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

Content in lockdown
An unbreakable link between media and its delivery end point is near

I’m increasingly aghast at the erosion of the traditional freedom we’ve enjoyed to do whatever we please with our personal computers -- but intrigued by the science behind it.

My latest revelation came during a recent visit to AMD for a day of briefings, mostly about the Barcelona quad-core Opteron and the Torrenza direct-connect coprocessor interface. During that visit, I got the briefest of updates on ATI’s new GPU (graphics processing unit) technology. It will ship with software that plays movies on Blu-ray discs. The AMD rep spelled it out in words that would have been undiplomatic coming from me: He said that the new chips will “block unauthorized access to the frame buffer.” In short, that means an unauthorized party can’t save the contents of the display to a file on disk unless the content owner approves it.

There is a short list of parties who will be unauthorized to access your frame buffer: You. There is a long list of parties who are authorized to access your frame buffer, and that list includes Microsoft, Apple, AMD, Intel, ATI, NVidia, Sony Pictures, Paramount, HBO, CBS, Macrovision, and all other content owners and enablers that want your machine to themselves whenever you’re watching, listening to, reading, or shooting monsters with their products.


Video, audio, and software will all drive a similar road, that being a single, unmodifiable path from the original encoded, licensed source to rendering, and on to delivery (display, headphones, portable device, printer, or memory for execution of software). This bit of progress seems to have little relevance to IT until you expand the meaning of the word “content” to encompass that which you create that is consumed by human eyes and ears.

As people working the IT side of business, academia, and government, we know all too well that personal and customer information, trade secrets, and other varieties of confidential data can be intercepted using tricks similar to those that are used to swipe movies and music. IT content needs that direct path from source media to delivery, too, so that possession of encoded media -- say, a Blu-ray disc -- is critical to viewing, listening, or executing.

For example, right now there is no unbreakable way to arrange that a PDF or other sort of viewable document can’t be copied or at least stored as a snapshot of the display. The audio portion of a classified presentation can be recorded as easily as hooking an analog or digital recorder into the headphone output. HTML would be a much more viable means of rendering rich content if it could be protected. Rich document and multimedia rendering engines would know if they were talking to delivery devices that were specifically matched with physically secure equipment. If a renderer couldn’t verify that a display or headset that it trusts was the sole source of delivery, nothing would appear or be heard.

It’s easy to write off entertainment content owners and distributors as a money-grubbing cartel; for the most part, they are. But the technical work they do to protect what they own matters, even that work which we find distasteful given needless extremes of use such as pay-per-single-view. They’ve got the money to drive the science of data and content protection. If they perfect that unbreakable link between the media and the delivery end point, if there’s never another DVD image splattered all over the Internet, then IT will be able to make a promise that, to date, it couldn’t: Nobody can view or copy your data without authorization.
Tom Yager is chief technologist of the InfoWorld Test Center.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/28/14OPcurve_1.html

 

i guess the following years will be full of surprises and counter-surprises. it's inherent of human nature. What?!!! Are you saying I can't??? Watch me!!!!

technology is a wonderful thing. i'm sure resistance to big brother will ensue and eventually succeed.

 

Killing that annoying bubble popper "auto updates is turned off"..

Google run at startup policy XP

The annoying little B... is called wnscntfy.exe or something like it.. look in OoO.. memory hole... wassit called?.. the system monitor thing.

 

RIAA goes after new family

p2pnet.net news:- Recording Industry vs The People is reporting another example of serious RIAA blundering that's been underway in Tucson, Arizona, since last year.

Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG's RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) tried to sue another computer illiterate victim.

Acting for Loud Records, Sony BMG Music Entertainment,BMG Music, UMG Recordings and Arista Records, they RIAA claimed Roberto Sanchez was an illegal online distributor of copyrighted music.

It's the RIAA's tried and tested way of causing as much grief as it can to families before turning to its real targets, the children.

"In February, 2005, Sanchez was contacted by Plaintiffs' settlement representatives demanding pre-litigation settlement," says a court document filed by Sanchez's lawyer, Edwin Eloy Aguilar of the Karp Heurlin Weiss, going on:

"Sanchez informed the settlement representative, through counsel, that Sanchez did not ever download or make available for distribution any songs, and accordingly refused to settle."

The RIAA, "acted maliciously and oppressively in that Plaintiffs, even after having been advised of the facts and circumstances of this case, have continued to demand that Sanchez pay money for damages related to acts that he never committed," says the document.

Having failed to make a case against Sanchez, they went after his daughter.

Last November, the RIAA decided to try to change things, "not to drop the father as a defendant, but to add the daughter," says Recording Industry vs The People, continuing, "on April 10th of this year, they sought to withdraw their motion and drop the case entirely against the father, without prejudice, indicating an intention to bring a separate suit against the daughter."

"Unbeknownst to them, however, the day before the Court had granted their motion for leave to amend to add the daughter.

"Defendants thereafter filed an answer and counterclaims to the amended complaint, counterclaiming for (a) a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and (b) money damages for prima facie tort under Arizona law."

In another case, "In what's become standard operating procedure, having failed to terrorize Cathy and Barry Merchant into 'settling' out of court, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has begun harassing their family".

"It's now demanding access to the household computer, saying it's going after anyone associated with the Merchants who's, 'directly or indirectly responsible for the illegal uploading, downloading and distribution of the Record companies' copyrighted works using Mr. Merchant's AOL internet account'."

And in yet another similar case, having accused Kylee Andersen's mother, Tanya, of being an illicit online music distributor, the Big 4 music cartel wanted to go after 10-year-old Kylee. Face-to-face.

"Was the idea to try to get information from her so they could use it against her mother?" - p2pnet wondered. "Or are they going to claim Kylee herself is another of those "massive online distributors of copyrighted music" who are, according to the multi-billion-dollar Big 4, "devastating" the corporate music industry?

"After all, Kylee was seven when the RIAA first zeroed in on her mother, who's disabled and who gets by on a pension. And as every online criminal and thief knows, seven is the perfect age to start as an illegal music distributor."

Slashdot Slashdot it!

Also See:
Recording Industry vs The People - R.I.P. PlayStation 3 20GB is officially no more, April 11, 2007
failed to terrorize - RIAA ramps up attack on family, April 10, 2007
p2pnet - RIAA vs Kylee hits the mainstream, Marech 28, 2007
http://p2pnet.net/story/11951

 

FredBun

get and install

Tweak UI

This PowerToy gives you access to system settings that are not exposed in the Windows XP default user interface, including mouse settings, Explorer settings, taskbar settings, and more.

Version 2.10 requires Windows XP Service Pack 1 or Windows Server 2003.

AFTER INSTALL OPEN TWEAK UI AND
click on taskbar and start menu,uncheck enable ballone tips

here
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx

 

European ISPs: "Aiding and abetting" copyright violations could land our CEOs in jail

By Nate Anderson | Published: April 12, 2007 - 01:56PM CT

European legislation that would criminalize commercial copyright violations has now made its way through the various and sundry committees of the European Parliament and is ready for a vote by the full parliament within the next two weeks. If adopted, IPRED2 would mark a major shift in EU intellectual property law, which has previously treated copyright violation as a civil offense with corresponding civil penalties (normally fines and injunctions). If passed, dirty pirates could be thrown in the brig.

Which wouldn't be that big of a deal if this were just about easily-defined "dirty pirates." The problem here is twofold. One issue is that many copyright cases involved legitimate businesses, not pirates cranking out bootleg DVDs to sell on street corners. Should executives of firms like Google or YouTube be thrown in jail if some new service of theirs is found to be infringing someone else's copyright? Many EU lawyers argue "no." These sorts of cases arise all the time in the course of business, and have generally been handled by civil proceedings.

The other issue is that the law also criminalizes "aiding or abetting and inciting such infringements," and this language is ambiguous enough to worry plenty of watchdog groups. We reported last month that ISPs are concerned that they could be liable for "abetting" infringement by allowing users to run P2P applications or access web sites like AllofMP3.com. The terms could be construed in a wide variety of ways, and content holders will surely push for the broadest possible interpretation.

Resistance to IPRED2 has been varied. The two branches of the Dutch States-General issued objections (Word document) last year, arguing that the EU lacked the authority to pass such a law and that civil penalties would work better.

"The two Houses take the view that violations of intellectual property rights cannot be treated as such a serious violation of the policy field to be protected that the harmonized deployment of criminal law measures must be considered essential in the battle against these violations," says the report. The wording is a bit awkward, but the idea comes through loud and clear: this simply isn't necessary.

The UK's Law Society issued its own set of objections (PDF) to IPRED2 and made some of the same points. "We are concerned that the introduction of broad criminal sanctions might upset the balance that exists between the use of civil and criminal proceedings," said the group. They urged that criminal penalties be reserved for counterfeiting and piracy only.

The EFF's European branch has also waded into the fray, launching a CopyCrime web site and encouraging users to sign its petition.

Fortunately, the bill was amended by JURI, the powerful European Parliament legal committee, during proceedings last month, and many of the objections put forward by these groups have already been addressed. For instance, the bill now would exclude "acts carried out by private users for personal and not for profits purposes" and fair use exceptions to national laws are required. The phrase "in the context of counterfeiting and piracy" was even included in Article 1 of the bill, as the Law Society hoped.

Still, some activists are worried about the broader application of criminal penalties to copyright law and have continued to call for amendments to the bill. These could be added up until the vote is actually taken, which is expected before the end of April.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...t-violations-could-land-our-ceos-in-jail.html

 

Judges: online comments by minors protected under Constitution

By Jacqui Cheng | Published: April 12, 2007 - 11:15AM CT

High school students are allowed to practice free speech online and are protected, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled this week. A three-judge panel ruled on Monday that even if the speech is laden with expletives, what a student says against school policy or against the state is protected under both the US Constitution and the Indiana State Constitution.Related Stories

* MySpace prank gone bad leads to misuse of school resources, multiple lawsuits

The student, only named as A.B. in court documents, was originally sentenced to probation for six counts of harassment based off of comments she made on a MySpace page. The comments were posted to a fake profile created by another student posing as the principal of the school, and they were focused mostly around A.B.'s dislike of the high school's policies and principal. She clearly indicated in her comments that she was aware that the profile was not real and that she was "pretty sure" she knew who created it. The principal, Shawn Gobert, testified that he never received any of the messages directly and only observed them as he was reading through the fake profile page.

Although A.B. ultimately made six separate comments on the profile expressing her distaste, one comment became the main focus of the case against her:

Hey you piece of greencastle sh*t.
What the f*ck do you think of me [now] that you can['t] control me? Huh?
Ha ha ha guess what I'll wear my f*cking piercings all day long and to
school and you can['t] do sh*t about it! Ha ha f*cking ha! Stupid bastard!
Oh, and kudos to whomever made this ([I'm] pretty sure I know who).
Get a background.

While the comments come off as typical of an angry teenager, the juvenile court decided that A.B. was a "delinquent child" and sentenced her to nine months of probation.

However, the Court of Appeals disagreed. "A.B. asserts that her message, made in a public forum and criticizing Gobert, a state actor, in implementing a school policy proscribing decorative piercings is a legitimate communication envisioned within the bounds of protected political speech," wrote the judges. "A.B. openly criticizes Gobert's imposed school policy on decorative body piercings and forcefully indicates her displeasure with it. While we have little regard for A.B.'s use of vulgar epithets, we conclude that her overall message constitutes political speech."

The ruling goes on: "The State failed to produce any evidence that A.B.'s expression inflicted particularized harm analogous to torturous injury on readily identifiable private interests as required to rebut A.B.'s claim of political speech. [...] Therefore, we hold that A.B.'s conviction for harassment contravened her right to speak, as guaranteed by the Indiana Constitution."

The judges' decision sets a precedent for other minors who may avoid posting their opinions online for fear of being smacked down by the state. Such a decision, however, does not seem like it would apply to other MySpace-principal harassment cases, such as that of a Pennsylvania principal who continues to have new fake profiles created about him that accuse him of sleeping with students, engaging in domestic violence, and doing drugs. However, as long as the comments are not directly threatening and/or libelous, it appears as if teenagers can expect some degree of Constitutional protection online after all.
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/72/295688#2989989

 

Ireland, when you say requires service pack one, does that mean one or above, cause I have ser pack2.

 

link to doom9
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=124294

 

install the program TWEAK UI ye will be ok with sp-2

 

New Bug Reported In Windows Help Files
Posted by l33tdawg on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 02:03 AM (Reads: 7)
Source: Information Week


Another Microsoft vulnerability has been disclosed, along with proof-of-concept code. The so-called heap-overflow vulnerability affects Windows help files in multiple versions of Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, Windows NT, and Windows 2000. Researchers at Security Focus reported that the Help File viewer is prone to a heap-overflow vulnerability because it fails to perform boundary checks before copying user-supplied data into insufficiently sized memory buffers. The problem arises when the application handles a malformed or malicious Windows Help File. "A successful attack may facilitate arbitrary code execution in the context of a vulnerable user who opens a malicious file," wrote a Security Focus researcher in an advisory. "Failed exploit attempts will likely result in denial-of-service conditions."


New Bug Reported In Windows Help Files

Microsoft is investigating a possible heap-overflow vulnerability that was recently disclosed, along with proof-of-concept code.

By Sharon Gaudin
InformationWeek
Apr 12, 2007 03:20 PM

Another Microsoft vulnerability has been disclosed, along with proof-of-concept code.

The so-called heap-overflow vulnerability affects Windows help files in multiple versions of Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, Windows NT, and Windows 2000. Researchers at Security Focus reported that the Help File viewer is prone to a heap-overflow vulnerability because it fails to perform boundary checks before copying user-supplied data into insufficiently sized memory buffers.

The problem arises when the application handles a malformed or malicious Windows Help File.

"A successful attack may facilitate arbitrary code execution in the context of a vulnerable user who opens a malicious file," wrote a Security Focus researcher in an advisory. "Failed exploit attempts will likely result in denial-of-service conditions."

A Microsoft spokesman e-mailed a response to InformationWeek and said the company is investigating new public reports of a possible vulnerability in the Microsoft Help subsystem. The company's initial investigation found that the possible vulnerability would require an attacker to use a .hlp file. Microsoft considers them unsafe file types and recommends people use the same caution with .hlp files as they do with .exe, since both file types are executables.

Hon Lau, a member of the Security Response Team at Symantec, wrote in a blog entry on Thursday that researchers there have not seen the vulnerability being actively exploited. Lau said Symantec analyzed a sample of the proof-of-concept code and released the Bloodhound.Exploit.135 to detect threats that exploit the vulnerability.

Mati Aharoni, lead penetration tester with Israeli IT security education firm See Security Technologies, is credited with discovering the bug.

Microsoft advised that any customers who think they've been affected by the vulnerability contact the company through this Web site.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199000619

 

Liberty, equality, interoperability? iTunes, Zune lock-ins may come to an end in France

By Nate Anderson | Published: April 12, 2007 - 05:39PM CT

The French DADVSI intellectual property law that stirred up such controversy when it was being drafted last year eventually passed in August 2006. One of the stipulations of the final version was that DRM schemes be made interoperable, and an independent body was to be set up by the French government to supervise the process. That group, the Autorité de régulation des mesures techniques (ARMT), was officially created (French) last week.

The ARMT was given six members; pictures of them, along with an opening speech, are available from the French government. The six will serve for six years each, and they are supposed to be fully independent. That is, they cannot have ties to the companies or industries that they will be working with.

Nicolas Jondet, a French graduate student now at the University of Edinburgh, has just posted a lengthy English discussion of the group and their work. The ARMT will be good for consumers, he argues, but it will not suddenly eliminate DRM. It will require interoperability, but the necessary information can only be requested by a company that has a legitimate interoperability problem—Microsoft, for instance, which cannot play iTunes files on the Zune.

Consumers will not be able to file interoperability requests, and they will not have access to the information that the DRM companies provide to the ARMT. Thus, the group will not suddenly make it simple for consumers to remove DRM shackles from their media, but it should get easier to transfer tunes from one DRM format to another.

The ARMT is also supposed to ensure that DRM does not prevent consumers from making legitimate uses of their works, but this is unlikely to pave the way for legalization of DVD ripping, for instance. That's because the group will apply a test that takes into consideration the effects that any decision has on the marketplace and on the ability of the content owners to profit from their content.

Although the group's power is limited, it does have teeth; it can impose large fines on any company that does not comply. Now that Apple is selling non-DRMed files from EMI and Steve Jobs has gone on record saying that he would prefer a DRM-free world, the company appears to be less concerned about measures such as France's, especially as the technical information that companies like Apple provide will remain (supposedly) private.

How times change. Last year, Apple was calling an early version of the bill "state-sponsored piracy" and there was talk of the company pulling out of France altogether. No longer; which means that iTunes Store media goodness may soon be available to all.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...ne-lock-ins-may-come-to-an-end-in-france.html

 

FTC: Games better regulated than music, movies

By Jeremy Reimer | Published: April 12, 2007 - 04:56PM CT

The video game industry is often accused of marketing overly violent games to children. But how does the industry stack up when compared to other mainstream media, such as movies and music? A new study (PDF format) released by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) attempts to answer this question, and the results—while mixed—look pretty good for the gaming industry.

The report looks at the structure and operations of each industry's self-regulation programs, such as the ESRB for video games. It also examines how much each industry intentionally markets its "adult" or "mature" products to children. Its most dramatic study involves a "mystery" child shopper who entered a random selection of stores and attempted to purchase movies, music, and video games that had ratings prohibiting retailers from selling said items directly to children.

All three industries were found to be in compliance "for the most part" with self-imposed regulations prohibiting advertising adult products on television shows and magazines aimed at the teenage and younger markets. However, the FTC had harsher criticisms for Internet advertising, which it called "an increasingly important medium that reaches millions of children each day." While the report cited many examples of movies, music, and games advertised on youth-oriented sites, it noted that of all three industries, only gaming has rules that restrict such advertising. The gaming industry's rules state that ads for adult games cannot appear on sites where more than 45 percent of visitors are under 17. The report supports strengthening these regulations, and suggests that the movie and music industries should adopt them as well.

As far as the "mystery shopper" test goes, the report indicates that the video game industry has made the most progress in enforcing the existing rules at retail. The rate at which underage shoppers could buy M-rated games dropped nearly in half from to 40 percent from the previous report, which was issued in the year 2000. This figure is just three percent higher than the number of kids who could get into R-rated movies, and far less than the 70-80 percent who were able to successfully purchase R-rated DVDs and music CDs with explicit content.

Organizations such as the Entertainment Software Association are pleased with the FTC's results, calling them a vindication for their industry. "We're pleased that the FTC has acknowledged what we in the industry have long-known: the best way to help parents are industry-led, self-regulatory efforts that can provide them information they need," said Carolyn Rauch, senior vice president of the ESA.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070412-ftc-games-better-regulated-than-music-movies.html

 

RyanVM's Windows XP Post-SP2 Update Pack 2.1.9
Apr 13, 2007 - 7:49 AM - by Digital Dave
If you have an XP disk and nLite, grab this baby and make a new install disk. It's SO worth the 1/2 hour of work.

This pack is designed to bring a Windows XP CD with SP2 integrated fully up to date with all of the latest hotfixes released by Microsoft since SP2's release.

Major Geeks.com Post and Download


RyanVM's Windows XP Post-SP2 Update Pack 2.1.9
Author: Ryan VanderMeulen
Date: 2007-04-12
Size: 45.9 Mb
License: Freeware


This pack is designed to bring a Windows XP CD with SP2 integrated fully up to date with all of the latest hotfixes released by Microsoft since SP2's release. It accomplishes this task via direct integration, where files on the CD are directly overwritten by the updated files. This method has numerous advantages over other integration techniques:

- Since the files are being directly overwritten on the CD, there is no period of vulnerability between when the files are copied to the hard drive and the hotfixes are run. This guarantees maximum stability and security.
- All necessary registry entries needed by Windows Update, QFECheck, and Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer are imported during Windows setup, meaning that the integration is transparent to Windows.
- Security Catalogs necessary for Windows File Protection to recognize the updated files as digitally signed are installed, once again ensuring maximum transparency to Windows.
- Since the updated files are being directly overwritten on the CD, this pack has the minimum possible amount of overhead associated with integrating hotfixes in comparison to other methods - both in space used on the CD and in Windows installation time.
- This pack works regardless of whether or not the Windows installation is unattended.

NOTE: This file is compressed in 7-Zip format. If your compression program does not support .7z extensions, you can

DOWNLOAD HERE
http://www.majorgeeks.com/RyanVMs_Windows_XP_Post-SP2_Update_Pack_d5085.html

 

Adobe Flash Player (IE, AOL) 9.0.45.0
Author: Macromedia Inc
Date: 2007-04-13
Size: 1.1 Mb
License: Freeware

Adobe Flash Player (formerly Macromedia Flash Player) lets you view the best animation and entertainment on the Web. It displays Web application front-ends, high-impact Web site user interfaces, interactive online advertising, and short-form to long-form animation. Since it is free of the design restrictions of more traditional Web display options, you can use it to clearly and exactly express your brand and company identity.

DOWNLOAD HERE
http://www.majorgeeks.com/Adobe_Flash_Player_IE_AOL_d5163.html

 

Warner unhappy with new, DRM-free AnywhereCD
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070413-warner-unhappy-with-new-drm-free-anywherecd.html
By Jacqui Cheng | Published: April 13, 2007 - 11:47AM CT

Michael Robertson, founder of MP3.com, has launched a new music download service that sells DRM-free albums, but Warner Music Group is not happy about it. The service, AnywhereCD, sells music in MP3 format with no copy protection, but customers must buy full albums—no cherry-picking of individual tracks as customers do on iTunes.

"Last year I decided it was time to revisit selling music in the MP3 format," Robertson wrote on his personal web site. "I reached out to many labels and all were polite and open to meetings. My message was to use the MP3 format to boost sales by offering a new buying option for online music fans."

AnywhereCD currently offers a fairly wide selection of music with a number of big names, such as Green Day, They Might Be Giants, Rolling Stones, Faith Hill, Metallica, and more. Although Robertson claims that albums start at $9.95, I could not find any at that price during my browsing of the store—most albums I found ranged from $12.95 to $19.95 apiece. These album prices are anywhere from slightly to significantly higher than full abums purchased from the iTunes Store (which are often priced at $9.99), but the extra value apparently comes from the "confidence of knowing you own all the digital tracks forever and they will play everywhere."

The bit rate of the MP3 files purchased through the service are encoded at 192kbps "or better," indicating that there may be inconsistencies in bit rates across different albums. AnywhereCD's help page justifies the decision to go with 192kbps, saying that "Your dog might be able to hear the subtleties and nuances but our blind taste tests reveal that very few people, if any, are really able to distinguish between our very high quality MP3s and the original CDs."

The new service launched just a couple of weeks after EMI's announcement that they were going to start selling almost their entire catalog online without copy protection, starting with the iTunes Store. Despite EMI's statement its DRM-free music won't be exclusive to iTunes, AnywhereCD doesn't appear to offer any music from EMI on its store just yet.
Warner still loves its DRM

Warner Music Group immediately demanded that AnywhereCD stop selling the label's albums the same day that AnywhereCD launched, saying that selling the music without copy protection was in "flagrant" violation with their agreement. "Accordingly, we have sent them a notice of termination and they are required to immediately remove all of our content from their site," the music label said in a statement given to Reuters.

Indeed, Robertson wrote on his web site that only "some labels were receptive" to his DRM-free approach, although it appears as if he moved forward with the business plan without ensuring that they were all on board. Some of the biggest artists whose music is being sold through AnywhereCD are those from Warner, including that of Madonna and Prince. If Robertson is forced to remove them, the site will likely end up losing a fair chunk of its widespread appeal.

Warner's reaction shows just how far out on a limb EMI has gone against the opinion of the rest of the music industry, and other labels will still need to be convinced that EMI made the right decision before diving into DRM-free waters.

 

Democrats hire RIAA spinster

p2pnet.net news:- Jenni Engebretsen, a misinformation director with Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG's RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), has been appointed deputy ceo for public affairs for the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver.

The RIAA is currently engaged in using university and college administrations to terrorise students into paying extortion money to avoid being sued by the RIAA.

Thirty-six University of Nebraska-Lincoln students were on the RIAA hit list. But the university system automatically changes a campus computer's IP address every time that computer is turned on, which stymied the RIAA.

Could the RIAA track them down some other way? "Probably not," the Omaha World-Herald had university cio, Walter Weir, stating, going on, "If they can't give us any more information, I don't know how in the heck anyone can find 'em."

RIAA spinster Engebretsen, "criticized the university for failing to keep computer records that would have made it easy to track down the UNL offenders," said the story, quoting her as declaring:

"One would think universities would understand the need to retain these records."

Engebretsen's appointment isn't surprising. According to the Democratic National Committee press release, "Before joining the RIAA, Engebretsen spent eight years working in Democratic politics, most recently as a Regional Communications Director for the Kerry-Edwards for President campaign, where she was responsible for developing campaign communications strategy for top-targeted states including Florida and New Hampshire."

No wonder the campaign went down the tubes.

"During the 2004 presidential cycle, she also served as Deputy Communications Director for the Democratic National Convention in Boston and as Press Secretary for the Edwards for President campaign during the primaries," says the statement.

Interestingly, she's a graduate of Chicago's Northwestern University, the site for the first conference devoted to "discussing what the hell the RIAA is doing with its indiscriminate litigation," as Boing Boing's Cory Doctorow summed it up.

Doctorow has a list of the largest donors to the DNC for the past two election cycles on Boing Boing and, "If you know these people, you can contact them and urge them not to contribute to the DNCC," he suggests, going on:

Engebretsen's PR approach, "is centered around stonewalling and avoiding difficult press calls. I sought comment on this post from the DNC and from Jenni Engebretsen. Neither responded in time for initial publication."

Slashdot Slashdot it!

Also See:
paying extortion money - Responses to RIAA sophistry, April 12, 2007
RIAA hit list - RIAA student attack foiled, March 20, 2007
Omaha World-Herald - UNL proves safe haven for music pirates, March 16, 2007
summed it up - 'Sue 'em all' conference report, November 6, 2005
Boing Boing - DNC appoints RIAA shill to run Public Affairs for convention, April 12, 2007
http://p2pnet.net/story/11953

 

Killing online freedom of speech

p2pnet.net news view:- A plan by Tim O'Reilly and Jimmy Wales to regulate the Net with a Code of Conduct has sparked outrage among supporters of free speech.

Kathy Sierra, a friend of O'Reilly, blogged about death threats she'd received, prompting Net publisher O'Reilly (left) and the Wikipedia's Wales to launch a campaign to clean up the Net.

Will O'Reilly, Wales and Sierra want a kind of seal of approval site owners who agree with their ideas will be able/expected to display?

Observes Brian Whitaker in The Guardian, a group of Saudis formed OCSAB promoting rules for "ethical" blogging. The rules were as follows, he says:

1 - That the blog does not touch on Islam improperly in any way or shape, which thereby rules out blogs that call to secularism and liberalism.

2 - Seeing as how the community is for Saudi bloggers, naturally then, the blog must be run by a Saudi.

3 - Since we exert much effort on maintaining an elevated level of blogging, the language in use must be Arabic. An exception: Blogs with a non-Arabic speaking audience are excluded, only on the condition that they call to Islam or reflect a pleasant image of Saudi Arabia.

4 - That the blog specifies a certain direction for it to follow, be it Islamic, scientific, technical, medical, social etc. We apologise for not accepting purely personal blogs (ie diary-like blogs).

Whitaker goes on:

Apart from OCSAB's claim to be "the official" organisation for Saudi bloggers, the talk of "ethics" raised alarm in the kingdom's blogging community. Some suspected it might be a cyber-vigilante group, perhaps even the internet equivalent of the dreaded mutawa, or Saudi religious police.

One astonished female Saudi blogger exclaimed: "Boys, boys, boys, when will you ever learn? ... You cannot regulate the Saudi blogosphere. You cannot 'refine' it nor 'filter' it or whatever else I read that you wish to do to it. Now get your filthy hands off blogging ... go ahead and pour your crap out to conventional media, that's what it's there for, anyway."

He sums it up thus:

No matter what rules or codes of practice Jimmy Wales, Tim O'Reilly and others try to establish, the blogosphere is always going to be an undisciplined place. But we should have faith in the people who read blogs: they are not stupid, and the more blogs they read the more they will learn to sift the treasures from the trash.

And that says it all.

The online community is vocal, but that's OK because that's what freedom of speech is all about.

And anyway, a kind of unspoken, voluntary Code of Conduct already exists because for the most part, members of the Net community are responsible people.

No matter how well intended, a formal Code of Conduct would be the thin end of a very nasty wedge.

JN

Slashdot Slashdot it!

Also See:
Code of Conduct - Online Code of Conduct, April 10, 2007
death threats - Death Threats vs Freedom of Speech, April 12, 2007
The Guardian - Blog and be damned, April 12, 2007
http://p2pnet.net/story/11954