know at least the basics about DVDs and video/audio files.

DVD Flick is Open Source, meaning that anyone can download and view or modify the program´s source code. It also means that it is absolutely free of charge. Several external programs are used by DVD Flick to do the dirty work like encoding and combining of video material. All of these programs are free, some are Open Source too.

About DVD Flick

DVD Flick aims to be a simple but at the same time powerful DVD Authoring tool. It can take a number of video files stored on your computer and turn them into a DVD that will play back on your DVD player, Media Center or Home Cinema Set. You can add additional custom audio tracks as well as subtitles of your choice.
Features

* Burn near any video file to DVD
* Support for over 45 file formats
* Support for over 60 video codecs
* Support for over 40 audio codecs
* Add your own subtitles
* Easy to use interface
* Burn your project to disc after encoding
* Completely free without any adware, spyware or limitations

For a more detailed list of features, see the Features page.
Support DVD Flick

Do you like DVD Flick? Do you like open source projects? The easiest way to help out is to make a donation, no matter how small. You can use PayPal, and part of your donation will go to SourceForge.net, the website that hosts DVD Flick's files and so many other great free open source software.

links
http://www.dvdflick.net/
http://www.dvdflick.net/download.php

 

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13313

New car? Try a Reventon

p2pnet news | Off Topic:- You know that new car you were thinking of buying?

You might want to check out a new set of Italian wheels called the Reventon.

Named for the bull that killed toreador Felix Guzman in 1943, it’s powered by a V12 and its carbon fiber bodywork is all-new and aeronautically inspired, which explains, “the pointed beak up front that’s flanked by a pair of gaping intakes that swallow air in gulps to cool the brakes,” observes autoblog, going on:

“Given the look of the car, you could probably tell people they’re feeding a Pratt & Whitney mounded aft of the passenger compartment and they’d believe you as long as you kept a straight face. In fact, the expected handbuilt V12 resides in that spot, proudly displayed under angled & vented glass panels that look like reptile scales from above.”

Like it?

Sorry. The Reventon, one of only 20 built, is slated to be displayed at the Frankfurt motor show.

But all 20 have already been sold.

How much?

A trifling $1,387,880, or so.

For the whole lot?

Nope. For just one.

The fact it’s made by Lamborghini explains the price tag.

.SlashdotSlashdot it! Add to Technorati Favorites

Also See:
autoblog - Frankfurt Motor Show: Lamborghini Reventon revealed!, September 12, 2007

 

Report: fair use adds $2.2 trillion to US economy each year

By Nate Anderson | Published: September 13, 2007 - 11:53AM CT

It's common to see reports that stress the economic importance of copyright and the content owners who benefit from it; the Copyright Alliance says that "core copyright industries" generated $819 billion in the US in 2005, for instance. What's less common is to find studies that look at the economic impact of fair use. That was the goal behind a new report (PDF) from the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA). Their provocative finding? "In 2006, fair use-related industry value added was $2.2 trillion, 16.6 percent of total US current dollar GDP."
Related Stories

* Google, Microsoft-backed group ready to Defend Fair Use

The CCIA is the group that has launched a Defend Fair Use campaign and has filed a complaint with the FTC about overly-broad copyright notices in books and on sports broadcasts. Now, it's challenging the "more rights are always better" approach of groups like the Copyright Alliance with its new report.

The CCIA hired an economic consulting firm to run the numbers on various US industries that rely on certain fair use privileges. The list is broader than you might think: Internet broadcasting, data hosting and processing, audio and video equipment manufacturing, electronic auctions, radio and television broadcasting, and many more all rely on certain elements of fair use.

The "photographic and photocopying equipment manufacturing" industry, for example, relies on the Sony principle (that devices capable of substantial noninfringing uses should remain legal even though they could threaten some copyright owners) for its very existence. Radio and TV broadcasters rely on fair use exemptions for criticism, news reporting, and parody. Even search engines like Google and Yahoo rely on fair use to republish tiny snippets of web sites in their search results and to store thumbnails of copyrighted images. YouTube has even relied on a "safe harbor" defense enshrined in copyright law to keep out of trouble even when copyrighted works are posted to its service.

"In our highly competitive markets, technology innovators depend both upon copyright protection and its limits," writes Ed Black, the CCIA's CEO. "While CCIA holds copyrights like the copyright protecting this study, for example, we also benefit—along with the rest of the public—from limitations on the reach of copyright, such as the fact that copyright does not extend to the raw data that forms the basis of this study."

The report concludes that industries which rely on fair use for at least some of their revenues have seen significant growth over the course of this decade. Between 2002 and 2006, total revenue from these industries surged from $3.5 trillion to $4.5 trillion—a rate of growth faster than that of the general US economy.

Groups like the Copyright Alliance would prefer not to focus on these claims (which are derived from a WIPO-approved method for measuring the economic value of copyrights in the country, but are likely exaggerated by the fact that all of an industry's revenues are counted, not just those that stem from fair use), but instead on the need to give content creators even more rights.

In a response to the CCIA study, the Copyright Alliance said in a statement, "There is no fair use without original creative works. Period. It is like trying to imagine a librarian without books. All those who embrace fair use must understand this and support creators who are producing the works they so prize." Which is true, but it also seems to attack an argument that no one is making.

This isn't really a surprise. William Patry, senior copyright counsel at Google, points out that the Copyright Alliance has one real goal: strengthen copyrights for content owners. On his blog, Patry notes that "a review of its web site reveals that every position it discusses as having taken is pro-protection. And that's fine: Washington, D.C. is awash with partisan groups like this, on all sides of issues, on hundreds of topics."

Not everyone sees a contradiction between the positions espoused by the two groups; Microsoft, for instance, is a member of both.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...se-to-the-us-economy-4-5-trillion-a-year.html

 

New hard drive tech could double storage densities

By Chris Lee | Published: September 13, 2007 - 01:37PM CT
Another week, another hard drive read mechanism, or so it seems. The amount of corporate and university-based research that is devoted to increasing the storage density of the common hard drive gives a clue about the relative importance and consequent economic drivers behind storage technology.

A trio of researchers from the National Physical Laboratory in the UK have proposed an entirely new read head mechanism that has the potential to overcome some of the looming barriers towards increased data storage density. First, there is bit size and bit spacing. Bits are stored as tiny ferromagnetic crystals, and it is their orientation that signals a one or a zero. These bits can only be made so small and placed so close together before they start to interact strongly enough to flip each other.

Another problem is that the read and write heads must be small enough so that the orientation of a single bit dominates the signal from the head. This means that the heads must be about the size of the spaces between the bits. Then there are problems of heat and power dissipation. Read heads have a small but continuous current flowing through them, constantly draining your laptop battery and heating the read/write head. Reducing the size of the read head means that it will get hotter, which causes problems of its own. Excess heat could cause the read head to flip the bit that it is reading.

Fundamental to these problems is the way that the read head works. The magnetic field induces a small change in the resistance of the read head, which is then detected by measuring the voltage drop across the it. The structure that supports this is relatively large, and the prospects for reducing it further are not too good.

The read head structure can be simplified considerably, however, by using a combination of magnetostrictive and electrostrictive material (a magnetostrictive material changes its size in a magnetic field and an electrostictive material changes its size in an electric field). When layered, these combine to make a material that is termed magneto-electric, which essentially means that a magnetic field is used to generate a current. When the electrostictive material is sandwiched between two magnetostrictive materials, the magentostrictive material tightens or loosens its grip every time the read head passes over a bit. Squeezing the electrostrictive material generates a detectable current.

The sensitivity per unit area is about the same as for more traditional giant magentoresistive and tunneling magnetoresistive read heads, but the layering requirements are much less strict. The researchers propose a device that is just 7 layers, rather than the 15 in today's hard drives. Furthermore, a current is only generated when the read head passes over a bit and the resistance is very low, so the power dissipated in the read head should be less. Beyond that, it doesn't require that pesky constant current source, so it should consume less power and require fewer components.

The biggest advantage is probably in the simpler read head construction. Current read heads need a biasing magnetic (a magnet that generates a relatively strong background magnetic field against which the bits on the disk operate) attached to them, and the authors claim that putting this magnet on the head takes about 100 production steps. Even if no other benefit is derived from the technology, that is probably enough to make it worthwhile to manufacturers.

Finally, a note of caution. This is a simulation of a read head, not the real thing. No experiments have been done, and although I think the idea will work, I have one small concern. Because the read head is now generating a fluctuating current, it is generating a magnetic field that is of comparable strength to that of the bits themselves. The generated magnetic field will oppose the direction of whatever bit is currently being sensed. I want to be sure that the read process is not going to be flipping any of my bits before you can sell me that hard drive.

If there are no major technical gotchas, then this technology should provide a factor of two increase in storage density in its first generation. Beyond that, it's much harder to prognosticate on, but I think it is safe to say that the doubling in storage density every year is set to continue for a while longer.

Journal of Physics D, Applied Physics, 2007, DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/40/17/003
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...rive-tech-could-double-storage-densities.html

 

Dutch police shut down DVD piracy plant

By Jacqui Cheng | Published: September 13, 2007 - 02:11PM CT

Dutch police raided an illegal DVD manufacturing plant in the Netherlands this week, resulting in the seizure of equipment and pirated discs, as well as the arrest of at least one individual. The large facility was capable of producing up to 900 DVDs per hour, said the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, and evidence suggests that the plant had previously been a legitimate DVD production plant that had gone bankrupt.
Related Stories

* A big difference: music fans have fewer guns, CD stampers than true pirates
* Aussies get lesson from pirated "Simpsons" movie: can't plug a digital leak
* A $13 billion fantasy: latest music piracy study overstates effect of P2P
* Movie biz obsesses about pirates even as it plunders box office booty

Some of the presses seized by police were set up to make copies of movies like Die Hard 4.0, Ocean's Thirteen, Evan Almighty, and Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer. Police also discovered pirated discs containing compilations of popular music, which they believe were part of a larger order for thousands of discs. Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN estimates that organized piracy such as this accounts for roughly 10 percent of physical piracy in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands don't exactly come to mind when you think of countries that have the worst reputations for mass-pirating music, movies, and software, but that doesn't mean that the IFPI is taking the raid lightly. "This raid shows that in 2007 physical piracy continues to damage the entertainment industries. Here we have a clandestine factory operating in a major western economy, producing huge volumes of product," IFPI CEO John Kennedy said in a statement. "This is not a petty crime, this is serious organised crime and it is important that the public understands that when they buy pirated products they are sending cash to organised criminals who are almost certainly involved in other areas of serious criminal activity."

The discs weren't sold through legitimate sales channels, said the IFPI, but rather by individuals on the street, at schools, and at workplaces. We're glad to see the IFPI going after real pirates—those who are attempting to make a profit off of the sale of copyrighted material. This is where the recording industry should focus its efforts, instead of on inflated online piracy numbers.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070913-dutch-police-shut-down-dvd-piracy-plant.html

 

Nintendo remains dominant in this month's NPD numbers

By Ben Kuchera | Published: September 13, 2007 - 08:38PM CT

The August console and game sales numbers for the United States are in from the NPD Group, and while there are a few things worth remarking on, overall the trends we've seen since the beginning of the year continue. Nintendo is dominating the business, the Xbox 360 does well but unspectacular, and the Sony business is kept afloat by the PlayStation 2 and the PlayStation Portable while the PlayStation 3 flounders.
Related Stories

* Nintendo the big winner, PS3 dead last for the first half of 2007
* With 60% sales boost, PS3 is hotter but still in "last place"
* Report: Gamers largely clueless about next-gen console media capabilities

Nintendo

Hail to the king. Yesterday, the Financial Times reported that the Wii is now the number one selling console in the world. This month the hardware sales stay steady with the Wii selling 403,600 units, and the Nintendo DS close behind with 383,200 units. That means in its lifetime the Nintendo Wii has sold 4 million units in the US, while the Nintendo DS has sold 12.7 million units.

Nintendo is also moving software at a brisk rate: Wii Play continues to sell amazingly well and takes the number five slot in software sales this month, while Metroid Prime 3: Corruption holds the number six slot, Mario Strikers: Charged has the number seven slot, and Mario Party 8 holds the number nine slot. It's good to be Nintendo. It has the two best-selling systems, and four of the top ten software slots for the month not only being held by games for their system, but by first-party games exclusively. It's hard to say how the company could possibly be more successful.
Microsoft

Microsoft has arguably the best selection of games in this generation so far and continues to move systems at a steady, if slightly stodgy, pace. The Xbox 360 sold 276,700 units this month, for a lifetime installed base of 6.3 million. To show just how far the tables are turning, this is the first time a non-Sony system has had the best sales numbers in the Madden franchise, as this month the 360 version Madden NFL 2008 is the best-selling console game, coming in at number one with 896,6000 units sold. Amazing. BioShock comes in at number 3 on the charts; the only other Xbox 360 game in the top ten.
Sony

Sony is still enjoying strong sales of its PlayStation 2 hardware; consumers bought 202,000 PS2s, giving the system an installed base of 39.1 million(!). The PlayStation Portable is also doing relatively well with 151,200 units sold this month, moving its installed base to 8.3 million units. The PlayStation 3 couldn't keep its sales momentum however, as sales dropped to 130,600 units this month, down from last month's 159,000. The system has a US installed base of 1.75 million units.

Sony may see a jump in its PSP business as the new, slim systems become readily available, although the TV-out cables for the hardware remain elusive. Sony needs a big hit for the PlayStation 3, and with Lair proving to be a disappointment, the next big software release, Heavenly Sword, has a lot riding on it.

Microsoft is of course going to see a boost in sales when the impossibly-hyped Halo 3 is released later this month, a game that has both sublime commercials and nearly tragic cash-ins associated with it.

Nintendo, as always, laughs from its huge pile of money.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...e-most-madden-in-this-months-npd-numbers.html

 

Proof-of-concept pops up hours after Redmond reveals critical Win2000 flaw
Sep 13, 2007 - 6:57 AM - by Digital Dave
Oh you better patch it!

It took less than 24 hours for attackers to crank out proof-of-concept code targeting the one critical vulnerability disclosed -- and patched -- Tuesday morning by Microsoft, security researchers warned.

Early Wednesday, analysts with Symantec Corp.'s DeepSight threat network alerted customers that JavaScript exploit code for the critical vulnerability in Windows 2000 that was revealed in Microsoft's monthly patch cycle. The proof-of-concept was posted to the Internet by someone with a Brazilian e-mail address. An hour-and-a-half later, Symantec updated its alert to say that additional exploit code was also available to users of Immunity Inc.'s popular CANVAS penetration testing ("pentest") software.

computerworld.com
http://www.computerworld.com/action...icleBasic&articleId=9036218&source=rss_news50
Exploit code appears for Microsoft Agent bug
Proof-of-concept pops up hours after Redmond reveals critical Win2000 flaw

September 13, 2007 (Computerworld) -- It took less than 24 hours for attackers to crank out proof-of-concept code targeting the one critical vulnerability disclosed -- and patched -- Tuesday morning by Microsoft, security researchers warned.

Early Wednesday, analysts with Symantec Corp.'s DeepSight threat network alerted customers that JavaScript exploit code for the critical vulnerability in Windows 2000 that was revealed in Microsoft's monthly patch cycle. The proof-of-concept was posted to the Internet by someone with a Brazilian e-mail address. An hour-and-a-half later, Symantec updated its alert to say that additional exploit code was also available to users of Immunity Inc.'s popular CANVAS penetration testing ("pentest") software.

To call attention to the added danger, Symantec also raised the vulnerability's threat score from Tuesday's initial 7.1 (out of a possible 10) to 8.5 today.

The Windows 2000 bug -- the only one rated critical of the four patched Tuesday -- is in Windows Agent, the component that drives the operating system's interactive animated help characters. The best known, and in its time, most detested, character was dubbed "Clippy," a.k.a. the Office Assistant, a bouncy paperclip designed to answer users' questions about Microsoft Office. The Redmond, Wash. developer disabled Clippy by default as of Office XP, and put it to rest when Office 2007 debuted earlier this year.

The JavaScript-based exploit fits nicely with analysis made yesterday by Tom Cross, a researcher with IBM Internet Security Systems Inc.'s X-Force. The vulnerability, said Cross Tuesday, is in the Agent ActiveX control, which are typically exploited by duping users into visiting Web sites where malicious script code has been planted. , and attackers will use a pretty common attack vector," he said Tuesday. The quick appearance today of proof-of-concept also matches his initial impression. "This uses a pretty common attack vector, and fits the profile of a lot of bugs."

Symantec advised users who were unable to immediately apply the patch to disable their browser's script-handling capabilities. "A successful exploit requires the execution of active content," its advisory said. "To mitigate against this and other latent vulnerabilities, disable support for active content in the browser."

VeriSign Inc. iDefense, which was credited by Microsoft for reporting the bug, also posted an advisory today; in it, the security vendor spells out how to set the "kill bit" in the Windows registry to disable the Agent ActiveX control.

Microsoft has posted its technical write-up of the Agent vulnerability in the MS07-051 security bulletin.

Tuesday's update is also a replacement for an earlier April fix of Agent, an indication that the company's developers didn't find all the bugs in the component five months ago.

 

Linux - ATI 8.41.7 Display Driver Released
Sep 13, 2007 - 6:46 AM - by Digital Dave
This is the much talked about ATI driver the Linux folks have been talking about for about a week now.

You can go download ATI's new Linux driver that is fast and supports the Radeon HD 2000 series. The long awaited driver is finally here!

digg.com

link
http://digg.com/linux_unix/ATI_8_41_7_Display_Driver_Released

 

Belarc Advisor 7.2.20.7
Sep 13, 2007 - 6:25 AM - by Digital Dave
Great piece of software.

The Belarc Advisor builds a detailed profile of your installed software and hardware and displays the results in your Web browser. All of your PC profile information is kept private on your PC and is not sent to any web server.

majorgeeks.com

Belarc Advisor 7.2.20.7
Author: Belarc, Inc.
Date: 2007-09-12
Size: 1.42 Mb
License: Freeware
Requires: Win All

The Belarc Advisor builds a detailed profile of your installed software and hardware and displays the results in your Web browser. All of your PC profile information is kept private on your PC and is not sent to any web server.

Limitations: Free for personal use

link
http://www.majorgeeks.com/Belarc_Advisor_d1385.html

 

Your Rights Online: eBay Seller Sues Autodesk for $10 Million
Posted by CowboyNeal on Thursday September 13, @09:21PM
from the autodesk-resellers-hold-their-breath dept.
Software
Miasik.Net writes "A lawsuit has been filed in Federal Court (US District Court for the Western Washington District C07-1189 JLR) that alleges Autodesk, Inc maker of the industry standard AutoCAD software and their attorney Andrew S. Mackay have devised an illegal scheme to have used copies of their software removed from the eBay site using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Finally someone decided that non-transferable licenses must be stopped." While proving $10 million in damages might prove difficult, the reasoning behind the case is pretty sound.



eBay Seller Sues Autodesk for $10 Million
Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 4:12 PM
[Editor's Note: With the exception of a few spelling corrections, this item is a press release published verbatim. In an unusual move for me, I offer no comment except to say it will be interesting to see what happens next.]

A lawsuit has been filed in Federal Court (US District Court for the Western Washington District C07-1189 JLR) that alleges Autodesk, Inc maker of the industry standard AutoCAD software and their attorney Andrew S. Mackay have devised an illegal scheme to have used copies of their software removed from the eBay site using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

The law passed in 1998 was designed to give intellectual property rights owners a way to have content removed from the internet that violates copyright law. An example would be a television show uploaded to YouTube without permission from the production company. The right to sell an item that has been legally purchased is protected under copyright law. The first sale doctrine allows an individual to transfer ( i.e. sell, giveaway etc.) a lawfully made copy of an item without permission once it has been obtained. The doctrine has been part of US law since the Supreme Court recognized it in 1908 and covers everything from books and DVDs to clothing and automobiles.

Autodesk is using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to have legal copies of their software removed from eBay so they can sell more new copies. The latest version of AutoCAD software is around $4,000 a copy. Autodesk's lawyer, Andrew S. Mackay states "AutoCAD software is licensed, not sold and that license is not transferable." AutoCAD software is available for purchase at most major software retailers. There is no indication your purchase would be different from any other until you get it home and open the box. There is a piece of paper tucked inside that says it is a licensing agreement with the statement "by opening the sealed software packet(s), you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this license agreement". This is called a "shrink wrap" contract. It cannot be read until you open the package which according to the contract constitutes agreement. US courts have not held a "shrink wrap " contract to be valid. Furthermore the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is only intended to enforce copyright violations, not breach of contract.

The lawsuit also alleges perjury since the notice that was sent to eBay is required to be signed under penalty of perjury and fraud. Using illegal means to make a legal gain (i.e. sell more new copies) is a civil definition of fraud. Autodesk's attorney Andrew S. Mackay is currently under investigation (# 07-24456) by the California State Bar Association for his actions in this matter.

Timothy S. Vernor, a Seattle resident, filed the suit when his eBay account was suspended after Autodesk sent eBay five takedown notices over a two-year period. For seven years he has made his living selling used items on eBay under the user name happyhourcollectables and has positive feedback comments from over ten thousand satisfied customers posted on the eBay site. He says "I tried to reason with (Autodesk) but they just would not take me seriously until I filed the suit."

Technorati Tags: eBay Autodesk copyright digital Millennium suit property rights shrink+wrap
http://aecnews.com/news/2007/09/10/2377.aspx

 

Your Rights Online: Microsoft Sued by a Beijing Student Over 'Privacy Violation'

Posted by Zonk on Thursday September 13, @05:25PM
from the guy-thinks-highly-of-himself dept.
Microsoft
freakxx writes "Xinhua report that a Beijing University student has sued Microsoft for allegedly gathering personal information via Windows Genuine Advantage. He has demanded a compensation of 1,350 RMB (around US$ 180) and an open apology printed in a national newspaper. The student has accused Microsoft of using WGA to gather information about his computer and himself, rather than solely checking whether or not the installed Windows XP system was genuine. A Microsoft spokesman has declined to speak on this issue and said that the matter is under investigation."


Microsoft sued by Beijing student for privacy infringement
www.chinaview.cn 2007-09-13 16:50:20 Print

BEIJING, Sept. 13 (Xinhua) -- A Beijing university student is suing Microsoft for infringing upon his privacy, demanding 1,350 yuan (180 U.S. dollars) in compensation and an apology printed in a national newspaper.

Peking University student Lu Feng said he installed Microsoft's Windows Genuine Advantage software according to prompts from the Windows XP operating system on his laptop only to find the program enabled Microsoft to gather information about his computer and himself, rather than solely checking whether or not the installed Windows XP system was genuine.

Lu argued that Microsoft had violated his legal rights by providing a formal contract which had to be accepted in order to proceed with the installation.

Lu wants the court to annul the WGA installation agreement, order Microsoft to delete all his personal information and provide a software tool that can uninstall the program.

A spokesman with Microsoft China told Xinhua, "We have only just received this filing, have not had the opportunity to review it and therefore cannot comment on the specifics of the allegations.

"What we can say is that Microsoft is fully committed to letting customers control their personal information."

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-09/13/content_6718045.htm

 

High Definition Technology breakthrough
HD VMD Players to be launched globally.
The first affordable 'True High Definition' playback in the world - starts at €179 /$199 in the USA

New Medium Enterprises (NME) provides the world's first low-cost True High Definition solution utilizing today's Red Laser Technology. HD VMD is based on NME's proprietary Versatile Multilayer Disc (VMD) format and seamless and cost-effective manufacturing solutions based on the existing Red Laser DVD production infrastructure.
HD VMD is a true HD format with 1920 x 1080i/p resolution, up to 40 Mbps bit rate playback, DVD up-scaling so users can watch their existing DVD collection and achieve premium picture quality through their HD TV monitors. The HD VMD player is suitable for playback on all HD-capable display devices and will support existing optical disc formats: CD, DVD (DVD 5 & DVD 9). HD VMD players also feature Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) and all region codes for greater film viewing flexibility.
These versions of HD VMD Player are a phenomenal progression of recordable technology; capable of reading the Multiple layers of the technologically advanced Versatile Multilayer Discs(VMD) and also compatible with DVD and VCD.
ML622 and ML777 HD VMD players are the first high definition video players to output true 1080p. Utilizing the Sigma Designs EM8622L chip set these two players will output the native 1080p resolution from the disc rather than adding a second conversion process by breaking it down to 1080i and de-interlacing back to 1080p.
HD VMD players are extremely versatile and compelling from both a technological and performance perspective. HD VMDs have a maximum data transfer rate of 40 Mbps versus 36 Mbps for HD DVD and Blu-ray, which gives it the potential of sharper more detailed pictures over the competing formats.
High-performance graphics acceleration, multi-standard audio decoding, advanced display processing capabilities, and HDMI/HDCP output round out its multimedia capability. With state-of-the-art HD performance and up-conversion for Standard Definition DVD playback, the HD VMD Player is also competitively priced far lower than the other major HD formats.
HD VMD is currently being adopted by content providers and distributors in more than a dozen regions worldwide, including Australia, Brazil, Central Europe, China, France, Germany, Iceland, India, Japan, Scandinavia, Middle East, Russia and the United States.
HD VMD Authoring and encryption solutions are all set to deliver the world's first advanced HD VMD titles and power the professional HD VMD industry including the world's major post-production facilities, movie studios and multimedia production houses dedicated to facilitating the rollout of titles for the HD VMD format.

There is talk that all you need is a firmware update to convert a stantard 5.25 DVD-RW Drive...to a VDM Player and Burner...This could be just what we need to End this Stupid Format War...

 

HD VMD Debuts in U.S. - Affordable HD Disc Solution Available to Consumers in Q3'07.
DENVER, Sep 05,2007
$199 Price-Point Drives Affordability into the HD Market

New Medium Enterprises (NME) (OTC Bulletin Board: NMEN - News) today officially launched its HD VMD (Versatile Multilayer Disc) player and disc into the U.S. market with a debut at CEDIA Expo 2007. HD VMD brings maximum-HD 1080p high-quality players to consumers for a groundbreaking MSRP of $199. HD VMD players will be available for purchase in late October.
HD VMD stands to revolutionize the high-definition disc market, providing consumers with the best possible HD experience. Combining the best industrial opto-electronics and disc technologies, HD VMD brings together established DVD red-laser production infrastructure and break-through multilayer discs technology to deliver its maximum-HD picture. HD VMD red laser multilayer disc plans include storage of up to 30 GB of content on a single side disc.
Mahesh Jayanarayan, CEO of NME, Inc. says "U.S. consumers have waited for an HD solution at DVD pricing; and with HD VMD, we believe we have met this desire through a stellar quality, high-definition disc and player at a price point that almost anyone can afford." Jayanarayan adds, "With the launch into the U.S. market this month and an accelerating rollout of HD VMD content and retail distribution partners, we plan to drive adoption of HD in the home."
At $199, consumers can easily create their own HD living rooms; with the security of having a globally adopted format, and a better solution for their existing DVD libraries.
High-Definition at the Right Price -- High-end HD VMD products will enter the market at a groundbreaking MSRP of $199 -- 30 percent less than the least expensive competitive (and low end) product.
Incredible Image Quality -- With true HD resolution 1080p -- and 45Mbps bit rate, HD VMD excels at processing images and delivering the highest quality picture. From animation to fast action, viewers will experience incredible detail and vibrant colors.

Crystal Clear Sound -- With up to 7.1 sound channels, HD VMD delivers immersive and realistic sound that will make listeners feel like they are a part of the action.

Exceptional Standard Definition DVD Upconversion -- HD VMD players upconvert standard definition DVDs to deliver a killer high-definition picture. DVDs have never looked so good.

Global Content Choices -- HD VMD is currently being embraced by content providers around the globe, offering consumers a broad option of content. From U.S. to India to France to China, content from the world's leading film markets will be available to all.

VMD is currently being adopted by content providers and distributors in dozens of regions worldwide, including Australia, Brazil, Central Europe, China, France, Germany, Iceland, India, Japan, the Middle East Russia, Scandinavia, and the United States.

Products Specifications:
Disc (single side) HD VMD15 and HD VMD20
Disc Diameter: 120 mm
Disc Thickness: 1.2 mm
Laser Wavelength: 650 nm
Native Resolution for all models: 1920x1080p
Video codecs: MPEG- 2, VC-1, H.-264
Audio codecs: Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, DTS
Data transfer rate: 45 Mbps
Video bit rate: 45Mbps
Security: AES based
Additional features: USB port, card reader, HDMI, Internet connectivity
MSRP: $199

 

How to run Microsoft Update using Firefox

Diane Korngiebel By Diane Korngiebel

The Sept. 6 issue of Windows Secrets explained how to automate Internet Explorer 7 to access Microsoft Update once a month.

But some readers expressed displeasure at the thought of using the dreaded IE 7 even for this relatively safe chore.

Firefox add-in runs Microsoft Update like IE

Scott Dunn's article asserted that IE 7 is a requirement in order to run Microsoft Update. (MU is a Windows Update superset that patches Microsoft Office in addition to Windows itself.) However, Ramona Lane sends this useful tip:

* "There is an 'IE Tab' extension that lets Firefox users update with the Windows Update feature. The IE Tab extension is located at the Mozilla add-ons site."

Thanks, Ramona! The IE Tab extension lets you switch between Firefox and IE rendering. Once installed, I had no trouble using the IE Tab add-on to run Microsoft Update. According to Mozilla's Web site, the IE Tab works with Firefox versions 1.5 through 3.0a5. I used it with 2.0.0.6.

To install the IE Tab, go to the add-ons site using the above link. Choose Install Now. The installer will restart Firefox when finished or prompt you to do so before the changes will take effect.

To add the IE Tab button to your Firefox Toolbar, right-click the toolbar and choose Customize. Drag the IE Tab icon and drop it where you want it. When clicked, the IE Tab button will swap rendering engines.

Once you've done this, you can use Firefox with Scheduled Tasks in XP; however, keep in mind that only administrators can install updates. The scheduling steps are slightly different from the ones provided in the last issue:

Step 1: Choose Start, All Programs, Accessories, System Tools, Scheduled Tasks.

Step 2: In the Scheduled Tasks window, double-click Add Scheduled Task.

Step 3: In the Scheduled Task Wizard, click Next. Then click Browse.

Step 4: Select Mozilla Firefox from the list. If you don't see it, use the Browse button to locate Firefox.exe and click Open.

Step 5: In the next step of the wizard, select Monthly and click Next.

Step 6: Specify a start time. Select the second radio button and specify the second Tuesday. Leave all months checked. Click Next.

Step 7: Enter your account name and password for an administrator account. Click Next.

Step 8: Check the box for opening advanced properties and click Finish.

Step 9: When the Firefox Properties dialog box opens, click at the end of the line in the Run box. Type a space followed by the URLs for each tab you want to open, separated by spaces. For example, when you're done, the finished command should read something like this:

"C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe" www.update.microsoft.com secunia.com/software_inspector

Step 10: Click OK. Enter your account name and password again, if prompted. Click OK.
http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070913/#known0



IE Tab 1.3.3.20070528 Homepage
by PCMan (Hong Jen Yee), yuoo2k

IE Tab - an extension from Taiwan, features: Embedding Internet Explorer in tabs of Mozilla/Firefox...

This is a great tool for web developers, since you can easily see how your web page displayed in IE with just one click and then switch back to Firefox.

If you need some instructions.
Please visit our official website on http://ietab.mozdev.org
Works with:

* Firefox Firefox: 1.5 – 3.0a5


copy and paste in your browser
link

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1419